Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Nationalists under Chiang Kai Shek nominally ruled China until 1949. Here are a few questions, I'd like to throw out:
1. Could Chiang Kai Shek in any way be described as an effective leader?
2. Did China make any substantial contribution to the defeat of the Japanese in World War II?
3. Did the Communists under Mao Ze Dong do any substantial fighting against the Japanese during the time they were in exile?
4. Was there ever a chance that Nationalists could have defeated the Communists after World War II ended?
5. What factors are to claim for the defeat of the Nationalists?
6. Did America follow the right policy following the defeat of the Nationalists in denying the Communists diplomatic recognition and a seat in the United Nations?
7. Did Chiang Kai Shek and the Nationalists lose power because of their own or because they were abandoned?
Too corrupt and failed leadership. It is a toss up which party was worse, the Communists or the Nationalists. The Communists killed off about 50 million or more of their own people, but the Nationalists were pretty inept when it came to running the country. It is amazing they were able to make Taiwan such a economic powerhouse.
It's hard to say that Chiang was an effective leader, mainly because he didn't seem to be very interested in effective leadership.
China's major contribution to the defeat of Japan in WWII was in the number of Japanese troops stationed there. (If they're mired down in China--and, of course, they had to support Manchukuo, which wouldn't have been a functioning entity without them--they can't be fighting anywhere else!)
I will attempt to answer #2 and #3:
But of course, China was at war with Japan much earlier than the western powers. The 2nd Sino-Japanese war started in 1937. And of course, they contributed to Japanse defeat in that Japan's war with China took up resources - men and materials, both in battle losses and the cost to garrison troops in the conquered areas. Like Germany in Russia, they just could not defeat China due to the vast territory.
Now, this indeed was in the midst of a Chinese Civil War between the communists and nationals. If you read PRC literature now, it's made out that the commust gueralla forces were a major fighting force against the Japanese and turned the tide and chased them out of China (and I know partly because I saw some absurd Chinese-made war films on TV during a China trip earlier in the year). In reality, Mao's forces used that period to regroup and grow stronger, and actually avoided fighting japanese forces, content on seeing National forces and Japanese forces destroy each other...although skirmishes with the JIA still occured at times, there was certainly no love for the Japanese. At the end of the war, Mao's forces were stronger, and Shek's forces and government were devestated by 8 years of warfare. No mystery on why Mao was able to defeat Shek.
The Nationalists under Chiang Kai Shek nominally ruled China until 1949. Here are a few questions, I'd like to throw out:
1. Could Chiang Kai Shek in any way be described as an effective leader?
2. Did China make any substantial contribution to the defeat of the Japanese in World War II?
3. Did the Communists under Mao Ze Dong do any substantial fighting against the Japanese during the time they were in exile?
4. Was there ever a chance that Nationalists could have defeated the Communists after World War II ended?
5. What factors are to claim for the defeat of the Nationalists?
6. Did America follow the right policy following the defeat of the Nationalists in denying the Communists diplomatic recognition and a seat in the United Nations?
7. Did Chiang Kai Shek and the Nationalists lose power because of their own or because they were abandoned?
1 No
2 Yes. Much more than England.
3 Most members of the resistance, in occupied China, were communists.
4 No
5 They lost support in majority of people.
6 No
7 Thay were never abandoned. Thay got,and are still getting, help from U.S.A. This is the main reason why Taiwan, is successful country. Plus, it is smaller than Poland.
PS.
These are huge questions, and i would have to write a book, to answer you correctly.
PPS.
I would like to answer other participants in this discussion;
totsuka do you know how many people did monarho-democrats from England killed in India. They killed more than 50 million people.
Or how many people did the democrats, killed in S. America, Africa, Russia ( civil war in which western democracies send their armies to fight (kill) communists).
When you add all the numbers you will see that democrats, killed more people than communist.
What do you think about "China miracle", which communist did in 60 years. Despite democratic boycott of China goods, till the recent years, and naval blockade which is still going on in some form.
Do not forget Hitler was democrat, but i did not counted WW2 victims in democratic-communist scoreboard.
Dd714 i watched hundredth absurd democratic war movies.
I would like to answer other participants in this discussion;
totsuka do you know how many people did monarho-democrats from England killed in India. They killed more than 50 million people.
Or how many people did the democrats, killed in S. America, Africa, Russia ( civil war in which western democracies send their armies to fight (kill) communists).
When you add all the numbers you will see that democrats, killed more people than communist.
What do you think about "China miracle", which communist did in 60 years. Despite democratic boycott of China goods, till the recent years, and naval blockade which is still going on in some form.
Do not forget Hitler was democrat, but i did not counted WW2 victims in democratic-communist scoreboard.
Dd714 i watched hundredth absurd democratic war movies.
Yeah, them democrats!...don't blame me, I voted republican last election. Glad you got that out of your system however, nonsensical and off-topic outbursts help, you must feel better...
I would like to answer other participants in this discussion;
totsuka do you know how many people did monarho-democrats from England killed in India. They killed more than 50 million people.
Or how many people did the democrats, killed in S. America, Africa, Russia ( civil war in which western democracies send their armies to fight (kill) communists).
When you add all the numbers you will see that democrats, killed more people than communist.
What do you think about "China miracle", which communist did in 60 years. Despite democratic boycott of China goods, till the recent years, and naval blockade which is still going on in some form.
Do not forget Hitler was democrat, but i did not counted WW2 victims in democratic-communist scoreboard.
Dd714 i watched hundredth absurd democratic war movies.
Your argument would have been a bit clearer if perhaps you just said western imperialist and neo-colonial powers and left it at that. By the way, Hitler was no democrat by any definition of the word.
Your argument would have been a bit clearer if perhaps you just said western imperialist and neo-colonial powers and left it at that. By the way, Hitler was no democrat by any definition of the word.
He was the morning star of democracy. He join the party which had goals that were closest to his beliefs. That party put his country and his nation as her prime objective. His country was in big economical problems, and he wanted to do his best to help her.
We could call him republican. He did not care if other people had to suffer, it was a fair game for any nation, and he knew that freedom is not free.
Nobody gave him a chance, but he would not give up. He presented his program to the party leders and his voters, and they elected him for their party leader. He entered the senat that year.
He become more popular in his first senat term, mostly beacuse of his relentless will to fight for the people. While his second elections where approaching, he starded touring the country, and like the true democrat he gave speeches in every occasion. He spoke with any farmer, worker, engineer that would listen to him. He was a firm advocate of womens rights, he declared that he would bring them their honor back.
Women loved him!
Not surprisingly he acquired majority in the voting body. Volunteers from all over the country gather to help him. Newspaper in that time jest ; "that on every corner in country, there
is a Hitler activist handing out papers that suport his cause, and if you asked them something, they would not let you go for half an hour".
Finally the election day arrived. End despite all the obstacles, and all the hardships, Hitler won and had achieved greatness.
He become planetary popular and a sex simbol. Every newspaper in the world wrote about his successful economic reforms.
Or like the people said :"we are back on top". Industry was booming.
You could call him Obama of the twentieth century.
He brought hope to the people.
Your argument would have been a bit clearer if perhaps you just said western imperialist and neo-colonial powers and left it at that. By the way, Hitler was no democrat by any definition of the word.
Now you got him started, did he just say Hitler was a sex symbol?
Western imperialist works as a label....I personally prefer to be addressed as "YOU YANKEE DOGS!" or "YOU COWBOY WARMONGERING SCUM" also works.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
