Significance of the Chinese military contribution to World War 2 disputed.

solarz · Jun 4, 2014

lightspeed said:
the Communist forces were reasonably well-equipped once they got hold of the Japanese military equipment. there were plenty of speculations regarding the quantity of the equipment. some said it is a considerable amount of equipment but others said it is the entire Arsenal.

This is all, in your own words, just speculation. "Reasonably well-equipped" means what, exactly? Better than the Eighth-Route Army, that's for sure, but what does that prove?

lightspeed · Jun 5, 2014

solarz said:
This is all, in your own words, just speculation. "Reasonably well-equipped" means what, exactly? Better than the Eighth-Route Army, that's for sure, but what does that prove?

it means they had the necessary equipment. ( rifles, machine guns, ammunition, artilleries and shells, grenades, explosives, tanks, etc. ) they possessed the capability to function effectively as a fighting unit and would engage in conventional battles with the similar-equipped enemy units and not be restricted to guerilla tactics or small scale attacks.

the Communists might have gotten hold of large quantities of Japanese military supplies or the Arsenals in Manchuria but still the Nationalists probably inherited larger Arsenals from those Japanese in China proper.

shen · Jun 5, 2014

lightspeed said:
my position remains the same. the Soviet’s archives indicated they directly gave weapons and ammunition to the CCP in 1945-46 and 1948. the CCP denied any Soviet military aid in 1948.

the CIA might not be accurate in its reports. the Americans were basically in the dark over the CCP-Soviet cooperation in China during 1945-49. they always said they found no concrete evidences that the Soviets were supplying military material to the CCP but they wouldn’t rule it out completely. the US imposed an arms embargo on the Nationalists from 1946-1947 but the Nationalists didn’t receive any significant US military aid till January 1949 when the Huaihai campaign ended. during that period. the Nationalist suffered from a severe lack of ammunition with no means for replenishment that resulted in their defeat to the Communists.

On June 19, 1951, during congressional hearings on the loss of China, Vice-Admiral Badger testified that the U.S. arms embargo against Nationalist China led to a loss of capability and morale that resulted in their defeat by Communist Chinese forces led by Mao Tse-Tung.[3]
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the chief source of CCP military supplies can’t be from capturing Nationalist supplies. take for example the artillery. the CCP’s superior artillery power was the decisive military winning factor. the CCP troops must have blasted hundred thousands of artillery shells during the three major campaigns of 1948 plus the siege of Jinan and Taiyuan. how could the Nationalists’ captured supplies solely constitute that huge source of artillery reserves ? a substantial part of their artilleries had to come from somewhere else.

do read the article in my previous post. various CCP Dairen officials said Dairen munitions factories produced 200,000 artillery shells for the Huanhai campaign. the Soviets supplied the CCP with war materials and technical assistance for the munitions factories. Su Yu’s words gave support to the importance of the Dairen munitions. this part of 1945-49 CCP Dairen history shouldn’t be ignored when understanding and evaluating the origin of the Communists' munitions source.

why do you persist on calling Dalian Dairen? The name Dairen was invented by the Japanese after their victory in the Russo-Japanese War.

lightspeed · Jun 5, 2014

shen said:
why do you persist on calling Dalian Dairen? The name Dairen was invented by the Japanese after their victory in the Russo-Japanese War.

it’s because i read some 1940s-50s works, and they used the Dairen term. I’m used to it already.

shen · Jun 5, 2014

lightspeed said:
it’s because i read some 1940s-50s works, and they used the Dairen term. I’m used to it already.

do you also prefer the terms, Shina and Manchukuo?

lightspeed · Jun 5, 2014

shen said:
do you also prefer the terms, Shina and Manchukuo?

you are so sensitive. you remind me of those people who schooled people for spelling and grammar mistakes in an internet forum. it's so pointless doing that.

Brumby · Jun 5, 2014

lightspeed said:
the US huge military aid to China during ww2 is a myth. General Stilwell only armed the expeditionary forces. General Wedemeyer never said he gave huge amount of military aid. the Air force received a good amount of aid. but that wasn’t really huge military or financial aid to China as a whole.

nobody would disagree or twist the fact that the KMT had a clear military advantage over the CCP after ww2. the military power balance gradually shifted in favor towards the CCP due to the complex amalgamation of many factors, i.e. the CCP's good military tactics and the KMT's deeply flawed military tactics, the US and the Soviet Union’s involvement and non-involvement, the KMT Communist military spies leaking vital intelligence to the CCP, etc.

artillery weapons were the decisive element of firepower that decided the outcome of the three major battles of 1948 in favor of the CCP and set the stage for them to take over whole of China.

KMT clearly had the advantage and should have walked away with the prize but did not. In a civil war, it boils down to leadership and the support of the people. KMT was corrupted.

lightspeed · Jun 5, 2014

Brumby said:
KMT clearly had the advantage and should have walked away with the prize but did not. In a civil war, it boils down to leadership and the support of the people. KMT was corrupted.

if the Soviet Russians didn't aid the CCP, even if the KMT had no US aid, they would not have lost all of China to the CCP. undercover Communist agent Ji Chaoding seriously disrupted the KMT government’s finances to the point of collapse resulting in the KMT losing the popular support. the undercover Communist agents inside the highest levels of the KMT’s military revealed KMT’s battle plans and vital intelligence information to the CCP which prepared and developed its battle plans using the KMT’s plans as references. “知己知彼百战百胜” the CCP ran an unusual highly skilled propaganda campaign. they skillfully eliminated all the KMT’s advantages. the Communists were really too smart and cunning.

solarz · Jun 5, 2014

lightspeed said:
it means they had the necessary equipment. ( rifles, machine guns, ammunition, artilleries and shells, grenades, explosives, tanks, etc. ) they possessed the capability to function effectively as a fighting unit and would engage in conventional battles with the similar-equipped enemy units and not be restricted to guerilla tactics or small scale attacks.

the Communists might have gotten hold of large quantities of Japanese military supplies or the Arsenals in Manchuria but still the Nationalists probably inherited larger Arsenals from those Japanese in China proper.

The Eighth-Route Army was able to function effectively as fighting units with only meager equipment. Again, your statement is meaningless.

lightspeed said:
if the Soviet Russians didn't aid the CCP, even if the KMT had no US aid, they would not have lost all of China to the CCP. undercover Communist agent Ji Chaoding seriously disrupted the KMT government’s finances to the point of collapse resulting in the KMT losing the popular support. the undercover Communist agents inside the highest levels of the KMT’s military revealed KMT’s battle plans and vital intelligence information to the CCP which prepared and developed its battle plans using the KMT’s plans as references. “知己知彼百战百胜” the CCP ran an unusual highly skilled propaganda campaign. they skillfully eliminated all the KMT’s advantages. the Communists were really too smart and cunning.

Do you think the Communism philosophy automatically gives its adherents some kind of intelligence boost? If not, why were the communists, who basically started as a bunch of peasants and academics, become so skilled in covert and propaganda warfare?

The answer is that, in the end, the communists' message appealed to people, even those who ranked high among the KMT goverment. That's why the communists were able to have informants among KMT military brass.

Brumby · Jun 5, 2014

lightspeed said:
if the Soviet Russians didn't aid the CCP, even if the KMT had no US aid, they would not have lost all of China to the CCP. undercover Communist agent Ji Chaoding seriously disrupted the KMT government’s finances to the point of collapse resulting in the KMT losing the popular support. the undercover Communist agents inside the highest levels of the KMT’s military revealed KMT’s battle plans and vital intelligence information to the CCP which prepared and developed its battle plans using the KMT’s plans as references. “知己知彼百战百胜” the CCP ran an unusual highly skilled propaganda campaign. they skillfully eliminated all the KMT’s advantages. the Communists were really too smart and cunning.

In war, it is the outcome that matters. CCP was able to exploit the resources that they had more effectively. Usually it is a combination of factors but popular support was in my opinion the overriding factor. KMT lost - it is a historical fact.

Just wondering, how is this discussion related to the title of this thread?

Significance of the Chinese military contribution to World War 2 disputed.

solarz

Brigadier

lightspeed

Junior Member

shen

Senior Member

lightspeed

Junior Member

shen

Senior Member

lightspeed

Junior Member

Brumby

Major

lightspeed

Junior Member

solarz

Brigadier

Brumby

Major