Why do chinks have very minimal military history and tradition unlike europeans?

Why do chinks have very minimal military history and tradition unlike europeans?

china never invaded:
>India
>japan
>south east asia.

Is their lack of military tradition and history proof they are inferior cucks who only fought when they had to defend?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_domination_of_Vietnam
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Dowager_Cixi
pewglobal.org/2014/07/14/chapter-4-how-asians-view-each-other/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

they didn't need to

last two were tributary states for most of their history
as for the first
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War

>small scale war in the 60s with less than 5000 deaths on both sides combined

Even Alexander killed more poo in loos 2300 years ago. You chinks were on the verge of an ancient extermination if it not were for alexander's early death.

Its weird that you are scolding china for NOT sending their people into a meatgrinder

getting your fucking job done with only over 700 dead is quite the achievement in our modern world.

>china never invaded south east asia
China literally invaded Vietnam right after the Vietnam War and Chinks got their shit kicked in.

>inferior cucks

I immediately disregard posts with that overused meme buzzword. Think of another word, because everyone immediately thinks you're a fedora-tipping redditor.

>inb4 ur an sjw libcuck r u triggered lmao
Nope, I'm a conservative, and you can fuck right off to the other boards with your dork shit.

...

You're only further proving my point, faggot.

The Chinese conquered the equivalent of the size of Europe if not more. Has any European empire owned the entire continent for more than 10 years?

Rome?

>chinks
>very minimal military history
>has like 12 of the 20 deadliest wars in human history
>has a "warring states" period in its history

They didn't have the entirety of Europe but I admit that Rome is a good contender.

plus if you add in the mongols who had china as sort of heartland they had conquered muuuuch more.

A bit more complicated than that, especially in Imperial times.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_domination_of_Vietnam

>Japan
The Tang dynasty fucked Yamato Japan at Baekgang when they were meddling in Korea, but apart from the failed Yuan invasion there's never been any reason to conquer Japan when they were willing participants in the tributary system (and greatly desired trade with China at that).

Could talk about the Han dynasty and the offensives against the Xiongnu, the Tang dynasty in inner/Central Asia, the Qing and the Dzungars etc.,

All of this stuff is on Wikipedia, which I thought OP would've at least checked given his penchant for posting images of wiki battle infoboxes.

most of Veeky Forums doesn't know shit about history outside of western Europe and America so they pretend it doesn't exist

China's bigger and more populous than Europe on its own and they conquered that, what else do you want really? It's like complaining that the Romans didn't conquer Russia and using that as evidence that they suck.

China does have a massive military history. 'China' wasn't even a country until fairly recently. It used to be hundreds of warring states and ethnic groups until they all united after centuries of conquest. I don't think you understand how big Asia is. Also there's the world's biggest mountain range between China and India, and one of the most violent seas between China and Japan.

His fault

>war
>meanwhile chinks get triggered every time 1967 is mentioned.

yes china seems to know very little about the Art of War

China was originally just along the plains of the Yellow River, but expanded with time mostly to the south and the western hills.

All of todays southern china south of the Yangze was non-chinese clay that has been conquered over time.
With the Qin and Han, the chinese went north of their defense line against the steppe barbarians and began to cuck them as well as vasalize the Koreans.
During the Three Kingdoms period southern china was completely sinefied (is that a word?) and their influence reached Vietnam, which became a province of the Jin Dynasty.
After reunification of the Sui and Tang they conquered (for a time) Korea and beat back japanese attempts to expand to the main land decisively. The Tang also brought the parts of central asia, that could be reasonable reached with pre-industrial technology under their control as well as pushed out the Turks from their steppes into the Middle East.
Under mongol rule invasions of southeastern asia, Burma, India and japan were launched, as well as Manchuria integrated into China.
The Ming took over Manchuria and Mongolia for good and annexed the non-chinese tribes in the today southwestern provinces (which were considered burmanese if I'm not wrong).
The Qing conquered the tibetan tribes and integrated the chinese side of central asia and Tibet into their empire.
Red China will gain the (rightfully theirs) Southern Chinese Sea

This.

I blame the /pol/ and Veeky Forums for this.

>Alexander invades countryside backwater villages and claims he's conquered India when hasnt even crossed the Indus river
>his army revolts before he could even face a semi decent opponent.
>dies
>gets his daughter married to an indian king

/pol/ is a huge problem with the endless shitty or "lolz so funy right?" threads we have here, but certainly is not responsible for a general lack of understanding for basic chinese or indian history

The fuck are you on about? Most of ancient Chinese history is nothing but constant war.

And the China you know isn't the China of back then. Most of it was conquered.

Historical consensus is that it was a tie.

The Chinese took a large chunk of Northern Vietnam and proved that the Soviets couldn't defend Vietnam.
But they weren't able to remove the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia.

>1967

Mind explaining how a 1 week comflict between border patrols is equivalent to a 3 month long conflict with 5 battles of 20,000+ soldiers?
They aren't even comparable.

There's plenty of military tradition, China as it is today is basically as if the Roman Empire (both East and West) hadn't fallen but was repeatedly reconquered.

i just noticed this forum and im surprised as hell at the amount of informed discussion despite the proximity to pol

crazy shit

>China's bigger

Stop this meme. If we talk about colonial era which started since Columbus sets his foot on America

China has more population then Europe and the USA + Canada put together.

>trusting Alexander's sources
top kek

Hasn't China invaded both Vietnam and India, or at least engaged in war with them?

I know right it's so frustrating.

>b-but it doesn't affect me so why should I care
Then don't make dumb assumptions.

>or at least engaged in war with them?
They probably have but I don't think there's ever been a full frontal war.

Historically, China and India were the two most richest and heavily populated areas in the globe. A war between them would've been disastrous and the'd both fall into ruin.

Not to mention natural barriers playing a role. The Himalayas and the Karakoram mountain range disallowed any large scale troop movement into or from Tibet and so any land invasion in that regard was out of question.

Not relevant. Europe (with it's current bundaries) didn't exist when Rome conquered the Mediterranean. Judge Rome based off on how much land and people it did conquer not how much land of an arbitraryly defined region they conquered.

>The Chinese conquered the equivalent of the size of Europe if not more

Europeans in turn conquered a total sum of lands that is 10 times the size of China

How does that disprove what he said? Europe was irrelevant for most of its history. That's a fact.

And most of these lands were taken over by Old World diseases, while China had to use militaristic might to take over their continent (which is what this thread is about).

>Europe was irrelevant for most of its history

What is Greek and Roman Era ? or were they been irrelevant too, Chang?

How do you define"Most of" ? i bet you would say the dark ages. Which isn't most.
>And most of these lands were taken over by Old World diseases

It's this meme again

>What is Greek and Roman Era ? or were they been irrelevant too, Chang?
>we wuz
Greek and Rome are part of Europe now but they weren't back then as we know it. They both conquered their respective areas of Europe and thought the natives as barbarians.

What you're doing is the equivalent of a Thailander (excuse me) jerking the Mongols to talk about Asian supremacy.

>It's this meme again
Are you really denying that Old World diseases didn't have a large part in conquering the peninsula?

China started out as just the Yangtze valley and gradually took over the rest of modern China which usually involved war. They actually conquered a great mass of land very fast and for most of their history post Han dynasty they were busy keeping it all together. China is a bit like a Roman empire that managed to survive. They didn't expand either after reaching an extant (btw Rome at it's height of power had about the same size and population as the Han Empire at it's height).

>Greek and Rome are part of Europe now but they weren't back then as we know it. They both conquered their respective areas of Europe and thought the natives as barbarians.

Kek. keep denying like this post ?

How much butt-hurt are you ?


>What you're doing is the equivalent of a
Thailander (excuse me) jerking the Mongols to talk about Asian supremacy.

Sry, i doubt that Thailander would be as stupid as you.

>Kek. keep denying like this post ?
It's true. I stand by what I said. A lot of people say the same about Ghengis Khan's conquests in Russia. That area wasn't considered a part of Europe then so it doesn't matter.

What's 'white' changes by the decade. I see people arguing that the people of the Levant and those of White-Hispanic heritage are European. Let's just say Lebanon is considered European three centuries from now and another country from, say, Asia invades them.

Would they be invading the ME or Europe?

>How much butt-hurt are you ?
I'm not. I'm answering you seriously while you're the one shitposting.

>Sry, i doubt that Thailander would be as stupid as you.
no u

Well Europe went shit after Rome collapsed.

It's like Europe gave China an advantage of 1000 years ahead but still managed to beat the shit out of the latter.

>It's like Europe gave China an advantage of 1000 years ahead but still managed to beat the shit out of the latter.
Tbf they were gangbanged.

>gangbanged

It came after the first rape

You're not wrong, but there's a reason why that rape even happened:
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Dowager_Cixi

Cixi is like 5 years old at that event.

I'm just gonna leave this here...

why?

>Europe was irrelevant for most of its history. That's a fact.
t. doesn't know what a fact is or understand history
>take over their continent
no, they didn't conquer western asia nor did they conquer Siberia, nor did they conquer Europe (in the whole "Eurasian continent" context)

>Europe was irrelevant for most of history
hate to break it to you, but until the French Revolution, pretty much everything was irrelevant since only a handful of empires stretched past their continent

put it back where you found it

most of that is desert and tibet

>t. doesn't know what a fact is or understand history
Oh boy. Please explain history to me then.

>no, they didn't conquer western asia nor did they conquer Siberia, nor did they conquer Europe (in the whole "Eurasian continent" context)
* sub -continent

I'm talking abour pre-age of exploration

Aren't you have a job at iphone factory ?

Back to work, make more cheap phones for us, now.

China is the only case of an empire holding together it's ancient territories, in the long run. I only made this up i don't know anything about china.

>China is the only case of an empire holding together it's ancient territories, in the long run.
Russia

> long run
Not ~500 years.

Not an argument cuckstain.

>W-we built glorious ching chong empire while white pigs were still crawling in mu-

underrated post

>oh wow, one regional power has slightly more influence than a seperate regional power, therefore one is relevant and the other isn't lol!
no

...

>showing han at its peak but not the roman empire
ok?

How about when they were contemporary?

Someone link the video game designer giving a talk about gamers and their knowledge of history. its basically his in a nutshell.

the only point i can gather from this is that the chinese at their peak were only equal to europeans

It's true. China was one the richest places in the world and the envy of near everyone. European monkeys (and Japanese mind you) were piss poor and ripping themselves apart over tiny differences in religion.

Ottomans came and easily conquered the Balkans. They blocked European trade which forced them to go by sea kickstarting the Age of Exploration.

Then China stagnated and the rest is history.

I still don't see what the point of this is. Most of Asia was a shithole throughout its history and I'd be the first one to laugh at any losers who want to take our accomplishments.

VIce-versa for all of you :^)

>how do you go from this

to this?

By stagnating internally from corruption, as well as your opposition finding other continents full of resources (while the natives go cough themselves to death somewhere) and then using it to take over by a brief time of being technologically advanced.

But with the declining European populations and America possibly going into isolation things are obviously going to be shaken up.

At the end of the day it's just another page of a Golden Age in history.

Failure to industrialize because of having a shitload of population reducing the need for labour saving technologies, and decades of relative peace instead of constant war with others of comparable strength driving military innovation. Then having to deal with massive rebellions just as you are trying to actually modernize, which is also hampered by political infighting as those in charge are afraid of losing their influence as a result of reforms, which goes back to China being way too huge for the Qing to really govern effectively enough to direct them towards modernization unlike Japan.

>Most of Asia was a shithole throughout its history and I'd be the first one to laugh at any losers who want to take our accomplishments.

Would anyone do that though? Koreans and Japs hate China with a passion. The latter even disassociated themselves with East Asian sphere and treat Chinese with full contempt

>Would anyone do that though?
Yes. I don't think I've ever seen any ethnic Asian-Asians do it (the same way I've never heard of Europeans talk about muh pan-euroism) but there are a lot of Pan-Asianism Asian-Americans who do.

>why is it always Americans!
Because they're majority mutts with no real legacy, so they take everything.

>any loser who want to take our accomplishments
Who is "our" in this context?

Chi-na

How do you "take" Chinese accomplishments?

I don't think China in general has ever dreamed of pan Asianism anyway, just Japan. China was content to just let everyone be tributaries instead of directly part of the empire.

>Please explain history to me then.
"Relevance" is an insult used casually on /int/, /pol/, and now Veeky Forums. I'd love to see you prove how Europe was "irrelevant". History is the study of people, cultures, civilization, etc. Europeans were relevant to Europeans. Chinks were relevant to other chinks. Relevance is subjective and depends completely on the perspective. Pretending the world was as unified and global as it is today is completely anachronistic and idiotic. Besides that, chinks needed buyers for their goods. So yes, Europeans (one of the major buyers of silk, spices, and paper) were relevant to them. The fact that this "irrelevant" part of the world conquered and controlled two continents (when China couldn't even do one) and have completely shaped and defined the modern world (China is literally run by a party named after the abortion of European political theory) should quiet you up.
>take over their continent
Pic related. They didn't conquer nearly all of this.

This applied within the empire, as well. The Ming dynasty was content to sit in the imperial city and let the kingdom mostly run itself. Remote villages could go long stretches of time without ever seeing an imperial official, and that was just fine for them.

3, actually.

>forum
fuck off

chink shitposters btfo

No it literally is not

t. retard

>Koreans and Japs hate China with a passion. The latter even disassociated themselves with East Asian sphere and treat Chinese with full contempt
[Citation needed]

>"Relevance" is an insult used casually on /int/, /pol/, .
That's true.

>Europeans were relevant to Europeans. Chinks were relevant to other chinks. Relevance is subjective and depends completely perspective. B So yes, Europeans (one of the major buyers of silk, spices, and pa
That's true but that's not the relevancy that we talk about on the chanz. China/India were known by vast lands to be great sources of trade and always had wealth flowing in and out thoughout the sub-continents. Europe was content in just shredding each other again and again. And I "pretending the world was as unified and global as it is today" didn't say that.

> The fact that this "irrelevant" part of the world conquered and controlled two continents
Because there was never a need for us. Everything they needed they had within China and there wasn't a lack of resources. Europe needed other continental to begin.

It was hard enough to conquer China as it was with the technology back then.Not to mention China having a vast population in contrast to most countries.

>and have completely shaped and defined the modern world
You shaped the New World more than you did the Asia's friend.The eradication of Chinese culture came more from within than it did from the West.

>China is literally run by a party named after the abortion of European political theory
To say China is a communist country either means you are out-of-date, misinformed, or trying to put a we wuz on the country. They only say they're a communist country to justify all the brutal things they've done.

> should quiet you up.
I don't see why it would. Most of Eastern Europe is still powerless. Southern Europe stopped being relevant to the global scheme things in the late 20th century. And Western Europe is on the verge of electing populist far-right fascist governments- which means the future of Europe doesn't look good at all.

And yes- Europe was still irrelevant for most of its history.

And I meant sub-continent.

really? don't see how. He just regurgitated what the other's in the thread spat out.

pewglobal.org/2014/07/14/chapter-4-how-asians-view-each-other/

I can't tell you enough how much it pisses me off. I'm currently working toward my master in history with a strong focus on asian studies and I'm already tired of arguing with /pol/niggers with an high school-tier of education.

Like, yeah man, that documentary you saw on Youtube at 240p is surely more valid than the books and articles that were given to me by my teachers, right? Fuck off.

>that documentary you saw on Youtube at 240p is surely more valid than the books and articles that were given to me by my teachers, right?
B-but "liberals"

>liberals have a bias so here's another guy with an agenda but support's my beliefs

At least the "liberal" textbooks are referenced and peer reviewed.
But my point is that they really do believe it's more valid, because of the influence of the left they perceive to be at the heart of the narrative in the humanities.
Perhaps they confused the "liberal arts" with the "liberal" arts.

You mean ((teachers))?

>Europe was content in just shredding each other again and again.
just as much as any other place in the world that isn't unified. and obviously they weren't since they started to expand and explore
>didn't say that
"Relevant", as it is used here, refers to the global world
>China/India were known by vast lands to be great sources of trade
To people in close proximity and within the trade circle. The Med. was also known as a place of trade and wealth
>need
Not need, a want. Europe wasn't going to fall apart and collapse without spices and they could have easily payed the Ottomans. It's a completely different mentality. As you said, the Chinese were content. The Europeans had incentive and a motivation to explore.
>more than you did the Asia's friend
Did you forget the colonial period? The rise of Japan and British conquest/control of India? The spread of communism? The fact that Japan and South Korea only exist as they do today because of American intervention. The existence of Pakistan and a unified India were because of British post-colonial policy. The eradication of Chinese culture was caused by a man who was influenced by communist beliefs and only had the opportunity due to the allies defeating the Japanese. Sure the west affected the Americas more, but they still had a major influence on modern Asia
>China is communist
Never said that, I said they were communist by name, and they still retain that name.
>Eastern Europe
The USSR only fell like 30 years ago, they're still recovering.
>Southern Europe
Italy's economy was the sixth largest in 87 and overtook Britain, Spain was doing very well at the turn of the century. The Balkans are still recovering and they were never a major part of European hegemony back in the 19th century.
>Europe was still irrelevant for most of its history
You gonna prove that?
>sub-continent
There's only one sub-continent. Then there is Asia in the seven continent theory and Eurasia in the six continent theory.

why do sino threads always no matter what in every single board always boils down to east vs west?

Daily reminder the Chinese humiliated the Gurkhas.

Twice. First in Tibet, the second in fucking Nepal itself.

>to east vs west?
You mean the West vs the rest? because that is pretty much how history showed.

Because the Chinese have the biggest fucking chip on their shoulder.

>because that is pretty much how history showed.
British/Spaniard conquests of Indian/South America were often done through the help of the numerous natives who had old grudges against the leaders of the sub-continent/continent.

It was never as clear cut as you think it is.