India tells China: Kashmir is to us what Tibet, Taiwan are to you

[huzihaidao12]

Don't keep us in suspense, I've tried to respond to Gubbi as best I can, Am waiting to hear your response.

Yes, I would also like to know that any Indians（especially JOE） to understand what I mean? If so, please share your views, thank you.

 

[Peshwa]

If you have a problem with Mr Hongwu then feel free to send him a private message, and argue over the point he made. However he didn't actually say that Japan was defeated SOLELY by the Chinese at any point, and Cardsharp has explained the rest.

Read my explanation to CardSharp.

I do take offense at you saying that firstly Chinese were not the victors in the second Sino-Japanese war (BS), and further that we somehow lacked merit.

No offense intended. Nor should you feel offended.

I dont agree with your position on many things India-Pak, Indo-China or India in general....
But have never been offended by the same. I hope you look at this as a conversation between 2 adults.
As I mentioned earlier, I am here to learn. I have mentioned what I believe based on facts I have read. Instead of being mad at me and other Indians, maybe you can teach us what you know.

I am sane enough to admit if Im wrong. But it has to come through evidence and debate, NOT because you believe what I say goes against your line of thinking.

Like I said in the other thread about Japanese war atrocities, I don't expect any Indians to sympathize with us, and I have only seen them mentioning it when they are trying to "get at us" for one reason or another.

Deleted my earlier comment.

CD...I read your post to me. I agree this can be a sensitive topic. I apologize if I have hurt anyones feelings.

 

[huzihaidao12]

War on Japan, you kids need to know more history, the Japanese army in China has been completely suppressed in 1945 by PLA.

 

[Joe Shearer]

May I remind you of my initial statement:



All the evidence I have provided is to support this statement.....Let me refresh:

1. Similar to France the eastern Chinese seaboard and Indo China was overrun by the Japanese. Unlike France which completely fell following which the allies jumped in, China had the help of allies well before the country fell to Japan which was an outcome that the allies feared was feasable causing them to jump in.Just curiousity; do you not feel that any credit was due to the Chinese forces for surviving the Japanese onslaught, so much more relentless and sanguinary than the Germans fighting the French? Surely if they had not resisted, and the country had fallen, we wouldn't have any cause to jump in.

More a case of jumping out, considering that in that case, the Japanese would have outflanked the British on the left flank, across the Sino-Burmese border?

2. The instrument of surrender was not a result of the Chinese victory. Hongwu claimed that Chinese victory followed by the "clean up" by the Soviets lead to the defeat of the Japanese. Not true considering it was the japanese bombing by Americans that halted any further aggression in China. I can't comment with authority on this point without refreshing my memory, but I do remember this as something slightly different.

My argument here is, China may have won the battle against the Japanese, but NOT the war. feel free to diagree You got me here, pardner; I'm totally foxed.

3. Comparing Chinese losses to Japanese losses speaks a very different story. Rarely in history has a victor suffered more losses than its counterpart. This is a truly disturbing thought. You couldn't possibly guess why, could you?

Anyways. I have no interest in further escalating this. Your lot seems quite perturbed by my words.

Consider this my POV and move on. You're free to interpret history as per your ideas and thinking. I obviously choose a different path.

Start another thread if you want to talk about it.

@Peshwa

Not fair, in my opinion. Your original statement, which I accept at face value as intended to depict fact and not intended to denigrate or be offensive (you yourself having said the right things about the way in which the Chinese people suffered during the war), did hit a raw nerve. When I first read it, my instinct was to duck. And it did have the desired effect of making every Chinese poster think that it was a condescending comment intended to put down the efforts of the Chinese soldier during these linked wars.

If you want to make a genuine historical point, you really ought to do your research and launch a new thread. But it should be objective, and it should account for the fact that the PLA, within a short span from the end of the two wars, was able to chase the Allies around and around the mulberry bush. Obviously that battle-readiness must have come from somewhere; where?

Secondly, I hope you start the thread, because I personally have two radically different points of view about the KMT and about the PLA. On the one hand, we had a leader about whom it was said that "when left alone, he would immediately proceed to disappear over the nearest horizon," and on the other, we had a genuine military genius, one of the finest of the twentieth century, in my opinion comparable with any of the tank-meisters or combined ops wizards that the Europeans had, and matched in Asia only by the Japanese themselves, criminal though they were, and by General Giap. I know that it is extremely unlikely that we will get a chance to talk about that war which built today's PLA, but if such a thing happened, how fine it would be! for all of us.

It is sad that that part of the discussion took on overtones of nationalist rivalry, because it was in military history terms such an amazing period. For those who have read Mao 'On War', we cannot think of the Sino-Japanese War with pity and sympathy on the one hand, and with reverence for the military principles, so radically different from the European, yet so similar, bordering on the identical, on closer examination.

 

[gubbi]

Gubbi I'd like to hear what you think about these two points affecting the talks.

By the beginning of 1960s, India already had two wars. The First Kashmir conflict being precipitated by Pakistani military incursions into what was then an independent princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and then again in 1961 with the liberation of Goa.

J&K was a problem. The Maharaja had signed the instrument of accession giving India control over whole of J&K. Ground realities were different - with Pakistan controlling 1/3rd of the state and the matter being discussed in UN. I think India was more concerned with consolidating borders with Pakistan, considering the painful and horrific partition of 1947.

Secondly, with Nehru's NAM, the thinking was that no-one would attack us (Pakistan being an exception). Added to this was the "Hindi-Chini bahi-bhai" slogan. But as Joe had mentioned somewhere, IIRC, Nehru's forward policy precipitated the conflict of 1962. I do not understand the logic of that policy.

I guess it had to do with the limited success of stopping Pakistan occupying Kashmir totally and the surprising military success of Goa's liberation. I think, the authorities were basking in the glory of military successes and thought a repeat performance was possible.

But then again, they surely were not so naive that they thought a war with China would be as easy as that one with Portugal. Goa was a cake walk, with Portugal not being able to do anything. Probably there was something else in their mindset which I hope Joe would better explain.

As for lack of foresight in seeing India's rise, I believe it had to do with this NAM movement. Nehru had the foresight to establish excellent centers of education - IITs and Public Sector units which formed the backbone of Indian economy along with agriculture. However with socialist policies, and this NAM, the governments of the time didnt envision the changes that would be thrust upon India leading to its opening up the economy in early 1990s. This new found economic might resulted in a more powerful military and an increasing number of audience who paid attention to what India had to say.

In my personal opinion this obstacle still exists.

Maybe. But the fact that diplomats are actively engaging the Chinese moves suggests that this obstacle is being slowly done away with. The then socialist mindset of Indian diplomats is now being replaced with the 'western' capitalist mindset. I wouldnt be surprised if Indian diplomats manage to wring out concessions from the Chinese in the near future.

The Hawks don't all come out of the PLA. Refer to post #256 http://www.defence.pk/forums/1449983-post256.html

Agreed. But unlike many other countries', you rarely hear the voice of a junior Indian General. Almost all statements are made by the Chief and that too approved by his/her civilian superiors. Ultimately there is thorough civilian control over the armed forces.

Unfortunately I think it doesn't matter who is in charge, the window on the Chinese side is closing, not least because the new more politically conscious middle class is unlikely to allow the government to give away land, they see as Chinese land. The major concessions made to the other 9 bordering countries during the early days of the Republic were possible because the Chinese people were not as politically minded (the way we think about politics).

How much does China's middle class have a say in Govt policies? Even if they are politically aware?

 

[huzihaidao12]

http://www.chinashakestheworldbook.com/TextFrameset.htm


CHAPTER III

BIRTH OF AN ARMY

13. Famine, Locusts and Overturned Idols


In August 1945, when the Russian Red Army invaded Manchuria, the Border Region launched its long-prepared counteroffensive. The plan of the high command of the 8th Route Army was to recover all the important cities of North China and to recapture the Tungpu, Chengtai, Peiping-Suiyuan, Peiping-Hankow and Tientsin-Pukow railways. The first objectives of General Liu Po-cheng's troops, however, were much more limited. They planned to take Taiyuan, Kaifeng, Tuncheng and Shibchiachuang. Thus, they would gain control of Shansi Province and the most strategic points on the Peiping-Hankow and Lunghai railways.

　　With the slogan "push forward to the Japs," General Liu Po-cheng's regular units now moved on the cities while the guerrillas remained behind to mop up. Within a short time, 127 middle- and small-size cities were recovered.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Deleted my earlier comment.

CD...I read your post to me. I agree this can be a sensitive topic. I apologize if I have hurt anyones feelings.

Don't worry about it.

I was just getting a bit frustrated that this same topic kept being brought up in all sorts of threads.

I know that you meant no offense Peshwa, I've seen your previous posts, and I know that you are a very reasonable poster. So if you want one of us to start a thread analyzing the second Sino-Japanese war, I think that will certainly be possible.

 

[CardSharp]

How much does China's middle class have a say in Govt policies? Even if they are politically aware?

Last point first I guess, since it's the one easily answered and the answer is a lot. Do not mistaken an undemocratic with a government not concerned with the people's sentiments. The CCP is perched on a tightrope, in order to quell discontent and stay popular, I bet dollars to peanuts that the CCP is fairly obsessed with public opinion. Think about it, for a government that is so obessed with control of the media, do you think that they will just ignore popular ground swells of opinion that could possible to a source of anger?

 

[Joe Shearer]

If you have a problem with Mr Hongwu then feel free to send him a private message, and argue over the point he made. However he didn't actually say that Japan was defeated SOLELY by the Chinese at any point, and Cardsharp has explained the rest.

I do take offense at you saying that firstly Chinese were not the victors in the second Sino-Japanese war (BS), and further that we somehow lacked merit.

Like I said in the other thread about Japanese war atrocities, I don't expect any Indians to sympathize with us, and I have only seen them mentioning it when they are trying to "get at us" for one reason or another.

This is addressed to all my Chinese friends and brothers, and to some extent, it is on behalf of other Indians who are not trolls and fanboys.

I am horrified at this suggestion that Indians lack sympathy with the Chinese people with regard to the unspeakable suffering that they underwent during the Sino-Japanese War. I am also not at all sure that Indians who mention this war mention it with much knowledge of what awful tragedies actually took place. Anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of those years and those events and who uses it to provide debating points is completely unfit for human company. It is my sincere belief that many, if not most Indians are in fact unfamiliar with the events in this war; it is this ignorance, I am sure, which sometimes leads to a slighting, insensitive and wholly brutal attitude to these tragic events. Any other possibility or interpretation is nightmarish, unthinkable.

I call on all Indians who are reading this to read up on the history of the Sino-Japanese war, even from short articles in Wikipedia, and to understand the origins of the present in Chinese society. This will prevent forever any slighting reference to those dreadful events, and will avoid any inadvertent offense to our friends and brothers.

 

[CardSharp]

This is addressed to all my Chinese friends and brothers, and to some extent, it is on behalf of other Indians who are not trolls and fanboys.

I am horrified at this suggestion that Indians lack sympathy with the Chinese people with regard to the unspeakable suffering that they underwent during the Sino-Japanese War. I am also not at all sure that Indians who mention this war mention it with much knowledge of what awful tragedies actually took place. Anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of those years and those events and who uses it to provide debating points is completely unfit for human company. It is my sincere belief that many, if not most Indians are in fact unfamiliar with the events in this war; it is this ignorance, I am sure, which sometimes leads to a slighting, insensitive and wholly brutal attitude to these tragic events. Any other possibility or interpretation is nightmarish, unthinkable.

I call on all Indians who are reading this to read up on the history of the Sino-Japanese war, even from short articles in Wikipedia, and to understand the origins of the present in Chinese society. This will prevent forever any slighting reference to those dreadful events, and will avoid any inadvertent offense to our friends and brothers.

Yep, the two Sino-Japanese wars were seminal moments in Chinese history.

 

[Peshwa]

Originally Posted by Peshwa
May I remind you of my initial statement:

1. Similar to France the eastern Chinese seaboard and Indo China was overrun by the Japanese. Unlike France which completely fell following which the allies jumped in, China had the help of allies well before the country fell to Japan which was an outcome that the allies feared was feasable causing them to jump in.Just curiousity; do you not feel that any credit was due to the Chinese forces for surviving the Japanese onslaught, so much more relentless and sanguinary than the Germans fighting the French? Surely if they had not resisted, and the country had fallen, we wouldn't have any cause to jump in.
More a case of jumping out, considering that in that case, the Japanese would have outflanked the British on the left flank, across the Sino-Burmese border?

I have mentioned that I have great respect for the Chinese to stand up to such brutality!
I think the greatest strength of the Chinese is their mind (something I can attest to in real life as well). I commend the fact that the Chinese forces were able to keep their morale so high even through the witness of massacres, being under equipped and under trained and having close to a million defectors who helped the Japanese...

No one can take that away from them...

2. The instrument of surrender was not a result of the Chinese victory. Hongwu claimed that Chinese victory followed by the "clean up" by the Soviets lead to the defeat of the Japanese. Not true considering it was the japanese bombing by Americans that halted any further aggression in China. I can't comment with authority on this point without refreshing my memory, but I do remember this as something slightly different.

I was alluding to the point that the surrender of Japanese started with the Americans under McArthur....It was McArthur who instructed the IJA to surrender to the Chinese

My argument here is, China may have won the battle against the Japanese, but NOT the war. feel free to diagree You got me here, pardner; I'm totally foxed.

By the end of war, the Japanese forces had been thinned out having to face multiple enemies in the conflict. The Chinese on the other hand were able to concentrate their forces on IJA only. The decisive blow, the one that led to the collapse of the Japanese was the bombing of H and N. Hence I credit the demise of Japanese imperialism to the Americans. IMO, China did have some victories against the IJA, but cannot be credited with winning the war...hence the battle, not the war. America was the "sleeping giant" whose awakening opened the pandora's box for the axis powers.

3. Comparing Chinese losses to Japanese losses speaks a very different story. Rarely in history has a victor suffered more losses than its counterpart. This is a truly disturbing thought. You couldn't possibly guess why, could you?

How insensitive do you think I am Joe? when speaking of losses, I meant purely in military terms. NOT civilian! I wouldnt be able to live with myself if I lauded civilian atrocities in a war.

Anyways. I have no interest in further escalating this. Your lot seems quite perturbed by my words.

Consider this my POV and move on. You're free to interpret history as per your ideas and thinking. I obviously choose a different path.

I hope this helps explain my thinking.

 

[huzihaidao12]

I accept your explanation, your attitude has proved this point, nothing.

 

[huzihaidao12]

In my opinion, if you say China did not win in Japan alone, I agree, but it also means that the United States, the Soviet Union did not win in Japan alone, this is the victory of the Allies, I agree, but you can not say that China has not made victory for Japan, if China did not win, the United States did not win, who win?

 

[Peshwa]

Don't worry about it.

I was just getting a bit frustrated that this same topic kept being brought up in all sorts of threads.

I know that you meant no offense Peshwa, I've seen your previous posts, and I know that you are a very reasonable poster. So if you want one of us to start a thread analyzing the second Sino-Japanese war, I think that will certainly be possible.

That would be much appreciated CD. This is a part of the learning process for Indian and Chinese members.

I promise you two things...
1. Familiarize myself with the thread on the Japanese atrocities in China. Although I have read about it, but it seems the thread you mention presents more details that I may have overlooked.

2. To contribute to the thread on the Second Sino-Japanese War with the points I have mentioned with sufficient sources going into detail of my POV. I am very interested in this topic which can present as a great learning experience abt WW2. I look forward to this thread.

 

[Peshwa]

@Peshwa

Not fair, in my opinion. Your original statement, which I accept at face value as intended to depict fact and not intended to denigrate or be offensive (you yourself having said the right things about the way in which the Chinese people suffered during the war), did hit a raw nerve. When I first read it, my instinct was to duck. And it did have the desired effect of making every Chinese poster think that it was a condescending comment intended to put down the efforts of the Chinese soldier during these linked wars.

I suppose I should have put a bit more thought into making that first statement so as not to offend our Chinese friends.
I agree with your statement wholeheartedly.

If you want to make a genuine historical point, you really ought to do your research and launch a new thread. But it should be objective, and it should account for the fact that the PLA, within a short span from the end of the two wars, was able to chase the Allies around and around the mulberry bush. Obviously that battle-readiness must have come from somewhere; where?

I think CD has mentioned the need for the same. I will collaborate with him to start this thread.

Secondly, I hope you start the thread, because I personally have two radically different points of view about the KMT and about the PLA. On the one hand, we had a leader about whom it was said that "when left alone, he would immediately proceed to disappear over the nearest horizon," and on the other, we had a genuine military genius, one of the finest of the twentieth century, in my opinion comparable with any of the tank-meisters or combined ops wizards that the Europeans had, and matched in Asia only by the Japanese themselves, criminal though they were, and by General Giap. I know that it is extremely unlikely that we will get a chance to talk about that war which built today's PLA, but if such a thing happened, how fine it would be! for all of us.

Interesting. I think there is much I can learn from your POV

I also would like to bring forth my arguments with greater detail and sources so the Chinese members can understand my line of thinking.

It is sad that that part of the discussion took on overtones of nationalist rivalry, because it was in military history terms such an amazing period. For those who have read Mao 'On War', we cannot think of the Sino-Japanese War with pity and sympathy on the one hand, and with reverence for the military principles, so radically different from the European, yet so similar, bordering on the identical, on closer examination.

Unfortunate and I do take responsibility for the words I wrote. Of course I will be more careful in the future...especially when commenting on such a sensitive topic.

PS: Your PM option is disabled is it?