Love-Hate relationship between Korea and Japan shown throughout the history is really interesting

>what is korean war
>what is best korea

Theres resource under that island

korea civilized japs by introducing them to Confucianism and other philosophies/inventions and being huge cultural influence
japs repaid them by being subhumans larping as european imperialists

>be japs
>invade korea every fucking era
>get their ass kicked every time
>wins the war for the first and last time
>turns out Korea had isolationist policy at the time during industrial revolution meaning no tech at all unlike japs
>like to imagine they are the greatest asian race of all time

Against its fame, Japan has been very isolationist.

- There was one time where Japan has allied with a Korean kingdom against another that was supported by the Chinese Emperor. After his ally lost, they gave him and his family refuge and court positions. Not an adversarial position.
- Two invasions during the era of Toyotomi Hideyoshi. Koreans were saved by the Ming dynasty, at a huge cost for the Chinese.
- And then, in the 20th century.

Korea has only went against Japan once, when their King who was a vassal of the Mongols apparently recommended the Mongols to invade Japan. Japan won.

So, there has been only 2 times Japan went against Korea and 1 time Korea went against Japan. Compare that to how many times England and France fought against each other.

Ignorant.

>Love
?
Rape gangs are not "love", user.

Thats not true
Korea was forced by mongols not china dumbass to help mongols cross the sea because they didnt have proper navy.
Japan was not an isolationist at the time they for once conquered korea, you are the ignorant one. They were becoming a prominent power and you are telling me that japanese were still in isolationist period? Bullshit, how do you think they became honorary aryans and defeat Russians.
You are also excluding how many god dam time japs invaded korea just because they were pirates. They werent just pirates. Japan always was sort of warmonging mafia states. Since three kingdoms era of Korea, Japan did constantly invade Korea with numbers sometimes going upto several tens of thousands. That is invasion.
But I agree Europeans fought among each other way more than Asians did.

Korea was saved by naval forces led by Yi. Japan was cut off from their supplies and eventually lost. But Ming did play an important role.

That was a very incoherent post.

>Korea was forced by mongols not china dumbass to help mongols cross the sea because they didnt have proper navy.
Let's see what I have written "Korea has only went against Japan once, when their King who was a vassal of the Mongols apparently recommended the Mongols to invade Japan. Japan won." I didn't mention China here.

>Japan was not an isolationist at the time they for once conquered korea, you are the ignorant one.
I believe you are saying in this incoherent post that "Japan was not isolationist, since they conquered Korea". My point is that for most of its history, Japan was not very active in foreign affairs, only being involved in overseas adventures in 3 eras of its history.

>Since three kingdoms era of Korea, Japan did constantly invade Korea with numbers sometimes going upto several tens of thousands. That is invasion.
We need some citations here.

I think that the Ming were at least as important as the naval forces. The Koreans would have no way of stopping someone like Shimazu Yoshihiro on land (the Chinese might not have defeated him in battle, but at least they could be a deterrence and if they outnumbered him, they could beat him)

>at a huge cost for the Chinese.
Maybe in monetary costs,but overall the Chinese really didn't send that many men as anticipated.

>Korea was saved by naval forces led by Yi.
Yi crippled Japanese logistics but he did not have the manpower to outright sink entire fleets.

> But Ming did play an important role.
The Ming intervention secured the legitimacy of the Joseon dynasty,giving Korean righteous armies a breather.

>The Koreans would have no way of stopping someone like Shimazu Yoshihiro on land
It wouldn't actually matter either way if the allied offensives managed to take out the Wajo. Unlike Suncheon or Ulsan the Ming lost because of unforeseen circumstances(chain explosion of gunpowder) instead of operational failure due to internal rivalry.

>There was one time where Japan has allied with a Korean kingdom against another that was supported by the Chinese Emperor.
Source on this? My knowledge of pre-Heian Japanese history is severely lacking.

*Senkaku

Baekje. Japan's nobles and Imperial family had relatives there.

During the Battle of Baekgang, Silla and Baekje called upon their respective allies Tang Dynasty and Yamato Japan. Japan sent a massive army to do so, following the spirit of miltary adventurism of the Japanese as it was their first "foreign" venture from the Jap mainland.

The battle was an amphibious one, involving a mouth of the river. Japs counted on numerical superiority to win them the day but the Tang fleet did a Thermopylae on a mouth of the river and stymied the Japanese landing heavily. The Jap troops that made it ashore were too disorganized and got BTFO by Tang and Silla troops.

>love

When?

>So, there has been only 2 times Japan went against Korea and 1 time Korea went against Japan.
[Citations needed]

you're retarded. koreans weren't saved by the ming. the chinese were pretty useless. their ships were even smaller than japan's sekibunes. also the chinese generals screwed up several times and even accepted bribes from konishi. during the battle of jeori, the chinese didn't even do shit. the chinese literally stayed back and watched while yi basically demolished japan's fleet. during the seige of jangdo, the plan was for yi and chen to attack konishi's ships and allow liu ting to seige the castle from the west. but liu ting accepted a bribe from konishi and didn't attack. yi told everyone not to break formation but the chinese broke formation and when they landed they were surrounded and yi had to send in soldiers to save them

ming didn't do shit. read above

the ming weren't important. read above

>he did not have the manpower to outright sink entire fleets.
he certainly had the means to sink entire japanese fleets. in fact he did so on numerous occasions such as when japan sent 100 of their atakebune ships against yi's 85 panokson ships and yi didn't lose a single ship

korea had a major technological advantage over japan during this time. japan were basically seen as barbarians. they tried to shed their 'barbarian' image by spending huge amounts during visits from korean envoys while koreans didn't give a crap about japanese envoys

t. kim park bong

t. chang ching tong

Although Japan was mostly an isolationist, Japan always subjugated Korea whenever it brought pressure to bear on Korea on a whim, and Korea didn't "kick out" Japan by itself in any case; it's only "Japan vs China on the peninsula" situations that thwarted it.

It's not "Japan" but just pirates that attacked Korea, and those were nowhere near an invasion to conquer Korea. So, it's safe to say Japan itself has been an isolationist for most of history. Thing is, Korea was so weak that even irrelevant private pirate raids did considerable damage, to such an extent that Koreans believed those to be military invasions and got traumatized, to them. Mainly led by a clan named Matsura-to, the Wakou pirates were comprised of people who came from pretty small part of northern Kyushu -Tsushima, Iki and Goto islands- that barely spanned three provinces while Japan had nearly 70 of them. Funny how a fucking clan managed to cause such clusterfucks; Korea was such a joke.

Lmoa, without Ming, Korea wouldn't have survived even the first invasion, in which Japan went through the entire peninsula within two months, taking Seoul and Pyongyang.

japanese supply lines were already blocked. koreans blocked them. the only reason japanese troops made it to seoul was because korea was unprepared, and even then korea was winning battles. the japanese fully relied on their supply line and because they bet everything on their speed. when korea was prepared, the japanese were ultimately devastated. case in point: the siege of haengju. chinese soldiers were ambushed and beaten by japanese soldiers. the japanese sent several waves of soldiers and were ultimately defeated even though they outnumbered koreans 10 to 1

the only reason korea called china for reinforcements was because half the ministers voted for it because they thought it would end the war sooner. but then the chinese ended up being a liability and accosted korea a sooner victory. the battle of noryang wouldn't have happened if chen didn't accept the bribe from konishi to allow one of his boats to escape and call for reinforcements

also, not to mention the fact that korea's cavalry were busy fighting the jurchens in the north

again, china didn't do shit

>being this delusional
Holy shit, you must be a Korean. I see a lot of your kinds on Youtube, lol

>japanese supply lines were already blocked
This is a meme to begin with.

>and even then korea was winning battles
Korean armies were defeated everywhere, and never managed to do strategically significant damage to Japan. Those "Korean victories" are just products of nitpicking, culminating in the Siege of Haengju you mentioned: the point of the siege was, need less to say, to occupy the Haengju fortress, and Japan indeed did with some casualties --of course Japan must've gotten some, and 'outnumbered' Koreans must've held ONE DAY until they abandoned it, because it's a fucking fortress on a steep hill Koreans were in, the sole purpose of which was for a smaller army to withstand a larger one for a while-- , and so it should be a Japanese victory, because Japan accomplished the objective, granted more casualties, while Koreans had to abandon it next day. This, however, turns to a "Korean victory" according to Koreans, resorting to nitpicking over the phase where Japan got casualties (who doesn't in a siege campaign?). Everything is like this, and then Koreans begin that obligatory "hurr Korean super ingenuity which even invented the world's first MLRS repelled Japan" thing, while it's the strategic significance of Ming reinforcements that caused Japan to cease the first invasion, even though Japan defeated them like this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Byeokjegwan

This is also evident from the fact that the armistice was concluded between Japan and Ming, not Korea.

>also, not to mention the fact that korea's cavalry were busy fighting the jurchens in the north
Except they got BTFO by Japan as well, and then Japan even crossed the Tumen river to invade Manchuria and occupied a fortress there, beating Jurchens. That's why Jurchen offered Ming and Korea to join them to fight Japan with.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamgyong_campaign

>Holy shit, you must be a Korean. I see a lot of your kinds on Youtube, lol

I only see two delusional asspies arguing.

>japanese supply lines were already blocked This is a meme to begin with.

Oh yes it must be a meme because it doesn’t fit the Japanese narrative. Armies March on food. The Japanese may have reached the Yalu with easy victories, but they failed to consider the logistical obstacles in overextending their lines. Continuous skirmishes from the peasant militia only worsened the fact that the mainland was very reluctant to send more troops. Nice use of the word “meme” by the way miyoshi. It must be tough trying to keep up with the times.

>Korean armies were defeated everywhere, and never managed to do strategically significant damage to Japan.

Why would it do any damage to Japan? It was an invasion. Defeated everywhere? They lost at Geumsan, Jiksan, Uiryong and Yongjin, to a militia group no less.
You also proved yourself wrong with the following sentences.

>Those "Korean victories" are just products of nitpicking, culminating in the Siege of Haengju you mentioned: the point of the siege was, need less to say, to occupy the Haengju fortress, and Japan indeed did with some casualties --

Indeed did? They were repelled, end of story.

>of course Japan must've gotten some, and 'outnumbered' Koreans must've held ONE DAY until they abandoned it, because it's a fucking fortress on a steep hill Koreans were in, the sole purpose of which was for a smaller army to withstand a larger one for a while-- , and so it should be a Japanese victory,

Yes they were outnumbered. I don’t understand why you would doubt that.
Battles end from hours to several minutes. I’m not sure why you should apply a time limit on how long the fotress should be kept. They also didn’t abandon the fotress, otherwise the Japanese would have occupied Jeolla.

Cont.

>because Japan accomplished the objective, granted more casualties, while Koreans had to abandon it next day. This, however, turns to a "Korean victory" according to Koreans, resorting to nitpicking over the phase where Japan got casualties (who doesn't in a siege campaign?).

Accomplished what objective? Being repelled by peasant levies while receiving casualties? Please give me sources on how the Japanese “granted” more casualties.

>Everything is like this, and then Koreans begin that obligatory "hurr Korean super ingenuity which even invented the world's first MLRS repelled Japan"
thing,

Did you use google translate? What does this have to do anything with the arguement used beforehand?

>while it's the strategic significance of Ming reinforcements that caused Japan to cease the first invasion, even though Japan defeated them like this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Byeokjegwan

You seem to forget that the Japanese OUTNUMBERED the opposing forces. And what’s with the “even though?” The Alliance recaptured the capital. The alliance defeated the Japanese at several key battles including:

The alliance although mostly by Admiral Yi alone devasted the Japanese fleet, restricting valued supplies to the frontiers. The Koreans held the province with the highest grain reserves which allowed them to continue the war. Hideyoshi DIED and little did the Vassals care about continuing the stalemate.

>you're retarded. koreans weren't saved by the ming.
You Koreans are hilarious when it comes to revising history. Go read up on the annals of Seonjo.

>the chinese were pretty useless.
Safeguarding the rump Korean court in Uiju,training Korean troops during the interbellum,capturing Pyongyang and forcing the Japanese to withdraw from Kaesong and Hanseong doesn't sound useless to me.

>he certainly had the means to sink entire japanese fleets.
Bullshit. Go look at the casualties for Myeongnyang or Noryang and tell me with a straight face he managed to annihilate the entire enemy fleet.

Yi didn't have the fleetpower to prevent all reinforcements from Japan.

Weeb detected. The Ming Shi was written during the Qing dynasty,the Ming actually mobilized less men than the Japanese.

If you wanted to cherry pick why don't you look how the poorly the Japanese preformed at Jiksan or Byeokjegwan?

How did Hideyoshi choose his generals and who would be the commanding ones?
Did each general supply their own troops?

Kinda hard to blame gooks and nips for revisionism when the Chinese spends 20 billion yuans for a revisionist project don’t you think.

Agree about Byeokjegwan by the way. Some of the Japanese sources are written by scholars from Tokugawa period.

>Kinda hard to blame gooks and nips for revisionism when the Chinese spends 20 billion yuans for a revisionist project don’t you think.
The difference is nips/chinks can actually read their primary sources while gooks can't. If you go over the Joseon annals you see how grateful the Korean court was to the Ming.

>Some of the Japanese sources are written by scholars from Tokugawa period.
That's why you get Japanese boasting of 6,000-50,000 Ming casualties even though the Ming only had 5,000 troops involved.

>How did Hideyoshi choose his generals and who would be the commanding ones?
Loyalist daimyos secured the Korean peninsula while the Eastern daimyos were expected to join in the Ming invasion(which never came into fruition).

Ukita Hideie was nominally the highest ranking commander that set foot in Korea while all other commanders were equal rank.

>Did each general supply their own troops?
Yes. As much as I dislike Turnbull,his Imjin War book includes the mobilization report for the Japanese forces.

I thought there were other commanders.

My impression is that Hideyoshi thought the fight would be easy, so instead of giving command to some military genius who he didn't trust fully (Shimazu, for example), he chose loyal men who wouldn't backstab him.

How butthurt can you be to make a such autistic screencap like that? Little Nip/Weeb loser?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_during_the_Japanese_invasions_of_Korea_(1592–98)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_naval_battles_during_the_Japanese_invasions_of_Korea_(1592–98)

>china didn't do shit
I don't know if you're Nip or Korean, but either way you should kill yourself.

Joseon King was already preparing to cross Yalu river to seek refuge in Ming since they almost lost the entire Korean peninsula in just 2 months, including their capital, they're already totally fucked up if Ming didn't save their ass.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Pyongyang_(1593)

So, we have Chinese nationalists, Korean nationalists and Japanese nationalists in this thread.

it's just a fact though.

if you sum up the war:
>first invastion
japanese armies easily conquered korea and occupied both capital cities. after the chinese entry, the japanese pulled out of pyongyang due to a lack of supplies to hold the line, and yet they defeated the southward-advancing chinese reinforcements at the decisive battle of byeokjegwan, and kept occupying seoul, and only after the establishment of truce agreement did the alliance recapture seoul. china and korea couldn't kick out the japanese militarily.

>second invasion
this time, the japanese didn't go so fast at once, but they focused on building a network of castles in the south at first, so they could permanently hold there. the alliance tried to thwart it and suffered devastating defeats. luckily for them, the mastermind of the invasion, toyotomi hideyoshi, died, and the japanese didn't continue the campaign, and went back to japan to prepare for succession wars. china and korea couldn't kick out the japanese militarily again.

I am a korean realist and i already have said the realistic truth. Japan invaded Korea many times (well China did more) and Imjin war was won by admiral yi and ming forces. Then autistic Jap supremacists and Korean buthurts and possibly chinks as well started to shit on this thread making everything emotional.

Kim Jong Un wouldn't be sperging every other week.

>Japan invaded Korea many times
Japan did this only twice.

>you must be Korean
sure and you must be chinese or japanese

>Korean armies were defeated everywhere, and never managed to do strategically significant damage to Japan
is that why hideyoshi ordered his navy to never attack korea after his army and navy got decimated. no, it isn't. japan didn't carried very little food during their invasion because they relied on speed and a supply line and when koreans cut off their supply line their campaign was effectively over

>the point of the siege was, need less to say, to occupy the Haengju fortress
wrong. the siege was spontaneous. it drew the japanese away from the southern direction they were heading in. the koreans were also caught off guard and the 'fortress' was just a makeshift barricade on a hill which wasn't steep at all
>and so it should be a Japanese victory
lel no. the japanese sent several waves and didn't even manage to break through the main line until the last wave and when their numbers dwindled they retreated

>Except they got BTFO by Japan as well
the korean cavalry that fought japan were recent conscripts with no experience at all and they were outnumbered. korea's elite cavalry were in the north fighting off the jurchens, the same jurchens who managed to successfully invade china and set up the qing dynasty

this is all recorded in chinese, korean, and japanese documents. face it, you're the delusional one

>after the chinese entry, the japanese pulled out of pyongyang due to a lack of supplies to hold the line
Konishi Yukinaga was BTFO and was even willing to hold peace negotiations where he got his men ambushed and killed. Otomo Yoshimune turned south and refused to engage the allied forces.

>yet they defeated the southward-advancing chinese reinforcements
Not exactly hard when the Japanese outnumbered their foes by six times while the vanguard forces under Tachibana Muneshige were utterly decimated.

>and kept occupying seoul, and only after the establishment of truce agreement did the alliance recapture seoul.
Way to skimp over the Japanese's failure at Haengju and the Ming forced them to abandon Kaesong without a fight.

>china and korea couldn't kick out the japanese militarily.
They couldn't even if they wanted to. The Ming threatened to bring 100,000 men while initially planning for 67,000. In reality they only had 33,000~ or less after Byeokjegwan,roughly half of what the Japanese had at Hanseong.

>the alliance tried to thwart it and suffered devastating defeats.
Other than Sacheon,the Ming commanders jeopardized what should have been allied victories.

>luckily for them, the mastermind of the invasion, toyotomi hideyoshi, died, and the japanese didn't continue the campaign, and went back to japan to prepare for succession wars.
The Japanese were effectively crippled after Jiksan. They didn't have the manpower to exploit defensive victories and the Ming wasn't going to leave because of failed offensives.

Koreans are pathetic

>muh revisionism is better than your revisionism

Why do people make this whataboutism “argument” so often?

>600’s
>1597
>1905

There were many other attacks and raids in the 700s and 1600s as well.

Can you count?

>no counter-arguments
>'muh pathetic'
lel. you should learn some history before posting on Veeky Forums

Did you know that there’s a national institute for TRANSLATION of historical texts? Why do you keep talking shit on pure assumptions.

I’d be a billionaire if I got a dollar for every weibo shitlords pretending to be the “correctManchurianheirs to Goguryeo”; yet I’ve never lost faith to academic studies from China.
Why do you stoop so low to generalise entire ethnicities? Political rile?

It’s hypocricy jack ass.

>Did you know that there’s a national institute for TRANSLATION of historical texts?
Exactly. Koreans have to rely on a Hangul translations because they abandoned Chinese characters.

>I’d be a billionaire if I got a dollar for every weibo shitlords pretending to be the “correctManchurianheirs to Goguryeo”
The Northeast project is irrelevant.

>Why do you stoop so low to generalise entire ethnicities? Political rile?
Maybe because of posts such as >you're retarded. koreans weren't saved by the ming. Which run contrary to the official Korean historiography such as the Joseon annals.

>It’s hypocricy jack ass.

Yeah. I agree. Now stop using governments being hypocritical as an argument.

Is it surprising that they are hypocritical? When has the winner not written the history?

>The Imjin War was decided on the sea
>"China didn't do shit."
Yes, I'm sure the Japanese forces that occupied almost the entire peninsula to the point that they were fighting Jurchens by accident simply retreated on their own will.

Totally not due to the incursion of a massive Chinese army nope.jpg.

they retreated precisely because their little excursion was set back by the navy completely cutting off their supply line. whatever aid the ming offered to korea was pretty much offset by the incompetence of its generals. yet china was pretty much obligated to help defend because they knew that japan would invade them next

>Did you know that there’s a national institute
Exactly. Koreans have to rely on a Hangul translations because they abandoned Chinese characters.

And? The comment was that Koreans can’t read primary sources. If you are saying the translations take away the intent of original writer, then it is pure assumption.

>The Northeast project is irrelevant.

Why is it irrelevant to what I said? This is everyday people, mostly from “Manchu ancestry” believing revisionism at face value. My conjecture was that neither countries should go into a discourse on history with a predisposed political bias because every person who gets into controversy it often have very little to measure themselves with.

>Maybe because of posts such as “you're retarded. koreans weren't saved by the ming. Which run contrary to the official Korean historiography such as the Joseon annals.

So basically you are going to make enormous assumption based on the Internet, Veeky Forums no less. Are you going to act the same way as the “Altaic Koreans” and “Netto Uyoko”?

>And? The comment was that Koreans can’t read primary sources.
If you have to rely on translations you are relying on the translator's interpretation rather than showing mastery of the source material. Not dissimilar to Turnbull and Hawley now that I think about it.

>Why is it irrelevant to what I said?
What does this even have to do with the Imjin War? You were the one that brought up the Northeastern project to deflect modern Korean revisionism.

>So basically you are going to make enormous assumption based on the Internet, Veeky Forums no less.
This case isn't isolated in of itself. Korean nationalists are quite vocal when it comes to projecting history i.e. Gojoseon.
koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2014/09/180_164607.html

>a war that happened in korea
>'muh japanese sources'
>'muh chinese sources'

>a war that happened in korea
Korean primary sources written in Classical Chinese no less.

>'muh japanese sources'
>'muh chinese sources'
The Joseon court wasn't omniscient and the Chinese/Japanese had details they kept privy.

>is that why hideyoshi ordered his navy to never attack korea
i'm talking about the army in the first place. also, hideyoshi ordered the navy not to chase the korean fleet because he did know that the primary maritime supply line, kyushu-iki-tsushima-busan route, was intact and that yi was unable to threaten it aside from randomly harassing small stray convoys. you see, if he was so stronk, the sole thing he should've done was to attack and destroy japan's primary logistics base in busan once and for all with his super fleet. but, he didn't (couldn't), because IRL he was little more than a maritime guerrilla unlike the modern narrative full of embellishment koreans want to make it out to be. japan's supply shortage was caused mainly by inland factors: bad condition of roads in korea, lower local food collections than estimation, and frequent arson attacks on food storages by chinese units and local resistances.

>wrong. the siege was spontaneous
they were just neutralizing bastions around seoul.

>korea's elite cavalry
anyway, it made no difference, because the japanese employed the formations comprised of pikemen and gunners equipped with shield (sort of japanese tercio) which negated cavalry pretty effectively.

again, it's you who are delusional. when the ming reinforcement came, korean royals were around the sino-korean border, and were on the verge of fleeing korea. had it not been for them, koreans wouldn't have recaptured even pyongyang. the imjin war is often described as japan's korean war/vietnam war. being decided by outside factors rather than local ones, it indeed took on the wars in the 20th century.

>they retreated precisely because their little excursion was set back by the navy completely cutting off their supply line.
Lmao no. If you read the map, they retreated following the battle of Pyongyang happened.

This isn't exactly a modern army. Many armies can still live off the land in the 1500s.

The Japs even built castles on Korea for fuck's sake.

*make out to be historical facts

>I thought there were other commanders.
The division commanders were all of equivalent rank. There was infighting between Konishi Yukinaga and Kato Kiyomasa though arguably the Ming had it much worse with troops from different provinces(think of the difference between Portugal and Romania).

>My impression is that Hideyoshi thought the fight would be easy, so instead of giving command to some military genius who he didn't trust fully (Shimazu, for example), he chose loyal men who wouldn't backstab him.
Being the megalomaniac as he is,Hideyoshi already had plans to retire in Ningbo. At one point he even considered crossing over himself but it probably wouldn't have altered the course of the war.

>because the japanese employed the formations comprised of pikemen and gunners equipped with shield (sort of japanese tercio) which negated cavalry pretty effectively.
Didn't they use rise bales to form a defensive formation? The Japanese were experts in utilizing the local terrain.

>hideyoshi ordered the navy not to chase the korean fleet because he did know that the primary maritime supply line, kyushu-iki-tsushima-busan route, was intact
what kind of stupid line of reasoning are you using there. first off, the japanese supply line was completely cut off by yi's ships during the battle of hansan which was way before the chinese arrived with reinforcements. if just 1 japanese ship arrived at pyeongyang, the japanese could've survived just 3 days with supplies. the same amount of supplies would need 500 horses and 500 men to transport them and additional soldiers to protect it. they had no way to transport said supplies and the supply route was completely blocked by yi's ships. whenever japan attempted to break the blockade they got demolished and yi didn't lose a single ship in these engagements. you have no clue

>they were just neutralizing bastions around seoul.
they were trying to get to jeolla, the main agriculture centre because they had no supplies and then they were quickly btfo by the korean troops there

>the japanese employed the formations comprised of pikemen and gunners equipped with shield (sort of japanese tercio) which negated cavalry pretty effectively.
their pikemen and gunners were like 5-10% of their forces. most of them were just swordsman. elite cavalry could've easily handled them

>when the ming reinforcement came, korean royals were around the sino-korean border, and were on the verge of fleeing korea. had it not been for them, koreans wouldn't have recaptured even pyongyang
if it weren't for korea's defenses, japan would've conquered china just like nanjing. you don't even have a clue how many japanese soldiers total were in those boats that yi destroyed and prevented from landing

>the imjin war is often described as japan's korean war/vietnam war. being decided by outside factors rather than local ones, it indeed took on the wars in the 20th century.
lel it's funny how dumb you are

Truth of the matter japan was once like the phillipines until it was invaded by china and north korea.

their retreat coincided with the news that their supplies were cut off you moron. why do you think they tried to attack julla province, where most of the food was

>if he was so stronk, the sole thing he should've done was to attack and destroy japan's primary logistics base in busan once and for all with his super fleet. but, he didn't (couldn't)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Busan_(1592)
Japanese forces lost 100 ships while no Korean ships were lost
it is recorded as the Korean navy decisively defeating the Japanese navy. Modern western historians also summarized the battle as a Korean decisive victory

>their pikemen and gunners were like 5-10% of their forces. most of them were just swordsman. elite cavalry could've easily handled them
Give a source for this statement. I'm very intrigued that ashigaru would only be equipped with katanas and nothing else. As for their border cavlry,they were ambushed and annihilated by Kato Kiyomasa.

>if it weren't for korea's defenses, japan would've conquered china just like nanjing.
What a joke,Korean armies had to be trained from scratch from Southern Chinese instructors. Unlike the Manchus the Japanese couldn't reliably beat Ming forces in a field battle.

>Japanese forces lost 100 ships while no Korean ships were lost
There is a difference between sinking 100 ships and sinking the entire fleet. Yi Sunshin simply didn't have the manpower to stop all Japanese incursions nor is it possible for Yi Sunshin to be in multiple places at once.

just look at their previous in-fights during the sengoku. their armies didn't utilize many guns. guns were quite primitive back then and even bow and arrow were still superior. sure guns helped especially because japan had a huge advantage in numbers, but they were terrible in close quarters. as for the hamgyong cavalry battle, you can bet that japan had a huge numbers advantage attacking from 3 sides

>What a joke,Korean armies had to be trained from scratch from Southern Chinese instructors
because it was during the 200 years of peace where most people were training to become scholars not soldiers and japan attacked by surprise. the korean soldiers who would've otherwise trained more soldiers were useful in battle instead

>Unlike the Manchus the Japanese couldn't reliably beat Ming forces in a field battle
now that's a joke. china didn't even have a huge army at that point like they used to and its generals were hugely incompetent. they'd blame their incompetence on their subordinates. they even accepted bribes by the japanese and allowed them to send reinforcements

>There is a difference between sinking 100 ships and sinking the entire fleet. Yi Sunshin simply didn't have the manpower to stop all Japanese incursions nor is it possible for Yi Sunshin to be in multiple places at once.
are you seriously braindead. yi stopped japanese incursions. the japanese were trying to retreat back to japan and recuperate their losses. that was the whole point of korea's blockade at busan you idiot. the fact that yi's ships, individually, were capable of destroying 10-20 other ships on their own without a scratch is certainly reason enough to believe he was capable of sinking their entire fleet. you don't know shit. jap ships were made of thin timber and would break apart when they were thrashed by korean ships. atakebunes were their biggest ship which could only carry like 2-4 cannons max. chinese ships were even more frail than japan's sekibune and were useless

>just look at their previous in-fights during the sengoku.
Life isn't game of Total War,name a source that supports your claim.

>hamgyong cavalry battle, you can bet that japan had a huge numbers advantage attacking from 3 sides
You've been called out on your bullshit multiple times. The elite Korean border forces weren't what you made them out to be.

>the korean soldiers who would've otherwise trained more soldiers were useful in battle instead
Excuses don't cut it. Joseon forces were nothing more than peasant conscripts while their Righetous armies did all the heavy lifting.

>china didn't even have a huge army at that point like they used to
The Ming had hundreds of thousands of men stationed at their border/capital garrisons,the same men who liberated Pyongyang.

>generals were hugely incompetent.
Individually they had varied talents while there was too much internal rivalry and lust for glory.

>they even accepted bribes by the japanese and allowed them to send reinforcement
That was only Liu Ting and even then it's debatable. Not every general is a shoddy as Won Gyun and not every general is as godly as Yi Sunshin.

> yi stopped japanese incursions.
Yi is limited by the resources at his disposal,don't disgrace his memory by fabricating claims that were impossible to fulfill.

Bottom line is that he was unable to destroy all enemy combatants or completely blockade all Japanese naval forces.

>chinese ships were even more frail than japan's sekibune and were useless
The Japanese did not have anything comparable to a Fu Chuan which never saw action as the war was already over.

your post seems to be the epitome of modern korean delusion, out of nationalism.

>their pikemen and gunners were like 5-10% of their forces.
the expeditionary force in the imjin war had arguably one of the world's highest gun possession rates of the time.
>Japan became so enthusiastic about the new weapons that it possibly overtook every European country in absolute numbers produced.[10] Japan also used the guns in the Japanese invasion of Korea in 1592, in which about a quarter of the invasion force of 160,000 were gunners.[17]

>you don't even have a clue how many japanese soldiers total were in those boats that yi destroyed and prevented from landing
the numbers in the results of "naval battles" during the war are pretty fishy, because koreans solely rely on yi's self reports, which are not so reliable due to his personal ambition, exaggerations peculiar to ancient/medieval war records, and miscounts, which were pretty common even in the ww2. the daimyo, wakisaka yasuharu, who lost the battle of hansan island, for example, had only 1,500 troops at a maximum then, which is a reliable historical fact derived from official records (not self report), backed up by the size of his fief (30,000 koku), which almost automatically determined one's mobilization quota (you can't mobilize soldiers more than what one's fief can sustain), and yet koreans say he lost nearly 10,000 to yi in the battle while he kept fighting the rest of the war with his men and was even promoted after the war for achievements.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wakisaka_Yasuharu
he might have lost hundreds, but this turns to a 10,000 japanese loss in the korean account. this way, koreans can have the delusion that yi was destroying/blocking the japanese en masse.

This thread is a total dumpster fire but I'm gonna ask anyway since I always notice that Veeky Forums has a few guys who seem to be extremely knowledgable about the Ming military and the Imjin War.

How accurate are the Japanese casualty numbers at the 1593 Siege of Pyongyang that I've seen attested in Swope's book (which the WIki article references)? That is, 1,500+ killed in battle with an extra 11,000 or so having died in the fires caused by Ming artillery/incendiary weapons and drowning in the Taedong river.

I remember a few people being skeptical of Swope's numbers (specifically on the samurai history forum, years ago) and pointing out the fact that a lot of Korean civilians were murdered and passed off as Japanese casualties by some of the Ming troops. I think Swope alludes to the latter in his book but says that official investigations failed to yield any definitive proof.

>Korean civilians were murdered and passed off as Japanese casualties by some of the Ming troops.
This happened when the war ended. When Ming armies returned home some of them plundered the civilian populace or even beheaded people and gave them Jap haircuts.

The Ming army was part professional and part ad-hoc formations composed of very rough elements like bandits & pirates. Its kinda like armies in the Thirty Years War.

>Life isn't game of Total War,name a source that supports your claim.
all you'd have to do is take into account their previous battles which are good indicators to their arms they used. if you're so weary about that then provide your own source that shows the raw figures instead of focusing on something so petty that it isn't even conducive to the argument

>You've been called out on your bullshit multiple times.
nope
>The elite Korean border forces weren't what you made them out to be.
what kind of ridiculous statement is that. just because of one battle where they were greatly outnumbered and attacked by surprise you choose to ignore their experience and skill altogether. top lel

>Excuses don't cut it. Joseon forces were nothing more than peasant conscripts while their Righetous armies did all the heavy lifting.
the righteous armies were literally peasants and monks. the joseon forces were largely unprepared at the outset because of the peace policy stated earlier. they still repelled attacks at stages that were pivotal during the war

>The Ming had hundreds of thousands of men stationed at their border/capital garrisons,the same men who liberated Pyongyang.
the ming had difficulty rallying even 100,000 men for their army. hideyoshi knew this. that's part of why he planned to invade china. it was the ming and their envoys that provoked hideyoshi to attack

>Individually they had varied talents while there was too much internal rivalry and lust for glory.
what happened to 'Excuses don't cut it'. armies rely a lot on the competence of their generals

>That was only Liu Ting and even then it's debatable. Not every general is a shoddy as Won Gyun and not every general is as godly as Yi Sunshin
chen lin also took kinoshi's bribe. in fact, chen felt guilty after yi's death and him and his family eventually became korean citizens

> That is, 1,500+ killed in battle with an extra 11,000 or so having died in the fires caused by Ming artillery/incendiary weapons and drowning in the Taedong river.
The 11,000 is definitely an exaggeration to impress the folks at home but there's really no way for them to tell how many drowned/incinerated men are Japanese.

The 1,500 sounds reasonable given the context,though some of these were definitely civilian casualties.

>The Ming army was part professional and part ad-hoc formations composed of very rough elements like bandits & pirates. Its kinda like armies in the Thirty Years War.
While the Ming conscripted POW(including the Japanese),bandits and pirates are far form the norm.

Border garrisons were full time professionals,ex Qi Jiguang soldiers were trained mercenaries and the southwestern natives substituted punishment/corvee labor/taxes with military service.

>Yi is limited by the resources at his disposal,don't disgrace his memory by fabricating claims that were impossible to fulfill.
it wasn't though. yi had limited resources, yes, but the korean ships were far superior to japan's ships. and along with yi's mastery of naval warfare, it wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that yi stopped japanese incursions

>Bottom line is that he was unable to destroy all enemy combatants or completely blockade all Japanese naval forces.
because the japanese always suffered heavy losses and retreated at every engagement against yi and his ships

DERET THIS

>all you'd have to do is take into account their previous battles which are good indicators to their arms they used.
You are a fraud with an ax to grind. Nothing supports 5-10% ratio of pikmen/arquebusiers in Sengoku armies.

>nope
>if it weren't for korea's defenses, japan would've conquered china just like nanjing.
>their pikemen and gunners were like 5-10% of their forces. most of them were just swordsman. elite cavalry could've easily handled them
>china didn't even have a huge army at that point like they used to
>yi stopped japanese incursions.
>chinese ships were even more frail than japan's sekibune and were useless
I wouldn't say so looking at your post history.

>what kind of ridiculous statement is that. just because of one battle where they were greatly outnumbered and attacked by surprise you choose to ignore their experience and skill altogether. top lel
Li Rusong's elites manged to extricate the majority of his force despite fighting back a far larger force. The bottom line is now matter how elite Chinese/Korean cavalry were they can still be defeated under specific circumstances.

>the righteous armies were literally peasants and monks.
Peasants and monks that gummed up the Japanese logistics.

> they still repelled attacks at stages that were pivotal during the war
Yea,once they were trained by Ming instructors.

>what happened to 'Excuses don't cut it'. armies rely a lot on the competence of their generals
You can't pigeonhole Ming commanders when they all preformed at different levels. How would you rate Li Rusong who managed to win Pyongyang but lose Byeokjegwan? Chen Lin who blundered Suncheon but won Noryang?

>chen lin also took kinoshi's bribe
There's no evidence this ever took place with Konishi still stuck in Suncheon. Liu Ting/Chen Lin lost due to sheer incompetence.

matchlock was incredibly inferior. if your argument is about the number of gunners then you're conveying the message that their army itself was large enough that the portion of gunners had enough of an impact to turn the war in their favor. but it didn't. even the chinese suffered firsthand casualties by the thousands due to that. if your argument is about whether primitive matchlock guns were effective against heavy cavalry at close to mid range then that's a different matter

>the numbers in the results of "naval battles" during the war are pretty fishy, because koreans solely rely on yi's self reports, which are not so reliable due to his personal ambition
to understand why you're wrong here and why most historians would disagree with you, you'd have to understand the character and background of yi. he had no reason to lie and he didn't value prestige or glory above his own honor. he was the on-scene commander who witnessed the events and counted firsthand unlike the bureaucrats that wrote the records from hearsay

>it wasn't though. yi had limited resources, yes, but the korean ships were far superior to japan's ships. and along with yi's mastery of naval warfare, it wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that yi stopped japanese incursions
I don't disagree with your first two points. Yi couldn't force the Japanese ground forces to leave nor could he prevent reinforcements who simply avoided him.

>because the japanese always suffered heavy losses and retreated at every engagement against yi and his ships
Yi could only destroy what he can get his hands on,he obviously did not have the military capacity to wipe out all Japanese naval forces.

If Yi could completely stifle all enemy naval forces the Japanese wouldn't have been able to reinforce Kato Kiyomasa during the Siege of Ulsan.

>matchlock was incredibly inferior.
Go read your own sources. The Annals of Seonjo had a healthy respect for Japanese matchlocks that gunned down Joseon conscripts.

>The 1,500 sounds reasonable given the context,though some of these were definitely civilian casualties.
Yeah, that sounds fair.

Should the allied casualties be suspect? I'm guessing not considering the general success of the first Ming expedition and how specific the counts are in general. The Byeokjegwan mess aside it seemed like logistics were the biggest obstacle for the Ming then.

And speaking of Byeokjegwan,

>Border garrisons were full time professionals,ex Qi Jiguang soldiers were trained mercenaries and the southwestern natives substituted punishment/corvee labor/taxes with military service.
Did Li Rusong's retinues/elites at Byeokjegwan come from any specific background? I'd read that they came from all over the damn place and weren't technically registered soldiers (which is why he was able to send misleading casualty reports in the first place) despite being extremely competent.

>Nothing supports 5-10% ratio of pikmen/arquebusiers in Sengoku armies.
look at oda's campaigns. 500 gunners in his army. and this was way after they were introduced to guns so it isn't a matter of them being unfamiliar with them

>I wouldn't say so looking at your post history.
you mean those posts where i dismantled all of your arguments

>Li Rusong's elites manged to extricate the majority of his force despite fighting back a far larger force. The bottom line is now matter how elite Chinese/Korean cavalry were they can still be defeated under specific circumstances.
that was the point. kato had to hide behind huge walls of rice that he found and firing in order to stave off the cavalry. had he not been so lucky to find rice bags to stack, the results could've been different

>Peasants and monks that gummed up the Japanese logistics.
why even downplay yi's role. he completely halted japan's supply shipments

>Yea,once they were trained by Ming instructors.
the ming only helped train a fraction of the troops. the ming only sent a sizable force to korea after they lost their battle against the japanese in pyongyang and realized beijing was under threat

>You can't pigeonhole Ming commanders when they all preformed at different levels
ming commanders were clever in their own ways but that doesn't excuse the fact that they took bribes from their enemies and made stupid mistakes that accosted lives on their own side. also why would you even attribute the victory at noryang to chen lin when he gave full control of his fleet to yi

>There's no evidence this ever took place with Konishi still stuck in Suncheon
a japanese ship sent out by konishi got through china's line formation to call for reinforcements. that's what allowed the battle at noryang and why chen became guilt-ridden

i don't agree with this. although the english wikipedia article is also written in the manner in line with the narrative believed by koreans and some historians, if you left out all the embellishment there, you would realize even the article itself suggests that the operation wasn't really a victory.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Busan_(1592)

>It was a Korean surprise attack on the fleet of Toyotomi Hideyoshi stationed at Busan.
>However, ultimately, the Korean fleet retreated from Busan.
>In a primary historical source, Annals of the Joseon Dynasty (Korean official history, written by bureaucrat of the Korean government located in Hanyang District), it is recorded as the Korean navy failed to defeat Japanese at Busan.

the objective of this operation was to reduce the busan base, which was the primary japanese logistic base in korea, pumping out supplies to the japanese armies throughout the peninsula. knowing this, yi stated that busan was the enemy base and that they had to reduce it to kick out the japanese once and for all, and formed the combined fleet to commence it; and he hailed.

yeah, this was a strategic failure; it's a pretty simple fact. koreans failed in reducing the busan base despite all the combined navy in full strength. it seems to me that the extra descriptions on the article are just redundant embellishments to make this strategic failure out to be a tactical victory, no matter what some "experts", yi himself, or writers of the eulogies on yi interpret it to be, and no matter how many stationed japanese ships they burned. they didn't put a dent on the base, which kept functioning throughout the war.

this is why i said the primary maritime supply line was intact. koreans were unable to block it even with the entire naval forces combined; and the situation was nowhere near the state described as a blockade. japanese ships easily came in busan, except for a few unlucky ships that got raided by yi, it's just a fact.

you have to realize that the event was recorded in the annals by bureaucrats at a time where yi was drawing too much support for the king's liking. and then there's the political dealings of won gyun who falsely accused yi of insubordinance and had him removed soon after the battle. anyhow, the fleet left the port because liu ting took konishi's bribe and didn't attack the castle like he was supposed to. even still, japan were the ones who suffered heavy losses (100-400 ships destroyed) and yi didn't lose a single ship. if you don't count that as a victory then you can chalk it up to incompetence on the part of the chinese generals

you have to realize that the event was recorded in the annals by bureaucrats at a time where yi was drawing too much support for the king's liking. and then there's the political dealings of won gyun who falsely accused yi of insubordinance and had him removed soon after the battle. anyhow, the fleet left the port because liu ting took konishi's bribe and didn't attack the castle like he was supposed to. even still, japan were the ones who suffered heavy losses (500 ships destroyed) and yi didn't lose a single ship. if you don't count that as a victory then you can chalk it up to incompetence on the part of the chinese generals

>this is why i said the primary maritime supply line was intact. koreans were unable to block it even with the entire naval forces combined; and the situation was nowhere near the state described as a blockade. japanese ships easily came in busan, except for a few unlucky ships that got raided by yi, it's just a fact.
no you're wrong. the bulk of japan's ships were at that harbor. they didn't have the means to transport supplies from japan at an efficient rate after most of their boats sank until won gyun took over yi's post

>Should the allied casualties be suspect?
They shouldn't be,the military commissioner had no incentive to downplay Ming casualties during Pyongyang.

Byeokjegwan casualties was anywhere between 264-1,500 men. Problem being most of these soldiers were off the books.

>Did Li Rusong's retinues/elites at Byeokjegwan come from any specific background?
Mostly derived from other Liaodong military families.

Retinue forces can be anything from former POW,foreign mercenaries,trained civilians and regular governmental troops given a promotion.

>Be China
>Recover Korea at an enormous cost after Japan conquered them in teo months
>This contributes to fall of dynasty
>centuries later, they say your help was useless

>look at oda's campaigns. 500 gunners in his army.
Sengoku armies weren't standardized,if you look at the Shimazu mobilization list they had more arquebuses than pikemen during the Imjin War.

Don't misrepresent an order of 500 arquebuses for what utilized on the battefield. Look at Nagashino for example. Funny you bring up Oda when Ashigaru were primarily pikemen not swordsmen as you claim.

>you mean those posts where i dismantled all of your arguments
I've proved you wrong on the seaworthiness of Chinese ships,the size and contribution of Chinese armies,distorted Sengoku army ratios and failure of the Korean border army.

>the results could've been different
Emphasis on the could. You tried to hype them off and they failed miserably.

>why even downplay yi's role. he completely halted japan's supply shipments
Yi didn't win fights on lands,he couldn't blockade them entirely.

>the ming only helped train a fraction of the troops.
Without the Southern Chinese instructors they wouldn't have gotten anywhere. Jixiao Xinshu was perfect for drilling Korean soldiers who lacked military discipline and martial prowess

> the ming only sent a sizable force to korea after they lost their battle against the japanese in pyongyang and realized beijing was under threat
It takes time to mobilize an expeditionary force,especially when the Ming had to deal with a northwestern mutiny.

> the fact that they took bribes from their enemies
Which sources allege these bribes took place? The Ming sources made it clear that investigations failed to procure evidence.

>made stupid mistakes that accosted lives on their own side.
Yea and no one is arguing otherwise.

>why would you even attribute the victory at noryang to chen lin when he gave full control of his fleet to yi
Chen Lin was the overall commander,with the vast majority of the allied fleet consisted of Chinese marines.

>a japanese ship sent out by konishi got through china's line formation to call for reinforcements.
This isn't evidence of bribery. Chen Lin/Liu Ting did not allow Konishi to flee as he wanted to.

>Recover Korea at an enormous cost after Japan conquered them in teo months
>This contributes to fall of dynasty
The impact of the Imjin War on the Ming is overstated. The Ming didn't even suffer heavy casualties and the war only cost 1/7 of Ming-Later Jin War.

so basically there's obviously differences in facts as well as opinions based on those facts here throughout the discussion. so whatever truth is apparent from those differences can only be concieved by whatever facts that're resolute and corroborated by all sides. some of those facts regarding the dispute of ming china's role, aside from the aforementioned bribes and strategic mistakes, and ultimately its impact in the imjin wars are
>ming china was weakened by mongol invasions and were still dealing with them
>ming china was also dealing with internal strife between its officials and leaders
>china first sent 5000 troops after japanese troops had already reached seoul which battled against korea's wholly unprepared and outnumbered forces along the way
>right after japanese troops were incredibly weakened from their failed siege on haengju as well as their lack of supplies, when they were heading back up to seoul, li rusong didn't send his troops to meet them, against korea's advice. instead china allowed japan to withdraw and recouperate
>ming forces failed to siege kinoshi's fortress at sunchon and shimazu's fortress at sachon and became weary of fighting the japanese
>when hideyoshi died and japan's forces were moving south, again china refused to seize the opportunity to attack japanese forces against korea's advice
>even though tens of thousands of china's soldiers were killed by those same japanese forces
>before chinese forces decided to even move to the location of kinoshi's forces who were trapped at busan, kinoshi's forces already escaped

sure, ming china played some part in the imjin war and its forces had a measurable amount of success in repelling some of the japanese excursions no doubt. but whatever successes it had were eclipsed by the things it didn't do properly or do at all which resulted in more lives lost. that's why it's almost absurd to claim that ming played an important part in the role that they had

Who exactly in Korea could be a deterrence to the Shimazu on land, if the Ming didn't help them?

who exactly in ming china with its weakened army could be a deterrence to an unchecked japanese army if korea hadn't withstood the brunt of the attack. japan was arguably, at the time, the strongest military in the world. perhaps the argument should just be resolved in agreement that the combined forces of the ming and joseon were able to ultimately defeat them

also remember, hideyoshi's ire was originally directed at china because of a breakdown in diplomacy

>so basically there's obviously differences in facts as well as opinions
You're full of shit. Look at the misinformation perpetuated by Koreaboo in this thread.

>ming china was weakened by mongol invasions and were still dealing with them
The early reign of the Wanli Emperor saw the resurgence of martial strength and renewed campaigns against Mongols/Jurchens. The main issue was the Ming was preoccupied with the Ningxia rebellion by Ming border troops.

>ming china was also dealing with internal strife between its officials and leaders
There were regional rivalries between different continents,no different than Konishi and Kato.

>china first sent 5000 troops after japanese troops had already reached seoul which battled against korea's wholly unprepared and outnumbered forces along the way
They only sent 2,000-3,000 who had no idea what the situation was like in Korea.

>right after japanese troops were incredibly weakened from their failed siege on haengju as well as their lack of supplies, when they were heading back up to seoul, li rusong didn't send his troops to meet them, against korea's advice. instead china allowed japan to withdraw and recouperate
This wasn't like the second invasion,Li Rusong knew firsthand how grossly outnumbered he was.

>ming forces failed to siege kinoshi's fortress at sunchon and shimazu's fortress at sachon and became weary of fighting the japanese
Neither Shimazu or Konishi were in a position to exploit their defensive victories and promptly retreated. If the Japanese were so superior than Konishi wouldn't have tried to repeatedly bribe Liu Ting/Chen Lin while nearly being assassinated in peace talks.

>when hideyoshi died and japan's forces were moving south, again china refused to seize the opportunity to attack japanese forces against korea's advice
This is true.

>even though tens of thousands of china's soldiers were killed by those same japanese forces
What are you smoking? Ming/Korean primary recorded casualties in the lower thousands not ten thousands. The Japanese lost a fair amount of men as well crippling their war effort.

>but whatever successes it had were eclipsed by the things it didn't do properly or do at all which resulted in more lives lost. that's why it's almost absurd to claim that ming played an important part in the role that they had
You are diminishing the Ming's role while elevating Yi Sunshin. None of the sources from the time period doubted the Ming's contribution.

>who exactly in ming china with its weakened army
Are you serious? Losing soldiers in failed offensives doesn't mean the Ming was out of the game.

To put it this way the Ming bounced back from Sarhu despite losing more men than the entirety of the Imjin War.

> japan was arguably, at the time, the strongest military in the world.
Their performance during the Imjin War doesn't lend credence to your claim.

>perhaps the argument should just be resolved in agreement that the combined forces of the ming and joseon were able to ultimately defeat them
No one argued otherwise.

>You're full of shit. Look at the misinformation perpetuated by Koreaboo in this thread.
no, you're full of shit. and that statement you replied to isn't even contentious

>The early reign of the Wanli Emperor saw the resurgence of martial strength and renewed campaigns against Mongols/Jurchens.
sure, the early reign. what of thereafter, particularly during the imjin war itself. read 'a year of no significance' by huang to learn more about china's military weakness and incompetence during and after the imjin war
>The main issue was the Ming was preoccupied with the Ningxia rebellion by Ming border troops.
in other words it would've been absolutely overwhelmed by unchecked japanese forces if they continued through korea

>There were regional rivalries between different continents,no different than Konishi and Kato.
the wanli emperor was tired of the turmoil and withdrew himself then delegated eunuchs in place of the ministers and officials who took bribes to allow officials to relay messages to him

>This wasn't like the second invasion,Li Rusong knew firsthand how grossly outnumbered he was.
he wasn't grossly outnumbered though. and he was obviously informed about the japanese troops' weakened state as well. he was just indecisive as a commander and completely unfamiliar with how the japanese fought

>Neither Shimazu or Konishi were in a position to exploit their defensive victories and promptly retreated.
if they weren't able to exploit their defenses then they wouldn't have been able to retreat
>If the Japanese were so superior than Konishi wouldn't have tried to repeatedly bribe Liu Ting/Chen Lin while nearly being assassinated in peace talks.
yeah and konishi had no way to escape the siege on the castle. but there was no siege which liu ting and his forces were held in charge of while yi's fleet kept konishi from escaping by sea

>bandits and pirates are far form the norm.

Koxinga's dad was a successful pirate and smuggler who was rehabilitated when, instead of fighting and imprisoning him, offered him a rank in the Navy, which he accepted.

>What are you smoking? Ming/Korean primary recorded casualties in the lower thousands not ten thousands
what the hell are YOU smoking. are you seriously suggesting that during the imjin war, there was only a few thousand ming/joseon casualties, not even mentioning civilians
>The Japanese lost a fair amount of men as well crippling their war effort
the point is, chinese forces were obligated to avenge the deaths of their fallen comrades but chose not to

>You are diminishing the Ming's role while elevating Yi Sunshin
no
>None of the sources from the time period doubted the Ming's contribution
that isn't the point

> Losing soldiers in failed offensives doesn't mean the Ming was out of the game.
it was more than that. the ming dynasty was on a decline and its army, which was even outnumbered by japan's 250,000 soldiers, was outstretched throughout china from the pirates along its coast, to the mongols across the great wall, to the jurchens, to losing its grip on burma, and its own internal problems in its ranks. there was no way it would've handled japan on its own. it's pretty well-understood by everyone that the ming dynasty was on a steep decline

>Their performance during the Imjin War doesn't lend credence to your claim.
by sheer numbers their army dominated any others. they had around 250,000 war-hardened samurai with exceptional sword skills who underwent a civil war lasting decades. compare that to the spanish army of 30,000 or the english army of 20,000 and it isn't even close

>No one argued otherwise
you sort of are