Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military From: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Chinese Army and the Vietnam conflict of 1979 Message-ID: <1990Aug15.032014.25708@cbnews.att.com> Date: 15 Aug 90 03:20:14 GMT References: <1990Jul27.015503.21955@cbnews.att.com> <1990Jul31.223503.6119@cbnews.att.com> <1990Aug6.031148.2110@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 55 Approved: military@att.att.com From: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) zrra07@crx34.UUCP (Randall R. Appleton) writes: >In article <1990Jul31.223503.6119@cbnews.att.com> eos!woody@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Wayne Wood) writes: >>In article <1990Jul27.015503.21955@cbnews.att.com> anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) writes: >>>In 1979 China was involved in a major conflict with Vietnam. The [stuff about Chinese army invading Vietnam deleted] >>first, consider logistical problems. the invading force not only has to fight >>and secure territory but it must also provide it's own logistical needs... >>possibly transporting the needed supplies/replacements through hostile >>territory. witness napoleon and hitler. >Ahhh, no. >The Chinese didn't get very far at all in their invasion. In other words, >the never got vary far from their supply. Exactly, China is right next door to Vietnam. In fact the border between China and Vietnam is only a small distance from the port of Guangzhou which is immediately North of Hongkong, there are major rail networks and shipping to bring in more supplies and fresh troops. >The Americans in Vietnam seemed to have all the supply they needed. If in >fact there were supply problems (and I'm sure their were) the problems >were of an organbizational and not a transaportation nature (that's an >opinion, not a statement of fact.) So supply was not a problem for the Americans and is it morale ? The Americans were in Vietnam from about 65 to 72, that's a long time even by WWII standards. How long was China in Vietnam ? Much less than a year and so if morale is supposed to go down over a long period of time than surely there's no cause for the Chinese army to lose their morale ? >In any case, the problems with the Chinese army were not supply. Unlike >Hitler or Napolean, they did not go literally thousands of miles across >an empty plain into the Russian winter. In fact, they didn't get anywhere >at all! That's right, even if the Vietnamese employed scorch earth tactics it wouldn't make any difference. This bring me to the question of "what was the objective ?" of the Chinese army in 79 ? They didn't exactly forced Vietnam out of Cambodia by their invasion ? Why didn't the Chinese army just continue to advance until the Vietnamese were willing to withdraw from Cambodia ? Did the Chinese army meet such opposition that it couldn't go any further ? -- Anthony Lee (Michaelangelo teenage mutant ninja turtle) (Time Lord Doctor) ACSnet: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz TEL:+(61)-7-371-2651 Internet: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au +(61)-7-377-4139 (w) SNAIL: Dept Comp. Science, University of Qld, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia