Chin VS Greece

as in being more drunk meaning more brave?

i'm physically not in hk however.

�this again?! uh no�

LOL, I know�

 

Hhmmmm, this is a tough one�

I gess I'll go with the Greeks military power�did you ever heard of 300 Spartans that hold back I think 30,000 Persians or more, and killed thousands of them�is gotten tell you something about Greek military�

I think the Greeks would win , because in the history of Alexander, there were no sign of him stopping to conquer (that�s if the men wanted more) and not to mention such experienced soldiers he had, experienced soldiers can make a big difference in war�I mean, they almost faced everything out there�

So I�ll say Is that Alexander has a big advantage. And I think he has such a better chance of winning�but if they invaded Greece, I think the Greeks will definitely win on this�

Edited by Praetorian

have u ever heard of the battle of chi bi where liu bei and wu joint forced slaughter cao cao's northern army of 830,000 with 50,000 soldiers?

both sides had various types of military experts acompanying the campaign. ancient china was diverse enough to have anyone or everything they wanted in their military forces.

greece was also technologically less advanced. i would say their calvary units would get slaughtered by long-range crossbows and fire arrows.

sure, there were more than 1000 battles during the spring and autumn warring state periods where forces with much fewer people slaughtered forces with more soldiers.

i was just trying to give an example. the battle of chi bi was a famous one.

some examples:

5th century bc, a wu army of 100,000 soldiers under wu zhi shui defeated a chu army of 3,000,000. a wu army of 3,000 defeated a wei army of 35,000. etc... 

I think this argument is unjust to compare because the technologies used between the two is not the same.  The Chin is technologically superior.  Superior because they existed 100 years or so after Alexander.  Unfair to compare was far as weapons and armor is concern. 

Yes, I read about Alexander's exploits.  I think those casualities numbers that credits Alexander's victories are hard to swallow.  Remember, history is written by the victorious, not the losers.  However yes, I have to say he is probably one of the greatest conqueror (with Genghis Khan with a slight edge).  But this argument is about who would win.  Not about which general is better.

I see this argument only on the basis of tactics.  Getting back to the argument, I just don't see that Phalanx being able to handle rough uneven terrain.  Mobility & speed is king.  Greek calvary is good, but compared to Asian counterparts, I have my doubts.  The tactics used by the Mongols, Huns, & even the Chin (because they had to fight the Huns) would be better (not superior) compared to the Greeks.  However, on the same token, the Greek infantry would be better (not superior) to the Chin.  Chin would win on Archer and Archery tactics.

As far as how the Greeks or Alexander conquerored half of the known world, I believe it had to do with Alexanders brillant & reckless tactics, the Persians incompentence and their inability to deal with the Phalanx.  When I think about it, (just my humble opinion) the Phalanx would be the most important part of the Greeks conquest.

"The tactics used by the Mongols, Huns, & even the Chin (because they had to fight the Huns) would be better (not superior) compared to the Greeks.  However, on the same token, the Greek infantry would be better (not superior) to the Chin.  Chin would win on Archer and Archery tactics."

I don't know. Chin is an oddball compared to the other Warring states. Its ranged military sucked compared to the warring states, but its infantry and calvary rocked.

Sun bin vs Alexander...hmmm don't know in a battle but just in a 1vs1 fight, then Alexander will win because Sun bin's missing a kneecap.

I will have to read through the posts here but there was an Arab army who defeated a Chinese army around 750 AD.

Question I want to bring up!!

Early Shang dynasty- Did Indo European nomads bring the art of metallurgy, the wheel and the horse to the Chinese?
Historian and archaeologist Colin Renfrew theorized about this possibility!!

But, even if they had the Chinese made great improvements to these innovations, while the nomads stayed barbarians.

and the battle was fought in central asia while there was rebellion in china proper.

it would've been impossible for them to defeat a tang force before an lushan rebellion even if it was fought very far away from china proper.

arab defeating chinese forces in central asia when china was in turmoil is like chinese defeating arab forces in china when arabic was in turmoil.

Concerning the Battle of Talas, basically the Tang Army was outnumbered because a Tang ally switched sides.  If memory serves me right, I believe even if that ally remained loyal, the Tang Army will still be outnumbered.

Of course, it is not the main reason why they lost, but it is a important reason.