In 1955, our army carried out the first large-scale award of military ranks, which marked the establishment of the rank system of our army. However, in this award, many historical and personal factors are involved, especially the situation of the four generals has attracted much attention, which has brought a lot of problems to the *** in charge of the evaluation of military ranks.
In this process, the personal experiences of Ye Changgeng, Liu Ziqi, Li Chiran and Yang Xiushan became the focus. The award of a title is not simply based on criteria, but requires taking into account historical context, individual contributions and many other factors. This makes the process of conferring titles quite complicated, especially for these four generals.
First of all, Ye Changgeng's personal experience shows his outstanding performance in the Red Army. From serving as a machine gun platoon platoon commander to becoming the commander of the Red 12th Division, Ye Changgeng provided great support for the firepower of the Red 5th Army. However, his position at the end of the Liberation War was relatively low, and how to give him a suitable military rank became a difficult problem. In the end, after comprehensive consideration, Ye Changgeng was awarded the rank of major general and won three first-class medals.
Secondly, Liu Ziqi's situation is even more special. For 16 years, he held the position of division commander of the 3rd Red Division, but he did not receive a corresponding promotion. At the moment of the great award, considering Liu Ziqi's contribution in the early days of the Eighth Route Army, he was finally awarded the rank of major general and also received three first-class medals.
Next is Li Chiran, whose experience is even more tortuous. During the Red Army, he was the political commissar of the Red 27th Army in northern Shaanxi, and his position was quite high. However, at the end of the Liberation War, his position was demoted to the rank of political commissar of the 12th Division of Ichino. Despite more than a decade of campaigning, he was awarded the rank of major general in the 1955 award, which caused his displeasure. In his memoirs, Li Chiran expressed his dissatisfaction with the military rank, believing that according to his seniority and merits, he should have the opportunity to fight for a higher rank.
Finally, Yang Xiushan's situation is relatively unique. Although he held a low position in the Red Army, he made many major military exploits and was burdened with 21 pieces of shrapnel that could not be removed. After the founding of the People's Republic of China, he was promoted to deputy commander. When conferring the title, in order to fully reflect his contribution, ** made a difficulty. In the end, after much consideration, Yang Xiushan was awarded the rank of lieutenant general.
The twists and turns in the process of awarding the title have made us deeply realize that the award of the title is not a simple administrative procedure, but requires a comprehensive consideration of various factors to ensure a fair assessment of the contribution and value of each general. This has also laid a solid foundation for our army's rank system and provided useful experience for the future awarding of military ranks.
This article deeply analyzes the complexity of the large-scale process of awarding military ranks in our army in 1955, especially the issue of awarding the titles of four generals. In my opinion, this article vividly illustrates the complexity and difficulty of military rank assessment at that time, as well as the various considerations that leaders had to face in decision-making.
First of all, through the description of Ye Changgeng, the article shows his outstanding contribution and leadership skills in the Red Army. However, due to his lower position at the end of the Liberation War, his title became complicated and tricky. This situation shows that the evaluation of military ranks does not only depend on the career of the individual, but also needs to fully consider the wartime contribution and the special circumstances of the individual. This example is cleverly illustrated by illustrating the practical difficulties in the awarding of titles.
Second, the discussion of Liu Ziqi reveals another dimension in the investiture process. Although he held the position of division commander for 16 years, he was not promoted accordingly. This raises questions about the rationality and fairness of the general's ranks. While maintaining military discipline, the military rank system should also reflect a fair evaluation of the contributions of individual soldiers. Through the example of Liu Ziqi, the article successfully highlights this problem.
Li Chiran's case even presented a kind of "demotion" in the evaluation of military ranks, which was obviously an isolated phenomenon at that time. This situation makes the award process more nuanced and requires decisions to be made on the basis of a combination of individual contributions and historical factors. Li Chiran's voice was also expressed in the article, further emphasizing the expectations and views of individual soldiers on the award.
Finally, the decision to award Yang Xiushan reflects respect for the general's personal heroic deeds. Despite his relatively low position, he made many major military exploits and was burdened with 21 pieces of shrapnel. **In this case, I faced an embarrassment, how to fully reflect Yang Xiushan's contribution in the awarding of the title, and not lose fairness. The final decision to give him the rank of lieutenant general was a reward and respect for the heroism of the individual.
In general, this article successfully presents the tediousness and complexity of the work of grading military ranks through specific historical cases. In modern society, although the principles and standards for the awarding of military ranks may be different, they still have an enlightening effect on fair and reasonable evaluation. Through in-depth analysis, this article triggered my thinking about the military rank evaluation system and my understanding of the decision to award titles in historical periods.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!