Without the Republic of China’s Contribution, WWII Would Have Taken a Different Course

[beijingwalker]

Back then no political force was strong enough to unite all political and military fractions together in China, every province was controlled by one or a couple of warlords who only looked after their own personal interests and gains. China was ruled by one central government only by name. Had China have a unified government. Japan would stand no chance.

 

[Providence]

Perhaps pretending to be a Chinese history expert wasn't bad enough?
However when you ain't doing too good with your "white man" fantasy, especially get caught by your inferior "Bitch Slap" victim......
"to come" and "Cryo sleep" should be one word "Cryosleep"? do correct me if i was wrong

Well a great psycho analysis there. I just pray one day you read history books with equal fervor.

Back then no political force was strong enough to unite all political and military fractions together in China, every province was controlled by one or a couple of warlords who only looked after their own personal interests and gains. China was ruled by one central government only by name. Had China have a unified government. Japan would stand no chance.

That has always been the case throughout history. Brave forces got marauded just because they were a fragmented bunch.

 

[beijingwalker]

That has always been the case throughout history. Brave forces got marauded just because they were a fragmented bunch.

The single greatest achievement made by CPC that eclipsed all other major events in recent Chinese history, which is often being ignored by the west but held so dear by the Chinese people, is the fact the CPC is the ultimate force which in the end successfully united the whole China and put the huge country under one single strong leadership after the country's a century old infightings and civil wars which claimed millions of people's lives . That single ultimate credit beats all in most of the Chinese people's eyes.

 

[Genesis]

Erm.. No. When KMT lost enough men to Japanese army, PLA chose to came out of it's cryo sleep ! That's all.

in 1935, Mao just finished the long march, with less than 6,000 men, he had less than 10% of the previous high. He has more men than guns and more guns than bullets.

He has no territory, except one of the poorest provinces' rural areas. Even then he had no control of any of its cities. Yanaan, his war time capital is a village that had starving people. I mean these are easily verifiable, considering even the capital xi'an went through a long siege that starved thousands during the war lord era, not even 5 years ago.

Mao was under siege from the end of the long march to the coming together of the parties when Zhang abducted Chiang.

What exactly do you think he could have done? This is like saying the Taliban didn't do anything against the US, because they didn't appear on the battlefield in formation.

The best Mao can do is annoy the Japanese, if that. Keep in mind this is the same army that captured thousands of British troops and bloodied the US time and again. Mao had units with swords.

Would you make fun of Brazil for not playing a bigger part in the war?

If you would like to know more, I am more than capable of providing answers.

It is not about Chiang, it is about Chinese military history. If you had any reading, you would have replied differently, with more respect for your own soldiers. That is the trouble with citizens of a totalitarian state; you believe what you are told to believe. And that is why I lack respect for the bulk of you. Cardsharp or Chausim would never have talked like you.

interesting observation, I'll make one of my own. Why is it every democracy thinks they are somehow better, unique and doesn't believe the "state line." Where do your news and history come from? The only way it could be multiple sources is if people who aren't involved became part of the source and the thing with no involvement, that means they must learn the material, guess where that material has to come from.

You have no idea what the official Chinese position on ROC's WW2 role today and yet here you are making generalizations. The observation @Jlaw made isn't false, the official position is that ROC is the major player in the war, but like Americans, the CCP, like to exaggerate their role and forget to mention Soviets/ROC (but not deny)'s role in the war.

I mean the theme of the video is forgotten ally from a Western perspective.

Just Chiang himself, he is a politician first and foremost, I wouldn't call him a puppet, because he trusts the Americans as much as he trusts Mao, I mean Americans tried to have him removed, and succeeded for a time. Though the Americans definitely saw him as a puppet.

 

[Joe Shearer]

in 1935, Mao just finished the long march, with less than 6,000 men, he had less than 10% of the previous high. He has more men than guns and more guns than bullets.

He has no territory, except one of the poorest provinces' rural areas. Even then he had no control of any of its cities. Yanaan, his war time capital is a village that had starving people. I mean these are easily verifiable, considering even the capital xi'an went through a long siege that starved thousands during the war lord era, not even 5 years ago.

Mao was under siege from the end of the long march to the coming together of the parties when Zhang abducted Chiang.

What exactly do you think he could have done? This is like saying the Taliban didn't do anything against the US, because they didn't appear on the battlefield in formation.

The best Mao can do is annoy the Japanese, if that. Keep in mind this is the same army that captured thousands of British troops and bloodied the US time and again. Mao had units with swords.

Would you make fun of Brazil for not playing a bigger part in the war?

If you would like to know more, I am more than capable of providing answers.

There is nothing in what you have written that was related to my post, far less to my position on the subject.

interesting observation, I'll make one of my own. Why is it every democracy thinks they are somehow better, unique and doesn't believe the "state line." Where do your news and history come from? The only way it could be multiple sources is if people who aren't involved became part of the source and the thing with no involvement, that means they must learn the material, guess where that material has to come from.

And that is precisely what a student of history does. Study ALL the sources. That is what I do. Not from the national narrative, but from independent, sceptical reading.

You have no idea what the official Chinese position on ROC's WW2 role today and yet here you are making generalizations.

Of course I am. I am responding to those who have posted, not to these weighty and portentous 'positions'.

The observation @Jlaw made isn't false, the official position is that ROC is the major player in the war, but like Americans, the CCP, like to exaggerate their role and forget to mention Soviets/ROC (but not deny)'s role in the war.

I mean the theme of the video is forgotten ally from a Western perspective.

Just Chiang himself, he is a politician first and foremost, I wouldn't call him a puppet, because he trusts the Americans as much as he trusts Mao, I mean Americans tried to have him removed, and succeeded for a time. Though the Americans definitely saw him as a puppet.

The observation made was not just false, it was terrible in its attitude of condescension and seeking to humiliate those who are not today in political ascendancy.

I am not concerned with the western perspective either, so that pronouncement leaves me stony cold. It is not America's version of the history that we are discussing that I follow, it is a compound one drawn from various narrations, including the Japanese. Whose war role I hate intensely, by the way, however much I admire them as a nation today, and as a culture and society.

I protested the denigration of the Chinese soldier, both the 'Nationalist' and the 'Communist' soldier, by a Chinese, and I stick to that. Other than refining and putting a subtle slant on whatever was said earlier by your countryman, there is nothing you have added to suggest that my protest was mistaken.

 

[Providence]

in 1935, Mao just finished the long march, with less than 6,000 men, he had less than 10% of the previous high. He has more men than guns and more guns than bullets.

He has no territory, except one of the poorest provinces' rural areas. Even then he had no control of any of its cities. Yanaan, his war time capital is a village that had starving people. I mean these are easily verifiable, considering even the capital xi'an went through a long siege that starved thousands during the war lord era, not even 5 years ago.

Mao was under siege from the end of the long march to the coming together of the parties when Zhang abducted Chiang.

What exactly do you think he could have done? This is like saying the Taliban didn't do anything against the US, because they didn't appear on the battlefield in formation.

The best Mao can do is annoy the Japanese, if that. Keep in mind this is the same army that captured thousands of British troops and bloodied the US time and again. Mao had units with swords.

Would you make fun of Brazil for not playing a bigger part in the war?

If you would like to know more, I am more than capable of providing answers.

Yes. I would like some sources. Mao's situation was not even that dramatic as you just made it out to be.

 

[bbccdd1470]

If you are talking after the war then that may be true.

However pre-Pearl Harbor the US was not very concerned about the Communists in China. The only thing that caught the attention of the US is when Japan started moving into Indo-China in 1941 when France was weak due to losing to the Germans. The US started embargoing Japan. Japan then did Pearl Harbor. We then sent the Flying Tigers to China.

If Japan didn't invade IndoChina the US would have done the same thing we had been doing since 1931...nothing.

The actual fact was the USA got huge benefits from China since the late Qing period and did care about their interests in China. If you care to check, there were three unequal treaties between China and USA, like Treaty of Wanghia, Treaty of Teintsin and Boxer Protocol. Those treaties gave the USA the right of Extraterritorial jurisdiction, fixed tariff on trade goods, freedom to buy land, receive the same beneficial treatment as other imperial powers, right to station troops in China and freedom of navigation of US warship in Yangtze river etc. Fortunately, those unequal treaties ended in 1943 when New equal treaty was signed between the two nations, however before that the Chinese government himself had no power to abolish any of the treaties. Moreover, USA was also the first one to propose the Open door policy to safeguard his own interests in China, in which to prevent any imperial power can able to solely dominate and control the Chinese market and trade tariffs. The same open door policy was again re-enforced in the Nine Powers Treaty in 1922 by USA government with other nations.
The main reason why USA support Chiang was the same reason that the Open door policy was proposed by USA, to safeguard his privileges in China. The time Chiang changed his master to USA was during the civil war between the KMT and those Warlords, because if KMT was able to conquer the whole China, then China will turn to SU since they were the one who supporting them in the war, and all the US privileges will be gone in a minute. Not to mention communist government would likely confiscate any captialist's property including those from the American. I have to make it clear that USA was not the sole supporter of Chiang, UK was the other one. Therefore, Chiang became a clear candidate for UK and USA to control, since he was the general in chief during the war. This is true that USA at that time was not as active as today, but US did provide funds to Chiang to encourage the split within the KMT.

 

[Viet]

China contribution was almost irrelevant. All major powers ignored Japan invasion of China. Nobody cares of.

In fact If Japan did not make the blunder by invading Vietnam, America had not entered the pacific war against Japan. The WW II might have a different outcome.

 

[greenwood]

China contribution was almost irrelevant. All major powers ignored Japan invasion of China. Nobody cares of.

In fact If Japan did not make the blunder by invading Vietnam, America had not entered the pacific war against Japan. The WW II might have a different outcome.

There was no country Vietnam in WWII, don't fool us.

"All major powers ignored Japan invasion of China." China was a major power, list how many nations exist in Asia then.

China killed 405,000 Japanese soldiers ( excluded Myanmar battlefield ), wounded 1,100,000 Japanese soldiers.

 

[grey boy 2]

China contribution was almost irrelevant. All major powers ignored Japan invasion of China. Nobody cares of.

In fact If Japan did not make the blunder by invading Vietnam, America had not entered the pacific war against Japan. The WW II might have a different outcome.

Did the school in Vietnam teach you such laughable history? OR simply your own imagination out your "HATRED" against Chinese blind your mind?
Now go learn some real history, troll

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/31/opinions/china-wwii-forgotten-ally-rana-mitter/
By Rana Mitter, Special to CNN

Updated 9:28 PM ET, Mon August 31, 2015

(CNN)On Thursday, there will be a major parade in the heart of Beijing, commemorating the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II in Asia.

In the West, many will see the military hardware and the troops that will, no doubt, be at the center of the event.
But relatively few will remember a historical fact that underpins the ceremony: China was the first country to enter what would become the Second World War, and it was the ally of the United States and the British empire from just after Pearl Harbor in 1941, to the Japanese surrender in 1945.
Yet today, China's memory of the war is becoming more, not less, important, as we move further away from it.
And many in China are becoming resentful that the West fails to remember that China was itself a significant player in the eventual Allied victory.

 

[Viet]

There was no country Vietnam in WWII, don't fool us.

"All major powers ignored Japan invasion of China." China was a major power, list how many nations exist in Asia then.

China killed 405,000 Japanese soldiers ( excluded Myanmar battlefield ), wounded 1,100,000 Japanese soldiers.

sure, there was a country called Vietnam, or more precise Annam, ruled by the emperor in Hue.

no. China was not a major power back then. you were weak, poor, helpless. ALL major powers from America, UK, France, Germany, Russia and many others were happy to loot China, enslaving the populace. and Japan was happy to join the party, too. no. the casualty of Japanese army in China won´t change the course of the war. it might slow down the conquest of China a bit.

 

[greenwood]

sure, there was a country called Vietnam, or more precise Annam, ruled by the emperor in Hue.

no. China was not a major power back then. you were weak, poor, helpless. ALL major powers from America, UK, France, Germany, Russia and many others were happy to loot China, enslaving the populace. and Japan was happy to join the party, too. no. the casualty of Japanese army in China won´t change the course of the war. it might slow down the conquest of China a bit.

No, China was a major power. We check all nations' performance against Japan during WWII.

France, didn't open a fire, surrendered, allied with Japan!
Britain, insist two months in Malaya, 120,000 soldiers surrendered and captured by Japan.
Holland, escaped before Japan invaded.
Thailand allied with Japan.
Germany? After WWI, Germany had disappeared in Asia.
Russia signed peace treaty with Japan, till 1945 August; America perform well in pacific.

sure, there was a country called Vietnam, or more precise Annam, ruled by the emperor in Hue.

no. China was not a major power back then. you were weak, poor, helpless. ALL major powers from America, UK, France, Germany, Russia and many others were happy to loot China, enslaving the populace. and Japan was happy to join the party, too. no. the casualty of Japanese army in China won´t change the course of the war. it might slow down the conquest of China a bit.

By the way, where is Vietnam?

 

[grey boy 2]

Though far weaker and poorer than the mighty United States or the British Empire, China played a major role in the war. Some 40,000 Chinese soldiers fought in Burma alongside American and British troops in 1944, helping to secure the Stilwell Road linking Lashio to Assam in India. In China itself, they held down some 800,000 Japanese soldiers.
The costs were great. At least 14 million Chinese were killed and some 80 million became refugees over the course of the war.
When the Allies won in 1945, China’s contribution to the victory was rewarded with a permanent seat on the Security Council of the new United Nations
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/opinion/the-worlds-wartime-debt-to-china.html

 

[Viet]

No, China was a major power. We check all nations' performance against Japan during WWII.

France, didn't open a fire, surrendered, allied with Japan!
Britain, insist two months in Malaya, 120,000 soldiers surrendered and captured by Japan.
Holland, escaped before Japan invaded.
Thailand allied with Japan.
Germany? After WWI, Germany had disappeared in Asia.
Russia signed peace treaty with Japan, till 1945 August; America perform well in pacific.



By the way, where is Vietnam?

Annam 安南 is the ancient name of Vietnam, going back to the Tang.

well, Chinese army had success in slowing down the Japanese advance but won´t change the course of conquest of China. it is like the Chinese wall. it might slow down the advances of the Mongols and other northern barbarians a bit, but won´t stop them.

in fact, it was the US that defeated Japan in the Pacific, the USSR defeating Japan in Manchuria, both countries were the real victors over Japan.

 

[greenwood]

Annam 安南 is the ancient name of Vietnam, going back to the Tang.

well, Chinese army had success in slowing down the Japanese advance but won´t change the course of conquest of Japan. it is like the Chinese wall. it might slow down the advances of the Mongols and other northern barbarians a bit, but won´t stop them.

You don't know what happend in WWII, as I know, no Vietnamese care that history, two world wars both had no relation with Vietnamese in their opinion. Japan expent more than 90% of the GDP to continue the war (without any potential mobilization ), Japan would collapse ealier than China.
I can understand you, as I mentioned above, Japan and France was ally in WWII. You as a former Frensh of course like to stand in Japan's shoes.