[Link]

Don't know how accurate this graphic is.

It is specific to dictators and might seem a bit misleading because timescale isn't a factor, simply numbers of deaths. Also, active and passive action aren't one and the same.

Nonetheless, potentially interesting.

I ain't got nuthin' funny to say. Sorry.

Thanks. That makes it alright then. Churchill is exonerated because of Stalin and Mao's c***ishness.

You might want to read the link you provided (which never manages to show a link between cause and effect): the key points are in the second and sixth paragraphs. Clearly, food was not removed, crops were not deliberately destroyed, people were not deliberately starved, and aid was sent (albeit it after the peak of the crisis).

That shows Churchill was ruthless, and racist, but that still does not make him the same as Hitler, Stalin, or Mao, etc.

Furthermore, many of the things put at Churchill's door, in that link, are factually false. He wasn't even alive for some of the claims. Ergo, they are false.

By the way, who was sweeping it under the carpet, or is that just a strawman?

Last, you might also want to look at the ongoing debate about food aid and famine, and the link between them, as it relates to the Bengal famine during WWII as well as some similar huge disasters in the same region previously (also under British rule). Some countries have chosen to refuse food aid as it often causes more long term problems than it solves, thereby costing more lives.

[Link]

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

Michael, I agree with you on this point.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

History is revised over and over to suit the prevailing zeitgeist.
In that respect at least, you can never fully trust it.

History is in general, written by the victors.