Milhist Thread Part The IVth: sir, my ass is flowing like Sun Tzu's army

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Milhist Thread Part The IVth: sir, my ass is flowing like Sun Tzu's army

«‹›500 »

GotLag: Jul 17, 2005; 食べちゃダメだよ

I am looking for the German text of a specific quote from Himmler, which I've seen/heard in a few places:
"We are living in an iron time and have to sweep with iron brooms. Everyone has therefore to do his duty without asking his conscience first."

I found a reference in The Holocaust: A New History, given as "Nds. HStAH, Hann. Des. 310 I A, Nr. 35. In English in Noakes and Pridham (eds.), Nazism, vol. 1, p. 76."

Is anyone able to decipher the part of that presumably referring to the German source?

# ? Feb 12, 2019 10:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 01:42

Chillbro Baggins: Oct 8, 2004; Bad Angus! Bad!

Cessna posted:

C.f., the entire US military in Vietnam 1971-72.

My father saw the proverbial elephant in '71-'72. Lifehack: enlist into the non-medical MOS with the longest stateside training time (18E) , you're guaranteed only one tour, rather than being drafted and sent to the 11B meatgrinder. Minor drawback: the NVA has put a bounty on your head equal to a year's wages for a laborer, and you're carrying a radio on your back with an antenna that does double duty as a "shoot me first" flag.
Worked out for him, though, seeing as how I exist. (My sister was born while he was deployed, I'm ten years younger.)

Squalid posted:

is increasingly based around advising and assisting local forces.

Point of order, that's how we STARTED Vietnam. Just saying.

Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 10:44 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 10:36

aphid_licker: Jan 7, 2009

GotLag posted:

I am looking for the German text of a specific quote from Himmler, which I've seen/heard in a few places:
"We are living in an iron time and have to sweep with iron brooms. Everyone has therefore to do his duty without asking his conscience first."

I found a reference in The Holocaust: A New History, given as "Nds. HStAH, Hann. Des. 310 I A, Nr. 35. In English in Noakes and Pridham (eds.), Nazism, vol. 1, p. 76."

Is anyone able to decipher the part of that presumably referring to the German source?

Nds. HStAH is Nieders�chsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv and is currently named Landesarchiv, Standort Hannover.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nieders%E4chsisches_Landesarchiv_(Standort_Hannover)

The letter salad after is the number of the bucket or whatever they have that particular bit of paper with the quote in

e: you could probably email them and have them pull that bit up for you

aphid_licker fucked around with this message at 10:45 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 10:42

Chillbro Baggins: Oct 8, 2004; Bad Angus! Bad!

zoux posted:

How long does it take to mag dump an m4? Would dudes just be constantly reloading?

Quoting from way back again, but I know this. Assuming 600 rounds/minute cyclic rate, typical of such rifles, a 30-round magazine lasts three seconds if you burn it all at once.There's a reason some models of M16 had semi and burst instead of full auto, and the full auto models were only entrusted to Rangers and SF who could modulate the trigger instead of holding it down ... but if the poo poo hit the fan and they needed to, they could. Y'know that one scene in "Predator".

Dad had a bag that originally held a pair of Claymore mines, refilled with mags for his Hobbesian rifle (nasty, brutish, and short, sort of the proto-M4) that they'd throw around in battle, just toss the tote bag of magazines to whoever needed ammo.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 11:07

FrangibleCover: Jan 23, 2018; Nothing going on in my quiet corner of the Pacific.

This is the life. I'm just lying here in my hammock in Townsville, sipping a G&T.

HEY GUNS posted:

pikes are overrated
https://twitter.com/bellegenerico_/status/1094646279488061441

Pre 20th century MilHist has all the good bits.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 11:10

Don Gato: Apr 28, 2013; Actually a bipedal cat.; Grimey Drawer

Tias posted:

So, how did the Taiping rebellion spread so to so many people? I've read your excellent posts on the conflict, but I never really got a handle on why they were so effective. I'm guessing wildly here, but did it have something to do with the Manchu dynasty being bad at government? I recently heard (in a podcast about taoism, weirdly enough) that there were actually co-belligerents against the Manchu, like the "turban rebels" and "sword societies", can you elaborate on that?

Thanks in advance!

Massively oversimplifying but the Taiping movement tapped into a lot of latent anti-Qing feeling in Southern China that was especially strong following the humiliation of the First Opium War, plus the idea that the Qing weren't really Chinese since they were Manchu claiming the mandate of heaven, and that loss and subsequent disasters did nothing good for their legitimacy. I'm not an expert in saying why people join mass movements but it's not unheard of for people to join some new hotness because they're angry at the current regime, a bunch of farmers following a preacher is literally how the Mexican war of Independence kicked off.

Also, again massively oversimplifying, in a 14 year period, on top of the Taiping, there was the Durgan Revolt, the Punti-Hakka clan wars, the Nian Rebellion, the White Lotus Rebellion, the Miao rebellion, a few minor rebellions I probably forgot and the Second Opium War. They aren't really allied with each other or the Taiping, per se, and their goals ranged from "TOPPLE THE QING" to "GODDAMN HAKKA GET OFF MY LAND" but combined they were a massive headache to the already overstretched Qing.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 11:17

GotLag: Jul 17, 2005; 食べちゃダメだよ

HEY GUNS posted:

pikes are overrated
https://twitter.com/bellegenerico_/status/1094646279488061441

Actually I think Francis Fukuyama raised some interesting points

# ? Feb 12, 2019 11:32

Chillbro Baggins: Oct 8, 2004; Bad Angus! Bad!

Don Gato posted:

not unheard of for people to join some new hotness because they're angry at the current regime,

isn't that how Bonaparte, Jeff Davis, Sam Houston, and even History's grearest Arshole got their starf?

# ? Feb 12, 2019 11:42

Arban: Aug 28, 2017

C.M. Kruger posted:

Somebody in the Airpower thread posted this the other day which is a nice illustration of the size difference:

And American submariners had ice cream machines, air conditioning, refrigeration and freezers, water distillers, laundry machines and plenty of bunk beds. The galley on a Gato class, according to a list I found, had "two griddles, a deep-fat fryer, two electric ovens, a electric mixer, and a two-gallon coffee urn." From what I can find U-Boats had, at most on the larger boats, three hot plates and two small electric ovens, a small refrigerator, a self-heating soup kettle, and a sink. (a feature like how economy cars will list "AM/FM radio" as a feature)

So imagine that, at the same time you've got Germans in harrowing Das Boot conditions in the Atlantic, there are a bunch of American submariners eating steak with french fries, and a sheet cake afterwards because they got a kill that day.

How many crew did they have? big difference there as well?

# ? Feb 12, 2019 11:49

Combat Theory: Jul 16, 2017

GotLag posted:

I am looking for the German text of a specific quote from Himmler, which I've seen/heard in a few places:
"We are living in an iron time and have to sweep with iron brooms. Everyone has therefore to do his duty without asking his conscience first."

I found a reference in The Holocaust: A New History, given as "Nds. HStAH, Hann. Des. 310 I A, Nr. 35. In English in Noakes and Pridham (eds.), Nazism, vol. 1, p. 76."

Is anyone able to decipher the part of that presumably referring to the German source?

The iron broom is a metaphor that predated the NS regime, but it was a recurring theme within it, to the point of being the name for an Austrian anti Semitic newspaper "Der eiserne Besen"

A quick quote search reveals it has been used by Göring in his speech for his inauguration as Prussias interior minister in 1933, although he used the metaphor to describe "how he will sweep with an iron broom and sweep out all those red and black [political left and the political centrist party] that sit in office to suppress national aspirations"

I'll look a bit further for a specific one you mentioned but it appears the metaphor has been peppered into a plethora of nazi speeches.

Combat Theory fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 12:06

Epicurius: Apr 10, 2010; College Slice

HEY GUNS posted:

pikes are overrated
https://twitter.com/bellegenerico_/status/1094646279488061441

Please, go into more specifics about tank and plane design and performance.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 13:29

feedmegin: Jul 30, 2008

Zudgemud posted:

It was never the horses who were the problem.

Sometimes it was. Some areas are better for raising horses than others; Scotland's cavalry in particular historically sucked because it just isn't good terrain for them.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 13:37

Tias: May 25, 2008; Pictured: the patron saint of internet political arguments (probably)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Bad cav highland, amirite folks :haw:

# ? Feb 12, 2019 14:01

Platystemon: Feb 13, 2012; BREADS

sullat posted:

Japanese sub did shell Oregon once. Didn't have much impact, in part because the gun crews of Ft. Stevens bravely withdrew to the forest so they wouldn't be tempted to fire back and reveal that their coastal defense guns weren't installed properly. They also shelled Los Angeles oil refinery, causing a movie-worthy panic. IIRC the Germans tried to mine the US harbors a couple time as well.

A single submarine‐carried floatplane bombed some trees in Oregon.

The plane was carried by I‐25, the same boat that shelled Fort Stevens.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:06

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

Slim Jim Pickens posted:

The Yuan Dynasty was a Chinese dynasty, but that's not the same thing as thinking Mongols are Chinese people. Mongols are an official ethnic minority of China, they speak a totally unintelligible language from Chinese, nor does written Mongolian use Chinese script. If somebody calls a Mongol a huaren then they're dumbasses or using some idiosyncratic version of the term.

This is all true but Chinese nationalism and propaganda is such that they have to hold onto every irredentist claim they can.

EDIT: You also get stuff like the Northeast Project every now and then that posits even crazier claims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Project_of_the_Chinese_Academy_of_Social_Sciences

I still think this is something they cooked up as a casus belli to invade North Korea if a civil war or something broke there.

RocknRollaAyatollah fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:13

Phanatic: Mar 13, 2007; Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.

Slim Jim Pickens posted:

From what I heard they were just neglected while mothballed and ended up with a host of issues.

Well, they also weren't worth keeping in service for more than a few years, the last one of the class was only in commission for a bit over a year.

I cheerfully admit that doesn't necessarily mean "bad" and could just be another stupid MoD decision.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:19

Fangz: Jul 5, 2007; Oh I see! This must be the Bad Opinion Zone!

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

This is all true but Chinese nationalism and propaganda is such that they have to hold onto every irredentist claim they can.

EDIT: You also get stuff like the Northeast Project every now and then that posits even crazier claims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Project_of_the_Chinese_Academy_of_Social_Sciences

I still think this is something they cooked up as a casus belli to invade North Korea if a civil war or something broke there.

You actually need some evidence other than "chinese people are crazy so any crazy belief I assign to them is true".

If you look at official chinese media it's pretty clear that while they like to take credit for the achievements of the Yuan dynasty, they do recognise the mongols as a foreign invasion. E.g.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/travel/2013-04/18/content_16418174.htm

Huaren means Chinese as an ethnicity, which is somewhat of a vague idea - especially considering that most han chinese have some mongolian ancestory. It doesn't mean "people of Chinese descent born outside of China or descendants of a Chinese diaspora".

Fangz fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:37

LatwPIAT: Jun 6, 2011

Folkmoot: Chieftain Variants Produced in the UK
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

The FV4201 Chieftain tank came in a bewildering number of different models with downright eclectic nomenclature. The exact details seem to belong more to the realm of folklore than fact, and the usual places you'd hit up for a quick reference - say, Wikipedia - are incomplete at best and incorrect at worst. In light of this, FrangibleCover and I have tried to piece together a more coherent picture of the different marks of FV4201 Chieftain.

And frankly it's still incomplete and messy and I kinda wish I could do better...

Chieftain Mk.1 - Mk.5
The initial series of Chieftain tanks, from the Mk.1 prototypes through to the Mk.2, Mk.3, and Mk.5 models were progressive upgrades of the design, each better than the last. They precede most of the efforts to upgrade the vehicles and each mark was a new vehicle rolling out a factory:

Mk.1: 40 Mk1's were made between June 1965 and February 1966. These early vehicles weren't all that great and were used for training or converted into bridge layers.
Mk.2: The Mk.2 is the first of what is truly a Chieftain tank. 318 were built from 1966 onwards and they would continue to serve until the Chieftain left British service. The primary difference from the Mk.1 is a more powerful engine and drivetrain and a new commander's cupola.
Mk.1/1: Ideally, a training vehicle should prepare the driver for the tank he'll actually be driving. The Mk.1s were therefore converted to the Mk.1/1, which had the engine and drivetrain from the Mk.2
Mk.1/2: To further improve the value of the Mk.1/1 as a training vehicle, some were essentially converted all the way to Mk.2s, but kept for training purposes.
Mk.3: The "second" Chieftain mark is the Mk.3, which has a number of incremental upgrades, including a more powerful engine, a new parking brake, and a new IR light system. 152 were built.
Mk.3(G): Six Mk.3s were made with a system that allowed the engine to draw air through the turret. The engine also received a more efficient air filter. While the Mk.3(G)s entered service, they were essentially prototypes for later marks.
Mk.3/2: ...like the Mk.3/2, which was a Mk.3(G) with modifications to the electrical system. Even fewer Mk.3/2s were made, as they were essentially prototypes for the...
Mk.3(S): The Mk.3(S) is a Mk.3 with a new engine and the G and /2 modifications. This one saw some significant production, at 40 built.
Mk.3/3: In British service the Mk.3/3 was as we shall see considered as distinct from the Mk.3 as the Mk.3 was from the Mk3. It's essentially the "third" Chieftain mark. However, the actual changes from the Mk.3(S) are slight: the 3/3 has a new NBC filter.
Mk.3/3P: 707 Mk.3/3s were built for and sold to Iran starting in 1971. These were designated Mk.3/3P - P for Persia.
Mk.4: A "fourth" mark of Chieftain was in the works and a prototype series of two Mk.4s was made. A decision was made not to produce the Mk.4 and instead pursue a slightly more ambitious project to ensure the numbering scheme made no sense. Unlike the G and /2, these didn't see any service with troops.
Mk.5: The Mk.5 is the "fourth" mark of Chieftain and set a new standard for what the Chieftain was. There's a variety of modifications, from a welded edge around the infantry telephone box to the new 9-dot sight and, yes, a new engine. You can read more about the 9-dot sight and its accessories in Part 1 by Frangible.
Mk.5P: Iran bought 187 Mk.5s, known as the Mk.5P.
Mk.5/2K Kuwait had leased a number of Chieftains and liked them enough to both buy the ones they'd leased and place an order for 152 more. These additional Chieftains were Mk.5s, named Mk.5/2K for Kuwait.

From Pamphlet No.33 - Chieftain, a 1980 handbook by the British Army for Chieftain crews.

Exercise TOTEM POLE
With the Mk.5 bringing increased firepower and mobility with a new sight and engine, the British Army launched an effort to upgrade all previous Chieftains to the new standard in the latter half of the 1970s. This was given the name TOTEM POLE and comprised three progressive stages:

X: Retrofitting the 9-dot sight and accessories to older marks;
Y: Retrofitting the Mk.3(G)'s breathing turret and low-loss air cleaner, as well as new sight mountings to older marks;
Z: Retrofitting the Mk.5's engine and NBC system to older marks. Probably nearly all complete by 1977.

(I've seen sources claim that these upgrades could be applied in any order, but from Pamphlet No.33 the Z upgrade clearly never preceded the Y upgrade and no suggestion is made that you could have a Y that didn't also have X.)

Instead of a single major refit, tanks would receive smaller refits of each stage over time. I can't confirm but I strongly suspect that this was done as part of regular maintenance at REME depots to keep the tanks available to units while still going through with the upgrades.

This gives rise to the following marks:
Mk.1/3: A 1/1 with the new automotive components, so the driver trains on a vehicle similar to the one he'll actually end up using.
Mk.1/4: A 1/2 with the new automotive components.
Anything-X: A tank that has gone through the X-stage of TOTEM POLE. E.g. Mk.2(X), Mk.3(SX), etc.
Anything-Y: Possibly also styled as XY. A tank that has gone through the X and Y stages of TOTEM POLE. E.g. Mk.2(Y), Mk.3(SY), etc.
Mk.6: The Chieftain Mk.6 is a Mk.2 that's gone through stages X, Y, and Z of Exercise TOTEM POLE.
Mk.7: The Chieftain Mk.7 is a Mk.3, Mk.3(G), Mk.3/2, or Mk.3(S) that has gone through stages X, Y, and Z of Exercise TOTEM POLE.
Mk.8: The Chieftain Mk.8 is a Mk.3/3 that has gone through stages X, Y, and Z of Exercise TOTEM POLE.

This consolidates the bewildering number of Chieftain marks into a much smaller number: Mk.1/3 and Mk.1/4 and Mk.5 through Mk.8.

However...

Fire Control
While TOTEM POLE is ongoing, the British Army is also seeking to further upgrade the fire control systems of their Chieftains to be slightly more modern. They do this as a programme called "F-C" which comprises three (but, really, five) phases:

Unnamed stage: First, tanks were fitted with for but not with the Tank Laser Sight. This could happen to any tank that had gone through TOTEM POLE stage Y.
F-C Phase 1 Stage 1: Fitting the Tank Laser Sight and modifying the tank to receive the Muzzle Reference Sensor but not actually fitting the MRS.
F-C Phase 1 Stage 2: Fitting the Muzzle Reference Sensor and removing the ranging machine gun.
F-C Phase 2: Fitting the Improved Fire Control System and making some minor improvements to the cupola. This could happen to any tank that had gone through TOTEM POLE stage Z.
Improved KE Round: Really two stages: first, fitting a new sight graticule for the new APFSDS round, then, modifying the ammo storage to be able to actually hold the new APFSDS.
F-C Phase 3: Installing new night sights.

The TLS and IFCS are described in Part 2 by Frangible, the MRS is described in Part 3.

This gives rise to the following marks:
Anything/L: A tank that has gone through stage Y of TOTEM POLE and has been fitted for but not with the TLS. This can be either a pre-Z tank or a post-Z tank. For example, a Mk.3(G)/L would become a Mk.7/L upon going through stage Z, but you could also go straight to Mk.7/L from a Mk.7.
Anything/1: A tank that has gone through stage Y of TOTEM POLE and F-C Phase 1 Stage 1 and has been fitted with the TLS and for but not with the MRS. E.g. Mk.3(G)/1 or Mk.7/1.
Anything/2: A tank that has gone through stage Y of TOTEM POLE and F-C Phase 1 Stage 2 and has been fitted with the TLS and MRS. E.g. Mk.3(G)/2 or Mk.7/2.
Anything/3: A Mk.5, 6, 7, or 8 that has gone through F-C Phase 2 and has been fitted with the TLS, MRS, and IFCS. E.g. Mk.5/3 or Mk.7/3.
Anything/4: A Mk.5 through Mk.8 that has received the sight graticule and storage for the new APFSDS round.
Mk.9: A Mk.5 through Mk.8 that has gone through F-C Phase 3 and been fitted with new night sights.

Some confusion exists regarding the last part: some sources claim that the Mk.9 through Mk.12 were for the Mk.6, 7, 8, and 5 respectively, while other sources claim that Mk.9 through Mk.11 were progressive upgrades. Even Pamphlet No.33 predicts that, in the future, Mk.6s will become Mk.9s and Mk.5s will become Mk.12s. However, by searching the vehicle histories of a variety of hull numbers, I've found a number of Mk.2 hulls that ended their service as Mk.10s, so clearly the Mk.10 is not exclusively for the Mk.7 with new sights.

In short, it seems more likely that Mk.5 through Mk.8 were consolidated as the Mk.9 upon receiving the new night sights, for convenience.

Which leaves us with Mk.1/3, Mk.1/4, and Mk.9.

However...

Dark Morn, Sundance, and Clansman
While TOTEM POLE and F-C are ongoing, the British Army launch several programmes to upgrade their Chieftains. These include:

Exercise DARK MORN: A June 1977 project to upgrade the Chieftains with the new Mk.9A engine.
Exercise SUNDANCE: A March 1978 project to upgrade the Chieftains with the new Mk.11A and Mk.12A engines.
Clansman Radios: In this period the Chieftains were also upgraded with harnesses for the new Clansman radio.

DARK MORN and SUNDANCE seem to have been quick, fleetwide upgrades and modified tanks don't appear to have received new names. The engine upgrade isn't even mentioned in Pamphlet No.33, which frankly surprises me. The harnesses for the Clansman radios were more sporadic, and tanks fitted for them were given a 'C' at the end of their designation. E.g. Mk.3(G)/LC, Mk.5/3C, Mk.9C.

Stillbrew and TOGS
We're nearly at the end!

The British Chieftains received two additional major upgrades during their service. The first was the Stillbrew armour package, which adds a significant lump of steel to the nose of the turret, giving a distinctive bridge over the barrel. This was fitted to tanks going in for maintenance at REME depots in Germany. Some tanks would also receive the Thermal Observation Gunnery Sight (TOGS), a thermal sight integrated with the IFCS.

This gives rise to two additional marks:
Mk.10: Mk.9 with Stillbrew applique armour on the turret and in front of the turret ring.
Mk.11: Mk.10 with TOGS.

Early model Chieftain, for comparison

Chieftain Mk.11. You can't really see the TOGS from here, so it's very close to a Mk.10. Note the huge blocks of armour under the turret nose.

Chieftain Mk.11. From this angle you can see the lens of the TOGS on the left side of the turret. Earlier marks would have an IR spotlight in this position. Also compare the Stillbrew shape on the left side of the turret with the right side in the previous photo.

Odds And Ends
Mk.12: A Mk.12 is occasionally mentioned. Originally this was supposed to be the name for Mk.5s with the improved night sights, but those ended up named Mk.9. It also appears that "Mk.12" might have been a planned upgrade of the Mk.11 with components from the Challenger (most likely the ICSS fire control system) but that's basically hearsay and speculation.
Mk.13: The name crops up from time to time in lists of (unbuilt) Chieftain marks. That's about all anyone knows about it as far as I can tell.
Qayd Al Ardh: Oman bought a number of British Chieftains and also ordered fifteen new vehicles for delivery in 1984-1985 (which is when the Chieftain production lines closed down). According to Chieftain Main Battle Tank 1965�2003 these were called "Chieftain Mk.15" by the British and Qayd Al Ardh by Oman.

Summary:
There's a lot of marks and they're confusingly named. If you want a full overview I've tried to combine it all in this unwieldly graph: Google Sheets link.

LatwPIAT fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:39

Cessna: Feb 20, 2013; KHABAHBLOOOM

Phanatic posted:

It is indeed for reloads. It's two more you can carry otherwise. A number of U-boats carried torpedoes externally as well.

Do you have a reference for US submarines carrying external reloads on patrol?

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:50

P-Mack: Nov 10, 2007

Tias posted:

So, how did the Taiping rebellion spread so to so many people? I've read your excellent posts on the conflict, but I never really got a handle on why they were so effective. I'm guessing wildly here, but did it have something to do with the Manchu dynasty being bad at government? I recently heard (in a podcast about taoism, weirdly enough) that there were actually co-belligerents against the Manchu, like the "turban rebels" and "sword societies", can you elaborate on that?

Thanks in advance!

The Manchu government was pretty bad at government, but that largely came down to money. The nominal tax rates had been frozen in the 18th century and not adjusted for inflation. The military successes of prior emperors had added a lot of territory but garrisoning the new periphery was a fiscal drain on the central government. Massive, massive amounts of corruption caused vast fortunes to just vanish from the treasury. The defeat in the first opium war was a final shock to the system, and the sudden and chaotic demobilization left soldiers stranded in Guangxi and Guangdong where they turned to banditry.

The Manchu government was also not that extensive. The number of real, exam passing officials was tiny compared to what they were supposed to administer. So there was a lot of reliance on local communities to manage their own affairs, which enabled things to lurch along in peacetime, but also meant imperial control could vanish in a heartbeat if the big boss of bumfuck village decided to throw in with the rebels.

But the biggest problem for Manchu government is that they were Manchu. There was a lot of ethnic resentment and this manifested in secret societies like the Tiandihui that were nominally dedicated to restoring the Ming. The Manchu garrison stipends hadn't kept up with the times, and they were impoverished and ineffective as warriors, but still an obnoxious drain from the perspective of Han taxpayers. The Qing tried to create an overarching Chinese identity that tied Han, Manchu, Mongol etc together but it hadn't really stuck.

So when the Taiping have their initial success, due to their own discipline and the incompetence of the provincial armies, it throws the floodgates open for everyone else to either join them directly or act on their own. These cobelligerant rebellions were often based on secret societies as the case of the Red Turbans in Guangdong or the Small Swords in Shanghai. While often steeped in daoist mysticism they seemingly had little trouble working with the iconoclastic Taiping against the common enemy.

The biggest rebel group outside the Taiping was probably the Nian operating between the Yangtze and Yellow rivers, which was largely a confederation of local powerholders/bandit lords which snowballed into a full fledged army in the chaos resulting from the Yellow River floods.

While that's happening in the heartland, the periphery starts falling apart as tensions between Han and minority groups get out of control and the imperial government has nothing to spare to nip things in the bud. So you get huge rebellions, largely started in self defense, by Muslims in Yunnan and Shanxi, and the Miao in Guizhou.

The Mongols, while we're talking about them, are one group that pretty much stays loyal through the whole thing.

Phone posting but hopefully that gives you a general idea.

# ? Feb 12, 2019 15:59

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

Fangz posted:

You actually need some evidence other than "chinese people are crazy so any crazy belief I assign to them is true".

If you look at official chinese media it's pretty clear that while they like to take credit for the achievements of the Yuan dynasty, they do recognise the mongols as a foreign invasion. E.g.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/travel/2013-04/18/content_16418174.htm

It is not crazy to say that China, as a state, claims that anywhere there was a trade post or outpost of some kind is an integral part of China and that to claim otherwise is a threat to Chinese sovereignty. The island disputes and the nine dotted line, which was literally just arbitrarily drawn on a map by an RoC official, are a perfect example of it. Also, Han doesn't equal Chinese so to claim that an ethnic group, that was able to gain independence from China at a point of national weakness and had their sovereignty enforced and recognized by the USSR, is considered Chinese is not crazy. The PRC no longer pursues reunification for that reason but the RoC does, but that's mostly because I don't think anyone is handling that part of foreign policy for obvious reasons.

I don't want to get in a slap match over what Chinese nationalists believe but China Daily is not made for domestic consumption. It's a foreign facing English periodical.

EDIT: Most of this by the way is an outcropping of the legacy of Zhonghua Minzu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhonghua_minzu).

RocknRollaAyatollah fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 16:04

ContinuityNewTimes: Dec 30, 2010; Я выдуман напрочь

I would not join the Small Swords rebellion

# ? Feb 12, 2019 16:07

Fangz: Jul 5, 2007; Oh I see! This must be the Bad Opinion Zone!

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

It is not crazy to say that China, as a state, claims that anywhere there was a trade post or outpost of some kind is an integral part of China and that to claim otherwise is a threat to Chinese sovereignty. The island disputes and the nine dotted line, which was literally just arbitrarily drawn on a map by an RoC official, are a perfect example of it. Also, Han doesn't equal Chinese so to claim that an ethnic group, that was able to gain independence from China at a point of national weakness and had their sovereignty enforced and recognized by the USSR, is considered Chinese is not crazy. The PRC no longer pursues reunification for that reason but the RoC does, but that's mostly because I don't think anyone is handling that part of foreign policy for obvious reasons.

I don't want to get in a slap match over what Chinese nationalists believe but China Daily is not made for domestic consumption. It's a foreign facing English periodical.

EDIT: Most of this by the way is an outcropping of the legacy of Zhonghua Minzu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhonghua_minzu).

I'm not calling you crazy. I'm saying that your essential argument is that "chinese people are dumb so everything I say they believe (as a mainstream belief) must be correct". Show some evidence.

The territorial disputes issue about the various islands connect a lot more to China grousing over non-participation in post-WWII discussions and the way that connects to the historical sense of Chinese humiliation at the hands of the west.

Fangz fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Feb 12, 2019

# ? Feb 12, 2019 16:30

Phanatic: Mar 13, 2007; Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.