human wave tactics - Page 3




 
--
Boots
 
January 20th, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
ya....although PLA actualy captured the capital of south korea Souel for a while...
PLA was beaten back and that is where lots of them got captured..(over 40000 probably)..

china did have some good ambush and encriclement at the beginning of the war and beat U.S back to 38th parrel...
but later...i think PLA commander made some mistakes...they violated their own rules of attacking enemies' weakness
January 20th, 2005  
k19
 
Well, that isn't really feeding people to your gun point mindlessly for the last part of war like you thought. Both sides were struggling for any progress at that point of time. But in order to enter the party talks with "advantage", both sides were throwing quite intensive offensives. South, with the overvlmeing advantage of planes, supplies and artillery, and way better strength on their defensive, PLA were taking one sided casualties without much alternative way to but, with large counter-offensive by massive attacks, to maintain the strength on the view of political reasons. Further, there were not many experienced soldiers lest, where most of them either wounded, or lost during the first 2 years of the war.
January 20th, 2005  
Chinaman
 
redneck 13 seem to be indirectly declearing that the chinese are stupid

attacking entrenched enemies head on is stupid and the chiense commander does not use this.

concentration vs weakness is the main war theory, if mao wrote it, then it was obeyed.

chinese definetly savor life over death, it was also mao who said: land could be captured and used over and over, but men cannot.


the chinese had brillant encirclement and flanking at first, defeated enemies and the un started pissing their pants

later, when a concentrated enemy attacked north korea with air support and fresh men to charge, china had to retreat rather than to starve itself if its strength

the battle became a trench warefare and thats why the stalemate happened
--
Boots
January 20th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
You Chinese guys are missing the point. Every culture places A value on human life, but some place a higher value on it then others. The American way of fighting is to place a very high price on human life, hence why when we lost 19 men in Somalia there was such a public outcry. You also see it in American vehicle design, such as the M1 series of tanks that incorporates many features so that the crew can survive even if the tank is knocked out of action, these are not mirrored in Russian designs.

To give you an asian example, the Japanese used human wave attacks, Banzai charges. They charged at American positions rather than surrendering because in their militaristic culture of that time they placed a higher value on their society than they did individual human life. In this manner they where willing to sacrifice life in ways that westerners would see as 'needless' just to kill those few extra enemies.

Communist nations also have a long tradition of human wave attacks. By the nature of the communist culture and government you see a higher importance placed upon the government/society than you do upon individual human life. In Stalingrad it is well known that soldiers where sent into human wave attacks with no gun and only a 5 round magazine of ammunition. The strategic thinkers of Soviet Russia placed a much higher value on saving the motherland than they did on human life.

China, North Korea, and Vietnam all have similar threads in their modern military histories.


K19 - You are also more right than you know. In Chinese/North Korean culture it is seen as a valuable thing for many more soldiers to die to enter peace negotiations with a stronger hand. Americans would probobly see this as barbaric, to force hundreds or thousands of your men into the jaws of death just for a slight advantage at the barganing table.
January 20th, 2005  
EuroSpike
 

Topic: Re: human wave tactics


Quote:
Originally Posted by paratroopa
why are there so many people that assume that china uses human wave tactics, not just china though, also russia, and other countries

give me ur reasons why u think so
China's army has traditionally been a human wave army like russia's and N-Korea's armies.

I would be interested to see some chinese military handbooks and manuals if ever possible. If they are found in pdf -format and in english.

Specially material about:

-Combat and service regulations
-Training handbooks (basic training, MOS training, weapon manuals and other handbooks used in training).
-NCO and officer training (how to choose and train NCOs and officers)
-Training time, week and day schedules (basic, MOS, NCO/officer)
-Combat techniques and tactics (squad, platoon, company, battalion etc.)
-Organisation charts and equipments used in different unit's (strenght, weapons, vehicles, equipments etc.)

I guess those books would give some information about PLA's training and tactics to make some image about is it more similar to human wave or to western armies.
January 20th, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
i think u should give some evidence why u call chinese's tactic as human waves?
and why u say china has a long traditon of that?

i think U.S also has a long tradition of human waves too...
outnumber others? is that human waves?

and by the way..U.S kind of got owned in Somali..so dont talk about that
January 20th, 2005  
Chocobo_Blitzer
 
Chinese commanders had to use "wave tactics", what else did they have? Their equipment was poor to my understanding, and the mountainous terrian holds less room for maneuver. Surprise was a circumstance added to certain battles, but the general tactic was mass. I imagine the higher-ups of the Chinese command expected progress.... or else. So what else could he do but blow the whistle?

I also think the idea that Chinese, or otherwise asian cultures, value life less than western cultures is absurd- that's too vague. However when it comes to military commmand, maybe. Afterall, at the time China was under a nonsensical form of thinking, who knows what minds were at the helm of China's armies.

Edit:

Of course the USA used "human waves", all western countries have. Till WW1 it was the core of military thinking, after that, though, there was a change of tactics due to technological leaps. Thereafter many western countries put an emphasis on precision, though mass was still wildly used for some.

Somalia, your blunt and absurd comment show how little you know of the event, please refrain from mentioning it again, it holds little value both by your flamming ignorance towards it and the fact it's completely off-topic.
January 20th, 2005  
Big_Z
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
i think u should give some evidence why u call chinese's tactic as human waves?
and why u say china has a long traditon of that?

i think U.S also has a long tradition of human waves too...
outnumber others? is that human waves?

and by the way..U.S kind of got owned in Somali..so dont talk about that
Yea we got owned bad didn't we? we lost 18 soldiers who were out numbered at the very least 100 to 1 and left with a 1000+/18 kill death ratio. I'm not sure how you people cant understand how China used human wave tactics. It seems like the entire world knows except for the Chinese. The Chinese had basically no training and no strategy, they had no choice but to use human wave tactics. And no America doesn't have to out number our enemy, I believe we sent 300k troops to iraq to face the 4th largest standing army in the world who numbered over 1 million. Isn't it the Chinese philosophy to not even engage an enemy if they don't out number them 3 to 1?
January 20th, 2005  
EuroSpike
 
"i think u should give some evidence why u call chinese's tactic as human waves?
and why u say china has a long traditon of that?"

I asked for evidence, training manuals, combat regulations, training subjects, week and day schedules etc.

I owned once a chinese Norinco made type56 AK clone. The quality was extremely poor, a typical human wave army's "spray and pray" weapon where number goes before quality. Put a few millions of them in line, spray&pray and one or a couple of bullets might hit an enemy.
January 20th, 2005  
03USMC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
and by the way..U.S kind of got owned in Somali..so dont talk about that

Given the Ratio of US vs Somoli fighters and the Causalties encurred by both sides respectively. 19 US vs an estimated 1000 Somolis. I don't see that as being owned Big Fella.