It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You said the Americans gave aid to China. They did, but during the war and a while after that in 1946 when the KMT was in power. When the CCP took over, there was no aid whatsoever coming from America. Militarily, the Americans only helped China with fighting the Japanese during WWII, after that, the Americans eventually began supplying the KMT which took control in Taiwan. Simply put, Americans never aided the CCP with anything after the war since it didn't want to aid a communist country.
Yes, in the Korean war, the Americans were pushed all the way back to the coast. The Americans eventually pushed back, but, the Chinese goal from the start was just to push the Americans away from the Chinese-NK border. With the 38th parallel being the point where the border is between NK and SK, the Chinese could be said as winning their part of the war, and preventing the US from moving in closer.
You mentioned the CCP attacking US forces unprovoked. Well, for a start, US forces attacked NK forces, which can be said to be an "unprovoked" attack too, since NK never attacked any US target, military or civillian
Chinese military deaths can be put at 500,000 dead. American losses on the other hand, could be put at around 70,000 dead. South Korean losses on the other hand were over a million. However, more than 70% of those losses were civillian losses. Technically, there was a ceasefire, with a demilitarized zone at the 38th parallel, but no peace treaty has been signed yet.
Towards the end of the war, yes, the Russians were dirt poor. The money and supplies given by the Allies did help them a lot. However, without the money and supplies, Russian soldiers would still just push through on foot, maybe less tanks and aircraft, but they would still eventually win the war. The Soviets were starting to gain ground at least a year before the D-day invasion. The British and American bombing campaigns only helped a little bit, after all, they were bombing the civillian population for the most of the time instead of the military or strategic targets.
My point is, the Germans were not fighting the Allies (as in Britain, America and remaining French) at full strength. They were too tied down with the Soviets, and it would be more like the Americans and British would have lost the war if not for the Soviets.
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
It doesn't matter which side we supported. In the end we saved the entire nation of China, not just the KMT.
America has a presence in South Korea. they were our allies. We attacked under the UN. Our war was legal.
And China and Russia both sponsored North Korea. They approved of their invasion of the South.
Where exactly are you getting these stats? Only 50,000 Americans died. And if you talk about South Korean losses, you'd better talk about North Korean losses, which were even higher. China wasn't fighting alone.
A few less planes and tanks would have meant a Russian loss instead of victory at many battles. Kursk was a battle that was in the balance for a long time, and only won because the Russians could wear the Germans down.
Without the material we provided them, Russia wouldn't have the logistical ability to defeat the Germans.
And my only point is that this goes both ways.
Chinawhite seriously downplays America's efforts. We did pretty much win the war in the Pacific on our own. To give the credit to the Russians is a smack in the face to all the Americans who died over there, and it's completely based on his bias 60 years after the fact.
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
It doesn't matter which side we supported. In the end we saved the entire nation of China, not just the KMT.
It doesn't matter which side we supported. In the end we saved the entire nation of China, not just the KMT.
And I could say America's goal was to simply protect South Korea from being overrun.
America has a presence in South Korea. they were our allies. We attacked under the UN. Our war was legal.
And China and Russia both sponsored North Korea. They approved of their invasion of the South.
Where exactly are you getting these stats? Only 50,000 Americans died. And if you talk about South Korean losses, you'd better talk about North Korean losses, which were even higher. China wasn't fighting alone.
A few less planes and tanks would have meant a Russian loss instead of victory at many battles. Kursk was a battle that was in the balance for a long time, and only won because the Russians could wear the Germans down.
Without the material we provided them, Russia wouldn't have the logistical ability to defeat the Germans.
And my only point is that this goes both ways.
Chinawhite seriously downplays America's efforts. We did pretty much win the war in the Pacific on our own. To give the credit to the Russians is a smack in the face to all the Americans who died over there, and it's completely based on his bias 60 years after the fact.
Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Chinawhite with all you crappy ignorance ridden posts are you trying to convey that China can defeat the US in war ??
Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Chinawhite with all you crappy ignorance ridden posts are you trying to convey that China can defeat the US in war ??
Originally posted by chinawhite
your so ignorant. your post about indias shiet weaponary. what are you trying to prove??? whats the big achiement breakthrough in indias weaponary that you are trying to convince everyone to believe
Originally posted by chinawhite
Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Chinawhite with all you crappy ignorance ridden posts are you trying to convey that China can defeat the US in war ??
do you have any edvidence to prove otherwise
Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Originally posted by chinawhite
your so ignorant. your post about indias shiet weaponary. what are you trying to prove??? whats the big achiement breakthrough in indias weaponary that you are trying to convince everyone to believe
what a cheap way to say "i quit" (like JBL)
like i said if you cant continue the discussion wihout using foul language,
You call indian weaponry as sh**, then there are words in the dictionary to describe chinese weaponry.
If the Su-30 MKI is sh**, then what shall i call the hundreds of Mig-19's that China still operates ??
What shall i call all the copies ??
God you've placed upon me the task of inventing new words
Can you name one piece of weaponry that India uses that is more outdated than any weaponry China uses ?? Go ahead, give it a try
Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Chinawhite with all you crappy ignorance ridden posts are you trying to convey that China can defeat the US in war ??
Yes, their war in Korea was legal. But, in Gulf War II, no such UN approval was there, yet Bush insists the war was legal.
The US cannot just go to war with someone just because Mr Bush wants to.
If this is true, say China wants Taiwan back, Hu Jintao says go to war, the rest of the Chinese government agrees, can they just take Taiwan by force, and ask UN only because it is courteous to do so?