kvLin
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 0
Adux, you may have to agree that,the Chinese had beat the US and then plus what you have achieved...or rather more prosperous than you are.
Taiwan test-fires missile capable of striking China
- Thread starter Neo
- Start date
Adux, you may have to agree that,the Chinese had beat the US and then plus what you have achieved...or rather more prosperous than you are.
But your country was sleeping with Russia.
kvLin
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 0
Chinese have beaten U.S in what sense?
In the Korean war (just corrected a typo above), China lost more lives than the US did to meet a 38th Parallel draw,but indeed won in the actual effect.
I doubt there would be any battle by India in 1971,were the inimical neighbor called America instead of Pakistan.
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
Bull Crap, Chinese lost big time, and even with huge amounts of Soviet Help. Chinese Airforce got clobberd evne though they had better machines, until soviet pilots came, Anyways they dont shoot at planes, but ram them into Planes, refer : US Plane Incident.lol
And what are you trying to convey in the second line.
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
Like yours was with the US. Russia has far influence in India than the US in Pakistan.
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
What are you trying to convey.
Chinese have'nt beaten the US yet, Do you want me to compare North Korea to South Korea.
You want a wasteland for Chinese Mainland by US Missiles.They are capable, and you are not even close to in technological and military standpoint to the ertswhile Soviet Union in the least.
China beating Korea I suggest you go say this in WAB.lol
kvLin
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 0
Wish you had known enough to say so, Audx. I dont plan to get you silent but there are still many more books on that ahead.
As for Taiwan and its advocates, one has to know where he was from,in order to know where he is going.
As for Taiwan and its advocates, one has to know where he was from,in order to know where he is going.
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
Hmm, Whatever that mean, everyone to their paths. Pls do enlighten me to the books you are talking about
kvLin
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 0
My pleasure
long after the bloody war in Korea there were few researches based on total objectivity in China until the 1980s. Thanks to the "Reform and Opening" that we began to have chance reading works from all side, especially by the declassification of the Soviet-era documents we tended to believe that the war was indeed ignited by an invasion from North Korea.
Warmongers had to admit the human tragedy if they were still alive, but turning back to the cold war time, the Panmunjom agreement was indeed a balance deal for all sides. Kim Il Sung failed to incorporate the South Korea,The Soviet Union and the U.S had to congeal their far east extending strategy by the 38th Parallel,while China finally got a glacis retained,at the expense of Taiwan's status quo.
The first upsurge of Korean War research came in the late 1970s ,with the release of American diplomatic documents in 1976. Matthew B. Ridgway,Ernest A. Gross,Averell W. Harriman(consultant to Harry S. Truman the US president),J. Lawton Collins and John J. Muccio were the most remarkable participators in the main stream. Among which we know most about are "The Korean War" by Matthew B. Ridgway,"Korea the First War We Lost" by Bevin Alexander,"Korean War, Peng and his voluntary army " by Russell Spurr,"Child of Conflict: The Korean-American Relationship, 1943-1953" by Bruce Cumings,"This Kind of War" by T. R. Fehrenbach, and "Forgotten War" by Clay Blair.
The second wave came with the extensive release of Chinese archives and dictated historical materials in the late 1980s.such as "The Manuscript of Maozedong","Military Analects of Pengdehuai" , "A review to Significant Decisions and Arrairs"by Boyibo the vise prime minister,and "Recall of Korean war" by Hongxuezhi,the general and former commander of No.43 Chinese Army.
The Chinese releases did help a lot in international reserach of Korean War,Mao's 46 decision-making telegraphes were fully pulished in American journals while many more archives introduced to western scholars by the Wilson International Scholar Center with its aperiodic publication.those archives obviously contributed to reseraching works like "Threat,Confidence and the last chance for peace" by Thoman Christanson, "Review on China's dicision of entering into Korean war" by Haoyufan, "China's way to the Korean War" by Chenjian,"Peiking and Korean Crisis" by Michael Hunter and especially the coauthored "Uncertain Partner" by scholars from South Koran,Russia,the US and China.
In the third wave of Korean War Reserach,the declassification of Soviet-era archives peaked the whole work in early 1990s,by which reseraching works truned into an unheard-of flourish. actually as OAH said that any listing and discussion of resources for the history of the Korean War (1950-1953) must deal with Soviet-era documents released or uncovered in the last several years. This period see notablely Stanley Sandler's "The Korean War: No Victors, No Vanquished" , William Whitney's "The Korean War: An International History", Ridgway's "Duels for Korea", Russell Spurr's "Enter the Dragon: China’s Undeclared War Against the U.S. in Korea, 1950-1951", Roy Appleman's "Disaster in Korea: The Chinese Confront MacArthur" and Goncharov, Sergei N., John W. Lewis, and Xue Litai's "Uncertain Partners: Stalin, Mao, and the Korean War", Shenzhihua's "Korean War,declassfied documents from Russian",William Sterk's "Korean War in the international history" and Puwenzhu's "Review on history,Stalin's foreign policy and the Korean war", and a pile of Russian works which we can trust by and large after disaggregation of the Soviet Union.
enough?
long after the bloody war in Korea there were few researches based on total objectivity in China until the 1980s. Thanks to the "Reform and Opening" that we began to have chance reading works from all side, especially by the declassification of the Soviet-era documents we tended to believe that the war was indeed ignited by an invasion from North Korea.
Warmongers had to admit the human tragedy if they were still alive, but turning back to the cold war time, the Panmunjom agreement was indeed a balance deal for all sides. Kim Il Sung failed to incorporate the South Korea,The Soviet Union and the U.S had to congeal their far east extending strategy by the 38th Parallel,while China finally got a glacis retained,at the expense of Taiwan's status quo.
The first upsurge of Korean War research came in the late 1970s ,with the release of American diplomatic documents in 1976. Matthew B. Ridgway,Ernest A. Gross,Averell W. Harriman(consultant to Harry S. Truman the US president),J. Lawton Collins and John J. Muccio were the most remarkable participators in the main stream. Among which we know most about are "The Korean War" by Matthew B. Ridgway,"Korea the First War We Lost" by Bevin Alexander,"Korean War, Peng and his voluntary army " by Russell Spurr,"Child of Conflict: The Korean-American Relationship, 1943-1953" by Bruce Cumings,"This Kind of War" by T. R. Fehrenbach, and "Forgotten War" by Clay Blair.
The second wave came with the extensive release of Chinese archives and dictated historical materials in the late 1980s.such as "The Manuscript of Maozedong","Military Analects of Pengdehuai" , "A review to Significant Decisions and Arrairs"by Boyibo the vise prime minister,and "Recall of Korean war" by Hongxuezhi,the general and former commander of No.43 Chinese Army.
The Chinese releases did help a lot in international reserach of Korean War,Mao's 46 decision-making telegraphes were fully pulished in American journals while many more archives introduced to western scholars by the Wilson International Scholar Center with its aperiodic publication.those archives obviously contributed to reseraching works like "Threat,Confidence and the last chance for peace" by Thoman Christanson, "Review on China's dicision of entering into Korean war" by Haoyufan, "China's way to the Korean War" by Chenjian,"Peiking and Korean Crisis" by Michael Hunter and especially the coauthored "Uncertain Partner" by scholars from South Koran,Russia,the US and China.
In the third wave of Korean War Reserach,the declassification of Soviet-era archives peaked the whole work in early 1990s,by which reseraching works truned into an unheard-of flourish. actually as OAH said that any listing and discussion of resources for the history of the Korean War (1950-1953) must deal with Soviet-era documents released or uncovered in the last several years. This period see notablely Stanley Sandler's "The Korean War: No Victors, No Vanquished" , William Whitney's "The Korean War: An International History", Ridgway's "Duels for Korea", Russell Spurr's "Enter the Dragon: China’s Undeclared War Against the U.S. in Korea, 1950-1951", Roy Appleman's "Disaster in Korea: The Chinese Confront MacArthur" and Goncharov, Sergei N., John W. Lewis, and Xue Litai's "Uncertain Partners: Stalin, Mao, and the Korean War", Shenzhihua's "Korean War,declassfied documents from Russian",William Sterk's "Korean War in the international history" and Puwenzhu's "Review on history,Stalin's foreign policy and the Korean war", and a pile of Russian works which we can trust by and large after disaggregation of the Soviet Union.
enough?
Similar threads
- Article
