This is a theory I saw on a certain video platform recently. A Chinese Manchu writer mentioned a theory in an interview. He believes that there is a limit to human killing. After reaching that limit, people will feel tired of killing, or even fear it!
In the interview, we can see that this writer used the War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea as an example, pointing out that the Ninth Corps of the Chinese Volunteer Army surrounded two regiments of the U.S. Navy. During the battle, our two regiments took turns attacking the U.S. Army. Since there were too many of our volunteers, both regiments mounted machine guns and opened fire directly on the crowd!
After the large-scale shooting, one of the US machine gunners did not want to fight, because he found that his hands were weak at the end of the shooting, but his eyes were still rushing towards them like a tide, and they continued to attack! The US military believes that this war can no longer be fought because it is simply massacre and not a battle at all!
Listen to the implication of this writer. On the one hand, it is an American soldier who suddenly had an epiphany during the war and thought that his killing was too heavy, so he did not want to fight! But this theory is simply not true. If Americans had had such a consciousness back then, they would not have continued to provoke regional disputes in many parts of the world from that year until today, and even launched proxy wars, causing more people to bleed to death and get involved in the war machine! With so many losses of people and property, I wonder why no one in the United States suddenly had a conscience and stood up and said that the war should not be launched?
On the other hand, what this writer means is that our volunteer army was so large back then that they only knew how to use the human wave tactic! This statement is also pure nonsense. Our infantry has its own set of fighting methods during the attack, such as three-three system . These are all experiences summed up from the war of blood and fire. When fighting, our army will not blindly rely on large numbers to send others to machine guns!
But what I didn’t expect is that there are many people below this video who agree with this writer’s statement! In the author's opinion, this is simply nonsense. In war, either you die or I die. Kindness to the enemy is cruelty to yourself! Both we and the Americans have a deep understanding of this after experiencing wars for many years! Many soldiers in the Volunteer Army at that time had experienced the Anti-Japanese War and the War of Liberation, and came out of the battlefields of blood and fire. They were at the pinnacle of infantry in terms of combat experience and tactical skills, and they would not kill the opponent at all!
The same was true for the American soldiers back then. Many American troops had experienced the baptism of World War II! When two such armies meet, one side actually wants to end the war because the killing is too heavy. Even a three-year-old child may not believe this!
According to this writer, the Korean War was a war that ended because the Americans felt that the killing was too heavy and finally did not want to fight. This was not in line with the actual situation at that time! On the Korean battlefield that year, the United States and their so-called coalition forces had already thought about all other conventional weapons except the atomic bomb. In the end, it was discovered that we were still unable to defeat us, and the negotiations did not happen overnight. It took a long time to talk and fight. In the end, the Americans had no choice but to temporarily end the war! To put it more bluntly, our military uses its strength to force the Americans to the negotiating table and let them sit down and negotiate with us calmly!
China has experienced peace for decades. In the minds of some so-called elites, perhaps war is just like a game. Personally, I feel that this kind of brainless and lack of historical basis is actually an insult to our ancestors! I don’t know if everyone agrees with this point of view?
