English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

As I am studying the Battle of Hong Kong,I have come to the conclusion that there was not enough troops,the Shing Mun Redoubt was a piece of stupidity,12 Acres for a trench line is not enough for defending Kowloon and as well sending unexperienced fighting units mean death as well.This really shows flaws of errors made during the battle.To be honest i believe most units at that time were not ready for house to house or street fights.For the Battle of Hong Kong to be in the favour of the Allies,I believe more troops would be needed and a effective line of supply and also naval units and air force as well.A Army without sufficent equipment is bound to lose

2007-08-11 17:24:15 · 4 answers · asked by alex_von_ho 2 in Politics & Government Military

4 answers

If there are enough troops in any battle, it can be won; look at the majority of the Soviets battle in WWII. They werent great Generals and Soldiers, they just threw more and more men at the enemy until they were overrun.

The Battle of Hong Kong wasnt planned well or executed well, more troops would have helped; but they could have pulled it off w/ better planning and preparation. (Like you stated, Naval and Air Support and something else besides a little trench)

2007-08-11 17:34:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Not much point of defending when your main artillery postions could only fire out to sea, the defence lines from the Jungle side were inadequate for defence, the island was surrounded and the japanese only would have to starve them out.

2007-08-12 00:25:16 · answer #2 · answered by conranger1 7 · 1 0

If there's enough...well, they should be driving back the Japanese to JApan.

Kind regards....

2007-08-12 00:21:52 · answer #3 · answered by HK Insider 3 · 1 0

Hi,

Hong Kong would have held out about one week .
rgds.............

2007-08-11 17:33:40 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers