Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/15/2021 4:30:57 PM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
It was annexed in 1910, and the country was far more "Japanized" - often willingly - than most Koreans would like to admit today. In the least, I should be able to immediately deploy troops in Korea, rather than having to ferry them from all the way to Japan.

Post #: 1
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/15/2021 5:49:52 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 568
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: online
OTOH all the MPPs will be teleported back to Japan, while if Korea is a separate country there would have to be a convoy route there (for Allied subs to interdict).

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 2
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/15/2021 6:18:42 PM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

OTOH all the MPPs will be teleported back to Japan, while if Korea is a separate country there would have to be a convoy route there (for Allied subs to interdict).


Huh? I am a bit confused by your response. I was saying that Japanese forces should be immediately deployable in Korea - and not have to transport from the Japanese islands - since Korea during World War II was not a distant, temporary Japanese possession but essentially fully "Japanized" part of the Japanese homeland.

< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/15/2021 6:24:36 PM >

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 3
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/15/2021 6:25:56 PM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
Does anyone know how to mod this for now?

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 4
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/15/2021 11:36:38 PM   
LoneRunner

 

Posts: 134
Joined: 8/16/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

Korea during World War II was not a distant, temporary Japanese possession but essentially fully "Japanized" part of the Japanese homeland.


I toured Korea on a business trip for a couple weeks and I think most Koreans would disagree with you regarding Korea being part of the Japanese homeland. Korean museums and history books frequently refer to the forcible occupation of Korea by Japan from 1910 through WW2.

< Message edited by LoneRunner -- 5/15/2021 11:41:33 PM >

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 5
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 12:25:31 AM   
Platoonist


Posts: 1199
Joined: 5/11/2003
From: Kila Hana
Status: offline
Korea is an interesting case. Because Korea was annexed through a treaty with its last monarch (albeit obtained under duress), the Japanese had certain obligations in Korea that did not exist elsewhere in their colonial empire. The Korean police were incorporated en masse into the new colonial police, and as late as 1930, Koreans numbered almost half the colonial police. The Japanese also left in place the system of village leadership, where prominent family heads were recognized as village elders and the chief elder was the village leader.

Unfortunately Japanese rule was clumsy even when it meant well. The Japanese began land and agricultural reforms that were probably honest and meant well, but which had the effect of favoring Japanese settlers, since the poorest Korean peasants were the least likely to have written records of their land rights.

Korean laborers impressed into the Japanese Army were more likely than Japanese soldiers to attempt to surrender to the Allies, but Western soldiers simply just saw them all as Japanese and were often reluctant to accept their surrender. So, the Koreans got a raw deal from both sides in the war.

(in reply to LoneRunner)
Post #: 6
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 1:18:02 AM   
Elessar2


Posts: 568
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

OTOH all the MPPs will be teleported back to Japan, while if Korea is a separate country there would have to be a convoy route there (for Allied subs to interdict).


Huh? I am a bit confused by your response. I was saying that Japanese forces should be immediately deployable in Korea - and not have to transport from the Japanese islands - since Korea during World War II was not a distant, temporary Japanese possession but essentially fully "Japanized" part of the Japanese homeland.


Yes, I grasped that; I simply alluded to other issues that would crop up if Korea was given said status. [I dislike teleporting MPPs and my Pacific scenario has convoys galore whenever possible] Note your idea would have Japanese units basically teleporting to Korean soil as they become activated.

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 7
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 2:16:03 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoneRunner


I toured Korea on a business trip for a couple weeks and I think most Koreans would disagree with you regarding Korea being part of the Japanese homeland. Korean museums and history books frequently refer to the forcible occupation of Korea by Japan from 1910 through WW2.


I am Korean; and I was born there and educated there; I have also talked to many people who have actually lived through the colonial times. So suffice to say that I have a better grasp of Korean history than would be possible than through just talking to locals while on a business trip.

As for the subject at hand, it is a complex and sensitive topic that perhaps ought not be broached here. Still, two points. On the one hand, citing that "most Koreans" would disagree with me is not exactly a persuasive argument. The majority is never the sole arbiter of the truth. Knowledge, rather than the sheer weight of numbers, ought to always determine the truth. In particular, the younger generation in Korea has been so thoroughly indoctrinated in anti-Japanese propaganda that it would be charitable to say that their views are worthless. Second, the truth about the colonial period - in particular, the issue of how willingly and thoroughly Koreans assimilated - is such an embarrassing topic that even Koreans with a more nuanced understanding of the Korean period will not admit or publicize. This is entirely unsurprising; nor is Korea alone in its attempt to "forget" or white-wash its more embarrassing past. Look at the extent that France and de Gaulle tried to offer a circumscribed and revisionist account of the extent of French collaboration with the Nazis. "National morale" is not always built to withstand the truth.

< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/16/2021 2:39:39 AM >

(in reply to LoneRunner)
Post #: 8
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 2:37:56 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Korea is an interesting case. Because Korea was annexed through a treaty with its last monarch (albeit obtained under duress), the Japanese had certain obligations in Korea that did not exist elsewhere in their colonial empire. The Korean police were incorporated en masse into the new colonial police, and as late as 1930, Koreans numbered almost half the colonial police. The Japanese also left in place the system of village leadership, where prominent family heads were recognized as village elders and the chief elder was the village leader.




That is all correct; and that is why I say that Korea was exceptional and unlike other Japanese colonial possessions.

It is a good thing in particular you allude to the extent of the assimilation on the part of the Korean populace. All successful colonial masters need local collaborators; but the scale and rapidity of collaboration or co-option - to be euphemistic - in Korea was rather stupefying and almost sui generis in the annals of colonialism. As you say, Koreans in large part manned the local bureaucracy and enjoyed much autonomy - in exchange of pliant assimilation. The program of assimilation in Korea was so successful that much of the Korean populace on the eve of the Pacific War considered themselves Japanese, not Korean. One telling sign of the extent of Korean assimilation and collaboration is found in the fact that Syngman Rhee never purged collaborators and instead employed them in the same roles. How can you purge virtually everyone and still run the government?

Also, as you say, Kojong did consent to annexation, albeit he certainly did not want to of his free will. But much of the ruling class did; and it should be stressed that Joseon monarchs - with a few exceptions such as Taejong - were weak and controlled by the Confucian bureaucrats. Perhaps more important, the monarchy had become incredibly unpopular at this time, largely due to the corruption of Queen Min and her clan. So many Korean elites saw the monarchy as something that stood in the way of a program of reform that would modernize Korea. This is a vacuum that the Japanese stepped in, and there is very little question that they were welcomed in - at least initially - by a vast swathe of Korean elites. In fact, even those who would eventually become renowned as independence fighters - Syngman Rhee, Soh Jaipil - were a part of a group of young reformers spear-headed by Kim Ok-kyun that sought Japanese assistance in overthrowing the ancien regime that culminated in the ill-fated Kapsin Coup.



< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/16/2021 2:59:59 AM >

(in reply to Platoonist)
Post #: 9
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 2:45:37 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

OTOH all the MPPs will be teleported back to Japan, while if Korea is a separate country there would have to be a convoy route there (for Allied subs to interdict).


Huh? I am a bit confused by your response. I was saying that Japanese forces should be immediately deployable in Korea - and not have to transport from the Japanese islands - since Korea during World War II was not a distant, temporary Japanese possession but essentially fully "Japanized" part of the Japanese homeland.


Yes, I grasped that; I simply alluded to other issues that would crop up if Korea was given said status. [I dislike teleporting MPPs and my Pacific scenario has convoys galore whenever possible] Note your idea would have Japanese units basically teleporting to Korean soil as they become activated.


Still confused. If the Korean peninsula were to become part of Japanese "homeland," then why would you need to change anything other than the simple convenience of not having to waste time and MPPs putting land units on transports to get to the Chinese or the Russian front?

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 10
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 10:06:49 AM   
The Land

 

Posts: 730
Joined: 2/19/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

Still confused. If the Korean peninsula were to become part of Japanese "homeland," then why would you need to change anything other than the simple convenience of not having to waste time and MPPs putting land units on transports to get to the Chinese or the Russian front?


Yeah, I don't think you would. You could make all of Korea owned and occupied by Japan, and set one or more cities to be supply sources and industrial centres. Then you'd be able to do almost exactly this.

Not sure whether you _should_ though - the discussion of Korean history is very interesting to me, but did Japan have many arms factories and recruiting centres in Korea? Were Japanese divisions actually formed in Korea without being shipped from the home islands?

_____________________________


(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 11
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 11:19:58 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land


Yeah, I don't think you would. You could make all of Korea owned and occupied by Japan, and set one or more cities to be supply sources and industrial centres. Then you'd be able to do almost exactly this.



Could you explain how to do this - if it is not difficult for a modding newbie like me?


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land

Not sure whether you _should_ though - the discussion of Korean history is very interesting to me, but did Japan have many arms factories and recruiting centres in Korea? Were Japanese divisions actually formed in Korea without being shipped from the home islands?


Yes, Japan had a lot of heavy industries in Korea during the colonial era - especially in the North. This was in part the reason why North Korea was so wealthier than South Korea until economic development really took off under Park Chung-hee (who was an officer in the Kwantung Army) after his coup in 1961. There is also a minority of scholarship, launched by Atul Kohli (who is himself not a Korea or East Asia specialist), that argues that the colonial legacy is the chief reason for the "miracle on the Han River." I am less persuaded by this argument though. Japan's role in South Korean economic development was indeed critical; but I would focus more on Japan's role after the Normalization Treaty in 1965. Japan funneled a lot of money to South Korea as essentially a restitution fee for the colonial era; and former collaborationists like Park Chung-hee exploited their Japanese connections in a variety of other ways to acquire Japanese know-how.

As for Japanese divisions formed in Korea: Hundreds of thousands of Koreans served in the Japanese army; there were Korean divisions; and in fact, much of South Korea's post-liberation officer corps came from the Kwantung army - including the aforementioned Park Chung-hee (dictator for almost two decades and the architect of Korea, inc.) and Baek Seon-yup (the most celebrated modern Korean soldier). But I don't know where these units were formed though.

Addendum: 19th and 20th divisions were recruited in Korea and stationed there.

< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/16/2021 2:27:49 PM >

(in reply to The Land)
Post #: 12
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 11:42:55 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land


Yeah, I don't think you would. You could make all of Korea owned and occupied by Japan, and set one or more cities to be supply sources and industrial centres. Then you'd be able to do almost exactly this.



Could you explain how to do this - if it is not difficult for a modding newbie like me?





Addendum: I got this to work - thank you so much! I made Pyongyang both an industrial center and a supply center. And that did it!

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 13
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 1:37:33 PM   
Bo Rearguard


Posts: 475
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

As for Japanese divisions formed in Korea: Hundreds of thousands of Koreans served in the Japanese army; there were Korean divisions; and in fact, much of South Korea's post-liberation officer corps came from the Kwantung army - including the aforementioned Park Chung-hee (dictator for almost two decades and the architect of Korea, inc.) and Baek Seon-yup (the most celebrated modern Korean soldier). But I don't know where these units were formed though.


I've noticed among the Japanese armies represented in the game there is one designated as the 17th Korean Army. I wasn't sure if that was because of the geographical area it was formerly based in, or because it was made up of a large proportion of Korean recruits, or both.


_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 14
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/16/2021 2:25:37 PM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


I've noticed among the Japanese armies represented in the game there is one designated as the 17th Korean Army. I wasn't sure if that was because of the geographical area it was formerly based in, or because it was made up of a large proportion of Korean recruits, or both.



Frankly, I've never heard of the "17th army." I know of no ethnic Korean units higher than the division level. There were ethnically Korean divisions based in Korea - often sending elements to the Chinese and Russian theater. But I don't know of ethnically Korean units at the corps level nor army level. Usually, Koreans were dispersed within the Japanese formations and mixed with native Japanese. In this respect, the most prominent association is with Koreans in the Kwantung army. As I have said, most of the relevant post-liberation South Korean officer corps were ex-Kwantung Army - including Park Chung-hee. This is still a flashpoint in south Korean politics today, because South Korea after liberation decided to essentially leave the collaboration issue alone - in contrast to, say, de Gaulle's de-nazification program in France (which likely didn't go far enough anyways and ended up scapegoating a portion of collaborators for theater). This was policy of letting sleeping dogs lie was necessary at the time, because there were too many collaborators to conduct France-like thorough purge. Yet, due to this failure to settle with the past, and there has also been periodic attempt to retrospectively purge the collaborators, whenever a Leftist government comes to power. (I have written about this phenomenon in print.) And these attempts to purge collaborators have occasioned huge cultural wars.

< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/16/2021 2:30:27 PM >

(in reply to Bo Rearguard)
Post #: 15
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/17/2021 8:09:17 AM   
The Land

 

Posts: 730
Joined: 2/19/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land


Yeah, I don't think you would. You could make all of Korea owned and occupied by Japan, and set one or more cities to be supply sources and industrial centres. Then you'd be able to do almost exactly this.



Could you explain how to do this - if it is not difficult for a modding newbie like me?





Addendum: I got this to work - thank you so much! I made Pyongyang both an industrial center and a supply center. And that did it!


Great! The map work is fairly simple, it's just clicking hexes and then finding the right bits in the country editor.

There is a risk of unexpected consequences if Korea is a trigger in any events, as Korea no longer exists. I'm not sure there are many and some of them will 'fail safe' so to speak. But it may be worth checking - the reasonably quick method to do that is to open each event text file, find Korea's country number, and search for the country number, then check each time the country number comes up to see if it's a country-based event trigger.

_____________________________


(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 16
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/17/2021 10:36:04 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land


Yeah, I don't think you would. You could make all of Korea owned and occupied by Japan, and set one or more cities to be supply sources and industrial centres. Then you'd be able to do almost exactly this.



Could you explain how to do this - if it is not difficult for a modding newbie like me?





Addendum: I got this to work - thank you so much! I made Pyongyang both an industrial center and a supply center. And that did it!


Great! The map work is fairly simple, it's just clicking hexes and then finding the right bits in the country editor.

There is a risk of unexpected consequences if Korea is a trigger in any events, as Korea no longer exists. I'm not sure there are many and some of them will 'fail safe' so to speak. But it may be worth checking - the reasonably quick method to do that is to open each event text file, find Korea's country number, and search for the country number, then check each time the country number comes up to see if it's a country-based event trigger.


Hmm, now you are scaring me. Also, checking seems a lot of work, and I may miss stuff, too. Maybe I should revert?

(in reply to The Land)
Post #: 17
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/17/2021 11:01:54 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

As for Japanese divisions formed in Korea: Hundreds of thousands of Koreans served in the Japanese army; there were Korean divisions; and in fact, much of South Korea's post-liberation officer corps came from the Kwantung army - including the aforementioned Park Chung-hee (dictator for almost two decades and the architect of Korea, inc.) and Baek Seon-yup (the most celebrated modern Korean soldier). But I don't know where these units were formed though.

Addendum: 19th and 20th Divisions were recruited in Korea and stationed there.


Correction: I am wrong. Mea culpa. 19th and 20th divisions were apparently raised in Japan and shipped to Korea to serve. They were not ethnic Korean divisions.

After doing some digging, it seems like that there may never have been ethnic Korean units even at the division level.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


Frankly, I've never heard of the "17th army." I know of no ethnic Korean units higher than the division level. There were ethnically Korean divisions based in Korea - often sending elements to the Chinese and Russian theater. But I don't know of ethnically Korean units at the corps level nor army level. Usually, Koreans were dispersed within the Japanese formations and mixed with native Japanese. In this respect, the most prominent association is with Koreans in the Kwantung army. As I have said, most of the relevant post-liberation South Korean officer corps were ex-Kwantung Army - including Park Chung-hee. This is still a flashpoint in south Korean politics today, because South Korea after liberation decided to essentially leave the collaboration issue alone - in contrast to, say, de Gaulle's de-nazification program in France (which likely didn't go far enough anyways and ended up scapegoating a portion of collaborators for theater). This was policy of letting sleeping dogs lie was necessary at the time, because there were too many collaborators to conduct France-like thorough purge. Yet, due to this failure to settle with the past, and there has also been periodic attempt to retrospectively purge the collaborators, whenever a Leftist government comes to power. (I have written about this phenomenon in print.) And these attempts to purge collaborators have occasioned huge cultural wars.


Likewise, I did more digging, and the "17th Korean Army" is in fact a unit that is well known to me, too well-known. I did not recognize it, however, because I was not familiar with that particular title. The "17th Korean Army" is better known as "Chosen Army" - or "Korea Army" - which was a formation stationed in Korea since around the time of the annexation. Obviously, this is a notorious unit in Korea. What I did not know is that its name was changed to the "17th Area Army" in 1945. What I still do not know is whether this unit was also called the "17th Korea Army" - or whether the devs came up with this name to stress its origin.

< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/17/2021 11:08:54 AM >

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 18
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/17/2021 9:07:36 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4451
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73
Likewise, I did more digging, and the "17th Korean Army" is in fact a unit that is well known to me, too well-known. I did not recognize it, however, because I was not familiar with that particular title. The "17th Korean Army" is better known as "Chosen Army" - or "Korea Army" - which was a formation stationed in Korea since around the time of the annexation. Obviously, this is a notorious unit in Korea. What I did not know is that its name was changed to the "17th Area Army" in 1945. What I still do not know is whether this unit was also called the "17th Korea Army" - or whether the devs came up with this name to stress its origin.


I've had a look in my notes and military atlases and can't find an answer to that question. It may have come from books I took out of the library many years ago when designing our original Pacific game (2008).

Of course, that doesn't mean it is correct, as it's not impossible that it was a misinterpretation on my part.

Glad to hear you worked out how to be able to deploy new units in Korea.

< Message edited by BillRunacre -- 5/17/2021 9:08:13 PM >


_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 19
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/17/2021 9:23:13 PM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre


I've had a look in my notes and military atlases and can't find an answer to that question. It may have come from books I took out of the library many years ago when designing our original Pacific game (2008).

Of course, that doesn't mean it is correct, as it's not impossible that it was a misinterpretation on my part.

Glad to hear you worked out how to be able to deploy new units in Korea.


Thanks for the clarification. It says something about a game that it is actually inspiring me to do more research! ;)

I decided to revert being able to immediately deploy in Pyongyang; I am a bit wary of modding stuff that may have unforeseen consequences, as some posters have pointed out.

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 20
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/18/2021 7:41:04 AM   
The Land

 

Posts: 730
Joined: 2/19/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

Hmm, now you are scaring me. Also, checking seems a lot of work, and I may miss stuff, too. Maybe I should revert?


I think very probably it'll be fine. I am struggling to think of any meaningful events triggered by Korea, mainly because Korea is a passive Japanese puppet. There will be some events that look at the control of various hexes in Korea but those will still work. It's not like you have deleted Russia which has a bazillion events associated with it!


_____________________________


(in reply to Alcibiades73)
Post #: 21
RE: Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? - 5/18/2021 11:00:06 AM   
Alcibiades73

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/4/2021
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: The Land



I think very probably it'll be fine. I am struggling to think of any meaningful events triggered by Korea, mainly because Korea is a passive Japanese puppet. There will be some events that look at the control of various hexes in Korea but those will still work. It's not like you have deleted Russia which has a bazillion events associated with it!



Already started a playthrough :(

< Message edited by Alcibiades73 -- 5/18/2021 11:02:47 AM >

(in reply to The Land)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> Should not Korea be considered Japanese homeland? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.383