Why did no European nation ever grab land in China during the

The British tried to take Tibet and the qing intervened. The Russians tried too but the qing held them at bay. Japs and Russians also fought over China too. Other countries didn't have enough logistics to keep an area.

Also taiwan, HK.

>>668162
>the qing
>the qing
Yes, that's why I mentioned the civil war and the warlord period. I understand that a stable government would never allow a foreign power within it's borders. I'm talking about the decades-long period of civil strife that followed it's collapse. Also:
>russo-japanese war
>fucking qing again
did you read my post?
>taiwan, hk
the enclaves i mentioned, yes.

Great job. You barely read the first sentence before replying. May as well have said "FURST" while you were at it.

>>668144
Wasn't worth the hassle considering most of the warlords still continued trade with the European powers from before, even with the chaos in the country, more countries just ended up with spheres of economic influence, Britain in the Guangxi and Guandong cliques, and tibet for example, the Russians in Mongolia, and of course the closest to a proper land grab being the Japanese packing of the Fentigen Clique, before their eventual invasion of it in 1931, and replacement of it with their own puppet state

>>668144
What was Shanghai, port arthur, the Japanese wars in China?

>>668187
I mentioned the Japanese wars in China. Japan is not a European power. I also mentioned the various port enclaves that the European powers possessed when I said "footholds". These could easily have been launch pads for full-scale colonization after the fall of the empire.

>>668192
China marines.

Europe is a concept m80

>>668187
>What was Shanghai, port arthur, the Japanese wars in China?

All Pre-Civil war, except the 1931 invasion of Manchuria and the Second Sino-Japanese war, Port Arthur was a Russian possession at the time, and part of a Japanese-Russian conflict

>>668193
The fuck is this post even trying to communicate.

Because it was right after ww1 and the europeans were busy rebuilding their own country, Plus the had treaties and so forth that limited their own mobility

>>668192
>These could easily have been launch pads for full-scale colonization after the fall of the empire.
Why? Colonization is about securing markets and resources. The warlords are already giving you those things more cheaply than actually occupying the land. Why would you colonize it?

>>668206
The qing dynasty was in full collapse in 1912, two years before ww1 even started. It would remain in this state throughout the 20s, 30s, and 40s.

>>668144
it's because a huge part of western China is covered by desolate useless land, such as the mostly high deserts of Tibet and the Gobi desert, everything else is pretty much the Stepp which is just useless grassland that is pointless to till, if you try and conquer any inner state in China you're going to be neck deep in chinks no matter what and have a multi thousand mile supply line, it simply would not be feasible pre-automobile

>>668144

They were too advanced. Its difficult to take land from spear throwing africans. Its nearly impossible to take it from anyone more advanced. It took the British centuries to take India.

Easier to trade.

>>668211
>useless land
>pointless to till
Are you implying that agriculture was ever a motive for colonization? Is this some new /his/ meme?

File: Chinese Landscape.jpg (952KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

952KB, 1024x768px

>>668144
>Why did no European nation ever grab land in China during the civil war?
Because compared to India and aboogaboo Africans, China does have a cohesive (pre-nation state) identity that is harder to break up and play against each other.

And believe me, Europe tried.
>Ok lets control teh Emperor
Chinese: PUPPET EMPEROR! LOSS OF MANDATE OF HEAVEN! REVOLT!
alongside
MUH MODERN CONCEPTION OF A CHINESE NATION.
>Ok, lets prop up some of the warlords instead.
Chinese soldiers in Warlord Armies: WESTERN GOONS! And then they fight each other and kill off military advisors/Western/Japanese nationals whenever they found them.

Hell a big reason for the loss of Chiang Kai-Shek to Mao was that Chiang did not manage to shake off the image (unwarranted or not) of being an American Pawn.

The only successful partition of Chinese identity was pretty much Hong Kong/Taiwan. And this took a century + China turning into an anti-traditional commie to happen.

This wasn't like in India or in Africa where a Princeling can be made happy and subjugated once you promise him support against his enemies. This happened to the Warlords too but its soldiers expected that Western support fuck off once they won.

Also one of the big impetus for why the SIno-Soviet Split Happened: PRC did not like being dictated by USSR and in essence, look like a puppet government to its people, destroying its tenuous hold on legitimacy in a time after the failure of the Great Leap Forward.

>>668224
not really, i'm simply implying that the land is mostly desolate empty land and pointless to divert resources to conquer also a natural barrier

i'm not sure what you're on about with colonization you could never establish a successful colony without rich land anyway

Because they were all busy scrambling to claim territory in Africa which was geographically more accessible relative to Europe than China. Colonies in China would have required circumvention of the globe westward from Europe or moving armies thru Russia or the Mid East.

I dunno why Russia didn't try invading. Maybe they took their roll as peacekeeper in the League of Nations seriously at the time. Or maybe having recently come out of their own civil war and revolution they were busy consolidating power.
I don't really know why Japan didn't take on China, perhaps they were more interested in investing toward being less agrarian economy.

>>668305
>I don't really know why Japan didn't take on China
>I don't really know why Japan didn't take on China
>I don't really know why Japan didn't take on China

>>668258
Nothing exists under the land. Everybody knows that. Just dirt right to the core.

>>668305
> why Russia didn't try invading
Russia tried to invade Japan and see how well it was. War in East Asia is logistical nightmare for Russia.

>>668246
So the tl;dr is that china was never colonized because they're racist?

>>668984
Its not racist to not accept foreign rule m8. Literally everyone does that.

>>669010
But the anon said that not literally everyone does that. That was his primary point.

>>668305
>I dunno why Russia didn't try invading.
Oh, for a billion reasons:
A) Russia lost its previous Chinese possessions to Japan and it was uncertain they could hold onto any new ones, especially since Japan was fully in control of the Chinese Seas and much of the Pacific by that point. That plus Korea and Manchuria gave the Japanese an enormous advantage in logistics.
B) They were busy consolidating their hold on central Asia and Mongolia, which was more defensible.
C) They were still in the middle of a revolution and civil war themselves in that period. The Japanese were propping up White Russians in the East, even past 1920.
D) The nationalist government in China and quite a few warlords were initially pro-Japanese and anti-Western.
E) Russia was always more interested in the European theater, and by the 30s Germany became an enormous concern.

They did pretty good repelling Japanese advances into Mongolia, that's more than everyone even expected.