AGM100
Topic Author
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

China .. World War II

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:22 pm

I was watching the documentary last night covering the Inchon landing and the 1951 battle to establish the 38th parallel in Korea.

I have a simple question ... How was China able to raise and equip such a huge army in the short period after WWII. ( Basically 5 years )

And .. why didn't they fight the Japanese ? Made me wonder why they raised such a army and fought for the communists while they seemed to have just let Japan run wild though Asia 6 years before .
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
Rara
Posts: 2296
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: China .. World War II

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:53 pm

They did fight the Japanese, but China was severely weakened due to internal struggles and a devastating civil war. Besides, the Japanese military was obviously superior.

Raising a huge army isn't really a problem for China, as they only need to draft a tiny percentage of the population to have millions of soldiers on their hands. As to how well they were equipped... no idea, but the Soviets must have played a part in that.
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:57 pm

The armies (both Nationalists and Communists) did try fighting the Japanese but were too weak for the Japanese. Nationalist fought on the front lines (not very successful), while the communists more or less "Guerrilla" style. WW2 ended in 1945, with the US dropping atomic bombs in Japan.

Then after the WW2, the Nationalist and Communists fought themselves. The Communists took over China, along with the left over weapons supplied by the U.S.A. This civil war ended in 1949 mostly and occasional conflicts after that, with , with the Communists winning all over mainland China and the Nationalists fleeing/(being defeated) to Taiwan (there you see mainland China and Taiwan shouldn't be viewed as separate countries at least they weren't, pun intended!)

The Communists troops were ready to deploy after winning the Nationalist with US weapons and took those and more from USSR to Korea in 1951.

So there was no "sudden" build up and everything was lined up.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: China .. World War II

Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:34 am



Quoting B2443 (Reply 2):
Then after the WW2, the Nationalist and Communists fought themselves. The Communists took over China, along with the left over weapons supplied by the U.S.A. This civil war ended in 1949 mostly and occasional conflicts after that, with , with the Communists winning all over mainland China and the Nationalists fleeing/(being defeated) to Taiwan (there you see mainland China and Taiwan shouldn't be viewed as separate countries at least they weren't, pun intended!)

The nationalists fought the communists and vice versa already before the Japanese invasion of the mid 1930s. The Japanese invasion caused an uneasy armistice between the two major civil war armies (there were other smaller ones, run by regional warlords), who were forced to fight an external enemy, but often enough they kept on fighting each other. Actually Japan never conquered the whole of China. Their conquests were limited to North-Eastern China and some stretches along the coast. The Japanese also tried to invade Siberia, but got beaten back in several battles by the a Russian General named Chuikov (the same one who later conquered Berlin).
Taiwan actually used to be a Portuguese and Dutch colony, followed by a short stretch of Chinese rule during the 19th century, followed by Japanese rule, except for the four years between the end of WW2 and the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. During the 20th century, Taiwan was only ruled by China for about 5 years.
By the same reasoning Korea (both Koreas) should belong to China, because they were once a vassal of the Chinese empire.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29929
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:09 am

In a communist state,getting volunteers is not an issue......They can be ordered to join up  Smile
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
User avatar
falstaff
Posts: 5593
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:17 am

RE: China .. World War II

Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:49 pm



Quoting Rara (Reply 1):
As to how well they were equipped... no idea, but the Soviets must have played a part in that.

The Soviets supplied a lot of arms to the the Chicoms. The Soviets had A LOT of arms leftover from WWII. Even today Soviet arms from WWII are cheap and plentiful here in the US.
My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
 
AGM100
Topic Author
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: China .. World War II

Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:38 pm

Just seems like with the Imperial Japanese Army overthrowing , burning , and destroying Nanjing, that they may have been able to recruit a massive resistance. Even if the masses were only armed with sticks and stones... the Japanese must have been out numbered 20-1 (guess)

For instance in comparison to the defense of the mother land executed by the Russians .. the Chinese appear to have simply laid down.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
ronglimeng
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:12 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:21 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
Just seems like with the Imperial Japanese Army overthrowing , burning , and destroying Nanjing, that they may have been able to recruit a massive resistance

I would ask "recruit to where" - the corrupt Kuomintang, the greedy warlords, or the exhausted Communists who had hardly then recovered from the Long March?

It wasn't until October 1, 1949 when Mao proclaimed that "the Chinese people had stood up" that China really existed as a nation. We found that out the hard way a year or so later when MacArthur ignored Chinese warnings about getting too close to the Yalu River.

Lack of unity wasn't just a Chinese characteristic. Look what a couple of boatloads of Brits were able to do on the Indian sub-continent against millions and millions of people.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:21 pm



Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
The nationalists fought the communists and vice versa already before the Japanese invasion of the mid 1930s.

Slightly off the topic...Oh yeah, the Nationalists almost wiped out the Communists. Then the Long March, Yan'An, peasant's revolution and all of that...Mao proved himself more than 'immortal" during that time. Then came the "Co-operation" of the two parties to fight the Japanese.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
Actually Japan never conquered the whole of China.

Thank God.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
Taiwan actually used to be a Portuguese and Dutch colony, followed by a short stretch of Chinese rule during the 19th century, followed by Japanese rule, except for the four years between the end of WW2 and the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. During the 20th century, Taiwan was only ruled by China for about 5 years.

So what did it use to be BEFORE the Portugese and Dutch? Certainly not in-dependent. According to the history I learned, Portugese/Dutch rule ended in 1662 when Zheng Cheng Gong kicked them out - "Re-claiming of Taiwan". If it hadn't been Chinese, where came the word "Re-Claim"?

China-Qing Dynasty claimed rule over Taiwan until 1895 when China lost the war the Japan (Jiawu) and Taiwan was 'given" to Japan as concession. So China had 230+ years rule over Taiwan, a lot longer than the Dutch, Japan combined, why is considered a "short stretch"? This does not even inlcude the years prior to European colonists's occupation of Taiwan.

By the end of WW2 in 1945, Taiwan was returned to China. But it's also interesting to see how the west see Taiwan NOT ruled by China after 1949. Taiwan, as of today, still has the official name of "Republic of China", doesn't it? It never left "Repblic of China", whose constitution still says mainland China is part of "Republic of China", no matter how many in Taiwan want to get rid of the mainland.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
By the same reasoning Korea (both Koreas) should belong to China, because they were once a vassal of the Chinese empire.

ummm...this would be really OFF the topic...Korea/Vietnam/Mongolia all fall in the same category, with Japan closely nearby.
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:53 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 8):
So what did it use to be BEFORE the Portugese and Dutch? Certainly not in-dependent. According to the history I learned, Portugese/Dutch rule ended in 1662 when Zheng Cheng Gong kicked them out - "Re-claiming of Taiwan". If it hadn't been Chinese, where came the word "Re-Claim"?

Well...if you really, really want to go into further history, Taiwan was originally aboriginal (similar to the those from Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines) and not Han Chinese until they started immigrating there in the 1600's. So, while whatever entity was called "China" back then may have had control of Taiwan for 230 years as you claim, it was aboriginal for over 8000 years.
 
AGM100
Topic Author
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: China .. World War II

Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:12 am

Anyone have a recommendation for a book about the history of china. After reading responses above I see I need to read up a bit. There are hundreds of them at the book store , just a recommendation would be good.

I am busy so it would be nice to have one that is not 10k pages, but still covers the important stuff . Thanks ,
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:05 am



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 9):
Well...if you really, really want to go into further history, Taiwan was originally aboriginal

If you really really really want to get into history....Chinese started their presence (10k+troops) in Taiwan back in Han Dynasty in year 230. More troops (10K+) were deployed in Sui Dynasty in 607/608. In Year 1171, houses and navy stations were built (Song Dynasty). And these went on and on throughout Yuan Dynasty, Ming Dynasty, Qing Dynasty, and the Republic of China. There was no short of Chinese in Taiwan, even considering just the Han Chinese.

Dutch did not appear until early 1600 and were kicked out in 1662.

Therefore I agree aboriginals had more years in Taiwan. But to say Taiwan was somehow Dutch, Portugese (together some 60 years) or Japanese (50 year + on and off invasions to Taiwan) and Chinese rule was the "short stretch" is not correct.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:17 am



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 6):
For instance in comparison to the defense of the mother land executed by the Russians .. the Chinese appear to have simply laid down.

Well if you consider China were forced to into wars ever since 1840 (First Opium War with the British, who else) and lost most of them (rememeber losses=concessions). By the time the Japanese invaded in the 1930s, China was basically in a sick-bed waiting to die.

Therefore the question here should have been why didn't those countries (The British, French, Germans + their neighbors, Russians, Japanese) leave China the f*ck alone?
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:08 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 11):
If you really really really want to get into history....Chinese started their presence (10k+troops) in Taiwan back in Han Dynasty in year 230. More troops (10K+) were deployed in Sui Dynasty in 607/608. In Year 1171, houses and navy stations were built (Song Dynasty). And these went on and on throughout Yuan Dynasty, Ming Dynasty, Qing Dynasty, and the Republic of China. There was no short of Chinese in Taiwan, even considering just the Han Chinese.

Dutch did not appear until early 1600 and were kicked out in 1662.

Therefore I agree aboriginals had more years in Taiwan. But to say Taiwan was somehow Dutch, Portugese (together some 60 years) or Japanese (50 year + on and off invasions to Taiwan) and Chinese rule was the "short stretch" is not correct.

That's not what I gather from the history I studied. The aboriginals were the original people of that island. Various settlers came and went (like from the Song Dynasty and Sui Dynasty, as you mentioned), but that island was predominantly aboriginal. Nothing can dispute the fact that they are the natives of that island and had THE predominant presence until the 1600's when the Dutch came in and then the Han Chinese started immigrating there in mass numbers and kicked the Dutch out. What happened after that has been argued by you and others.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 12):
Well if you consider China were forced to into wars ever since 1840 (First Opium War with the British, who else) and lost most of them (rememeber losses=concessions). By the time the Japanese invaded in the 1930s, China was basically in a sick-bed waiting to die.

Therefore the question here should have been why didn't those countries (The British, French, Germans + their neighbors, Russians, Japanese) leave China the f*ck alone?

You originally from China?
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:06 am



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 13):
The aboriginals were the original people of that island

I was not disputing that. But even the aboriginals in Taiwan came from elsewhere, no? You may say the same (aboriginals) about many parts of China, especially in current day Yunnan, Sichuan, Guangxi...weren't we all some kind of aboriginal at some point in history?

Back to my point:

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 13):
Therefore I agree aboriginals had more years in Taiwan. But to say Taiwan was somehow Dutch, Portugese (together some 60 years) or Japanese (50 year + on and off invasions to Taiwan) and Chinese rule was the "short stretch" is not correct.



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 13):
You originally from China?

Why does that matter? My history book is 'propagada' and yours isn't?
 
johns624
Posts: 1250
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:24 am



Quoting B2443 (Reply 14):
Quoting Corinthians (Reply 13):
You originally from China?

Why does that matter? My history book is 'propagada' and yours isn't?

Maybe because you seem to be taking this a little too personally???
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:15 am



Quoting B2443 (Reply 14):

I was not disputing that. But even the aboriginals in Taiwan came from elsewhere, no? You may say the same (aboriginals) about many parts of China, especially in current day Yunnan, Sichuan, Guangxi...weren't we all some kind of aboriginal at some point in history?

Well, the aboriginals in Taiwan are the same as those from the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia. If you say they're from "China", then good on you. But then from your argument, where the Malaysians, Indonesians and Filipinos from China too? And by your explanation of us all being aboriginal at some point, well I guess we're all the same, right?

Quoting B2443 (Reply 14):

Why does that matter? My history book is 'propagada' and yours isn't?

I just asked a simple question that warranted just a "yes" or "no" answer. I don't know why you couldn't answer it directly and were so defensive. It had nothing to do with your history lessons. Even with your evasive response, you basically answered my question.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7872
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:46 am



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 10):
Anyone have a recommendation for a book about the history of china.

Spence.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 11):
There was no short of Chinese in Taiwan, even considering just the Han Chinese.

So, that does not mean it was their island. There was no shortage of Chinese in California either during much of the 1800s. Yet, California is not part of China.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 8):
So China had 230+ years rule over Taiwan, a lot longer than the Dutch, Japan combined, why is considered a "short stretch"? This does not even inlcude the years prior to European colonists's occupation of Taiwan.

Well Taiwan's time as a Chinese province was pretty short, 1887-1895, about 7 or 8 years only. This is not a very substantial record. Furthermore, this was a long time ago. It strikes me as too convenient to pinpoint a particular 7 year people (even a 100 year period so distant) and describe it as relevant. Couldn't many people describe the PRC governement as completely invalid, since it only came about in 1949? That's a pretty new government. Before them, there were others. We have to work within today's framework, and not use history selectively. History can be used for, or against, any purpose. It could, for example, totally invalidate the US or China's own governments, under all sorts of justifications. But we should not be slaves to persons who died long ago, that is my message.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:00 pm



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 16):
Well, the aboriginals in Taiwan are the same as those from the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia. If you say they're from "China", then good on you.

People, I was NOT arguing aboriginal Taiwanese...I was merely saying Chinese started to make presence on the island way way way ahead of the Dutch and Japanese. So please don't say it was Dutch, Japanese while denying it was Chinese.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 17):
So, that does not mean it was their island. There was no shortage of Chinese in California either during much of the 1800s. Yet, California is not part of China.

Therefore can we safely conclude racial roots have "NOTHING" to do with political divides? So why were we even talking about aboriginals, the Dutch, the Japanese....
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:21 pm



Quoting Flighty (Reply 17):
Well Taiwan's time as a Chinese province was pretty short, 1887-1895, about 7 or 8 years only.

hmmm...Not sure where you got that from...as history did not just start in 1887...

http://www.tpg.gov.tw/e-English/history/history-e-2_1.htm

Quoting Flighty (Reply 17):
Couldn't many people describe the PRC governement as completely invalid, since it only came about in 1949?

I don't see how relevant that is...An emperor dies, another emperor takes his place , i.e. new government, and therefore "invalid"? Kosovo? Mongolia (name changed from People's Republic of Mongolia a couple years ago), invalid just because they are "young"?
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:40 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 19):
hmmm...Not sure where you got that from...as history did not just start in 1887...

http://www.tpg.gov.tw/e-English/hist...1.htm

The official Taiwanese government site has a different version of history than the site you provided.

http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/5-gp/yearbook/ch3.html
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:46 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 10):
Anyone have a recommendation for a book about the history of china.

Not a general history but one book that seldom gets adverse criticism is:

Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China - a formidable number of volumes though, as so far, they have not made the film, although that would be a good idea!!!

* Vol. I. Introductory Orientations
* Vol. II. History of Scientific Thought
* Vol. III. Mathematics and the Sciences of the Heavens and Earth
* Vol. IV. Physics and Physical Technology
* Vol. V. Chemistry and Chemical Technology
* Vol. VI. Biology and Biological Technology
* Vol. VII. The Social Background

He has a Wiki entry at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Needham

If you do not find the history of China interesting, just the history of Needham is a worthwhile study!!
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:54 pm



Quoting Flighty (Reply 17):
Quoting B2443 (Reply 8):
So China had 230 years rule over Taiwan, a lot longer than the Dutch, Japan combined, why is considered a "short stretch"? This does not even inlcude the years prior to European colonists's occupation of Taiwan.

Well Taiwan's time as a Chinese province was pretty short, 1887-1895, about 7 or 8 years only. This is not a very substantial record. Furthermore, this was a long time ago. It strikes me as too convenient to pinpoint a particular 7 year people (even a 100 year period so distant) and describe it as relevant. Couldn't many people describe the PRC governement as completely invalid, since it only came about in 1949? That's a pretty new government. Before them, there were others. We have to work within today's framework, and not use history selectively. History can be used for, or against, any purpose. It could, for example, totally invalidate the US or China's own governments, under all sorts of justifications. But we should not be slaves to persons who died long ago, that is my message.

Exactly. By this reasoning we Germans could claim the rule of most of Euope, since most of it once was the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, or the Italians could do much the same, since most of Southern Europe and Northern Africa used to be part of the Roman Empire at some time.
In anycase, selfdetermination of the peoples is a relatively new concept. Up to the mid-20th century basicallywhoever had an advantage (weaponry etc.) would use it to his profit and this includes invading and occupying other countries. I'm sure that while China was strong in asia, they did the same there.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
Doona
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:43 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:24 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Thread starter):
I have a simple question ... How was China able to raise and equip such a huge army in the short period after WWII. ( Basically 5 years )

Not too difficult in an authoritarian regime. Hell, even a democratic nation like the US was able to massively increase the size of it's armed forces in the run-up to and during WW2 (albeit with ALOT more money).

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
The Japanese also tried to invade Siberia, but got beaten back in several battles by the a Russian General named Chuikov (the same one who later conquered Berlin).

I thought those attacks, like the Chasan Lake incident, were more like border skirmishes, in order to test the Soviet defences, rather than actually invade. Although that I guess that in itself was a kind of preparation for a possible invasion. They got their butts thoroughly kicked by the Soviets, and I read somewhere that while the Japanese did not think much of the fighting spirit of the Soviet troops, they were scared shitless of Soviet artillery and armour, areas of land warfare where the Japanese were seriously lacking.

Quoting Ronglimeng (Reply 7):
It wasn't until October 1, 1949 when Mao proclaimed that "the Chinese people had stood up" that China really existed as a nation.

Interestingly, the Taiwan government continued to be the recognized government of China, at least in the eyes of the West. Taiwan occupied the Chinese seat in the UN Security Council until something like 1972, IIRC (And, if you read the UN charter, it even today states that one of the UNSC seats belongs to the Republic of China, not the PRC. Come to think of it, it also says "USSR", and not Russia. For some reason it hasn't been changed). This had lead to a boycott of the UN by the USSR in the late 40's, early 50's, which in turn led to the fact that the UN was able to take action when it came to Korea. Yet another moment in time when "international solidarity" shot itself in the foot, I guess.  silly 

Cheers
Mats
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:52 pm



Quoting Doona (Reply 23):
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
The Japanese also tried to invade Siberia, but got beaten back in several battles by the a Russian General named Chuikov (the same one who later conquered Berlin).

I thought those attacks, like the Chasan Lake incident, were more like border skirmishes, in order to test the Soviet defences, rather than actually invade. Although that I guess that in itself was a kind of preparation for a possible invasion.

Depends how you define a border skirmish!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol

Casualty estimates vary widely: Some sources say the Japanese suffered 45,000 or more soldiers killed with Russian casualties of at least 17,000,[5]. The Japanese officially reported 8,440 killed and 8,766 wounded, while the Russians initially claimed 9,284 total casualties. It is likely that figures published at the time were reduced for propaganda purposes. In recent years, with the opening of the Soviet archives, a more accurate assessment of Soviet casualties has emerged from the work of Grigoriy Krivosheev, citing 7,974 killed and 15,251 wounded.[1] Similar research into Japanese casualties has yet to take place.

Quoting Doona (Reply 23):
They got their butts thoroughly kicked by the Soviets, and I read somewhere that while the Japanese did not think much of the fighting spirit of the Soviet troops, they were scared shitless of Soviet artillery and armour, areas of land warfare where the Japanese were seriously lacking.

That is one way to phrase it and another would be:
The Japanese, however, while learning never to attack the USSR again, made no major changes to their tactical doctrines. They continued to emphasize the bravery and courage of the individual soldier over massing force and armor. The problems that faced them at Khalkin Gol, most importantly their lack of armor, would plague them again when the Americans and British recovered from their defeats of late 1941 and early 1942 and turned to the conquest of the Japanese Empire.

It started as a border skirmish with Mongolians trying to find grazing for less than 100 horses in a disputed border area but when you have more than a Japanese division being opposed by about 50,000 Russian and Mongolian troops and 450 tanks, it no longer counts as a border skirmish. The main battle was notable for Russian armour being able to mount encircling attacks and taking the Japanese in the rear. Encirclement was followed by destruction of the Japanese 23rd Div mostly by artillery and air attacks. 450 tanks was quite something in 1939!

In May 1940 the whole of the BEF had 100 tanks and 200 light tanks and we do not speak of that as a border skirmish - which of course it was, bloody great big borders of course!!

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWbef.htm
 
AGM100
Topic Author
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:14 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 21):
a formidable number of volumes though,

With my schedule I would have trouble finishing one book in a month , but thanks man. I am interested in getting a good accurate but general overview of the modern history of China.

Since I may be living there sooner than later.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:23 pm



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 20):
The official Taiwanese government site has a different version of history than the site you provided.

http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website....html

ahh..Interesting how it so conveniently started listing "key event" from 1624...(a de-linking Chinese roots act among many during a highly political and pro-independence DPP rule would be an explanation). But what is not listed there does not mean things did not happen.

BTW the link I provided is by the offiical Taiwan Provencial Government.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:37 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 25):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 21):
a formidable number of volumes though,

With my schedule I would have trouble finishing one book in a month , but thanks man. I am interested in getting a good accurate but general overview of the modern history of China.

Since I may be living there sooner than later.

Start here for a reference to an abridged version!!  Big grin

http://dannyreviews.com/h/Science_China.html

The Shorter Science and Civilisation in China: 3
Joseph Needham
Cambridge University Press 1986
A book review by Danny Yee © 2000 http://dannyreviews.com/
It would be nice to have a spare six months to read Joseph Needham's mammoth Science and Civilisation in China, but I fear a few volumes of Ronan's abridgement are as much as I will ever manage. This volume, abridged from volume IV parts 1 and 3, covers matters nautical: electricity and magnetism (because of their connection with the compass), ship design and its historical evolution, exploration, navigation, propulsion, and so forth. Needham sets this in a broadly comparative overview, ranging from ancient Egypt to premodern Europe (his approach is strongly "diffusionist", reflecting the early 1960s date).


So he reckons six months!!! I think that might be optimistic.
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:42 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 26):
ahh..Interesting how it so conveniently started listing "key event" from 1624...(a de-linking Chinese roots act among many during a highly political and pro-independence DPP rule would be an explanation). But what is not listed there does not mean things did not happen.

BTW the link I provided is by the offiical Taiwan Provencial Government.

I know about the link you provided and where it's from. But what about the link I gave? Isn't that an official too?
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:44 pm



Quoting Doona (Reply 23):
Interestingly, the Taiwan government continued to be the recognized government of China, at least in the eyes of the West. Taiwan occupied the Chinese seat in the UN Security Council until something like 1972

It was not Taiwan government, it was "Republic of China". Both governments (PRC and ROC) claimed (still do with PRC more vocal) "representation" of the whole China (mainland and Taiwan) and PRC won in 1972 and that was that.

That says it all... "recognized by the West". If PRC wasn't founded by a "Communist" party, it would have been a different story. Wouldn't you agree? Given how quickly PRC started to get "recognized" by the West when China-USSR relations started to go sour...All of sudden PRC could be used for the West...Poor POC all she gets is victimized by all of these "world power interests"...denied of UN, denied of recognition...and when convenient, she's used to go against their brothers and sisters across the Strait.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:48 pm



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 28):
I know about the link you provided and where it's from. But what about the link I gave? Isn't that an official too?

While I know it's ROC official, I raise this question, what happened before 1624, nothing? Did the Han, Sui, Song, Yuan, Ming Chinese not make any significance in Taiwan?

And again:

Quoting B2443 (Reply 26):
ahh..Interesting how it so conveniently started listing "key event" from 1624...(a de-linking Chinese roots act among many during a highly political and pro-independence DPP rule would be an explanation). But what is not listed there does not mean things did not happen.

 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:08 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 30):
While I know it's ROC official, I raise this question, what happened before 1624, nothing? Did the Han, Sui, Song, Yuan, Ming Chinese not make any significance in Taiwan?

This is a matter of debate that you and I are not going to solve through this forum. How much influence the Han settlers had before the Dutch went to Taiwan is still an open question depending on which side of history you were taught. My initial point is that Taiwan was aboriginal long before the Han Chinese ever even heard of the island. Taiwan was no different than Indonesia and Malaysia. What you learned and what others learned cannot dispute this fact.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 29):
That says it all... "recognized by the West". If PRC wasn't founded by a "Communist" party, it would have been a different story. Wouldn't you agree? Given how quickly PRC started to get "recognized" by the West when China-USSR relations started to go sour...All of sudden PRC could be used for the West...Poor POC all she gets is victimized by all of these "world power interests"...denied of UN, denied of recognition...and when convenient, she's used to go against their brothers and sisters across the Strait.

"Poor me, poor me. Everyone has screwed us." What are we trying to say here?

As for the "brothers and sisters" across the straight, I'm sure a lot of them don't see you guys in the same light. Hell, my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, doesn't view Taiwanese as her "brethren". I know she's not unique in this regard. She's a political journalist and oddly enough, she doesn't get so sensitive when it comes to discussing Chinese politics. Actually, she doesn't like Taiwanese people, but it has absolutely nothing to do with politics.
 
johns624
Posts: 1250
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:34 pm

I think there is confusion between the Chinese being a distinctive race and the Chinese having a central, continuing government.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:35 pm



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 31):
My initial point is that Taiwan was aboriginal long before the Han Chinese ever even heard of the island.

Hello Hawaii! Hell the whole America and Australia!

I was/am NOT disputing that...geez how many times do I have to repeat myself..I was simply looking at the Chinese influences over the Dutch and the Japanese, which seem to be more regarded/emphasized than the Chinese is.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 31):
my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, doesn't view Taiwanese as her "brethren".

Getting a little too personal here...don't want to go there...after all, what I say is my opinion. Her view is a view. You may or may not agree with it and I accept that.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 31):
"Poor me, poor me. Everyone has screwed us." What are we trying to say here?

Not everything is taught in the West, including the truths. But that doesn't mean they didn't happen. I guess "invasion", "colonists" are not negative words in the western dictionary.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:47 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 25):
I am interested in getting a good accurate but general overview of the modern history of China.

Since I may be living there sooner than later.

When it comes to things related to China, many of the books here in the west tend to get too political, including National Geographic, which I have a lot of respect for. Chinese views (many would equate those as Communists views) are little spoken in English language.

If I were you, I would forget of the books and just go there and feel it for yourself.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:51 pm



Quoting Johns624 (Reply 32):
I think there is confusion between the Chinese being a distinctive race and the Chinese having a central, continuing government.

And there's also confusion between Han Chinese and other ethnic Chinese, such muslim Chinese, manchurian Chinese, mongolian Chinese, Korean Chinese, etc....Chinese is Han+.
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:55 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 33):

Hello Hawaii! Hell the whole America and Australia!

And while we're at it, let's include Tibet, Xinjiang, Gansu and Qinghai, OK? Their original populations were not Han Chinese.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 33):
Getting a little too personal here...don't want to go there...after all, what I say is my opinion. Her view is a view. You may or may not agree with it and I accept that.

I just brought her up as an example and it's a legitimate one because she happens to be from China (a political reporter, no less) and her viewpoint is just as valid as yours, even if it is different. But like I said, it's her viewpoint and I know she is not alone in this regard.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 33):

Not everything is taught in the West, including the truths. But that doesn't mean they didn't happen. I guess "invasion", "colonists" are not negative words in the western dictionary.

Nobody ever said everything has been taught in the West, but it has nothing to do with the victimization you brought up. As for "invasion" and "colonist", are they negative words in the Chinese dictionary? Or only negative when they happened against China and not the other way around?
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:03 pm



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 36):
Quoting B2443 (Reply 33):
Getting a little too personal here...don't want to go there...after all, what I say is my opinion. Her view is a view. You may or may not agree with it and I accept that.

I just brought her up as an example and it's a legitimate one because she happens to be from China (a political reporter, no less) and her viewpoint is just as valid as yours, even if it is different. But like I said, it's her viewpoint and I know she is not alone in this regard.

I could also quote my girlfriend, who is ethnic Chinese, but considers herself Filipina, since this is the place her great-grand parents emigrated to in the early 20th century.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:05 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 34):

When it comes to things related to China, many of the books here in the west tend to get too political, including National Geographic, which I have a lot of respect for. Chinese views (many would equate those as Communists views) are little spoken in English language.

If I were you, I would forget of the books and just go there and feel it for yourself.

I would agree with him here. Western and Chinese books are divergent in their historical perspectives.

And if you do go to China, whatever you do, don't talk about the "Three T's"!

Quoting B2443 (Reply 35):
Quoting Johns624 (Reply 32):
I think there is confusion between the Chinese being a distinctive race and the Chinese having a central, continuing government.

And there's also confusion between Han Chinese and other ethnic Chinese, such muslim Chinese, manchurian Chinese, mongolian Chinese, Korean Chinese, etc....Chinese is Han+.

I think it depends who you ask here, but I'd agree with our Mainlaind friend here that China as it is now is not totally Han Chinese. But if you were to ask a person from one of those minority groups, I don't think they'd consider themselves Chinese. The guy who lives on the third floor of my apartment building is a Korean from China. He doesn't consider himself Chinese at all and considers himself totally Korean. He speaks Korean at home, even if he also speaks Mandarin. Then again, Koreans from Korea don't really consider him to be one of their own and consider him to be "Korean-Chinese". That itself is another matter of debate.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 8:31 pm



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 36):
And while we're at it, let's include Tibet, Xinjiang, Gansu and Qinghai, OK? Their original populations were not Han Chinese.

I knew that would come up, a bit too far away from the topic nonetheless...And you forgot about Jilin, Liaoning, Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, Guangxi, Yunan...how about all of mainland China? Point is does it matter? (Han and non-Han) China's controls over those area are no more or less legitimate than Canada or the US in America, not a single bit more or less than the Australians. If you think ethinc percentage makes it 'legitmate" or not in Australia/America/Hawaii/Alaska/parts of California/Texas/Florida, wouldn't it make Han Chinese control over Tibet, Xinjiang and all other areas legitmate in 200 years provided the Han Chinese started agressive migration into those areas if you still consider they weren't?

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 38):
Then again, Koreans from Korea don't really consider him to be one of their own and consider him to be "Korean-Chinese". That itself is another matter of debate

Even Han Chinese is mixed. Same in Vietnam, considering Vietnam was once Chinese long before the Europeans set foot there. But that's been my point, racial roots play hardly any role when you think who should or shouldn't be the governing a country. When you read the arguments about Tibet as they are of a different culture, race, or whatever, ask why we are in America and why we are not returning to our original ethnic countries.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 38):
And if you do go to China, whatever you do, don't talk about the "Three T's"!

That's such stereotyping...But if you plan to be awarded with "Nobel Peace", or US Congressional Award, or at least make front page on AP, CNN, BBC, DW or whatever, you need to do a lot more than just "talk" about the three T's: For example, set fires in Lhasa or other Tibetan areas.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 36):
Or only negative when they happened against China and not the other way around?

Lets see, last non-Tibetan-Chinese "invasion" was? Oh yeah Tibet in 1951 as reporoted in the west. And what was the one prior to that?

Now, what was West's last invasion? Oh in 2003 to 2 countries! And what were the ones prior to that? Countless since 1600 and within thermselves like forever?

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 38):
But if you were to ask a person from one of those minority groups, I don't think they'd consider themselves Chinese.

In China they would say they are not Han, and that's not a problem whatsoever. They used the word "Chinese" because few people here could differentiate between Han and Chinese and believe other ethic groups are not Chinese. Most would just equate Han to Chinese, close but not accurate.
 
corinthians
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:54 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:18 pm



Quoting B2443 (Reply 39):

I knew that would come up, a bit too far away from the topic nonetheless...And you forgot about Jilin, Liaoning, Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, Guangxi, Yunan...how about all of mainland China? Point is does it matter? (Han and non-Han) China's controls over those area are no more or less legitimate than Canada or the US in America, not a single bit more or less than the Australians. If you think ethinc percentage makes it 'legitmate" or not in Australia/America/Hawaii/Alaska/parts of California/Texas/Florida, wouldn't it make Han Chinese control over Tibet, Xinjiang and all other areas legitmate in 200 years provided the Han Chinese started agressive migration into those areas if you still consider they weren't?

This only came up because you strayed off topic with the "Hawaii, America and Australia" bits. It goes both ways. And yes, most of those provinces you mentioned were eventually colonized by the Han Chinese. I'm not one to deny that the Europeans colonized many parts of the world, and sometimes brutally. But it's not like the Chinese were angels with their past invasion and colonization too. That's why I don't get this "poor me, poor me" attitude displayed here.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 39):
Even Han Chinese is mixed. Same in Vietnam, considering Vietnam was once Chinese long before the Europeans set foot there. But that's been my point, racial roots play hardly any role when you think who should or shouldn't be the governing a country. When you read the arguments about Tibet as they are of a different culture, race, or whatever, ask why we are in America and why we are not returning to our original ethnic countries.

Believe it or not, I don't have any opinion on Tibet one way or the other. But at one point they were their own governing entity before the Chinese came in. Fact is that most cultures were their own governing bodies at one point or another before foreign influences came to part. Now whether or not you think those foreign influences were justified is another debate altogether.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 39):
Lets see, last non-Tibetan-Chinese "invasion" was? Oh yeah Tibet in 1951 as reporoted in the west. And what was the one prior to that?

Now, what was West's last invasion? Oh in 2003 to 2 countries! And what were the ones prior to that? Countless since 1600 and within thermselves like forever?

Again, this isn't about Tibet. Or Iraq. Or Afghanistan. My point is that you bring out the colonization the West did against countless countries, but fail to mention the colonization that happened within Chinese history. Again, Tibet, Xinjian, Inner Mongolia and whomever are not ethnically Chinese. Hell, most people of Xinjian are Muslims, even to this day. Even back then, were they not called "white people"? These people didn't naturally gravitate to the Han Chinese and beg to be part of them. No, they were acquired. No different that how the West acquired different countries. You guys colonized just as much as everyone else did. Now, I'm not doubting the legitimacy of China's rule over those places. Yes, you are right that China has as much claim to that land now as the US or Canada or Australia has a claim to their land mass. But to say that China acquired this land through anything else other than invasion and colonization while chiding others for doing the exact same thing is hypocritical.

Quoting B2443 (Reply 39):

That's such stereotyping...But if you plan to be awarded with "Nobel Peace", or US Congressional Award, or at least make front page on AP, CNN, BBC, DW or whatever, you need to do a lot more than just "talk" about the three T's: For example, set fires in Lhasa or other Tibetan areas.

I'm not trying to get a rise out of you, but it's pretty safe to say (especially judging from your reaction) that it's not a good idea to talk about the "Three T's" when you're in the Mainland. I never brought it up or anything political the times I went there and I can't complain about my visits. Korea is another story, though...

Quoting B2443 (Reply 39):

In China they would say they are not Han, and that's not a problem whatsoever. They used the word "Chinese" because few people here could differentiate between Han and Chinese and believe other ethic groups are not Chinese. Most would just equate Han to Chinese, close but not accurate.

My neighbor is the only non-Han I've met who was born and raised in China. Oh, sorry...I met someone who was Man, but I don't know much about their history. Anyways, he was adamant that he was not Chinese and really stressed that he's Korean born and raised in China. It could be because he's Korean and you should know as well as I do how racist Koreans can be.
 
B2443
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:28 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:16 am



Quoting Corinthians (Reply 40):
That's why I don't get this "poor me, poor me" attitude displayed here.

Guess I am having too much time today...I was saying in the context of "ROC" replaced by PRC in the UN in 1972. "Poor POC" as in she got left out/abandoned by the west politically.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 40):
most of those provinces you mentioned were eventually colonized by the Han Chinese

Maybe not the most...They were inherited from Manchu Chinese and the Mongols Chinese, and it just so happens that the Han Chinese is in power. For example, Tibet was first conquered by the Mongols, not Han Chinese. Northeastern China was Manchurian that got absorbed into the Chinese map. Han Chinese built the Great Walls to keep themselvs in.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 40):
but fail to mention the colonization that happened within Chinese history

You must have meant Mongol colonization? Or Manchu colonization or inter-colonization within China that formed Han Chinese? But you are right, that is "within Chinese history", even though Han Chinese most of the time being invaded, rather than invading.

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 40):
These people didn't naturally gravitate to the Han Chinese and beg to be part of them. No, they were acquired.

As in they were aquired by non-Han Chinese, then the Han+ Chinese inherited the territories. Still thinking no difference how British aquired America and China aquired Manchuria or Xinjiang/Tibet or non-Han regions?

Quoting Corinthians (Reply 40):
...I met someone who was Man, but I don't know much about their history.

Manchu (Man Zu) conquered/invaded Han China (Ming) in 1644 by becoming the emperors in the very same Palace built by Ming Emperors, got Tibet back in its control, got now-a-day north eastern and Mongolia (those regions outside of the Great Wall) into its power/territory, Xinjiang in the same manner. Sadly they lost most of its cultural heritage and even the language. Cross marriages between Manchu and Mongols and Han were very common.
 
johns624
Posts: 1250
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:58 am

I believe what B2443 is trying to say is that it's only okay to conquer neighboring lands if they are the same ethnic makeup as yourself.  Silly
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: China .. World War II

Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:59 pm



Quoting Johns624 (Reply 42):
I believe what B2443 is trying to say is that it's only okay to conquer neighboring lands

I dunno what is being attempted, but perhaps it is worth noting that European countries have been decolonizing their conquests since the late 40s. If they are an example for conquest, then mayhap they could be an example for decolonization or unconquest if you prefer??? They even let HK and Macao go. Any offers?
 
ALexeu
Posts: 1446
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:01 am

RE: China .. World War II

Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:16 pm

Taiwan was never part of PR China. It was part of the Republic of China, and it is still part of it.

--

PR China was Sino-Indian war, but I am still curious about the status of Chinese Kashmir.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], DLFREEBIRD, Majestic-12 [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 24 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos