Talk:Indian Legion

message: The article says they surrendered to or were handed over to the British to face treason charges, but then doesn't say what happened to them after that. Richard75 (talk) 11:19, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A few of them were charged in the INA trials (that page discusses the trials generally in more detail) along with members of the INA proper, as mentioned in the text, and presumably the rest would have been. But because of the tension the trials produced, most of the trials were halted before independence, presumably including those of Legion soldiers. All the Indians who fought for the Axis were released in 1947, including the three who had been sentenced—but as the British insisted they were never allowed to serve in the new Indian Army. —innotata 19:14, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Were they prosecuted or not? 

message: What is the reason this article isn't at "Indian Legion of the Waffen SS"? A Google Books search for "Indische Legion" gives 81 hits here, and "Indian Legion" comes up with 108 hits  here. Not only that, but highly regarded books on the Waffen SS (such as Stein) refer to it as "Indian Legion". This is en WP after all. Thoughts? Peacemaker67  (send... over) 10:47, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I propose "Free India Legion". "Legion Freies Indien" was used as an official name when it was in the Wehrmacht and when it was in the Waffen-SS. Free India Legion gets 549 results; this German name and English translation seem to be most commonly used in sources on the unit. —innotata 11:37, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to go to the last page to get the real number of hits, and your search actually comes up with 58 hits per this Stein is one of the foremost scholars on the Waffen SS, and he refers to it as "Indian Legion", which gets 212 hits, per this. It seems to me that "Indian Legion" is the WP:COMMONNAME by a significant margin. Peacemaker67  (send... over) 13:31, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess you're right, the name is more commonly used. (Please remember, though, that the unit was part of the Wehrmacht for most of its history…"Indian Legion" should be the article's name.) —innotata 17:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is true, but the other names will need to be bolded in the lead, and redirects created to ensure they all come here. Regards, Peacemaker67  (send... over) 23:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: 'In considering the history of the Free India Legion, the most controversial aspect is its integral link to the Nazi Germany, with a widespread perception that they were collaborators of Nazi Germany by the virtue of their uniform, oath, and field of operation.'
Whatever the motives and we can probably assume resistance to British rule as the primary motive, there can't be much more of a clear cut definition of collaboration than joining the enemy forces, wearing their colours, promising to obey their orders and operating in a war zone on their side. If we couple this with hints at atrocities committed by the Indian forces there doesn't seem to be much controversy. The point surely is that the Indians who fought in this regiment were operating on a means to an end basis, probably they did not like Nazi Germany and simply wanted freedom but that should be clarified with sources. Millions of German soldiers could probably say the same but then where do we draw the line? The use of 'controversy' in this is only in how we perceive their actions retrospectively 
Tarzanlordofthejungle (talk) 08:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Tarzan. To contribute my two pennies to the above discussion, the aggression of men and passivity of women are socio-behavioral stereotypes which would be a behavioural study and hard to define short of a case-control or observational study (I do not see a randomised control study feasible in this scenario). The statistics of infanticide perpetrated by either sex are observational reports which report a specific observation. I am sure both sexes are capable of being violent. The explanation of female reaction to male violence attempts to explain why the observation is seen, and in a wikipedia article, merely stating the observation is a start class article, but adding consensus expert opinions of these observations takes it much further. I think this discussion is a bit far removed, perhaps this discussion may shed a bit more light into why a blanket tag maybe inappropriate. It is a bit like tagging Churchill or British Raj ( as war criminal or perpetrators of genocide for Bengal Famine etc. There is more to the story than one side will tell you, hence the need to be careful about NPOV.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 09:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

text: Fascinating. I think a lot of the old arguments on gender are now almost museum pieces with the current proliferation of possible social identities. I appreciate that the endless attempts to revise history (often to someone's particular political ends)  must make Wikipedia a bit of a minefield. I'm just an avaricious reader who occasionally sees something that doesn't quite make sense to me. The use of terms like 'criminal' for war leaders seems to part of the general progression of language. Words are simply changing their meaning. Thanks for taking the time to explain thingsTarzanlordofthejungle (talk) 21:59, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  collaboration 

message: There are some strange part in the picture with General Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, the 3rth of the article. It could well be, that it is manipulated. Do you know something about that? --2.71.254.79 (talk) 09:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It just looks poorly exposed. Rommel definitely did meet with the Legion, at any rate. —innotata 19:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manipulated picture 

message: Curious. The goal of the SS was to kill anyone without blond hair and blue eyes. How did they allow this? Seems like like the article is confusing something. HeinrichMueller (talk) 02:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hitler did not have blond hair and blue eyes so why is he still alive? Checkmate libtard 2603:9008:1707:37EE:11D8:44C4:A354:6DC (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian Nazis? 

message: you seem to have a problem with me removing the tag of Indian far-right from this article. I see no relation between Indian far right the Azad Hind force/Indian Legion. They were indeed supported by Imperialist Nippon, but calling them Indian far-right is too far fetched. In fact, the entire categorization of all right wing organization as far-right it too ridiculous, which is why I was removing articles from that categorization, including Uma Bharati's party. Crawford88 (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian far-right tag 

message: When a military unit is labelled as belonging to a country, that means it served that country. This is speaking in terms of both practice on Wikipedia and in how it will be understood by the reader. The Indian Legion was obviously in opposition to the British government in India (or on the opposite side in a war at least). Even if you take "country" in a different sense, like where they operated - which you shouldn't - this doesn't make sense. It utterly confused me to see that this page had been edited to put the link and flag of British India up there, it's nonsensical.
The only questions are whether a provisional government counts as a sovereign government for purposes of the template, and whether this unit actually was under that government and Bose's control - it effectively operated only under German command. —innotata 01:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country 

message: @WikiLinuz
I added the words missing in the Text. Which are Provided in the Source. You cannot undo the Edit without Proof. https://salute.co.in/a-forgotten-army-the-legion-freies-indien/
The Text says:-
Organisation of the Legion Freies Indien The British Indian Army, possibly as an extension of their ‘divide and rule’ policy, had organised Indian Army units on the basis of regional identities. Bose from the inception of the Legion, sought to eradicate any semblance of divisive factors and built a force on a unified Indian identity. Consequently, the Legion Freies Indien was organised as mixed units comprising of all religions, states and class. Approximately two-thirds of the Legion’s members were Muslims and one third Hindu and other religions, including a large number of Sikhs. This was the first time a modern professional Indian Army was created where Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims all served together in close-knit units and this set a precedent for Indian Army of the post-Independent era. After the end of the war, when the British investigators interrogated the soldiers and commanders of the Free Indian Legion they found “the morale, discipline and indo German relations were excellent”.
SikkaSingh (talk) 10:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Text provided Should match with the Given Source.