[NewEra]

A question that may be more subjective than it originally appears.

Would love to hear your opinions.

Also, specific question: What percentage of Japanese death tolls are accountable to China or the United States? If you have any information on this, I would really appreciate it.

[Thunderhawk]

The Japanese had to constantly fight to hold their part of China. Chinese actions and China's contribution to WW2 is substantial yet rarely mentioned in the West.

Though I have no numbers, from what I have read, Chinese resistence tied down large amounts of Japanese manpower while it was the USA that destroyed their offensive ability. I dont want to continue the downplaying of the Chinese efforts, but Japan was occupying large parts of China for almost a decade before Japan went to war with the USA.

[InterestedInPolitics]

US played the key role overwhelmingly in defeating Japan. Though China might have tied down manpower with Japan, the key to defeating Japan was winning the naval and air war. Without the allies dominating at the sea or air, which it was the US who did the lion's share of achieving for the allies, Japan could not be defeated.

[Bosnjak]

I would say the USA.

China was divided beteween coloborateurs (like the last emperor), communists and Kuo min Tang, what made an organized uprising difficult. But Antiguerilla Warfare against an such huge population is nearly impossible to hold for several generations

War fare techniques was Japan several generation in front of china.

[Nattering Nabob]

Only a nation with a Navy comparable or superior to Japan's could have defeated Japan.

[Thunderhawk]

^ or a couple nations with smaller respective navies that combined were better.

[NewEra]

So, in your opinion, do you think that Japan would have continued to to dominate China, Korea, and other occupied territories had the US not been involved? Would China have been able to defeat the land forces of Japan and protect her territorial integrity without the US involvement on the naval front?

Just interested in weighing the contributions on each side on pushing back Japan's occupation.

[Bosnjak]

For Sure, would China be still under Japanese occupation, like hole east-asia.


China has waked up first under Maos rule. Today would china fuck Taiwan and Japan.


How many chinese died in WW2? I read about 30 Million, true?

[Oxymoron]

So, in your opinion, do you think that Japan would have continued to to dominate China, Korea, and other occupied territories had the US not been involved? Would China have been able to defeat the land forces of Japan and protect her territorial integrity without the US involvement on the naval front?

China lacked the Air Power and Mobile weaponry to defeat the Japanese army. If the Allies would have provided these I am sure that the Chinese would have eventually forced the Japanese out.

[Suska]

China was punching Japan's fist with its face, Redcoat's disease is terrible, Japan was planning for a mass Kamikaze, America had finally had its coffee and was rolling thunder... Boom.

[Thunderhawk]

So, in your opinion, do you think that Japan would have continued to to dominate China, Korea, and other occupied territories had the US not been involved? Would China have been able to defeat the land forces of Japan and protect her territorial integrity without the US involvement on the naval front?

I suspect that had the USA and the Soviets not got involved, then Japan would continue to dominate the area, but at a large cost. Especially so if Chinese resistence forces were being supported by GB/France.

[Igor Antunov]

Japan could not have held onto those areas of china it held for long, even without having to fight others. At best it could have killed another 50 million chinese then gained some concessions as the colonialist powers had done in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Although China kept the majority of Japanese land forces bogged down in south east asia, the soviet union destroyed those forces during operation august storm.

The americans played a pivotal role in dismantling japan's pacific empire and it's navy, stopping then reversing it's expansion and later a dual role in it's total defeat, since the japanese had to sign a separate surrender with the soviet union after their 1 million strong army was annihilated in manchuria. The soviets occupied then annexed the kurills as compensation for their contribution. The US occupied then puppeted Japan for it's role. To this day Japan remains a loyal puppet.

[LAz]

USA.


How many Zeros and other such fighters did the chineese military take out? Few.



In fact, I would say that neither did it. The japaneese themselves are responsible for their defeat moreso than anyone else.
A third wave of attacks on pearl harbor would have crippled the US navy - that was a huge lost opportunity.
The phillipines battle was another drastic mistake.

And more...

[Tailz]

Why has no one raised the Russian invasion of Japanese occupied China as an issue?

[Dr House]

Who contributed more to Japan's defeat: China or the US?

The question is ridiculous. Without American aid Japan would've absolutely trampled the Chinese forces. There is absolutely no question that it was the US that won the Pacific theater.

[Watermoon]

I think so. But why I feel upset about these "absolutely".

Code: Select allThe question is ridiculous. Without American aid Japan would've absolutely trampled the Chinese forces. There is absolutely no question that it was the US that won the Pacific theater.

[Thunderhawk]

^ The Japanese were trampling the Chinese for years before the USA got really involved.


The Japanese army in Manchuria that was destroyed by the Soviets was not the same army that was occupying hte region for the previous ~decade. That army initially had far more equipment and veteran personal, most of which was trasnsfered to the Pacific/colonies. What was left in Manchuria was a large infantry force with much equipment to fight a (then) modern war.

[R_G]

Ultimately the Japs would have lost to China, but it would have taken a lot longer.

The U.S. sped up inevitable defeat.

[Thunderhawk]

What was left in Manchuria was a large infantry force with much equipment to fight a (then) modern war.

should be..

What was left in Manchuria was a large infantry force without much equipment to fight a (then) modern war.