Who is Wang Zhengxing? Of course it's me.
I wrote this article five times, deleted four times, I really don't want to post, a fool, actually want me to write a special article, when did I drop to this extent. Until the exact news was obtained in the afternoon, it would not be possible to update the article normally until July 9, so I decided to send it, anyway, idle is idle.
Many readers forwarded to me articles that others hated me. Recently, there have been many such things, and they are in the midst of criticism by many big names in military circles.
Some people say you should respond or it will affect your reputation.
If you attach too much importance to it, it will be like the ancients said: the one who is a widow is easy to fold, and the one who is a bright one is easy to be polluted.
People are always improving, and I have always had the best reputation. But after entering 2021, I have changed, and my name is something. A few days ago, I talked to Professor Jiang Lin again, and my feelings were even deeper. Professor Jiang is a titan figure in China's tactical science, and there are several people in the outside world who know him, and what he cares about. Those who often show their faces, can their level really match him? I see, huh.
I am satisfied with this, and it is not an easy task to let go of the temptation of huge economic interests. I have been confused by economic interests in the past few years, otherwise the manuscripts of several books would have been completed long ago. Look at Professor Jiang, a man in his 60s, still immersed in research, he said that he was writing a "Brief History of the Battle", and I was a giggle in my heart as soon as I heard it, why? The so-called "A Brief History of the Campaign" is actually the reading notes of the book "Introduction to campaign science". At the beginning, Professor Jiang's "Introduction to Tactics" also had reading notes, with a word count of 1 million words, more than the manuscript, and later became a book "A Brief History of Tactics". So he said he was working on a brief history of the battle, which meant that it was another million words of reading notes. Look at me, I know that I make money by writing articles in the self-media, and I don't have the heart to complete the book manuscript. So I'm more satisfied with this year's personal transformation.
This is one.
Second, I have already made this topic very clear. People with a normal level of reading comprehension naturally know that I am right, to intimidate me that it is purely IQ and reading comprehension ability. There is no need to repeat a knowledge point that has been made very clear. Aesthetic fatigue, reading will also have fatigue. Readers don't like to read the same topic over and over again. I have countless knowledge points that no one has ever talked about before, so why should I talk about repetitive knowledge?
Third, to talk to those people is to talk to chickens and ducks.
I have offended many people, and many readers always say that what I have offended is public knowledge. Wrong, I offended the so-called leftists, who are basically the so-called bigwigs and veteran military fans in the so-called military circles. In fact, it is my own fans, these people have been my fans, and many people are still lurking. This is also a more interesting thing, on the one hand, I hate my teeth, on the other hand, I have read my articles for four years, and I refuse to leave. Hate me so much, what are you doing here?
Now it's the fan economy, their fans are offended, isn't it a brain show funny.
Without him, the Tao is different and does not conspire.
They thought I was too arrogant and arrogant, and yes, I was very arrogant in front of them.
The arrogant are ignorant, and the ignorant are fearless. They think I'm arrogant, so naturally I'm an ignorant person. I deeply understand this, and when I read the book every day and see new knowledge about the Korean War, I feel my own smallness and ignorance.
I hate arrogant and ignorant people the most, like myself. I hate myself, so naturally these people are even more hated by me.
By our Chinese standards, the mistake is definitely mine. At the beginning, people wanted to make friends with me, as the identity of the "senior boss" to "fold the knots", but I ignored it. China, the most exquisite circle, I have not mixed with the network of military circles, through the contact in recent years, I learned that basically those who mixed military forums before, think that the military is a big winner, one is more crazy than the other, but also self-righteous, do not know how to pretend to understand, there are mistakes do not recognize, export into dirty. In fact, those who were relatively high-level in the mixed military forums at that time are basically franchised authors of this number. Yan Kefu, Forgetful, Zhuo Chaoyang and so on. Unfortunately, Yan Kefu put me and his chat records in the article, and he didn't want to offend on both sides, so he was angry, so he was not here now. This incident also taught me a lesson, and from then on I will post chat logs, either erased my name or asked for advice.
Although I thought I was arrogant, I felt frightened when I saw them. And they also have the biggest ills of the people in the circle, pulling gangs, touting each other, and excluding others.
Last time I said that Shuangshi was so touted to me at the beginning: "This is an expert in the study of the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea, Teacher Wang." Expert is now a derogatory term, so I emphasize being an expert. ”
Of course, I am well aware of the importance of the circle, but I am a person with psychological purity and do not like to associate with such people. In my mouth, I rarely hear words of praise for others. What's more, I don't have time to brag with them and talk to each other. I am only interested in one kind of person, and that is the person who gives me knowledge, then I will change my face and become polite.
I've said before that there are thousands of people who add me to WeChat, and for the vast majority of people, I haven't even replied, and some of them are indignant about it. I'm not a waiter at a restaurant, and I won't run over you when you say hello. I didn't have time, I was so busy that I couldn't read the books I wanted to read. Therefore, in order to avoid offending people in this regard, I have not added WeChat for a long time, except for the following three situations: one is to give me knowledge, all kinds of information; second, the children of the volunteer army, want to know the specific coordinates of the place where the elders sacrificed or fought, this matter I will take time no matter how busy I am; the third is that I have something to find someone to help.
People are not the same, I don't like to offend people, but some people think that I snubble him, not that he harasses me.
The reason is very simple, do you want to read the article? I'm dealing with conversations all day, and I don't have anything to do.
In fact, ordinary readers are a little better, most people can understand, that is, these so-called military circle bigwigs, senior military fans, their brain circuits are different from others. Because I think of myself as a character, I feel very neglected. For example, the following figure.
I don't want to go to dinner, okay? Not going to dinner is looking down on him? After I didn't go to dinner, this big coffee went around saying bad things about me.
I don't want to deal with people who don't speak honestly, okay? If I don't make friends with him, I'm going to blackmail me and say bad things about me everywhere?
And so on, I don't want to socialize, I have my business, I don't have enough time, okay?
Coupled with the fact that I like to "criticize people", they feel that I like to step on others. In particular, after hating me, he went around making rumors that I wrote critical articles in order to step on people's positions. I'm really sorry, these people don't add up to my fame, I don't know much, there is nothing worth stepping on, stepping on them can't lift me up. So why do I criticize people all day? I'm sorry, but I'm not criticizing people, but correcting all kinds of mistakes.
Many of us in China are like this, unable to stand criticism, making things up on our own, being pointed out by others, not reflecting on mistakes, but thinking that others cannot get along with him. Last time I mentioned "Attack on The Bear Daddy" in the article, I didn't criticize him, people's glass hearts can't stand it, and they came to leave a message to make a big fuss. I replied: The hatchlings of the husband and fly in the South China Sea, not the sycamore, not the practice, not the food, not the liquan spring. So the bird got rotten rats, and the birds passed, and looked up: "Scared! ”
In this regard, let me ask you the simplest question: Do you like to look at the real history, or do you like to look at the things that are made up? Many of the mistakes we are currently circulating about the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea were actually created by these big men in the military circles. I also don't have time to deliberately correct it, and I correct it wherever it is written in the manuscript.
However, for these so-called military circles, I have offended them deeply, and many people hate me with itchy teeth. People think that they are big men in the military circle and real military fans, and I, a newcomer to the Later Jin Dynasty, have broken down, and I have not given face, and I actually want to criticize, can I hate.
However, your level of knowledge does not make me feel the urge to communicate with you. I, a person who loves knowledge, who will not hesitate to make a big fuss about a book, cannot produce such an impulse, and you can imagine your level.
Then in response to the recent criticism of me, these two articles that made these military leaders extremely excited, these two articles made them as excited as if they had picked up treasure. I said it one last time, and this is the last time I respond to such a low-level article, time precious and wasted. In the future, there will be articles that scare me, and I will not reply. Once the reply is received, either the rumor is excessive or the level of the article is in place. But, after a while, I don't hold out hope. I have read countless books and articles related to the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea, and in our country, Yan Kefu has a few articles that make my eyes light up. Although I have offended him, I am a realistic, folk researcher, and if I can nod my head, I will be able to repeat it. Within the system, several predecessors who wrote the "War History of the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea" were naturally respected by me, and how to say anything else, after all, I understand the restrictions they are subject to, so I can't evaluate them.
Turn back to the main topic. Shuangshi wrote an article, Shuangshi is the most famous of these people, and the result is the worst level of writing.
Shuangshi is because of the poor reading comprehension ability, did not understand what I was saying, in order to scare people and scare people, as a result, my readers read it and said, isn't the content of the information you quoted Wang Lian said? He was also blackmailed by his insults. 
Scolding my readers, it is definitely not OK, this head, I want to come out. But I also want to say to those readers who leave a message, Shuangshi is this character, and the level is generally thought to be always correct. Don't pay attention to him, but you, he will only scold.
"The Korean War - The Unexploded Inside Story" is actually a "very famous" book, and he also took it out to show you, haha. These people are not doing academics, they read some information and take it out and display it on the Internet.
I've told you in my comments before. The American side of the book about the Korean War, the average reader can read two books, "The U.S. Army in the Korean War" and "The Forgotten War", that is, the following book. 
This book is the classic American masterpiece of the Korean War. What are the judging criteria? Look at references quoted in various Korean War books in the United States. The appearance rate of this book is very high, and it can be seen in many book references. This is academic status.
As for the American books that have been translated into Chinese except for "The U.S. Army in the Korean War," don't read any of them, they are all road goods, worthless, and the level is far less than the Korean War papers written by US military officers. By the way, Shuangshi was originally in the military academy, and before he was reformed by the army, he was an instructor in the teaching and research department of the foreign army. A teacher in the teaching and research department of the foreign military, who takes the road goods as a treasure, I don't want to evaluate.
The article you recently transferred to me, "What cowardice did Wang Zhengxing, a bricklayer of military history, show when questioning the movie "Chosin Lake"?" ", the author is not a big man in the military circle, is a post-90s, sprinkled with thousands of words, the result is a lot of mistakes, white writing. This young man is actually a pity, not very talented, low intelligence, but more serious than the big men in the military circle, at least can go to check the information. But after mixing with the big men in the military circle, I learned a bad thing, full of foul language, and exported dirty, just to amplify the defects in my personality. If he had spoken politely, I wouldn't have written this article yet.
The first mistake was that he said that the gate was the Watergate Bridge, and mocked me that I would not look at the map. I wonder if he's blind. Look at the picture.
The Pratunam Bridge is a power station, and the gate is north of the power station. In fact, the place name Of the Gate Has already made its terrain clear. Da Nang, small and high mountains. The door doesn't need me to explain. The two words together refer to the mountain pass. In fact, it is the pass of this winding road south of Huangcaoling.
The second mistake is to insist that there are US troops stationed in the Huangcaoling area. The reference material used by this young man is basically the same as mine, that is, one less copy of the "Special Report on the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir of the US 10th Army". His first argument was that the 20th Army's Chosin Lake Formation Diary said that "the American army occupied Huangcao Ridge". There is also a sentence in the "Diary of the Battle" at the end of the sentence: "These American troops have entered the ancient earth and water." As I have already said, the "so-called U.S. occupation of Yellow Grass Ridge" was the 2nd Battalion of the U.S. 31st Regiment Combat Team that did not participate in the battle of Xinxingli, when they were on their way to Gutuli. Therefore, in the "Diary of the Formation" recorded on the second day, it was reported that this American army had entered the ancient soil. People are passing by, not stationed. His second argument is that the Diary of the Commander in Arms also states that on the third day another American reconnaissance unit was discovered. In fact, it is the engineer unit of the US military that maintains roads and bridges. Therefore, the "Diary of the Formation" recorded a report to Zhang Yixiang on the same day that "the fortress is invincible" after the fort.
The third mistake is to confuse the concept of combat. It is true that the breaking of roads is also a battle in the strict sense of the word, which is a battle in a broad sense, generally referred to as "military action". A battle in the narrow sense is a battle that is usually described, that is, a battle in which two sides exchange fire. I was talking about narrow fighting, and he came to talk to me about the broad battle, the donkey's lips are not right for the horse's mouth, and the brain is sick.
The fourth mistake, he said, can't the U.S. military send a vigilant force? I just asked, send it over to find death? More than ten kilometers of winding roads, send a squad to a platoon to do what? Look at the road? How many meters does a person have to look at? A dozen or so lonely people, sent to the volunteer army as a target, you as stupid as the U.S. army as you are. The highly intelligent crowd of military fans is basically my readers, and no one will say such stupid things. So the editor of Xinhua News Agency told me before: Your level of fans is very high.
It is those who are moderately inferior in intelligence, but think that they are smart, say some stupid things all day long, and think that they are the first in the world.
Taking ten thousand steps back, even if the US military sends troops to guard these more than ten kilometers of winding roads, the volunteer army only needs to blow up the bridge and destroy the road. You're as stupid as you are as a volunteer.
As I said long ago, the "Special Report on the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir of the US 10th Army" is very clear, and there are four bridges that were destroyed.
The fifth mistake is actually related to the third mistake. He said: What is wrong with the film "Chosin Lake" as a literary and artistic work, which is properly artistically interpreted? Even if you use a searchlight to hide from the US military and touch the bridge section all the way under the bridge, it cannot be said to be untrue.
As soon as he said this, he could tell that he had never seen the video released by the movie "Chosin Lake". The last minute of the video is all about the battle scene of the volunteers attacking the Watergate Bridge and the American troops guarding the bridge.
It's really damning, I haven't seen it, I dare to write an article.
The sixth mistake, he said, was that the U.S. military did not dare to build the bridge under the eyes of the volunteers, and must have occupied the area, as a proof that there must have been a battle. This raises the question, the 180th Regiment of the Volunteer Army has occupied this line of positions, why not call the American engineer battalion to repair the bridge?
Why fight? In the daytime, as soon as the fire was fired, the US planes immediately came, looking for death. You think the volunteers are as stupid as you are.
This problem can be applied to all other battles of the Volunteer Army, such as the Battle of The Grass Cave of the 39th Army, the 4th Company of the 348th Regiment of the 116th Division is blocking the attack, and the other units of the 116th Division are all on the side. The answer is the same, in broad daylight, looking for death, I am afraid that the US military plane has no target to bomb it.
The seventh mistake, he said that on December 9, when the Americans crossed the Watergate Bridge, they captured the Watergate Bridge after a battle with the blocking volunteers, so how can it be said that there was no battle?
I wrote an article about the volunteers not attacking the Watergate Bridge, and I did not say that the American army did not attack the Watergate Bridge when it broke through. I really don't understand how he got two unrelated things together.
So as I said earlier in the article, talking to these people is chicken and duck, playing the piano to cows. Their reading comprehension skills are so low that they are shocking.
In addition, there are many mistakes, I will not talk about them one by one, this article is like an old woman's shroud, smelly and long, I look disgusting, don't torture me.
In fact, everyone in our lives has met, ordinary intelligence, poor understanding ability, but a tendon, stubborn, never listen to what others say, just what they say, it is difficult to communicate. But I still have to apologize, I said that the author was stupid, which is not right. This insults the word "stupid."
I have said it all before, and I don't want to respond, so why point out the mistakes?
Because the big men in the military circle led by Shuangshi read this stupid article, if they got the most precious treasure, they were extremely excited, and various groups went around, and Shuangshi also advertised it in the circle of friends and Weibo. I am really convinced, so many mistakes, Shuangshi and other military circles can not see, but also spread everywhere, is not shameful? However, Shuangshi and others will not feel ashamed, and thick-skinned is their magic weapon for survival on the Internet.
So far, all the articles that come to scare me are all IQ discriminators, what to identify? Obviously, they are all a lot of wrong articles, and these so-called military bigwigs actually think they can punch me in the face. Doesn't that expose their inferiority? Do you think I would be interested in communicating with these so-called big men who come to "fold and hand over"? As I said a long time ago, I asked Shuangshi a thousand questions, and I can guarantee that he would not be able to answer any of them.
Finally, I would like to say to the gang of military circles led by Shuangshi, can you grow a little longer and write an article that I can take seriously. There are a lot of errors in my article, can't you find one? Every time I was intimidated, I had to be punched in the face in the face, which was really disappointing to me. My two favorite things are that someone can point out my mistakes and someone who can give me knowledge. These two things are actually one thing. Please, raise your level and punch me in the face. Those who punch me in the face, not only will I not be angry, but I will also be treated as a guest.
A veteran of the double-stone side pointed me out a mistake, saying that the 60 mortar sound is very loud and really needs to cover my ears. Although the speech was very ugly, I said very respectfully: I have been taught.
About the author: Wang Zhengxing, a special military observer of the Xinhua News Agency Lookout Think Tank, and a former officer of a field unit of the People's Liberation Army, has served in infantry detachments, headquarters, logistics departments and other units, devoted himself to the study of war history and tactics, and has a unique understanding of military tactics and non-war operations. His book "This is War" was recommended in two issues in May and June 2014 by Phoenix TV's "Eight Minutes of Open Volume" column. His public account name is also "This is war", welcome to pay attention