Ratings of Chiang Kai-Shek

[kaleun]

Not really defending Chiang, I agree he was just a warlord.
I also read that, in Burma he offered Wavell 2 divisions to help out, but was told to only send one, because the Chinese operated without a supply chain, (since theydidn't have any, [and maybe Chiang was keeping it to himself]) they lived of the land.

[freeboy]

comment really was directed at ycwang... so wheres my turn already?

[ycwang]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

comment really was directed at ycwang... so wheres my turn already?

I was not defending Chiang's characters, but arguing that his ratings in this game are too low. Some of you guys don't like him because he and his KMT government was corrupted, but it has nothing to do with the game.

I find it ironic that I need to defend a person that I have disguised for a long time simply because some people here would not objectively discuss this matter based on facts that are related to this game. Can anyone honestly believe that CKS is worse at the operational level than any other generals in this game, including those random-figure, nobody-knows-who-he-is ones?

[ycwang]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

And Taiwan is only a little more democratic than China.

Mike

Though this is really off topic, I believe that I know more than you do about it, and I disagree with your description "only a little". I would agree with you if you are willing to delete those three words.

If you want to take issues with me, you need to know that you are arguing with a law professor who got his doctorate degree in the U.S. I hate to say this, but saying that democracy in Taiwan is only a little better than China sounds quite like an insult to me.

BTW, Sun Yat-Sen's political theories are in part anti-democracy, if you have any idea about what he said. If we people in Taiwan follow his theories, we have no hope for true democracy.

[pyaeen]

Although I agree with you about the ability of CKS, other guys respond negatively I think just bcs they don't know much about Chinese history in 30-50, or may be they accept other point of view of WW2 like Buma campaign.
But I know this really off topic too.
1.Law Professor means nothing here for gorgnard
2.Taiwan has trun democracy now? [>:] What a good president election show we had seen.
4. It seems you come from Taiwan and should learn Sun Yat-Sen's theories when you were as boy in Taiwan. But do you have deep research on that?

[Jim D Burns]

I agree with you that his ratings are probably too low, but the problem lies with trying to simulate the ineffectiveness of the KMT during WWII. They were basically unable to launch any kind of cooperative operation of significance in China proper and Chiang interfered with Stillwell’s planned defense in Burma to the point that an entire division pulled up and redeployed on the eve of battle without telling Stillwell because Chiang feared losing the unit more than losing Burma (not a sign of a very committed ally).

The game does not simulate these problems at all, so the only choice is to make the Chinese army totally ineffectual. A better solution might be to make the Chinese units more capable combat wise, but prevent them from moving more than a hex or two from their home provinces. Currently China can be pushed back in just a few months due to the ineffective combat ratings; historically they defended themselves relatively ok, but couldn't launch any kind of decent assaults.

Jim


Here's a good read for a general overview of some of the difficulties the allies faced in China:

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/brochures/72-38/72-38.htm

Jim

[ycwang]

ORIGINAL: pyaeen

Although I agree with you about the ability of CKS, other guys respond negatively I think just bcs they don't know much about Chinese history in 30-50, or may be they accept other point of view of WW2 like Buma campaign.
But I know this really off topic too.
1.Law Professor means nothing here for gorgnard
2.Taiwan has trun democracy now? [>:] What a good president election show we had seen.
4. It seems you come from Taiwan and should learn Sun Yat-Sen's theories when you were as boy in Taiwan. But do you have deep research on that?

Thank you for your comment. It's always a pleasure to have an intellectual dialogue with someone who knows.

As for your off-topic comments:
1. I agree with you that law professorship means nothing when we are talking about war. But if democracy is at issue, then my expertise means something.

2. The recent presidential election in Taiwan was only a more dramatized version of the 2000 Gore-Bush show. Even I was amazed, too. If you are talking about the bullet, nobody has proved anything yet. Don't forget that even though we saw what happened about J.F.K. or Richard Nixon, nobody denies that the U.S. is still a true democratic country. Not to mention that democracy in Taiwan is still in its infancy. However, I didn't say that Taiwan has already reached the same level of democracy as the U.S. Nevertheless, saying that democracy in Taiwan is only a little better than China still sounds like insult to the Taiwanese people who fight for and believe in democracy. If Taiwan is only a little bit better than China, you would see the KMT still be the ruling party instead of being thrown out of power through election in 2000 and again in 2004.

4. As long as you teach contitutional law in Taiwan, you need to pay extra attentions to what Sun Yat-Sen was talking about. However, Sun's theories were still considered "modern" for China when he promoted them in the early 20th century. However, it would be a disaster to design a democratic government based on his theories, and we have already seen that in the current Taiwanese constitutional structure. Nonetheless, Sun still deserves respect for what he did historically.

BTW, I will stop commenting on why I think CKS is rated too low because I think I've already made my points clear. All above comments on my opinions are really appreciated.

[Bandkanon]

I apologize for my earleir rudeness. I was, however, very surprised trying to make the point for higher numbers for Chiang. I don't understand why you think Chiang won the civil in China prior to the invasion of the Japanese. It was Chiang's arrogance in the first place when he kicked the Communits out of the KMT during the Northern Invasion of 1925 in Shanghai. For the next decade Chiang chased the CCP all over China but was never fully able to eradicate them. It was only through a German advisor and his blockhouse strategy of containment then eradication, which itself was very much like how the Ching's Han banners destroyed the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom almost a century earlier. Just because Chiang went to a Japanese military school does not mean he is even capable of military operations. Chiang was also the commandant of Whampoa Military Academy, and from the stories of my grandfather, who was a graduate of the 17th Class, Chiang wasn't all that great of a military man. His strategy of staying put is sound but immoral in my opinion. But morality oftentimes do not matter in war. He could have fought harder against the Japanese, especially in 1931 in Shanghai, and the subsequent invasion in 1937. KMT troops were fighting hard on and providing much resistance to the IJA in Shanghai and needed supplies and reinforcements. Chiang misjudged and decided to pull back thereby forfeiting the defense. The retreat thus turned into a rout. The KMT troops who fought the IJA were mediocre and definitely not Chiang's best, but they put up enough resistance to frustrate the IJA enough to perpetrate one of the worst massacres in human history at Nanjing. If only Chiang was willing to inspire his troops to fight, but he didn't.

Chiang only became the leader of China because he was able to politically herd the warlords into place, either through the threat of force or by just buying them into the KMT, and it was often the latter tactic he used. He was never a good planner of military operations and when he did it always sucked. Another example of his ineptitude was the Battle of BeiHai in northern China in 1948. The KMT had the best the US could offer: artillery, tanks, and planes. But what did they do? They just sat on their asses and waited for the CCP to encircle them and build layers and layers of trenches until the armor was completely useless. The result: the complete collapse of the KMT in northern China and then the retreat back to Taiwan. What I just said is true. My grandfather was there fighting for the KMT as a LT. general. He escaped the encirclement only because he was freed by his captors, who were also Whampoa graduates after he turned down to offer to turn coat. But this battle just shows the ineptitude of Chiang as the leader since he is the one who has to take responsibility for his command decisions.


By the way, why does Taiwan follow the Japanese way of teaching law to 4 year undergrads? How come there aren't any law schools like the states? I interned with Lee and Li for a while and I am sorry to say I was not very impressed wth the thinking of undergrad law students in Taiwan. It seems that they are taught law but never the reasons as to why the laws exist in the first place.

[Bandkanon]

Sorry for the horrible typos and disjointed sentences. My excuses are I'm tired and this isn't an academic paper or business report. [:o]

[ycwang]

ORIGINAL: Bandkanon

I apologize for my earleir rudeness. I was, however, very surprised trying to make the point for higher numbers for Chiang. I don't understand why you think Chiang won the civil in China prior to the invasion of the Japanese. It was Chiang's arrogance in the first place when he kicked the Communits out of the KMT during the Northern Invasion of 1925 in Shanghai. For the next decade Chiang chased the CCP all over China but was never fully able to eradicate them. It was only through a German advisor and his blockhouse strategy of containment then eradication, which itself was very much like how the Ching's Han banners destroyed the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom almost a century earlier. Just because Chiang went to a Japanese military school does not mean he is even capable of military operations. Chiang was also the commandant of Whampoa Military Academy, and from the stories of my grandfather, who was a graduate of the 17th Class, Chiang wasn't all that great of a military man. His strategy of staying put is sound but immoral in my opinion. But morality oftentimes do not matter in war. He could have fought harder against the Japanese, especially in 1931 in Shanghai, and the subsequent invasion in 1937. KMT troops were fighting hard on and providing much resistance to the IJA in Shanghai and needed supplies and reinforcements. Chiang misjudged and decided to pull back thereby forfeiting the defense. The retreat thus turned into a rout. The KMT troops who fought the IJA were mediocre and definitely not Chiang's best, but they put up enough resistance to frustrate the IJA enough to perpetrate one of the worst massacres in human history at Nanjing. If only Chiang was willing to inspire his troops to fight, but he didn't.

Chiang only became the leader of China because he was able to politically herd the warlords into place, either through the threat of force or by just buying them into the KMT, and it was often the latter tactic he used. He was never a good planner of military operations and when he did it always sucked. Another example of his ineptitude was the Battle of BeiHai in northern China in 1948. The KMT had the best the US could offer: artillery, tanks, and planes. But what did they do? They just sat on their asses and waited for the CCP to encircle them and build layers and layers of trenches until the armor was completely useless. The result: the complete collapse of the KMT in northern China and then the retreat back to Taiwan. What I just said is true. My grandfather was there fighting for the KMT as a LT. general. He escaped the encirclement only because he was freed by his captors, who were also Whampoa graduates after he turned down to offer to turn coat. But this battle just shows the ineptitude of Chiang as the leader since he is the one who has to take responsibility for his command decisions.


By the way, why does Taiwan follow the Japanese way of teaching law to 4 year undergrads? How come there aren't any law schools like the states? I interned with Lee and Li for a while and I am sorry to say I was not very impressed wth the thinking of undergrad law students in Taiwan. It seems that they are taught law but never the reasons as to why the laws exist in the first place.

Your comment this time is indeed very informative and has more significant substance. Please don't forget that I only argued CKS should not be the worst general of all in this game.

Referring to your off-topic question: A simplified version of the reason why Japan had and Taiwan now still has undergraduate legal education is that we both considered ourselves countries of "Civil Law system", as opposed to the Common Law system. Therefore, basically both Japan and Taiwan, to some extent, cloned the German legal system and its undergraduate legal education. However, Japan has changed their legal education system since (I believe) this year and switched to graduate legal education similar to what has been done in American law schools. We have some similar discussions here in Taiwan in the legal education circle. I do agree with you that many undergraduate students are not mature enough to meet the chanlleges in the legal education. I personally also favor a migration to graduate level of legal education.

[Bandkanon]

I would say that Chiang comes close to being the worst general in the game but I do agree he isn't the worst like you said. But Chiang's talents was always on the political side.

Thanks for the info on the off topic post. I kept asking that question when I was in Taiwan but never got a straight answer. I knew that China copied Japan and Japan copied German but I never understood the implications behind using the German legal system. Here is another OT question: As a professor of law would you happen to know the pass rate on the bar in Taiwan? I think its higher than Japan's horrendous 2%, but maybe that went higher since the system changed to a graduate law education.

[timtom]

How does CKS' stats effect the Chinese position in the game? Reading the AAR's, it seems that the IJA is pushing the Chinese back all along the front with little effort. This begs the question why, if the game reflects history, the Japanse didn't wrap China up nicely.

[Bandkanon]

ORIGINAL: timtom

How does CKS' stats effect the Chinese position in the game? Reading the AAR's, it seems that the IJA is pushing the Chinese back all along the front with little effort. This begs the question why, if the game reflects history, the Japanse didn't wrap China up nicely.

Are you asking why in history the IJA didn't complete their invasion of China?

The IJA didn't really have the resources to continue to go any deeper. The IJA controlled the major cities but definitely guerrilla activity hindered any major incursions into the countryside. The main reason why the Japanese attacked Pearl was because they needed to cripple the USN in order to invade the resource rish Dutch Indies and British Malaya. The US and British cut off resource shipments to Japan to protest continued aggression in China. By December 1941 the Japanese had about 180 days left of resources before their industry falls apart due to the lack of resources. I hope that answers your question. I also think that there are others in this forum who can provide more details.

[timtom]

Well, not quite, Bandkanon, the question is this:

To my knowledge, the IJA more or less sat on its ass in China until 1944, when they went after the B-29 bases and all that. Reading the AAR's on this forum, an IJA offensive in China from the word GO! seems to be the norm, and with great succes I might add: The main challenge for the Allied player seems to be to avoid a collapse in China. Now, if this reflects the actual, historical balance between the IJA and the KMT at the time, why is it that the theatre historically became a backwater, when the game tells us there's an easy victory to be had for the IJA. Does this disparity reflect a flaw in the game?

[Bandkanon]

Heh, now thats a question. I didn't know that its so easy to romp around China at will. Hopefully the Japanese player will pay for it when the US comes a knocking.

[timtom]

Well, I don't know either (haven't got the game YET [:(]), its just my impression from reading the AAR's.l

[Bandkanon]

ORIGINAL: timtom

Well, I don't know either (haven't got the game YET [:(]), its just my impression from reading the AAR's.l

Still waiting for the CD to be delivered? Yeah that sucks. Hope you get it soon. Are you also paying for the VAT?

[timtom]

No, Im actually waiting to get it in a case and all, well that and the fact that I haven't got the time to spare this month, really. Hopefully there'll be a patch or two out by the time my schedule clears up (can't help hanging out here, though, and its three in the morning already - I oughtabe [>:] )

[Arsaces]

While CKS was a man of some ability, these abilities were mainly political. He chose his military subordinates for their political loyalty, not for their military competence. Since CKS understood that the road to power belong to he who controlled the best army, he was obsessed by the imperative of preventing any of his generals from becoming too powerful.

In any case by 1942, China, was basically exhausted by years of war and invasion and was in no shape to mount any kind of offensive. The fall of Burma, following the occupation of French Indo-China, effectively isolated China from the outside world, and exposed the country to slow strangulation. The situation of China actually deteriorated with America's entry into the war and led to the catastrophes of 1944.

American planners devised grandiose schemes for using Chinese manpower armed by american weapons to defeat the IJA in an asian land war. Chinese leaders, accepted the foreign weapons, made polite noises and pursued the ancient strategy of using the barbarians to fight the barbarians. They could do little else.

Actually Wavell was one of the better generals of the British army, as he showed in North Africa, proving more than a match for his adversaries until he was obliged to send half his armies to Greece and Crete. Churchill gave him one impossible assignment after another. His Far East command was the most impossible of all.