Korean War 70 years later Win Lose and A draw

antiterror13 said:

I have no idea what you are talking about .. just stop it .. I don't want to talk about it anymore with you who don't accept your mistake .. just wasting my time .. stop it!!!!

Click to expand...

You know if you want to stop you can simply just stop posting right ? And I do admit that not the entirety of HK was under a 99 year lease in the OP but I am pointing out that in terms of public pressure there is certainly less on Beijing shoulder in comparison to if lets say the entirety of HK was ceded in perpetuam.

Viktor Jav said:

Honestly Russo-Japanese war in 1904 deserves that credit more.

Click to expand...

No comparability at all btwn Sino-US Korean War of 1950s and Rus-Jap war in 1904, except both Chinese and Japanese are Orientals and both Americans and Russians are Caucasians.

What Japan beat was a backward, agricultural Tsar Russia whose industrialization and social development were lower than Japan's. And Tsar Russia had never been accepted as an equal member of Western Dominance society, despite Tsar Russia had marital connections to many Western European royal families and despite Tsar Russia had defeated many Western Dominance members before. Still, Tsar Russia's social status in the Western Dominance society was higher than Imperil Japan due to racial factors.

What the backward, agricultural China beat was the incumbent King The World, a fully industrialized, fully developed Western dominant power with the best military hardware, best military technology, and the most advanced military logistic available in the world. And the US is considered as a pure blue blood heir to the throne of the Western Dominance society since 1492. Hence, you could say China's victory has destroyed the most valuable part of the Western Dominance society, and starts a new era.

Right the US supremacy in war material, technology is just too lopsided The Chinese army overcome those shortcoming by wit, strategy and sheer human will to prevail. The western press wiki, analyst excused their failing by pointing to human wave tactic that is sheer rubbish. I have no doubt that they use it occasionally but the basic.

Chinese strategy is infiltration, enveloping and total surprise to overcome lack of air superiority and heavy mechanized force. Most of the operation occur at night under the cover of darkness to negate the air superiority
There is no million of peasant army The strength of both army is about equal and if you add the korean army casualty the Chinese suffer about the same men as the UN.

Chinese army fought bravely and heroically suffering immense casualty including Mao son Mao Anying.
Here is footage of the war including remark by Mark Clarke and Peng Dehuai the brilliant commanding general of Chinese army. The Korean war convince him to modernize the Chinese Army and bring the start of professionalism in the Chinese army. You can say the Chinese army modernization start from here.

And no China intervene in Korean war is not the drive US out of Asia because at that time China just to poor and doesn't have the mean to do it . But she intervene just to defend the heart land of China the same treatment that China deal with Hideyoshi Japan in 17 the century or war of 1905

Hendrik_2000 said:

Right the US supremacy in war material, technology is just too lopsided The Chinese army overcome those shortcoming by wit, strategy and sheer human will to prevail. The western press wiki, analyst excused their failing by pointing to human wave tactic that is sheer rubbish. I have no doubt that they use it occasionally but the basic.

Chinese strategy is infiltration, enveloping and total surprise to overcome lack of air superiority and heavy mechanized force. Most of the operation occur at night under the cover of darkness to negate the air superiority
There is no million of peasant army The strength of both army is about equal and if you add the korean army casualty the Chinese suffer about the same men as the UN.

Chinese army fought bravely and heroically suffering immense casualty including Mao son Mao Anying.
Here is footage of the war including remark by Mark Clarke and Peng Dehuai the brilliant commanding general of Chinese army. The Korean war convince him to modernize the Chinese Army and bring the start of professionalism in the Chinese army. You can say the Chinese army modernization start from here.

And no China intervene in Korean war is not the drive US out of Asia because at that time China just to poor and doesn't have the mean to do it . But she intervene just to defend the heart land of China the same treatment that China deal with Hideyoshi Japan in 17 the century or war of 1905

Click to expand...

what's the "heart land of China" in your last sentence above?

I've always thought there's Korea south to Yalu River, so did you perhaps mean some part of Korea historically claimed by China??

Jura said:

what's the "heart land of China" in your last sentence above?

I've always thought there's Korea south to Yalu River, so did you perhaps mean some part of Korea historically claimed by China??

Click to expand...

No it mean that any foreign army get too close to Chinese border it is interpreted as threat to China heartland of Beijing and Tianjin and China has the right to intervene and will
Here is a good reference on Korean war and dispel some myth about Korean war


19. What was the PVA and UN numerical strength at various stages of the Korean war?
Both sides had about the same numerical strength.

The first batch of PVA consisted of the 13th and 9th Army Group plus 3 artillery divisions, about 270,000 men.

At the peak time, total PVA and NKPA strength reached 1.2 million during the Korean war.

In June 1951, right after the 5th campaign, UN total strength was 695,110, with 520,850 ground force (US 253100, ROK 229600, other 38150), 80340 navy (US 66700, ROK 6000, other 7640) and 94520 air force (US 90000, ROK 4000, other 520). At the same time, PVA strength was about 240,000, much lower than total UN strength.

At the end of war, from PVA statistics, UN total strength was 1,111,340 (1.11134 million), ground force 904,550 (US 373,500, ROK 491,000, other 40050), navy 101,180 (US 73000, ROK 20000, other 8180), air force 105,610 (US 95000, ROK 10000, other 610). From western source (Korean Almanac), UN ground forces strength was slightly higher with a total of 932,539 (US 302483, ROK 590911, other 39145). PVA counted 70000 more US troops, this was probably because many ROKs (KATUSAs) were serving in US forces and counted as US strength by PVA.

In the war, PVA rotated about 2 million troops, US used 86% of its infantry and 14% of its Marine Corps, rotated over 1.319 million troops .

20. What is "human wave" tactics?
During battles, western forces were usually incapable of correctly estimating the strength of PVA forces, often times, they greatly exaggerated the number of attacking PVAs, such as taking a PVA regiment as a PVA division. PVA mostly attacked at night, blowing bugles and wistles, shouting thrills, even play "sweet music" to cause psychological stress, the PVA tactics made western forces feel that the enemy was everywhere from every direction. Moreover, PVAs were masters of infiltration, they often sneaked in and attacked directly on command posts, generating shock and chaos. Western combat history always refered PVA attacks as "swarm of Chinese", "human waves", "Chinese hordes", as if PVA simply threw its men into the fire and let itself slaughtered, such a description indicated a great misunderstanding of the PVA tactics. As some military analysts pointed out, PLA rarely use dense formation in their attacks, it seeks to inflict maximum damage with mnimum casualty. At various stages of the Korean war, PVA nevered had a commanding numerical superioty against UN forces, in fact, during the 4th campaign, it was greatly outnumbered by UN (it was always outgunned), yet it could still outmaneuver UN forces and even managed to counter attack at X Corps. PVA could achieve all these with inferior firepower because it had smarter tactics and strategy.

Hendrik_2000 said:

No it mean that any foreign army get too close to Chinese border it is interpreted as threat to China heartland of Beijing and Tianjin and China has the right to intervene and will
...

Click to expand...

thought the main reason for China to intervene was not to let Comrade Kim to lose, no?


(source of this map: )

Actual one of the most important outcomes of the Korean war is the death of Mao AnYing. He was well educated and very well liked by the military and political circles. If he had lived there was a very good chance Mao Zedong would make him the heir and truly make PRC into a dynasty like NK. All of the other sons from Mao Zedong are incompetent.

When my mom was growing up in the late 50s and early 60s, she said Mao Zedong would still do memorials for Mao AnYing on his memorial day.

It is only because he died that people like Deng could rise up through the ranks and take over and change China into a capitalist society. Unless AnYing is going to pull a Jiang ching Guo and reform,. Which I think is not too likely.

Jura said:

thought the main reason for China to intervene was not to let Comrade Kim to lose, no?

(source of this map:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

Click to expand...

Nope it was the policy of Chinese government whether they are imperial China or Communist China As soon as the enemy approach Chinese border, China will intervene 3 times in history China answer the call of help form Korea with one win one lost and one draw
China has no interest in saving the skin of Kim Il Sung who happened to cowardly fled Noko and hide in the cave in Manchuria But Mac Arthur start bombing Dandong a border town at the border and the noise of helping Chiang Kai Shek to wrest China from the CCP enough reason to intervene.
Coming out of long and debilitating civil war China has no reason to get involve in the war The country is in ruin and the treasury is empty China get dragged into the war not of their choosing But because aggression from McArthur



If you look at Imjin war of 1592 it is exactly at the same area when China start get involve.

China and America are not destined to become enemy There are still reserve of Good will toward US in China. But if the neo con keep hitting China with false and fake accusation and make every effort to contain China then the inevitable will happened. Hope we all will learn from Korean war and derive meaning from it I like this guy conclusion

34. How many civilians were killed by US forces in Korea?
About 3 million. (To be detailed)

35. What was the lesson China learned from the Korean war?
Chinese learned that united as a nation, they can defeat any enemy.

36. What is the future outlook of Sino-US relations?
China and US historically had fewer and less severe conflicts during the humiliating 100 year Chinese history since the Opium war. Chinese and Americans need not and should not be enemies, they should cooperate with each other to build a world of peace and prosperity.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

I simply disagree with your assessments that doesn’t mean I am lying or rewriting history. It’s interpretation.

Click to expand...

I am sorry Terran, I certainly didn't mean that to suggest you are lying. Please accept my apologies.

You are definately not lying, It just that because I am an old-timer, and remember things differently to you youngsters having to read from history books.

The 80s when I was growing up was a very intetested period in time, from Regan and Thatcher, miners strikes, "big bang", Falklands war to the collopse of the Berlin wall. Even funny hair-dos and first die-hard and terminator film, and of course, back to the future. I lived through it, seen it and debated it (at the time) with peers at Univetsity.

Anyway, you should read up on it when you got time. Its a very intetesting period.

Hendrik_2000 said:

36. What is the future outlook of Sino-US relations?
China and US historically had fewer and less severe conflicts during the humiliating 100 year Chinese history since the Opium war. Chinese and Americans need not and should not be enemies, they should cooperate with each other to build a world of peace and prosperity.

Click to expand...

That would be kinda of wishful thinking. China can work with the US with easy, but the US can't. Just as the US can't walk away from the ME, the US can't afford to let Taiwan united with the mainland China without some gut-wrenching struggles.

The most important factor that prevents the US from walking away from the ME is the "Petro-dollar" bond. The US has to keep the Saudis under constant watch to ensure it will not default the "dollar for crude only" scheme. The US knows, If the "Petro-dollar" is gone, the dollar will be dead immediately. The dollar is the only fiat money that has ever been used as a world currency since 1492, and US war debt is far beyond the $22 trillions US national debt on book. If the "Petro-dollar" were dead, the US had to collect all the greenbacks it has been over-supplying the world since the Korean War. Thus the US economy would be killed by the war bills it has accumulated during the past seventy years. So, for good, for bad, or for ugly, the US has no other choice but to stay in the ME to protect the "Petro-dollar", until it couldn't afford it anymore

The most important factor that prevents the US from walking away from Taiwan is its credibility. The US has promised to protect Taiwan, thus it must keep this promise. This is an issue of credibility, and a death and life issue for the dollar. A fiat money lives on the credibility of the issuer. When the issuer's credibility is gone, the fiat money becomes less valuable than toilet papers. For good, for bad, or for ugly, the US has to stick to its promise for as long as possible, until it finds, one day, its promise to Taiwan is less important than its own life.

China can easily prove US credibility is nothing but a joke. China may launch, any time after 2022 when China feels time is right, a small scale military operation against Taiwan, forcing the US to choose between fighting an unwinnable war against China in Asia, for the third time, or giving up Taiwan in exchange for China's help to avoid an immediate explosion of US debt crisis. China is the only country in the world that can help the US in this regard. This would be a replay of the British's Suez Canal crisis of 1956 where the US threatened the British to back off from the Canal, or to face the consequences of a dead Pound Starling. Hopefully, the US can make the right call for its own good. As an opportunist by birth, the US knows how to trade off its liability for gains. Plus, its military has never been a capable fighting force, at least in front the PLA, even in front the donkey-riding, Mauser rifle-wielding Afghan Taliban.