Even if the Jap concentrated on fighting China alone and not do the Pearl Habour thing, I doubt they will succeed. Even if they succeeded, I dun think the conquer will last very long before the Jap would be kicked out.
Another question is... what would Asia be like WITHOUT the Jap offensive?? Would the Asian countries gain independence? Would China be weaker than it is today?
We might be using pounds and shillings, and speak with stiff upper lips instead...
My vote is China would succeed in defending herself, even if Japanese threw all they had into China.
1. The Japanese had limited resources. Even taking out the conflict in Pacific theatre against the US, they simply did not have the logistical assets and numerical superiority on their side. They HAD to bring their offensive down to SEA region.
2. They had started the war with China but their intention soon grew to SEA because of resources. It grew overly ambitious, and China didn't gave them what they had wanted (tin, oil and rubber), and yes, like Germany's invasion into Russia. It was just plain too big piece for them to bite.
3. Japanese focused their available resources into building a first class navy with their 8-8 armada, and dreadnoughts and flattops would be pretty useless for a full invasion. Though their Armies were well trained, the Imperial's decision didn't work well for protracted offensive like overruning China.
So with my dua-puluh sen's worth, I think their plan was doomed to fail from the beginning.
from guitars, cars to dslr...
if usa didnt enter the war, maybe , the world is now most probably dominated by 3 big powers, us, germany and japan.
china may have numerical superiority in terms of people, but without superior firepower, it counts for almost nothing. china at that time was the sick man of asia - western powers had already carved up extra territorial rights in the big cities like shanghai.
japan's firepower at that time was second to none in the pacific. in 1905, in the Tsushima Straits, japan's victory over russia was one of the most decisive sea battle in history. it was 45 russian ships versus 31 japanese ships. final tally of the fight: 21 russian ships sunk, 13 captured or disarmed. japan lost only 3 torpedo boats.
smaller (area and/or population) countries do win over bigger countries as proven in history, eg france under napolean conquered most of euro. mongols conquered almost the whole of asia and half of euro. malacca controlled the whole of malaya.
in the final analysis, superior firepower is the determinant of who the victor is. numerical numbers will only be useful when accomapnied by firepower.
Yes, China was insulted and humiliated by Japan and European Powers from the begining of the late 19th Century onwards.
The words Sick Man of Asia 東 亞 病 夫, reminds me one of the Bruce Lee's movies : Fist of Fury.
This 4 chinese characters 東 亞 病 夫 have great impact to people of China and even in today society.
It unite China's nationalism and Chinese's determination to fight, and prove to the world that China will never be look down again.
中 国 人 不 是 東 亞 病 夫
Last edited by King Tiger; 7th July 2007 at 01:16 AM.
Last edited by King Tiger; 7th July 2007 at 01:26 AM.
foreign powers intervention in any dispute is inseparable in all disputes since pre-historic times and it continues till today...
Even if japan did concentrate all her resources, she would have to spend them all conquering china. Next, even though japan might have conquered several cities, what they do to the civilians was simply dumb - killing innocents. They won't have the support to generate the resources even if it was a well resourced city.
I think Japan might succeed in conquering China had it avoided fighting in 3 fronts (China, SEA, pacific?). Reasons include their advance biological weapons program, superior airpower which can match anything the US could muster during the early days of the war.
The battle of Midway was a watershed and Japan never did recover from losing all those planes and aircraft carriers in the defeat.
I am not saying that this is a historical fact, but the author did an interview with General Zhang while he was retired in an old folks home in Canada... can't recall the details maybe I will look it up later when I get home
This is the book I read
Just did a quick scan of the chapter in the book about the kidnapping of CKS. Some interesting points:
1. General Zhang ("young marshal") inherited Manchuria when his warlord father ('old marshal') was assassinated in 1928.
2. Zhang placed domain under CKS central govt and ruled Manchuria until japanese invaded in 1931.
3. But Zhang tried to supplant CKS by offering to make a deal with the russians that he was ready to form alliance with the chinese redsand engage the japanese. In return Zhang wanted Moscow to back him to replace CKS as head of the country.
Last edited by FooFighter; 10th July 2007 at 11:14 PM.
The propaganda worked well in persuading Chinese Armies to surrender wholesale at Nanking. However when soldier's mentality of, "I dun even have food & water to feed my own army, u tell me to feed civilians? Priority: Army first. Can waste the Civilians as target practice boards." they literally committed political suicide.
Had the Imperial Army walked in and lived out the promises of their propaganda and tamed their conquered quests (like what they did when the colonized Taiwan) with Civilian Administrators to the cities instead of Military Commanders, half of China would have rose against the KMT and CCP.
I guess old habits ARE hard to break. Education reform during the rein of Meiji Emperor and the long standing history of internal warfare and spirit of Samurai never died. Enemy lose = Kill or Seppuku.