On the European theatre Britain was basically alone for a while – there were of course Partisan movements in Europe but, to be frank, it’s unlikely they would have stopped the Nazi war machine. Yes, Britain could have collected soldiers from Canada, Australia and India to fight the Nazis (and they did exactly this during D-Day and in North Africa). But there was a period, after Dunkirk and during the Battle of Britain, where reinforcements were quite far and Britain was pretty alone. The Germans also sunk a lot of the vessels headed for Britain with their U-boats, and it took a while for anti-submarine warfare to catch up.
Alone: separate, apart, isolated from others; solo, without company; exclusively, uniquely; without aid or help. I don’t see anywhere in the definitions in the OED, Merriam-Webster, or at Dictionary.com where it says your allies and/or companions have to be capable of winning the war alone. Most of the countries in the Empire declared war within 24 hours to one week after Britain did. The fact we lost tons of materiel and human lives to German submarines suggests rather strongly that, far from being alone, Britain was receiving materiel and soldiers well; before D-Day, The reality is that the partisans and resistance fighters, the colonial soldiers, the other nations also fighting on their fronts were all part of the same anti-Nazi alliance: Britain was emphatically not alone. It simply had the best orator and propagandist at the head of its government.
And, yes, you are right about the majority of Indian deaths being civilian. I admit I have always considered them with the soldiers because so many of them died of starvation when Britain confiscated their food for its own people.
On the European theatre Britain was basically alone for a while – there were of course Partisan movements in Europe but, to be frank, it’s unlikely they would have stopped the Nazi war machine. Yes, Britain could have collected soldiers from Canada, Australia and India to fight the Nazis (and they did exactly this during D-Day and in North Africa). But there was a period, after Dunkirk and during the Battle of Britain, where reinforcements were quite far and Britain was pretty alone. The Germans also sunk a lot of the vessels headed for Britain with their U-boats, and it took a while for anti-submarine warfare to catch up.
Also, a correction, India lost over 2 million people, but most of the deaths were civilians, not soldiers; they lost about 87,000 troops: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_World_War_II
Alone: separate, apart, isolated from others; solo, without company; exclusively, uniquely; without aid or help. I don’t see anywhere in the definitions in the OED, Merriam-Webster, or at Dictionary.com where it says your allies and/or companions have to be capable of winning the war alone. Most of the countries in the Empire declared war within 24 hours to one week after Britain did. The fact we lost tons of materiel and human lives to German submarines suggests rather strongly that, far from being alone, Britain was receiving materiel and soldiers well; before D-Day, The reality is that the partisans and resistance fighters, the colonial soldiers, the other nations also fighting on their fronts were all part of the same anti-Nazi alliance: Britain was emphatically not alone. It simply had the best orator and propagandist at the head of its government.
And, yes, you are right about the majority of Indian deaths being civilian. I admit I have always considered them with the soldiers because so many of them died of starvation when Britain confiscated their food for its own people.