[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;30421420]It's probably worth mentioning that China has not successfully fielded a navy since the Battle of Penghu in 1683. Against the Kingdom of Tungning.[/QUOTE]
They haven't had much cause to. Most of their battles since then have been on the ground. They're okay when it comes to that.
They kicked our asses back in Korea after all.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;30421682]They haven't had much cause to. Most of their battles since then have been on the ground. They're okay when it comes to that.[/quote]
Well, they're just not good at naval warfare. They had navies during both Sino-Japanese Wars, they tried to use their forces in both instances, and both times they lost most of their naval units, the first time decisively enough that the Japanese were able to claim a victory and subsequently gain a foothold in Korea, the second time invade their homeland and occupy it for 8 years and kill anywhere up to 4 million men.
[quote=Psychokitten]They kicked our asses back in Korea after all.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War[/url]
Casualties and losses
United States
36,516 dead (including 2,830 non-combat deaths)
92,134 wounded
8,176 MIA
7,245 POW
P.R. China
(Official data)
183,108 dead (including non-combat deaths)
383,218 wounded
25,621 MIA
21,400 POW
[IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/2qnsdgn.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;30421757][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War[/url]
Casualties and losses
United States
36,516 dead (including 2,830 non-combat deaths)
92,134 wounded
8,176 MIA
7,245 POW
P.R. China
(Official data)
183,108 dead (including non-combat deaths)
383,218 wounded
25,621 MIA
21,400 POW
[IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/2qnsdgn.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
We still got pushed all the way back to pre-war lines.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;30421935]We still got pushed all the way back to pre-war lines.[/QUOTE]
And in turn pushed them back to the Kansas Line north of the 38th Parallel in Operations Tomahawk and Courageous during the March Push where we and the rest of the UN forces held out on North Korean soil until the cease-fire was negotiated in 1953.
I think it's worth pointing out that those numbers are what China released. It's estimated by the U.N. that the actual Chinese casualty count was actually closer to 1,000,000.
[editline]13th June 2011[/editline]
Including non-combatants.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;30422080]I think it's worth pointing out that those numbers are what China released. It's estimated by the U.N. that the actual Chinese casualty count was actually closer to 1,000,000.
[editline]13th June 2011[/editline]
Including non-combatants.[/QUOTE]
I don't think there was a battle during the war where the Chinese had fewer casualties than we all did. Even the one battle we lost during the stalemate period, Triangle Hill, saw them take more casualties (in both the dead and the wounded categories).
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;30422128]I don't think there was a battle during the war where the Chinese had fewer casualties than we all did. Even the one battle we lost during the stalemate period, Triangle Hill, saw them take more casualties (in both the dead and the wounded categories).[/QUOTE]
Human wave tactics man. The Chinese use them because they're effective and they can afford them.
Also human right's violations.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;30422203]Human wave tactics man. The Chinese use them because they're effective and they can afford them.
Also human right's violations.[/QUOTE]
Human wave tactics are pretty much a misunderstanding and a stereotype.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_wave_attack#People.27s_Liberation_Army[/url]
ITT: People who think they know about how the economy works.
Also, the PLA has changed from the 1950s, if you didn't know.
In the 1970s, the United States Army was at its lowest point yet with rampant drug and alcohol abuse, racism, and desertion due to no small part by Vietnam. Turn the clock forward a decade and the U.S. Army was revived into a formidable force, due to improvements in training, pay and funding by the Reagan administration.
The point is, things can change rather quickly, no matter what the historical track record may be.
Who kills humans better competition NO ONE WILL TAKE AMURRICAS SPOT!!!1
[QUOTE=Tac Error;30422265]Also, the PLA has changed from the 1950s, if you didn't know.
In the 1970s, the United States Army was at its lowest point yet with rampant drug and alcohol abuse, racism, and desertion due to no small part by Vietnam. Turn the clock forward a decade and the U.S. Army was revived into a formidable force, due to improvements in training, pay and funding by the Reagan administration.
The point is, things can change rather quickly, no matter what the historical track record may be.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the PLA have definitely adapted and modernized, relatively speaking.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.