How did Westerner look at Chinese in Korean War?

To describe the PLA or PVA(as it was known in Korea) tactics as "wave tactics", during the Korean war would be wrong. Mass infantry assaults were just a small part of the overall tactics and strategy used by PLA/PVA commanders. A brief on the Korean War tactics are given below.
http://www.centurychina.com/history/faq2.shtml#6
PVA's tactics were designed to void UN's advantage of air power and artillery.

PVA used night fighting tactics. It would start an attack when night fell, withdrew and went to cover at dawn, so US airplanes could not harass them. It also used close combat, threw its units into enemy line, so the enemy artillery could not operate. Another PVA tactics was to infiltrate deep into enemy positions, attack their command posts and artillery positions directly from inside.

During the truce talks, PVA invented the bunker war, they would dug very long and deep bunkers in the hills and stock supplies there, when enemy shell the hills, they would withdraw into the bunkers, when the shelling stopped, they came out to fire on the attackers, after the surface positions taken by enemy, they would withdraw back into the bunkers, then PVA artillery would shell the enemy on the surface and they came out the bunkers again to assist the retaking of the hill.

PVA's main strategy at the beginning was the so-called "movement war", the main objective was to divide the enemy into isolated pieces and then use superior strength of force to annihilate the encircled enemy piecemeal before enemy reinforcement could be brought in, to do this, PVA uses frontal attacks and simultaneous penetrations to cut directly into enemy rear, cutoff MSR (main supply route) and withdraw routes, trap enemy units when they tried to redeploy.
Click to expand...
PLA commanders had to plan keeping in mind their strengths and weaknesses. Superiority in manpower was their strength and they used it to their best ability.
To say that PLA commanders did not care about soldiers lives, would also be wrong. Chinese soldiers do happen to have mothers and families back home.
 
Point taken about human waves. I am overstating their prominance, but they were used. I hope we are past debating that point.

I still think that leading a poorly equipped, poorly trained men into the Korean War was irresponsible. It should have been obvious that a huge portion of them would die. Many more than if they had been better prepared. Was it really worth it? I think that China might not have been isolated by the world community if they had just stayed out of it. I also think that the KMT would have had its permanent UN seat taken away years earlier.

Conversely, I believe that MacArthur was an idiot to just simply ignore China's warnings. Inchon was the most brilliant achievement of his military career. Drawing China into the fight was the biggest mistake of his career. He could have prevented China's intervention. He was he was just too full of himself to see it coming.
 
to fully justify the biases on both sides, i have seen enough korean war articles to know what the battle is like

both sides used the (human wave tactic) during the stalemate, simply put,: tanks were useless in the hills.

the main tactic of the americans in offensive was to drive the entire hill nuts with artilery rain and b-29 bombardments with fighterbombers, after all that, the infantry charges towards the hill.

at first the western commanders suggested charging, but that had too many deaths because of the chinese bunker tactic, to miniize deaths, they sent infantry foward walking slowly firing as they go

it was a bad tactic, simply put they were caught in chinese artillery storms

infantry wave tactic, or rather infantry led attacks were the usual way of attacking in korea, both UN forces and chinese forces usese it


so dont go out proud with ur big smile thinking why those chinese charged their men when your own country's men also did the same
 
AA said:
both sides used the (human wave tactic) during the stalemate, simply put,: tanks were useless in the hills.
Click to expand...
AA
There is a major difference in the infantry attacks of western armies and that of PLA.
The PLA would committ a minimum of a regiment (i.e one brigade) or at least 2 infantry battalions for an objective as small as a rifle company defended locality. So when a PLA attack comes it seems endless, because 2 to 3 battalions are pressing in the attack. Hence the term wave attacks.
Where as a western army would only committ a single battalion for a similar objective. After the initail attack fails they don't have a second wave following, they retreat, regroup, bring down arty/air fire on the enemy and then only press home the second attack.
It is just a matter of military doctrine followed by each side.
 
well i guess thats one of the reasons why the Un forces had been stalled eh?

militray speaking, when attacking, you concentrate, that is the simpliest strategy that even a child could understand, if you dont get it, please read sun tzu's art of war

when attacking with first wave, you can do quite a lot of damage to the enemy, why not release second wave???

thats pretty stupid not to, those soldiers who died for the first eave meant nothing???? their deaths was for ntohign???

the second wave ought to have an easier time and believe me, time is important



look, the basic tactiscs of all infantry are basically the same, you attack with concentrated units supported by art and airplanes during mountain battles, it is the otehr way around in plains battles, when the infantry support artilery planes and tnaks
 
Its funny that the main thrust of the conversation would be an emphasive on the use of large bodies of men thrown continuosly against the US forces. The use of large bodies of men thrown against the marines positions probly led to a Marine machine gunner asking his gunnery sgt that immortal question "Hey Gunny! How many hordes are there in a Chineese rifle platoon anyhow"?

Seriously...the US and UN forces soon learned they were up against a determined foe, for all the nonsense said. My Father in law said he learned to respect that determination...even as he sat in a fox hole for 20 hours straight repelling wave after wave of those mentioned wave attacks. :D
 
lol funny story that is, beacause that is pretty true, though to soem extent i think you chose ur words wrong

no battle in the 20 hours could you just sit in a fox hole with a machinegun and gun off waves

no, if a battle lasts 20 hours long, subjected to chiense attacks ( chinese attacks gennerally are shocking and does not attack frontal) then the fighting will be probably be very intense

as my friend's grandfather had told me, after the initial attack, the battle pretty much relied on determination becuase by then un artillery and chiense artillery are gunning th esame cordinants with troops in that corrdinate gunning each other off, bayonets, grendaes you name it



if a battle lats 20 hours its not a wave replling thing, its a local close range combat from fox holes to foxholes
 
AA said:
militray speaking, when attacking, you concentrate, that is the simpliest strategy that even a child could understand, if you dont get it, please read sun tzu's art of war

when attacking with first wave, you can do quite a lot of damage to the enemy, why not release second wave???
Click to expand...
The standard type of infantry attack has is based on a good fireplan and infantry assault.
Fireplan means providing the infantry arty/mortar and MMG covering fire during its move to the objective. As the infantry reaches closer to the objective the enemy is forced to keep his head low by the arty fire, and at each stage depending on range the arty fire lifts and is replaced by mortars, which lifts when the assault troops are 100 mtrs from the objective and the MMGs open up from the firebase. By now the infantry is 30 mtrs away and MMG fire lifts up. By the time the defenders infantry reacts the assaulting troops are on the forward trenches in hand to hand fighting. There is no need for second waves.
The second wave is only used to re-enforce a crucial area, by the battalion reserve rifle company.
So if they can get the job done with 1 battalion, then why waste a second battalion, it can be used for another objective. Economy of resources is also a principle of war mentioned by Sun Tzu.
 
lol, ur talkng on the same topic but on different context

look, what im saying is when you have the first units up and battling, you reinforce it when their strength is at least 75 or below, this will give you the additional firepower and strength to make it to the hills.

art and mortars and other weapons used are autotmatically allocated to the help of ht einfantry, thereby it wasnt mentioned
 
AA said:
look, what im saying is when you have the first units up and battling, you reinforce it when their strength is at least 75 or below, this will give you the additional firepower and strength to make it to the hills.
Click to expand...
It is just a difference in concept of warfare that is acceptable to either side.
 
well mech...what can I say?

I asked my Father in Law if he really had been in a fox hole for 20 hours during a battle with the red chinese forces in Korea...i related what you had said in the forum about the situation...

His reply? Yes. contrary to popular belief, the US and the red chinese weren't really specific about following the battle plans and would get bogged down in little long term slug fests like he mentioned.

When i asked him how they dealt with the horde or wave type type tactics against a fixed position...he related that the marine or navy air groups could and did press some serious air support..including 50 caliber strafing attacks, napalm, and quite a few bombs.

He says his groups could and did fend off 20 hour attacks...who am i to say he didn't. Especially since he has that M-1 off the wall...and a leering grin on his face as he is pointing it this way... :D
 
Try googling Korea and Hill Fights or Reno, Carson City, Las Vegas and Korea. Those are some USMC outposts late in the war that fought exactly those type of fights.
 
lol, i still dont believe any chiense commander is reatrded enough to have a 20 hour attack while the americans sat back and fired back

thats impossible, after 1 hour the attack is definelty called off

close combat is the most occuring thing when a 20hour battle occurs



lol, seriously western documents are not accurate, especially from a father in law whom i dont even know if he has proof that he went to the korean war

why red forman would have a much realistic story than that
 
Mech said:
lol, i still dont believe any chiense commander is reatrded enough to have a 20 hour attack while the americans sat back and fired back

thats impossible, after 1 hour the attack is definelty called off

close combat is the most occuring thing when a 20hour battle occurs



lol, seriously western documents are not accurate, especially from a father in law whom i dont even know if he has proof that he went to the korean war

why red forman would have a much realistic story than that
Click to expand...


Oh well. I guess I'm just more inclined to believe historical accounts rathar than the Party Line of the Peking Peoples Daily Worker.
 
lemontree said:
AA said:
look, what im saying is when you have the first units up and battling, you reinforce it when their strength is at least 75 or below, this will give you the additional firepower and strength to make it to the hills.
Click to expand...
It is just a difference in concept of warfare that is acceptable to either side.
Click to expand...


I think the concept is acceptable to both sides.

It is the serendipity of history that current Americans think their country would not send soldiers in human-wave attacks. If the circumstance required it, their country would demand that sacrifice. Most countries would.
 
Oh well. I guess I'm just more inclined to believe historical accounts rathar than the Party Line of the Peking Peoples Daily Worker.
Click to expand...

lol for ur infomation im not a worker, im a student and not a member of ccp

maybe for future references its called beijing



1,000,000 (Britannica)
225,000 KIA (Pentagon: ¼ "KWM")
]


as u see, two western countires coming up with complete different answers for chinese casulties

this is just sad, it proves that you have no idea of what the casulties are

therefore dont go and point and say a million dead
 
Mech,

I presume that the Chinese notified families about lost men in the Korean War.

Is that what they did?

I do accept it as factual that there were attacks where large numbers of Chinese soldiers were killed in frontal assaults - North Koreans, too.

I also know my military has had a propensity for exaggerating the casualties of an opponent in wars.

I wish the Chinese government would just declassify their losses in the Korean War.
 
Oh well. I guess I'm just more inclined to believe historical accounts rathar than the Party Line of the Peking Peoples Daily Worker.
Click to expand...

Are you sure those historical accounts not bias? I can understand the vets' account of the battles, but 1 Mil Chinese soldiers died? C'mon, I would advice you to look at others' data (non-Commies or Commies) instead of focusing on the US military's version of "Dr. Feel Good".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top