Kampfwagen
Junior Member
That must have been somewhat akward for the Germans...though I guess it would not have been the last time.
A german geared soldier figure
- Thread starter Red Guard
- Start date
mindreader said:
It's true that a WW2 German Division was better armed and had more firepower than their KMT/CCP counterparts, BUT, I'd also point out that the German-trained ROC army divisions were organized in 1933-1936 under Hans von Seeckt, and their quality was comparable to German divisions prior to their destruction in 1937 (Battle of Shanghai).
If we look at the quality of the German army in 1936, when they invaded the French puppet state of Rhenish Republic (Rhineland), the Wehrmacht went in on bicycles with Kar 98k rifles on their backs. This was not the same German army that rolled into France in 1940.
The German-trained divisions in China in 1936 was equipped with the same M35 Stahlhelm, with Kar 98k rifles, C96 Mauser pistols, Maxim & MG 35 machineguns, artillery, howitzers, mortars, etc.
The main German tank in 1936 was the Panzer I w/20mm gun. The same tank was supplied to Spain and China, though in limited quanities. The ROC Army only received 15 Panzer I's and a number of Panzerspahwagen 222 armored cars, before the Japanese pressured Germany to end arms delivery to China.
Had the Marco Polo bridge incident not escalated into war, and Von Skeet's 60-division plan complete by 1940, I think the Sino-Japanese war would've turned out very differently. From the Japanese military's point of view, you could say that they had little choice but to gamble on an attack while it was still in their advantage.
mindreader
New Member
adeptitus said:
Sorry to tell you but, you are a little misinformed. When the Germans and KMT boast how they will train and equip China with 20 divisions, how many do you think actually reached the Chinese? Obviously they failed in such an ambitious, if not impossible goal.
If you want to claim that KMT's Germans trained troops are on an equal footing with the Germans, I'm not gonna argue on that. Not because I think it's true, but merely because there is no basis for comparison. They've never faced each other so it's pointless to argue one way or another.
On the other hand, in terms of equipment, it's not even close. Just look up how many pieces of artillery a German division headquarter has. That, like I said, is more firepower than the entire KMT army. And there is no point even bringing up tanks, planes, ships. Put simply, the KMT had none (worth mentioning).
Failure at Shanghai was expected. Bravery and valour only gets you so far. After being bombarded by Japanese ships and planes and being cut off from reinforcements and supplies, it was only a matter of time.
And no, even if the Marco Polo Bridge accident didn't happen when it did and those divisions weren't destroyed in Shanghai, the war would still turn out the way it did, maybe even worse.
All the industrial capacity in China was concentrated in the Northeast, which once the Japanese took, there was little the Chinese could produce except light arms.
All the resources, rich and fertile lands, trade, money generating property were dominated by coastal China. Once that Japanese take that and start a blockade, even if the Germans didn't ally with Japan, nothing would reach the KMT forces.
I don't really want to argue about Chiang's other qualities, but he was a moron. China would have been much better off had he chose to fight in 1931 (instead of letting the Japanese take the Northeast without a fight), back when China and Japan's comprehensive strength was much much closer.
mindreader said:
Most sources cite 8 divisions were complete in the re-org and training, 7 combat + 1 training division. A further 12-20 were "in progress". The original plan was not complete because of Japanese pressure to withdraw German advisors. Had the Marco Polo bridge incident been resolved peacefully, it's not impossible to think 20 ROC Army divisions could've completed their re-org and training by 1940. Heavy equipment, however, is another story.
mindreader said:
If we're talking about German Infantry divisions (not Panzer divisions or Panzer armies), each German division had its own artillery brigade armed with some 105mm and 150mm artillery, plus heavy mortars. Except for elite units or Panzer armies, most German infantry divisions were not mechnized and was powered on 2 legs or 4 legs (4,000 - 5,000 horses/division), plus some bicycles, motorcycles, and trucks they can get their hands on.
The German-trained divisions in China were comparable in light arms up to light machineguns, but was only equipped with half as many heavy machineguns, mortars, and far fewer artillery. As an infantry division, they were prolly comparable to the German infantry that invaded Rhineland in 1936, but definately not the German army that rolled into Poland a few years later.
On artillery comparison, in 1933 the ROC Army had 134 Infantry divisions and 9 Calvery Divisions, but only 5 artillery brigades and 20 artillery regiments. Obviously there wasn't enough artillery go around, but if you combine the ENTIRE ROC Army's artillery guns in 1936, it's numerically superior with more firepower than a SINGLE German infantry division's artillery regiment.
If we move up the timeline a little, after the Germans withdrew their support, the ROC went to Soviets for help, and the Soviets delivered over 1,300 artillery pieces and 1.9 million shells between 1937-1939. I'm pretty sure that's more than what a single German division has in artillery.
mindreader said:
Perhaps, but by the Marco Polo bridge incident it was too late to go back and change history. Chang should've listened to Alexander von Falkenhausen.
Last edited:
mindreader
New Member
adeptitus said:
By most sources, I also strongly believe you are referring to most western (including German) sources. In reality, KMT forces was nowhere near that strong. I think you saw way too many vanity pictures taken to fool the Japanese regarding the KMT's true strength. I hightly doubt that either the Germans or the KMT truly believe in such numbers.
Like I said, you are simplifying the situation. Even if we suppose outright war did not occur in 1937, no amount of supplies would have reached the Chinese any ways. The Japanese were already effectively blockading China's eastern seaboard.
I also don't know why you insist on leaving out heavy equipment. Like I said, if you are referring to the submachine guns and some LMG, yes the Chinese had limited access to those. But surely you aren't suggesting that they try to streamroll Japanese tanks on China's central plains with those.
Once again, you are over-simplifying the situation. Heavy equipment provide the bulk of firepower a combat force has. Without those, there simply ISN'T any comparison between the Germans and the KMT forces. It isn't simply land forces either. The KMT also had no airforce to speak of and no naval power. Furthermore, from a logistics point of view, they are also much behind. From a tactics point of view, their commanders were inferior. So no, even in 1936, there isn't any reason to believe a KMT division would come anywhere near a German division.
Also, I think you are forgetting one very very important point. With the KMT it was an either or situation. It was either the Germans or the Americans and British. German aid = no American, British and Soviet aid. It was that simple. With your scenario, even if we do assume that by miracle, it actually happened, it would have meant that the KMT would receive no supplies (as little as it was) from 1940 onto 1945, perhaps even longer, had the war turn the other way.
As for the Soviets providing artillery, yes, that did actually happen. However, that was following the fact that war with Japan ALREADY occurred. We have no indication that Stalin would provide those resources had that not been the case.
I think you are forgetting that if Japan didn't invade China, it probably would try to take a shot at the USSR. If the IJA was not tied down in China, I doubt that the Red Army would be able to find the spare resources to relieve the KMT.
Also, you are a little late. The Soviets have been providing aid to China before the Germans. They have done so since the mid 20's, though primarily financial aid. Since we are discussing alternative history here, there is a far greater chance that the Soviets, Americans and British provide China with aids earlier had the war occurred earlier than there is chance that the Germans would equip China with 20 divisions, in which we know they failed to do.
Yes, by the Marco Polo Bridge incident, it was too late to change what transpired in the Northeast. But it was not too late to avoid another mistake, which is to fight earlier.
Put simply, the amount of money looted early in the war would equal several years worth of Japan's total tax income. The longer they are there, the more dangerous the situation becomes for the Allies.
mindreader said:
...and here enter the realm of "what if" questions...
If we were to assume that the Marco Polo bridge incident had been resolved peacefully:
1) Would German military assistance have been withdrawn in 1937?
2) Would Japan still blocade all Chinese seaports from East to South?
3) Would additional deliveries of German-made heavy weapons, such as 150mm artillery, been made to China in exchange for tungsten up to 1940?
4) Would the Chinese munitions factories at Hanyang, Guangdong, and Taiyuan have been able to produce heavy weapons (37mm anti-tank guns?) from German-supplied blueprints by 1940, like it did with machineguns in 1930s? Would the Chinese-produced heavy weapons (if any) be effective vs Japanese tanks such as the Type 89 & Type 95?
The Chinese munitions factories were known to produce simple stokes-type mortars in 1930s, but not heavy artillery. The NRA was stuck mostly with WWI-era 75mm field and mountain guns. Too bad the development of recoilless rifles and Panzerfaust came so late, had they been adopted earlier, and perhaps imported to China and produced locally, it'd have made a big impact against the lightly-armored Japanese tanks.
mindreader said:
IMO from geographic point of view, it's a lot easier for Sovies to send aid than the Germans. The Soviets can simply ship them over the border by land, vs. Germans have to send it by ship.
Chiang could've retained Soviet aid, had he not expelled them in 1926. But that's another historical "what ifs". Since it was already done, he had to look for someone else to provide aid, and Germany was happy to oblige.
Last edited:
mindreader
New Member
adeptitus said:
Outright war may not have started in China, but that was only a matter of technicality. If the Germans were pressured (alliance or not, a minor threat would also suffice), the outcome would have been the same regardless. And there was no indication the Japanese wouldn't take this course of action.
They already were. The bombing of Shanghai isn't just a coincidence. It was a calculated move.
Theoretically yes, until 1939. In reality no. I don't see the Germans risking their lives running against a Japanese blockade.
I also think that I forgot to mention a key point in my last post. We know that somewhere between 1931 and 1937, Japan's comprehensive advantage over China increased multifolds, despite German aids.
So even if we make the unrealistic opinion that German help continued. The Japanese simply aren't sitting there doing nothing. So let's say in 1940, China's overall strength relative to itself in 1931 increased significantly, they would merely have fallen even further behind Japan.
No. Put simply, China did not have the industrial capacity to do so. Even if it did, they would be the first targets for the Japanese to bomb. In fact, Chiang actually made fairly significant improvements to China's industrial capacity by the early 1930's, but those were the first ones the Japanese took out.
Hanyang rifles are also known to be outdated by the time war started.
Indeed. But those don't stop air raids. Chances are, China also wouldn't have them in copius quantities to have changed the outcome of the war.
Absolutely true, but quite irrelevant to the topic of German aid. This is another reason why I believed Soviet help was more crucial (as it can be maintained) than German aid.
Chiang was in a bundle in that situation. He had to juggle Soviet interests, German interests, American and British interests (and of course, rob China to enrich his family and goons). I don't believe Chiang's expelling of Soviet help was an "what if."
With Soviet help it would have meant no American and British help. And no one would have predicted such 180 degree changes which saw the Americans and British on the same side as the Bolsheviks against the Germans in such a short period of time.
So, perhaps Chiang was a little short sighted, but he did take the best option available to him at the time, except of course, the Northeast incident.
Last edited:
Lots of good pictures here of the Chinese army in Shanghai, most being the German-trained units.
(Though not a picture of the Chinese fighting in Shanghai, this is a picture of young volunteers signing an 'Oath of loyalty' that they will not return home until the invaders are dead)
Chinese troops marching to the frontlines
(Though not a picture of the Chinese fighting in Shanghai, this is a picture of young volunteers signing an 'Oath of loyalty' that they will not return home until the invaders are dead)
Chinese troops marching to the frontlines