QA網(wǎng)友討論：為什么美國不和中國“熱戰(zhàn)”
Why doesn''t the US go to war with China?
譯文簡介
專業(yè)人士解答
正文翻譯
Robert Vannrox
Former Operator at Office of Naval Intelligence (1981–2007)
前海軍情報局職員(1981-2007)
Because the United States will lose very, VERY badly.
…
I suppose you don’t want to hear that answer. You want to hear, or read something that makes you feel good about yourself, or your life.
But, I hate to break the news to you, all indications are quite clear. The United States would lose.
All RAND studies say so.
All of the American War Colleges say so.
Historical comparisons indicate that this will be the case.
Social predictions say so.
Even remote viewing of the future say so.
因為美國將輸?shù)梅浅７浅K。
…
I suppose you don’t want to hear that answer. You want to hear, or read something that makes you feel good about yourself, or your life.
But, I hate to break the news to you, all indications are quite clear. The United States would lose.
All RAND studies say so.
All of the American War Colleges say so.
Historical comparisons indicate that this will be the case.
Social predictions say so.
Even remote viewing of the future say so.
因為美國將輸?shù)梅浅７浅K。
…
我猜你不想聽到這個答案。你想聽到或讀到一些讓你自己感覺良好的東西。
但是，我不想告訴你這個消息，所有跡象都表明。美國將會失敗。
蘭德公司的所有研究都是這樣說的。
所有的美國戰(zhàn)爭學(xué)院都這么說。
歷史對比表明情況將是這樣。
社會預(yù)測是這樣說的。
就連預(yù)言家也這么說。
我猜你不想聽到這個答案。你想聽到或讀到一些讓你自己感覺良好的東西。
但是，我不想告訴你這個消息，所有跡象都表明。美國將會失敗。
蘭德公司的所有研究都是這樣說的。
所有的美國戰(zhàn)爭學(xué)院都這么說。
歷史對比表明情況將是這樣。
社會預(yù)測是這樣說的。
就連預(yù)言家也這么說。
Oh.
It doesn’t sell newspapers, and it isn’t “sexy”. But it is the truth.
China is a fortress, with peer or above peer military capabilities. It has created a defensive umbrella that is lethal. It’s military is huge, well trained, and enormously armed. It is a nuclear armed nation, and any attacking nation should consider the massive nuclear Armageddon that could be unleashed on their home cities, and peoples.
As overwhelming as the evidence is, there are a small number of people that say something different. And since their conclusions make many people in the Weest feel good, their conclusions are repeated endlessly. Even though the documents are openly ridiculed inside the halls of the Pentagon.
哦。
它是為了不賣報紙，也不“性感”。但這是事實。
中國是一個堡壘，擁有同級別或高于同級別的軍事能力。它創(chuàng)造了一個完美的國家防御系統(tǒng)。它的軍隊規(guī)模龐大，訓(xùn)練有素，裝備精良。它是一個擁有核武器的國家，任何發(fā)動攻擊的國家都應(yīng)該考慮到大規(guī)模的核武器爆發(fā)的世界末日，這可能會對他們的家鄉(xiāng)城市和人民產(chǎn)生影響。
盡管證據(jù)確鑿，但仍有一小部分人持不同意見。由于他們的結(jié)論讓許多西方人自我感覺良好，他們的結(jié)論被不斷地重復(fù)。盡管這些文件在五角大樓的大廳里被公開嘲笑。
It doesn’t sell newspapers, and it isn’t “sexy”. But it is the truth.
China is a fortress, with peer or above peer military capabilities. It has created a defensive umbrella that is lethal. It’s military is huge, well trained, and enormously armed. It is a nuclear armed nation, and any attacking nation should consider the massive nuclear Armageddon that could be unleashed on their home cities, and peoples.
As overwhelming as the evidence is, there are a small number of people that say something different. And since their conclusions make many people in the Weest feel good, their conclusions are repeated endlessly. Even though the documents are openly ridiculed inside the halls of the Pentagon.
哦。
它是為了不賣報紙，也不“性感”。但這是事實。
中國是一個堡壘，擁有同級別或高于同級別的軍事能力。它創(chuàng)造了一個完美的國家防御系統(tǒng)。它的軍隊規(guī)模龐大，訓(xùn)練有素，裝備精良。它是一個擁有核武器的國家，任何發(fā)動攻擊的國家都應(yīng)該考慮到大規(guī)模的核武器爆發(fā)的世界末日，這可能會對他們的家鄉(xiāng)城市和人民產(chǎn)生影響。
盡管證據(jù)確鑿，但仍有一小部分人持不同意見。由于他們的結(jié)論讓許多西方人自我感覺良好，他們的結(jié)論被不斷地重復(fù)。盡管這些文件在五角大樓的大廳里被公開嘲笑。
Who writes these papers?
These are [1] military-industrial complex funded “think tanks”, and [2] politically-connected “Studies”.
In every instance, they promote the idea that if military and weapons spending is increased; GREATLY, that the United State would prevail in a “hot” war against China. It’s simply a matter of funding the right weapons systems, and placing them in the right locations.
You cannot argue that they have been unsuccessful. In fact the very opposite is true. These “reports” and “studies” have been very successful in increasing the United States federal budget to surpass the $30 trillion dollar mark.
If you believe that money solves all problems, then you will agree with these outliers. For as long as there are trees, the United States can simply print unlimited amounts of “green backs” to solve festering problems.
Otherwise, I suggest that you listen to RAND.
…
So it is up you to decide.
這些論文是誰寫的?
這些是[1]軍工聯(lián)合體資助的“智庫”，[2]與政治相關(guān)的“研究”。
在每一個例子中，他們都宣揚這樣一種觀點:如果軍事和武器開支增加;很大程度上，美國將在一場針對中國的“熱戰(zhàn)”中獲勝。這只是為了購買武器提供資金，并將其部署在正確的位置的問題。
你不能說他們不成功。事實上，情況正好相反。這些“報告”和“研究”非常成功地將美國聯(lián)邦預(yù)算增加到30萬億美元以上。
如果你相信錢能解決所有問題，那么你就會同意這些異常增加的聯(lián)邦預(yù)算。只要還有樹，美國就可以無限量地印刷“綠色鈔票”來解決日益惡化的問題。
否則，我建議你聽蘭德公司的。
These are [1] military-industrial complex funded “think tanks”, and [2] politically-connected “Studies”.
In every instance, they promote the idea that if military and weapons spending is increased; GREATLY, that the United State would prevail in a “hot” war against China. It’s simply a matter of funding the right weapons systems, and placing them in the right locations.
You cannot argue that they have been unsuccessful. In fact the very opposite is true. These “reports” and “studies” have been very successful in increasing the United States federal budget to surpass the $30 trillion dollar mark.
If you believe that money solves all problems, then you will agree with these outliers. For as long as there are trees, the United States can simply print unlimited amounts of “green backs” to solve festering problems.
Otherwise, I suggest that you listen to RAND.
…
So it is up you to decide.
這些論文是誰寫的?
這些是[1]軍工聯(lián)合體資助的“智庫”，[2]與政治相關(guān)的“研究”。
在每一個例子中，他們都宣揚這樣一種觀點:如果軍事和武器開支增加;很大程度上，美國將在一場針對中國的“熱戰(zhàn)”中獲勝。這只是為了購買武器提供資金，并將其部署在正確的位置的問題。
你不能說他們不成功。事實上，情況正好相反。這些“報告”和“研究”非常成功地將美國聯(lián)邦預(yù)算增加到30萬億美元以上。
如果你相信錢能解決所有問題，那么你就會同意這些異常增加的聯(lián)邦預(yù)算。只要還有樹，美國就可以無限量地印刷“綠色鈔票”來解決日益惡化的問題。
否則，我建議你聽蘭德公司的。
…
所以由你來決定。
所以由你來決定。
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 7 )
收藏
This is precisely what countries like China and Russia, among others, are attempting to counteract - the US's capacity to print money at will.
這正是中國和俄羅斯等國家試圖抵制的——美國隨意印鈔的能力。
That capacity only exists as long as the petro-dollar and the international community supports the USD. Once the USD loses international settlement ( reserve currency), it will ignite inflation in America like Germany in the 1920’s.
這種能力只有在石油美元和國際社會支持美元的情況下才存在。一旦美元失去國際結(jié)算(儲備貨幣)，就會像20世紀(jì)20年代的德國一樣引發(fā)美國的通貨膨脹。
That is happening right now. Wait until the changes of the last three months start to make their impact.
這正在發(fā)生。過去三個月的變化開始產(chǎn)生影響。
Nazis don’t believe they will lose because they are deluded and even if they will lose they have to destroy the other. Hitler would have killed every German because they failed him. Fascism in the US will destroy the world to save face if they are not stopped
納粹不相信他們會輸，因為他們被欺騙了，即使他們會輸，他們也必須摧毀對方。希特勒會殺掉所有德國人，因為他們辜負(fù)了他。如果不加以阻止，美國的法西斯主義將摧毀世界以挽回顏面
The United States has wasted too much money on military alliances, and not spent enough on economic ones.
The elephant in the room is, the average American does NOT want war with another superpower. WW2’s toll is plain to see.
Nor does the average Chinese, but when push comes to shove would you bet on the country with an individualist culture to want to do the actual fighting, or the one with a collectivist culture?
All war is wrong. But even if a government thinks a military strike against a superpower is a smart idea, would the citizens agree? A preemptive strike against Chinese territory is going to result in mayhem on the steps of Capitol Hill. The average American talks a big talk about bald eagles and machine guns online, but striking the biggest trade partner that makes all of our tech is a tough sell for us peasants.
We don’t want to admit it, but deep down, the Chinese-US “alliance” is now the most important in the world. Has been for decades.
美國在軍事聯(lián)盟上浪費了太多的錢，而在經(jīng)濟(jì)聯(lián)盟上卻花得不夠。
房間里的大象是，普通美國人不希望與另一個超級大國發(fā)生戰(zhàn)爭。二戰(zhàn)的代價顯而易見。
普通中國人也不希望，但當(dāng)事態(tài)發(fā)展到緊要關(guān)頭時，你會對一個有個人主義文化的國家發(fā)動戰(zhàn)爭，還是一個有集體主義文化的國家?
所有的戰(zhàn)爭都是錯誤的。但是，即使政府認(rèn)為對超級大國進(jìn)行軍事打擊是一個明智的主意，公民會同意嗎?對中國領(lǐng)土的先發(fā)制人的打擊將導(dǎo)致國會山上的混亂。普通美國人在網(wǎng)上大談特談禿鷹和機(jī)關(guān)槍，但打擊為我們提供所有技術(shù)的最大貿(mào)易伙伴對我們農(nóng)民來說很難接受。
我們不想承認(rèn)，但在內(nèi)心深處，中美“聯(lián)盟”是當(dāng)今世界上最重要的。已經(jīng)有幾十年了。
“We don’t want to admit it, but deep down, the Chinese-US “alliance” is now the most important in the world. Has been for decades.” The Chinese were willing to work for US dollars as long as they could acquire technologies with them. After the US banned the transfer of the most advanced technologies the Chinese-US alliance ceased to exist..
我們不想承認(rèn)，但在內(nèi)心深處，中美“聯(lián)盟”是當(dāng)今世界上最重要的。已經(jīng)有幾十年了?！?br /> 中國人愿意為了美元而工作，只要他們可以用美元獲得技術(shù)。在美國禁止轉(zhuǎn)讓最先進(jìn)的技術(shù)后，中美聯(lián)盟不復(fù)存在。
The problem is, why do these people need to bash or go to war with another country in order to feel good about themselves? How about doing something positive to improve their own lives and leave the rest of the world alone?
問題是，為什么這些人需要為了自我感覺良好而與另一個國家開戰(zhàn)?做一些積極的事情來改善他們自己的生活，不要管世界其他地方怎么樣?
An United States invasion of china would surely fail, but a Chinese invasion of the United States would also fail. Both sides are very well defended because of their geography. A war between the two would most likely be a battle of blockades and economics.
美國入侵中國肯定會失敗，但中國入侵美國也會失敗。由于雙方的地理位置，雙方都有很好的防守。兩國之間的戰(zhàn)爭很可能是一場互相封鎖和經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)。
Yes. One in which the United States cannot win.
是的。一場美國贏不了的戰(zhàn)爭。
Neither can China. The reality is that war will be pyrrhic.
中國也贏不了?，F(xiàn)實是，戰(zhàn)爭將是得不償失的。
I agree. No one wins in a war.
Especial when two major powers duke it out.
我同意。戰(zhàn)爭中沒有贏家。
尤其是當(dāng)兩個大國在爭斗的時候。
Quora is full of questions like this, thinking about war against China, destroy China, US will win, China is evil, defend Taiwan, …….etc. It shows how Americans have been brainwashed by US govt propaganda beyond recognition. They dont think, they just take what is being fed to them by the media.
這表明美國人是如何被美國政府的宣傳洗腦的。他們不思考，他們只是接受媒體灌輸給他們的東西。
You must be clairvoyant! Everyone thought that Russia conquered Ukraine in 3 days and that's what we see. Results only after the game is over.
你一定是明察秋毫的人，!每個人都認(rèn)為俄羅斯在3天內(nèi)征服了烏克蘭，這就是我們所看到的。游戲結(jié)束后才有結(jié)果。
It was principally western media that promoted the 3 day claim.
主要是西方媒體宣傳了3天的說法。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處