|
|
|
|
|
by gnufied
1114 days ago
|
|
I think the question is was the resources diverted from same regions to fight the war or policy decisions taken which would accelerate the onset of famine? Quoting from the book: >The "rice denial" policy saw soldiers confiscate and destroy rice deemed surplus; according to one journalist, thousands of tons of rice were thrown into the water in east Bengal.[8] The "boat denial" policy saw 46,000 boats able to carry more than ten passengers confiscated; bicycles, carts and elephants were also taken.[9] One civil servant said the policy "completely broke the economy of the fishing class" in Bengal. The answer seems an resounding yes - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill%27s_Secret_War#:~:.... |
|
Isn't this true of every wartime famine throughout history? My understanding is that famine and hunger were pretty standard during wartime as armies would "forrage" (a lovely euphemism for theft, murder and rape).