What won India its independence: the non-violent struggle or the draining effect of WWII on Britain?

Okay, first of all let me at the outset state that what i mention here are my views solely and might hit some very raw nerves, but that's just the way it is. We were largely handed our independence, civil disobedience and the Gandhian model of doing things sound Utopian and visionary but they do not even begin to jolt empires the way we think they do. Countries like France faced bloody insurgencies in Algeria and refused to let go for over a decade, and France does not have half the grit and character Britain does(at least around the mid 20th century it did not). Sure the Quit India movement and the brouhaha around Simon Go back made things hard for them, but the mines would have still given them coal and gold in just as much volume and the farmers would still have cultivated indigo while the crown jewel of the empire kept making Britain phenomenally wealthy. The other more widely adopted - militant way of doing things was just not in "vogue" in India, and the few who walked down this path ended up facing trial and subsequent death pretty quick. Here again I would like to remind you of how efficiently under control India really was. The police and their network of informants had complete control. Usually countries need full fledged armies to keep indigenous populations quiet, but we were as far away from that state as the Vatican is from developing a plutonium bomb. So that brings us to the question, if they did not want to and we could not get them to, how on earth did we "win" freedom. Well here is where Uncle Sam steps in and tells all the allies that look boys we fought the war on the plank of human freedom and liberty and other grandiose values while you enslave people at will; so stop with the hypocrisy and get out of there. The fact that the USA had no colonies had a lot to do with them taking the high road, but hey that is the way the world . So much so that even the Soviet Union was told to give all recaptured Eastern European countries a shot at self governance but Stalin told Truman to go fish. This is where the cold war started by the way as Truman realized how much of a threat Stalin really was, but that is for later anyway. While Churchill was in no mood whatsoever to just let India go, the kind of people of Britain threw him out of 10 Downing Street and in came the all willing Clement Atlee. His labor party lineage did help along with the fact that he was a socialist at heart, a very soft politician..the man who started the NHS and fought tirelessly for women's rights was as far away from the Winstonian (i made that up) firebrand way of doing things as possible.     For anyone who thinks otherwise, do go through the independence dates of most countries from Korea to Kenya and you will see a pattern, a large number of countries "won" their independence in the 4-5 years post WW2 and the truth is they themselves had precious little to do with it.

Countries that won independence from The UK -> South Africa got independence in 1931 -> No other country until 1946 -> WW2 ended in 1945 -> Jordan, India, Pakistan, Myanmar, Israel, Sri Lanka got independence between 1946-1948 -> After that, none until Sudan in 1956 We can see that though Non-violent struggles might also have had an impact, the impact of world war 2 was certainly big. After the Quit India movement was comfortably suppressed even during war times and Subhash Chandra Bose had no support (had probably died) then, Royal Indian Navy mutiny was probably the only significant event that occurred before independence.This too is not connected to Gandhi or the non-violence/civil disobedience movements.

"The news of the naval revolt spread like wild fire around the country including the tightly controlled ranks of the army units. Within a couple of days the army men of the Signals Training Centre (STC) at Jabalpur in central India, mutinied soon after the Navy revolt. Apparently 1700 soldiers were involved in this uprising which lasted two weeks and subsequently suppressed by brutal force by the British.Nevertheless the British Empire finally came to the conclusion that they cannot pursue their imperial ambitions in the sub-continent anymore. Clement Attlee was forced to immediately announce the Cabinet Mission to India and hastened the process of independence.The great naval revolt of 1946 forced the national liberation from the hands of the uncanny British ruling class and promoted solidarity amongst the masses overriding communal, and caste divisions, but those ruling classes sponsored partition based independence of India and Pakistan saw over a million people die in the largest and deadliest population exchange in history and the abortion of democratic revolution."http://www.socialism.in/index.php/1946-bombay-mutiny-the-revolt-that-compelled-indian-independence/