Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nationalist Victory in China

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Engineer 1888
    I highly doubt that if the Communists were defeated that China would have been unstable because their were only two major groups in China that could have run the country. The Communists and the Nationalists. Chiang Kai-shek had run much China for several years under less than ideal conditions. (Unless you consider fighting a civil war and another country at the same time ideal).
    well, Chang did not really rule the lands under his "control". nationalist china was a patchwork of landlords and generals with very high autonomy, who agreed to fight the japanese and communists, but who reluctantly gave way to any other command other than military.. taxes, especially... so.. not sure if the Kuomingtang would have been such a dominant political party...

    for sure, on thing. a nationalist china would have seen less bloodbath than a communist china under Mao.


    Originally posted by Engineer 1888
    Tiawan is not a small island and I doubt that the natives were happy to see all the troops that Chaing Kai-shek brought.
    Interestingly the natives fought for the japanese and fought for the new chinese. in Taiwan, the natives are highly considered and respected as a different ethnic entity of Taiwan. in fact the ethinicity is not too different from chinese.
    "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

    Comment


    • #17
      At least we agree that China would be somewhat unified. And I agree that much of China would have been controled by warlords. The Kuomingtang might not have ruled all of China but I think China as a whole would be in better shape now than it is in real.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Engineer 1888
        At least we agree that China would be somewhat unified. And I agree that much of China would have been controled by warlords. The Kuomingtang might not have ruled all of China but I think China as a whole would be in better shape now than it is in real.
        I just finished reading a book called What If? that considers this case. It turns out that in 1946 the Nationalists had the Commies cornered in Manchuria and were tightening the noose on them when Secretary Marshal asked them to stop in order to work out a deal. As we all know now, Commies don't make deals. By the time Marshal realized that he was hurting more than helping, the Nationalists had lost momentum -- they were unable to finish the job, the Reds rebounded and we have the current situation. The wise military writer of (whose name I don't recall) supposed that the Commies would have hung on to central and northern Manchuria and the Nationalists would have the rest of China, also that IndoChina would still be around and unified, Korea in one piece, and 100k Americans would not have died fighting Communists in Asia since 1950.

        Looks like Marshal really porked the puppy on this one.
        Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
        Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


        "Never pet a burning dog."

        RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
        http://www.mormon.org
        http://www.sca.org
        http://www.scv.org/
        http://www.scouting.org/

        Comment


        • #19
          Commies don't make deals
          Yea and worst still not uphold the made ones, excelent post Janos, the Macnamara did he same mistake in Vietnam he fought not to win but to negociate.
          Politicians lie, Soldiers die.
          Kosovo is Serbian.
          I support United Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
          Behead those who say Islam is violent!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DracoBorealis
            Yea and worst still not uphold the made ones, excelent post Janos, the Macnamara did he same mistake in Vietnam he fought not to win but to negociate.
            Politicians lie, Soldiers die.
            Thanks DracoBorealis! They never negotiate with the intent of keeping the promises (if that term even applies) that they make.

            We need to recall that when working with North Korea, but that's another thread.
            Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
            Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


            "Never pet a burning dog."

            RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
            http://www.mormon.org
            http://www.sca.org
            http://www.scv.org/
            http://www.scouting.org/

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Janos
              I just finished reading a book called What If? that considers this case. It turns out that in 1946 the Nationalists had the Commies cornered in Manchuria and were tightening the noose on them when Secretary Marshal asked them to stop in order to work out a deal. As we all know now, Commies don't make deals. By the time Marshal realized that he was hurting more than helping, the Nationalists had lost momentum -- they were unable to finish the job, the Reds rebounded and we have the current situation. The wise military writer of (whose name I don't recall) supposed that the Commies would have hung on to central and northern Manchuria and the Nationalists would have the rest of China, also that IndoChina would still be around and unified, Korea in one piece, and 100k Americans would not have died fighting Communists in Asia since 1950.

              Looks like Marshal really porked the puppy on this one.
              I guess that answers the question of “Who lost China?”
              Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by tsar
                I guess that answers the question of “Who lost China?”
                Yep, it's good to put the blame where it belongs.
                George Marshall
                Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
                Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


                "Never pet a burning dog."

                RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
                http://www.mormon.org
                http://www.sca.org
                http://www.scv.org/
                http://www.scouting.org/

                Comment

                Latest Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X