Your CdM's China Warmongering Thread du Jour

[Siege]

If the US gets conquered by China, your city will be occupied by these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cbMLeeV1ww

Do you still want to resist?

Armies that are good at marching suck at war.
The better they march the worst they fight.

You can't march in step can you?

I can, but not nowhere near as elegant as the enemy can.

This video is Obama inauguration in 2009. I was there, if you faggots remember the pictures I posted.
Notice the bobing heads, which is the dudes out of step.
And this is the best of the best at marching, so imagine the rest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1KreBkLa_o

[The Brain]

Maybe if you tried marching on different internal organs until you hit one that works for you.

[Monoriu]

Pretty impressive parade shows. I wonder what kind of soldiers those in the bright red uniforms are?

If I remember correctly, they are reservists/militia. 

You sure?
I thought they were military police.

Yeah, the caption in Chinese says militia. 

[DGuller]

I wonder if these parades are a way to strip away personal initiative?  Nothing says that you as individual don't count for anything like being forced to train for days on end to perfectly do exactly what hundreds of people around you do.  In non-autocratic countries, personal initiate in the military is considered a big asset, but in autocratic you really don't want your soldiers to start having thoughts.

[Martim Silva]

Armies that are good at marching suck at war.
The better they march the worst they fight.

The link are the female soldiers. Most of them are intended for garrisons.

Which is great to tone down local resistance. If his city gets occupied by them, CdM has to choose between keeping the place filled with hot chinese girls, or let the US retake the city and have to look at YOU instead.

The ones you'd face are these guys:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHZIUdHm6b4&feature=related

Also, note that the Prussian Army of Frederick II was also famous for doing the best parades in Europe. And in ww2 the German Army thought that the SS (especially the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler division) were only fit to look good on parades, as it seems that was all they could do.

Then those troops hit the field...

Pretty impressive parade shows. I wonder what kind of soldiers those in the bright red uniforms are?

If I remember correctly, they are reservists/militia.

Bright red = elite milita
Pink = regular militia
Brown = Army
Blue = Air Force
White = Navy

[Neil]

Infantry is unimportant in modern warfare.  All those Chinese girls are powerless against my one finger that rests on the button.

[DGuller]

Didn't Germans eventually abandon the Prussian goose step sometime during the war, because it was wasteful?

[The Brain]

Didn't Germans eventually abandon the Prussian goose step sometime during the war, because it was wasteful?

In favor of what? Quickstep? Dubstep?

[OttoVonBismarck]

Armies that are good at marching suck at war.
The better they march the worst they fight.

Oversimplification (expected from you, since your brain "don't work right.") A lot of countries have units that specialize in pageantry type stuff and public marches, they typically aren't going to be the first into any battle, you can still have units like that but still have the rest of your military trained to actually fight.

Also, historically marching was a big part of military success, back before the modern era.

[Berkut]

And in ww2 the German Army thought that the SS (especially the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler division) were only fit to look good on parades, as it seems that was all they could do.

Then those troops hit the field...

...and were largely inefficient and casualty prone compared to their Wehrmacht counterparts until they replaced the spit and polish bullshit with actual training.

LAH was best known in Poland for torching villages, and in France for massacring POWs.

[Martim Silva]

Didn't Germans eventually abandon the Prussian goose step sometime during the war, because it was wasteful?

West Germany gave it up (after the war, obv) in order to avoid connotations with militarism. East Germany did not, but the 1990 reunification made the West German norm the rule for all the German military.

...and were largely inefficient and casualty prone compared to their Wehrmacht counterparts until they replaced the spit and polish bullshit with actual training.

LAH was best known in Poland for torching villages, and in France for massacring POWs.

They grew in size during the war. In the Union they got fame for being very hard to fight against at Uman, Kiev, the Don, Kharkov and Kursk. They had lots of casualties because they took many risks to get things done, a tactic I do not disapprove of.

They also killed many prisoners, but that's war - we also killed all of them that we could 

(and, if your own American movies/series are anything to go by, wasn't the killing of POWs a regular thing that the GIs liked to do? In 'Saving Private Ryan', 'Band of Brothers' or 'Letters from Iwo Jima', for an Axis soldier to try to surrender to an US unit is basically a 50/50 tossup on weather he'll get killed on the spot or not).

[grumbler]

They grew in size during the war. In the Union they got fame for being very hard to fight against at Uman, Kiev, the Don, Kharkov and Kursk. They had lots of casualties because they took many risks to get things done, a tactic I do not disapprove of.

So you agree with Berkut that they were poor soldiers until they dropped the parade-ground mentality?  Wise, as I think he hit the nail on the head.

They also killed many prisoners, but that's war - we also killed all of them that we could 

I am not clear on how the fact that you guys killed PoWs and grin about it is relevant to the reputation of LAH in France in 1940.

(and, if your own American movies/series are anything to go by, wasn't the killing of POWs a regular thing that the GIs liked to do? In 'Saving Private Ryan', 'Band of Brothers' or 'Letters from Iwo Jima', for an Axis soldier to try to surrender to an US unit is basically a 50/50 tossup on weather he'll get killed on the spot or not).

Three problems independently make this statement absurd:
(1) Fiction isn't a very good basis for arguing facts.
(2) shooting a soldier who may be attempting to surrender in combat is not murdering POWs.
(3) While there certainly were instances where allied and Axis individuals or units deliberately killed POWs (or civilians), there weren't units which did this repeatedly and routinely, unlike the SS (and LAH in particular). [/quote]

[Razgovory]

Didn't Germans eventually abandon the Prussian goose step sometime during the war, because it was wasteful?

They only did it when they got in front of the reviewing stand.  Once they round the the bend they went to normal march I think.  Didn't the Soviets have some guys goosestep round the clock at Lenin's tomb though.  Guy must be really fucking tired.

[Martim Silva]

So you agree with Berkut that they were poor soldiers until they dropped the parade-ground mentality?  Wise, as I think he hit the nail on the head.

As a group changes, so can another... dismiss a foe because it is disciplined in parade is foolish in the extreme.

I am not clear on how the fact that you guys killed PoWs and grin about it is relevant to the reputation of LAH in France in 1940.

I duuno, how is their reputation in France (I don't think it was 1940, the LAH at the time was a regiment and was pulled into reserve after the fall of the Low Countries) has anything to do with the way they fought battles? 'Cos for us, they were tough bastards.

Three problems independently make this statement absurd:
(1) Fiction isn't a very good basis for arguing facts.

As you very well remember, pre-1990 history books said pretty much nothing about US troops killing surrendering soldiers/POWs, but they DID mention often the execution of prisioners both by the Nazis (like the 113 US POWs killed by the LAH in Málmedy in 1944, dubbed "the WORST atrocity commited against POWs" (like here: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/malmedy_massacre.htm), and by the Union soldiers, and it wasn't until well-know anti-American anti-semites like Steven Spielberg and Clint Eastwood put these tales into images that the testimonies of US ww2 veterans began to be heard and publicized, like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f86CTa7uGVQ

Of course, we know from experience in Korea and Vietnam that the GI habit of killing surrendering soldiers/POW is alive and well, and it continues in Afghanistan, if what has been coming out is true (like "the Convoy of Death' in Afghanistan - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ6OytX80NI )

(2) shooting a soldier who may be attempting to surrender in combat is not murdering POWs.

Okay, then:



Guess those Nazis are just attempting to surrender... sneaky types.

(3) While there certainly were instances where allied and Axis individuals or units deliberately killed POWs (or civilians), there weren't units which did this repeatedly and routinely, unlike the SS (and LAH in particular).

More accurately, since the US won the war, it had absolutely no interest whatsoever in telling anything about any executions of POW.

Very mich in just the same way it arranged the fairytale that the Japanese Emperor was totally blameless of Japan's role in the war and that Hirohito had been a puppet of the military in order to facilitate Japanese cooperation against the Union and later China, a myth that was only debunked when the historian Herbert P. Bix had the incredible idea of actually going to Japan and checking the records of Imperial conferences, thus being able to prove that Hirohito did have power during WW2*; until then, the vast majority of US historians merely parroted each other, all telling the official government line.

And still today, most Americans believe the official lie, so ingrained it is.

(*: for this, I recommend reading 'Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan')

It would therefore be hardly surprising if the same scheme hasn't happened for the allied units in WW2. While some are accused - like the US 34th Infantry Division - over the decades the US and its historians simply did not mention anything about the executions of POWs by its troops - but rather never missed a chance to point out those made by the Nazis or by the soldiers of the Union.

I suspect an actual investigation of US war archives - the kind you'd get if a nation like China conquered America and forced a deep and exhaustive research of the data and testimonies - would reveal a truth far different than that of "our units never did this so often".

[Admiral Yi]

Of course, we know from experience in Korea and Vietnam that the GI habit of killing surrendering soldiers/POW is alive and well

We do?