thanks for the explaination on the US call for coalition. The pt of the matter is i doubt the US can fight 8-11 countries simultanously. Mind you china at that time was fighting countries superior to itself in terms of weapons technology.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Why the Manchurians could defeat the Ming?
- Thread starter mscitw
- Start date
actually initially no, they render Manchus as foreign invaders...its after number of years that they realise under Manchu rule, life is better...
Actually not exactly. Mongols and Manchus were considered Chinese minorities. That include Tibetans also. Han Chinese just want to rule whole China since they think they're majority should rule whole China always. Thats sometime got fight and not everytime majority win LOL
Something like Sg now. Always must have Chinese gahment. But Malays and Indians and other are Sgporeans too.
It's just the facts of life. It happens everywhere not just in china or sg.
You sound just like ram always calling tibetians, mongols chinese too.
What he think is none of my biz. My teacher teach 汉，满，蒙，回，藏，中华五大民族。
I never even been to China before LOL but just interested since I'm Chinese.
Last edited:
correct me if i am wrong, Mongols / Manchus r considered barbarians / outsiders...although in terms of stock / DNA they may be carrying the same traits.
at that time, the idea of country / citizen is unheard of....so long skin colour / language different considered different liao.
What none of your business? Aren't you him?
Yes of course if you like. I dont care who you think me is. I just here for fun LOL
Wu Sangui is not a traitor. Wu Sangui was a general under the Chongzhen emperor who owed no loyalty to Li Zicheng.
hello ram.
Of course PAP will do this, it is in their interests, but the question you have to ask is, why 2 of the rambutans did not quit at the last mins of the president election and endorses one? you see, if you are in such as mess, why would sinkies want to give you power?
that is true, but coming from thailand all the way down to sg has already drained the soldiers in terms of resources, both mentally and physically in such a rush period. anyway those guns are you were saying if i do not recall wrongly its for navel battle. that itself is another joke
losing the war due to underestimating the jap plays a very heavy role. but wrong ground judgement of the enemy and lack of intelligence on it was another serious factor which many overlooked. situation was really bad for the japanese troop then even though they had already enter singapore in a lightning fast amazing speed. they were really putting on a very strong false front. if you were to read the account and dairy of the japanese commander, he fear going to the war all out to the street when he reach singapore. i would say the most important factor that result in losing the war in singapore is the lousy management at the top, not able to coordinate the troops and get proper info and intel about the enemy.
"My attack on Singapore was a bluff – a bluff that worked. I had 30,000 men and was outnumbered more than three to one. I knew that if I had to fight for long for Singapore, I would be beaten. That is why the surrender had to be at once. I was very frightened all the time that the British would discover our numerical weakness and lack of supplies and force me into disastrous street fighting."
– Tomoyuki Yamashita Shores 1992, p. 383.
things were bad for the local troop then, but it was way much worse for the japanese. i did read on the account of general yamashita that he would most likely surrender if the war drag on for another 2 weeks.
Last edited:
if my memory does not failed me, 3 japanese soldiers were issued to share 1 mag of bullets then. that was how bad things were for them when they entered singapore.
its funny about the subject on history, you hate it for exam and projects, but you love to talk about it to pass time.
its funny about the subject on history, you hate it for exam and projects, but you love to talk about it to pass time.
think no need another 2 weeks, another 1 week will suffice for the Jap to withdraw back to malaya - not surrender.
they have already conquered malaya, they just disappear back to malaya and rest and regroup before attacking again.
Singapore won't rest easier, water is already lost, food is dwindling, unless British can mount replenishment via the sea - but if they have Malaya, coming thru via Straits of Melaka won't be easy. Moreover, we will be continuously pounded by air raids launched from Malaya.
With UK tied down in Europe (fighting Atlantic wolfpacks - just aftermath of battle of britain) - they are not in a good shape to replenish Singapore.
the outcome likely to be a long drawn battle but will definitely throw the spanner into the plans of the Japs.
Percival is not called the rabbit for no reason.
japanese had modernized it navy with british help and use french advisers to modernized its army. They fought the naval battle against the Tsar's fleet in open sea and won. Port Arthur surrendered to japanese forces. so your claim that japanese have no military capability against the russian do not hold water.
Since jah claim u a indian so i reply as follow. As lousy as the chinese were, at the very least, they always manage to rid its land of the foreign invaders, be it in a couple hundreds of years. but india subcontinent were attack by foreign invaders since the dawn of history yet most of the time the invaders stay on when being invade by another foreign invaders and the original native ppl like under the yoke of foreign rule till 1949. While china force to lease its ports to foreign powers but the country remain free wheras indians have to acknowledge Queen Victoria as the Empress of India. Indian civilisation at least 5000 yrs history being rule by an upstart kingdom with less than 1500yrs history.
I actually believe that the British surrender was deliberate after the miscalculation and underestimation against the Japanese, as part of overall war strategy and recovery but I don't blame them, such is war and warfare. As in chess, you let your opponent capture some of your pawns and even rooks to lure them into position for you to checkmate. It's sad with the loss of lives on all sides, British, Japanese and local. But it's a fact of life and fact of war if war it's going to be.
and also their naivety that they will be treated humanely in Changi chalet...little did they noe, they are going to build the Death Railway...
reminds me of Stalingrad...the turning point of WW2.
Good point. The British fought and died here and suffered the humiliation all the way to Burma. Wherefrom those talks about British abandonding Singapore? They would have won the war more quickly if not for trying to defend Malaya and Singapore. Just withdraw everything and let us die or survive at the mercy of the Japanese, they go settle Germany and US go settle Japan. Win first, talk later. You die, whoever die, your business. Did they abandon our ancestors for simply pawns of war? The answer is a resounding no. Ingrate is the word I'd use to those who think so. Idiot is the word I'd use to those who think SAF can fight off a force like the Japanese army.
Last edited:
Similar threads
