[2023-09-11]Quora问答：现在美国至少还占上风，为什么他们不向中国宣战呢（反正他们可能迟早都会打起来的）？

Qi Chen Electrical Engineer (2017–present)
Question: Why doesn't the US declare war on China while they at least still have the upper hand (since they're probably gonna end up going to war sometime anyway)?
Answer: They did. It is called Korean war.
Ever since, US policy has been a war with China is not feasible and China today is a lot closer to US in strength comparing to the 1950s.

【回答】电气工程师（2017 年 - 至今）
问题：现在美国至少还占上风，为什么他们不向中国宣战呢（反正他们可能迟早都会打起来的）？
回答：他们打过了。这被称为朝鲜战争。
从那时起，美国的政策就一直是“和中国开战不可行”，而且与50年代相比，今天中国的实力已大大接近美国了。
-------------------------------------------------------

Edward Cook
It is well known in every war college in the world "you don't go to war on the Asian land mass!"

【回复】世界上每一所战争学院都有一个信条“不要在亚洲大陆上打仗！”
-------------------------------------------------------

Stephen "Rocky" Wernick Former Republican, now a Democrat
What, exactly, would be the reason for the United States of America to begin a war with China?
Has China provoked a military response from the United States by sending its military into the US, its protected territories, or its allies?
Has the United Nations held a vote to enforce a peacekeeping effort because of something China has done on the global stage?
Has China declared war on the USA?
I don't know what you might think China has done to deserve the United States taking up arms against it, but without a clear provocation for a US military response, there is no good reason for the United States to do so.

【回答】前共和党人，现民主党人
究竟得是什么原因会让美国与中国开战？
中国有派遣军队进入美国、其受保护的领土或其盟国，激起美国的军事回应？
联合国有因为中国在国际舞台上的所作所为，而进行强制维和的投票表决？
中国有向美国宣战了？
我不知道你认为中国做了什么需要美国拿起武器来对抗它，但如果没有明确挑衅美国做出军事回应，美国就没有理由这么做。
-------------------------------------------------------

Albert Willems
The Korean was should serve as a good example of what can be expected, when the US tries to bully China or threaten it. The Vietnam war was based on lies, just like the Iraq and Afghanistan ones. Even that Perl harbor massacre seems to have some errors in its official story line. What puzzles me most though is, that none of the countries attacked, ever invaded the US or even threatened to do so. Capitalism has turned into that snake, that tried to eat itself. The only difference is, that capitalism will in the end prove to be successful in causing its own demise, caused by unbridled greed.

【回复】朝鲜战争就是一个很好的例子，它说明了当美国试图欺凌或威胁中国时会发生什么。越南战争是建立在谎言之上的，就像伊拉克和阿富汗战争一样。即使是珀尔港大屠杀，其官方故事线似乎也有一些错误。但最让我困惑的是，被攻击的国家没有一个曾入侵美国，甚至没有一个曾威胁入侵美国。资本主义已经变成了那条想要吃掉自己的蛇。唯一的区别是，资本主义最终会被证明在“肆无忌惮的贪婪导致自我毁灭”上是成功的。

Jed
“Has China provoked a military response from the United States by sending its military into the US, its protected territories, or its allies?”
The answer to that is a definite YES, China has militarily occupies places within the sovereign territory or jurisdiction of various neighboring nations, including US allies like Japan and the Philippines, and sends its warships and military aircraft into such areas to harass. They also claim to own about 90% of international waters in the South Asian Sea.
“Has the United Nations held a vote to enforce a peacekeeping effort because of something China has done on the global stage?”
No, BUT China is openly and defiantly refused to comply with international maritime law, especially the UN Convention on the Law Of the Sea. Moreover, seven years ago, the Arbitral Panel of the International Court of Justice ruled, in The Philippines v. China, PCA Case, violations of the UNCLOS treaty China signed, and other international laws.
But, nonetheless, the US strictly respects and follows international maritime law, and only operates in international waters or where it has a legal right to be. It does not trespass into China’s territorial waters, nor does it interfere in any way with China’s commercial or military vessels operating lawfully. It doesn’t threaten China at all, except perhaps by it’s existence and presence, although China frequently threatens US Navy vessels or falsely claims to have driven them away from “its,”.

【回复】“中国有派遣军队进入美国、其受保护的领土或其盟国，激起美国的军事回应？”
回答肯定是“是”，中国军事占领了包括日本和菲律宾等美国盟国在内的多个邻国的主权领土或管辖范围，并派遣军舰和军用飞机在这些地区骚扰。他们还声称拥有南亚海域约 90% 的国际水域。
“联合国有因为中国在国际舞台上的所作所为，而进行强制维和的投票表决？”
没有，但中国公然蔑视并拒绝遵守国际海洋法，尤其是联合国海洋法公约。此外，七年前，国际法院仲裁庭在南海仲裁案中裁定，中国违反了所签署的联合国海洋法公约和其他国际法。
但是，尽管如此，美国严格遵守国际海洋法，只在国际水域或有合法权利的地方活动。它没有侵入中国领海，也没有以任何方式干扰中国合法运营的商业或军事舰艇。尽管中国经常威胁美国海军舰艇，或错误声称已将他们从“其”水域驱离，但美国海军舰艇根本没有威胁中国，也许只是因为它的存在。

Leroy Huang
Well, well, well, Thanks to the “World Plice” for the jurisdiction and "protection" of the people all over the world, I believe people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia….they will appreciat the US army a lot . In addition, I want to say that USA actually tried to declare war to China before, In 1950, in North Korea, but the two sides finally discovered that the fight could not go on. so they still keep on the armistice agreement until now.

【回复】好好好，感谢“世界警察”对全世界人民的管辖和“保护”，我相信伊拉克、阿富汗、南斯拉夫的人民.... 他们会非常感激美国军队的。另外，我想说的是，早在1950年，美国在朝鲜就曾试图向中国宣战了，但双方最终发现打不下去，所以一直到现在，他们仍然保持着停战协定。

Nandan Tandel
Damn, I am starting to think that the US politics is based on Anti Asian Propoganda. Do you really think other countries will support US if it attacks China. Lol, no one want political instability in there neighbourhood.

【回复】卧槽，我开始觉得美国的政治是基于反亚洲的宣传。你真的认为如果美国攻击中国，其他国家会支持美国吗？哈哈，没人希望周边政治动荡。
-------------------------------------------------------

Phillip Wynn Ph.D. in Medieval Europe & Theology, University of Notre Dame (Graduated 2011)
This idea would make any list of the worst ideas in history. Any such war cannot be won by either side, and would end in defeat for both. In fact, this idea is not only the height of stupidity and insanity, it is downright satanic in its evil. Maybe you think of this like a game of Risk, where you can always resurrect your fortunes on the next turn. No one will be able to resurrect the mountains of dead that would result from such a war. And the generations of hate that would ensue. So not only is the thought of such a war preposterous, evil, and insane, it is exactly the war that both countries should do all in their power to avoid.

【回答】圣母大学，中世纪欧洲及神学博士（2011 年毕业）
这个想法可以被列入历史上最糟糕的想法清单。任何一方都不可能打赢这样的战争，而且都将以失败告终。事实上，这个想法不仅愚蠢至极、疯狂至极，而且邪恶至极。也许你会认为这就像玩冒险游戏一样，下一回合你总能复活。没有人能够复活这样一场战争所造成的堆积如山的亡灵。以及随之而来的几代人的仇恨。因此，这种战争的想法不仅荒谬、邪恶、疯狂，而且正是两国都应该竭尽全力避免的战争。
-------------------------------------------------------

Gary Cummings
First of all, it would be a nuclear war and that would bring on nuclear winter. Secondly, you do not want to fight a war with China. Remember they invented gunpower and much more related to war, and even perfected the art of war. It might go “our way” at first, but not for long. Or, it could go their way, before it even starts. Unintended consequences and the fog of war are beyond our imagination.

【回复】首先，这将是一场核战争，会带来核冬天。其次，你不会想和中国开战的。请记住，他们发明了火药和更多与战争有关的东西，甚至贯彻了孙子兵法。战争一开始可能会按“我们的方式”进行，但不会持续太久。或者，战争还没开始时，就已经按照他们的方式发展了。意外后果和战争迷雾超出了我们的想象。
-------------------------------------------------------

Matt W Former Research PhD Student at UNSW Bioanalytical Centre (2015–2019)
Well remember Vietnam.
What is a country like Vietnam to the great US of A?
Well, the Americans lost that one, and heck, they weren’t even fighting the whole of Vietnam, just the communist North.
Ten years spent (1965 to 1975) before the fall of Saigon when American troops were forced home having failed their mission, and sparking much home criticism of the war effort.

【回答】新南威尔士大学生物分析中心 前研究博士生（2015年-2019 年）
还记得越南吗？
越南这样的国家对伟大的美国来说算什么？
美国人输掉了那场战争，而且他们甚至没有和整个越南开战，只是与北方共产党作战。
西贡沦陷前的十年（1965 年至 1975 年），美军因未能完成任务而被迫回国，引发了国内对战争的大量批评。
-------------------------------------------------------

Edward Cook
The American public opinion effectively ended that war.

【回复】美国舆论有效地结束了那场战争。
-------------------------------------------------------

Nathan James Geopolitical pundit and blogger.
Because the US isn’t stark raving mad?
The US does not have the upper hand. War with China will be very bloody and devastating for both countries, and the world as well.
You do know that China is a major nuclear power, right?
China also has the third most powerful military on the planet. China is not a pushover like Afghanistan and Iraq.
> since they're probably gonna end up going to war sometime anyway
If you really believe this, then you better learn how to bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.

【回答】地缘政治评论家和博主
因为美国没有完全疯掉？
美国并没有占上风。与中国的战争对两国乃至世界都将是非常血腥和毁灭性的。
你知道中国是一个核大国吧？
中国还拥有全球第三强大的军队。中国不像阿富汗和伊拉克那样好欺负。
>“反正他们可能迟早都会打起来的”
如果你真的这么认为，那你最好学会如何弯下腰来和你的屁股吻别。
-------------------------------------------------------

Hugh Rogerson
The American public does not have the stomach for a ground war with China. When the body bags start coming home people get pretty upset. Vietnam is an example.

【回复】美国公众对和中国进行地面战争没兴趣。当尸袋开始运回国家的时候，人们会非常不安。越南就是一个例子。

Pasons
So true. They will bark here on internet having wet dreams how they destroy china. And when their soldiers come home dead they will whine and force the government to retreat.

【回复】太真实了。他们会在互联网上咆哮，做着摧毁中国的春梦。当他们的士兵死后回去，他们就会抱怨并迫使政府撤退。

Stephen Hausladen
What would there be to gain by war with a very powerful military and nuclear power? I love my country but a war like this would cost millions of lives in a short period of time. The old world is done and colonizations are not like they used to be. There is no more prestige In occupying parts of world which are far from home. Now would he considered, barbaric.

【回复】与一个军事和核力量非常强大的国家开战有什么好处？我爱我的国家，但这样的战争会在短时间内夺走数百万人的生命。旧世界已经一去不复返，殖民统治也不像以前那样了。占领远离本土的地区已经不再有什么威望了。现在会被视为野蛮行径。

Candice Mckenzie
Colonizers still have the same mindset and are crying because there hegemony on the world is coming to an end.

【回复】殖民者仍然抱着同样的心态，他们因世界的霸权即将结束而哭泣。

Benson Pe Chua
China will not wage wars of stupidity and all its advancement are all for defense - be it Economic, military, scientific etc ( even for the fortifying of the CCP, chinese nation and the country ). And these lessons comes from historical aggression by the west ,and Japan ( if there is no Himalayan mountain- maybe by the Indians also) . The economy to sustain the well being of the chinese nation and preserving the CCP. Even the BRI and the maritime Silk Road are for opening western and southern corridors to have Economic ties and maybe escape route . Well the recent successes of the Mars landing , the orbiters/ lander / explorer , the super computer , even quantum one, the hypersonic orbital nuclear capable missile , countless patent right etc really caught the west by surprise. I think better pray for the USA for the sake of the world . You see the problem is not CHINA but the USA !

【回复】中国不会发动愚蠢的战争，所有的进步都是为了国防——无论是经济、军事、科学等（甚至是为了巩固中共、中华民族和国家）。这些教训来自于西方和日本的历史侵略（如果没有喜马拉雅山，也许还有印度人）。经济是为了维持中华民族的福祉和维护中共。即使是一带一路和海上丝绸之路，也是为了开辟西部和南部走廊，建立经济联系，或许还有逃生通道。最近成功登陆火星、轨道器/着陆器/探测器、超级计算机，甚至是量子计算机、高超音速轨道核导弹、无数的专利权等成就，着实让西方感到惊讶。我觉得为了这个世界着想，最好为美国祈祷。问题不在于中国，而在于美国！

Donald Tufts
Please note that the USA has lost wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and now Afghanistan. WTF are these people thinking.

【回复】请注意，美国已经输掉了朝鲜战争、越南战争、伊拉克战争，现在又输掉了阿富汗战争。这些人到底在想什么？

Stephen Hausladen
From an original objective, a few we did achieve major goals by keeping the Communist troops out of South Korea, destroying the Ba’ath (Saddam’s) regime, and putting the Northern Alliance on charge of Afghanistan. Unfortunately, we did not solve any long-term problems and each of these conflicts came at high costs in terms of lives and money spent.
what we have learned is that an invasion is very easy for the US to win but occupations are where we falter since the will of the people cannot be changed. Conflicts operated by politicians can go nowhere aa we saw in Vietnam. We have also learned that private interests and industries benefit immensely from war as we witnessed in Iraq with Dick Cheney’s company being the sole victor.

【回复】从最初的目标来看，我们确实实现了一些主要目标，把共产党军队挡在韩国之外、摧毁了复兴党（萨达姆）政权、让北方联盟掌管了阿富汗。遗憾的是，我们并没有解决任何长期问题，而且每次冲突都付出了高昂的生命和金钱代价。
我们学到的教训是，美国很容易赢得入侵，但占领让我们举步维艰，因为人民的意志是无法改变的。就像我们在越南看到的那样，由政客操纵的冲突可能不会有什么好结果。我们还学到，私人利益和产业从战争中获益匪浅，正如我们在伊拉克看到的那样，迪克·切尼的公司是唯一的胜利者。

Donald Tufts
Your observation that corporations profit from America’s military adventures is dead on. One has to wonder if that is not the sole reason for these misadventures. Keep those bomb industry humming and dividends flowing to the Corporate elite.

【回复】你关于企业从美国的军事冒险中获利的观点完全正确。人们不得不怀疑，这是不是造成这些不幸事件的唯一原因。让炸弹产业继续运转，红利流向企业精英。

George Mccarten
Follow the money…

【回复】跟着钱走...

James Loh
A nuclear war will not gain either one any mileage.

【回复】核战争对任何一方都没有好处。

Art Lee
it’s no surprise, with the US history of world wide military engagements since it’s existence, that many of its citizens know of only one way to resolve differences, that is by going to war. In fact, to some, there are other untold benefits for such a strategy. Going to wars in foreign countries have been great business for the military industries as well as a mean for the government to unit its people to fight “foreign threats”, real or not real, instead of trying to deal with many dividing and unsolvable issues at home. Now, China is being targeted as the enemy, yet, many naive and ill informed warmongers in US probably have never heard of MAD. The question here is, talk is cheap, are you and your family ready to die!

【回复】美国自建国以来就一直在世界范围内进行军事行动，所以毫不奇怪，许多美国公民只知道一种解决分歧的方法，那就是战争。事实上，对某些人来说，这种战略还有其他数不清的好处。对军工企业来说，在外国打仗是一桩大买卖，对政府来说，这也是一种让民众团结起来的手段，与“外国威胁”（无论真假）作斗争，而不是努力处理国内许多分裂和无法解决的问题。现在，中国被当作敌人，然而，美国许多天真的、不明真相的战争贩子可能从未听说过MAD（注：核战争的相互保证毁灭）。现在的问题是，空谈无用，你和你的家人准备好赴死了吗？

Daniel Turan
* While military industries logically benefits from the war, all other industries suffers, because they need to pay for it. The economical costs are much greater than benefits of the few military companies. A war expenses does not help the economy. Unbelievable that people still thinks so.
* mean to unit its people to fight “foreign threats” - Exactly the opposite in the long term. Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, they all became quite unpopular. Even USSR invasion to Afghanistan was a disaster that has been a big factor by USSR’s decline.

【回复】* 从逻辑上讲，虽然军工企业可以从战争中获益，但所有其他行业都会受到损害，因为它们需要为此付出代价。经济成本远远大于少数军工企业的收益。战争开支无助于经济发展。真不敢相信人们还这么认为。
* 意在让本国民众团结起来对抗“外国威胁”，从长远来看恰恰相反。越南战争、朝鲜战争、阿富汗战争、伊拉克战争都变得非常不得人心。即使苏联入侵阿富汗也是一场灾难，这成为苏联衰落的一个重要因素。

Art Lee
Agreed and thank you for your further explanation of the current faulty US policies and strategies. But the smart think tanks and decision making leaders in the government do not seem to agree and they tend to ignore valuable lessons of yesterdays. Biden has a chance to tune down the rhetorics but he has decided to act tougher than Trump. Short term political gains in the expense of the country’s long term prosperity. Sad but real.

【回复】同意，感谢您对美国当前错误政策和战略的进一步解释。但精明的智囊团和政府决策领导人似乎并不认同，他们往往忽视了过去的宝贵教训。拜登有机会收敛言辞，但他决定表现得比特朗普更强硬。短期的政治利益牺牲了国家的长期繁荣。可悲但真实。

Daniel Turan
No US politician said, that the above mentioned wars were to support economical growth and they weren't because it it nonsense.
So maybe, just maybe there could be other reasons….

【回复】没有一个美国政客说过，上面提到的战争是为了支持经济增长，它们不是，因为这就是无稽之谈。
所以，也许，只是也许，可能还有其他原因...

Tom Withey
Oil?

【回复】石油？

Daniel Turan
Explain.
In Afghanistan, there's not really that much oil. Just google the cost of war and price of all oil in Afghanistan.
I mean I’m neither, political or economocal expert, but this is what my common sense tells me. I’m not trying to defend usa or anything. I just hate stupid arguments

【回复】解释一下。
在阿富汗，并没有那么多的石油。谷歌一下阿富汗的战争成本和所有石油的价格就知道了。
我的意思是，我既不是政治专家，也不是经济专家，但这是我的常识告诉我的。我并不想为美国或任何东西辩护。我只是讨厌愚蠢的争论。

Jules Wallace
Mutually Assured Destruction. Very scary term. I remember when it was an everyday worry.

【回复】相互保证毁灭。非常可怕的术语。我还记得那时候人们每天都在担心这个问题。

Benson Pe Chua
China buying buy not waging war for oil

【回复】中国购买石油而非发动石油战争

Owen Sichone
After the NATO retreat from Afghanistan and Biden’s declaration that Trump was right, China is an ecistential threat to American imperialism, it is not very likely that China or Russia or even Iran for that matter, will succumb to European gunboat diplomacy. After all it is not the Chinese who are suffering the humilliation of being opium addicts now. Whether you like it or not, all that you know is at an end.

【回复】在北约从阿富汗撤退之后，拜登宣布特朗普是对的，中国是美帝国主义的根本威胁，中国、俄罗斯甚至伊朗都不太可能屈服于欧洲的炮舰外交。毕竟，现在正在遭受鸦片成瘾之辱的不是中国人。不管你喜不喜欢，你所知道的一切都结束了。

Francis Chan
As long as the dead are not the politicians family, who cares.

【回复】只要死者不是政客的家人，谁会在乎呢？

Jason Kowanetz
People that would really ask a question like that make me worry about the future of humanity.

【回复】真的会问这种问题的人让我担心人类的未来了。

Stephen G.
I am constantly amazed at how dumb questions like this are asked.
First, the US CANNOT win a conventional war with China. China is too big, too far away, and too well disciplined. And, the US - and ALL of its western allies -CANNOT logistically support or supply troops anywhere in the western Pacific. Particularly not for any prolonged period of time.
So, that leaves a nuclear conflict. Does anyone know what Mutually Assured Destruction is?

【回复】我经常惊讶有人会问这样愚蠢的问题。
首先，美国不可能打赢与中国的常规战争。中国太大、太远，而且纪律严明。而且，美国及其所有西方盟国都无法在后勤上支持或补给西太平洋任何地方的军队。尤其是无法长期支持。
那么，就只剩下核冲突了。有人知道什么是相互保证毁灭吗？

Stephen Vingiello
China cannot possible win due to its geographic position. U S and it’s allies would cut off China’s supply chain set up a blockade in the sea of China
China can not compete with U S on the open seas

【回复】由于其地理位置的原因，中国不可能获胜。美国及其盟国将切断中国的供应链，在中国海域设置封锁线
中国无法在公海上与美国竞争

Stephen G.
Lol. You’re pretty funny. You are aware that a MILITARY fleet in the open ocean makes the use of nuclear weapons possible. WITHOUT ANY civilian collateral damage?
ONE medium size nuclear weapon could EFFORTLESSLY take out a US carrier battle group.
But, put your mind at ease. The Chinese are smarter than that.

【回复】哈哈。你真有趣。你知道，公海上的军事舰队让核武器的使用成为可能，而不会对平民造成任何附带损害？
一枚中型核武器就能轻松摧毁美国航母战斗群。
但是，请放心。中国人比这更聪明。

Huang Euchai
Two questions:
* Which other country do you think would be willing to join forces with the US to wage war on China?
* And how many Americans are you prepared to sacrifice to go to war with a country that has over 4 times the population?

【回复】两个问题
* 你认为还有哪个国家愿意与美国联手对中国发动战争？
* 你准备牺牲多少美国人，去和一个人口是美国四倍多的国家开战？

Stephen Vingiello
If a war ever happened between the U S and China I’d fully expect all the members of NATO and NAFTA plus Australia,Japan ,Korea and Israel plus most of the free world. I wouldn’t expect troops from most of them but fully expect support and compliance of the embargo and blockade As far As China’s advantage in troop numbers it’s not 1920 anymore. Wars will be fought with strategic strikes and small troop engagements. it’s nice to have a large reserve of troops but not a Hugh advantage Nobody wants a war.

【回复】如果中美之间发生战争，我完全可以期待北约和北美自由贸易协定的所有成员国，加上澳大利亚、日本、韩国和以色列，以及自由世界的大多数国家。我不指望其中大多数国家会出兵，但我完全相信他们会支持并遵守禁运和封锁。至于中国在军队数量上的优势，现在已经不是 1920 年了。战争将以战略打击和小规模部队交战的方式进行。拥有大量的后备部队是件好事，但不是巨大的优势，没有人想要战争。

David Ng
And the US think they can?
They think they are ‘saint’ but causes chaos wherever they went.
'Intelligence failure of the highest order' — How Afghanistan fell to the Taliban so quickly

【回复】美国认为他们可以吗？
他们自以为是 "圣人"，却在所到之处制造混乱。
“最高级别的情报失败”——阿富汗为何如此迅速地落入塔利班之手

Pasons
Open seas? You think US would stop at the middle of the sea and wait for china to come? Good luck with that. China will be lighting the fireworks and sit back and enjoy the show.

【回复】公海？你以为美国会停在海中央等中国来吗？祝你好运。中国将点燃焰火，坐下来欣赏表演。

Samson Qiu
They’re even end up with a devastating failure in Afghanistan after 20 years invading…

【回复】他们甚至在入侵阿富汗 20 年后以灾难性的失败告终...

Yap You Wai
hmm…. the private defense contractors win with more weapon contracts i.e. more $$? The politicians win as the defense contractors re-channel some $$ to them as political funds?

【回复】嗯.... 私营国防承包商赢得了更多的武器合同，也就是更多的美元？政客们赢了，因为国防承包商重新向他们输送了一些美元作为政治资金？

Peter Chan
And the American people lost. Trillion of dollars by tax payers gone to support war profiteering.

【回复】美国人民输了。纳税人的数万亿美元被用来支持战争暴利。

Samson Qiu
That’s true, many people win except…you know

【回复】没错，很多人都赢了，除了... 你知道的

David Leong
Can’t win against a “ schrimp” but want to fight killer whales that outnumber you 5 to 1? The only winner will be Russia.

【回复】打不过一只“小虾米”，却想打5倍于你的虎鲸？唯一的赢家会是俄罗斯。

Swee Chen
Because very smart people have war-gamed numerous scenarios regarding a military conflict between the US and China and there are not many in which the US comes out ahead in any substantive way. The choice between mutually assured destruction or an embarrassing military defeat is not one that any POTUS wants to be associated wth. Unless they do not have all their faculties…

【回复】因为非常聪明的人已经模拟过许多中美军事冲突的场景，而美国在这些场景中，并没有以任何实质性的方式取得领先。在“确保相互毁灭”与“令人尴尬的军事失败”之间做出选择，是任何一位美国总统都不愿意看到的。除非他们不具备所有能力...

Simon Kam
Unless they do not have all their faculties….
Precisely my worry, these US antiChina hawks may just be stupid enough to start a war in SCS thinking war only happens outside the US soil which they are so used to!

【回复】“除非他们不具备所有能力...”
这正是我所担心的，这些美国反华鹰派可能会愚蠢到在南海挑起战争，以为战争只会发生在他们习以为常的美国本土之外！

Oliver
Lets hope the PRC don't force anyones hand with expansionism then.

【回复】但愿中国不要以扩张主义来强迫任何人。

Blobby
What expansionism? They’ve shown no sign of that to date, so it would only be something manufactured by the USA…

【回复】什么扩张主义？到目前为止，他们还没有表现出任何这种迹象，所以这只会是美国制造出来的东西...

Benson Pe Chua
They’re not that stupid - USA wars are only done on small and weaker countries

【回复】他们没那么蠢，美国只对弱小国家发动战争

Jacob Mallory
You know the US military has historically have faked there wargames to get more funding in congress.

【回复】要知道，美国军方历来都会在战争模拟中造假，以获得国会更多的拨款。

Jonathan Harrison
You do realize those simulations were ran in the South China Sea? Moreover, in all out conventional warfare, China stands little chance against the United States.

【回复】你知道那些模拟是在南海进行的吗？此外，在全面常规战争中，中国几乎没有机会对抗美国。

Yip Cheong
US had the courage to attack Iraq and Libya because she knows the adversaries have no defense against them. These are really cowardly attacks, the worst coward anyone would know of.

【回复】美国之所以敢攻击伊拉克和利比亚，是因为她知道对手对他们毫无招架之力。这真是懦夫式的攻击，是众所周知的最可怕的懦夫。

Pasons
Let me add something. Some coward ways US fought.
1. Atomic bombing on Japan. Cant fight face to face like men? Let’s bomb their women and children.
2. Vietnam war. US got ass kicked in the jungle so they poisoned the forest with agent orange.

【回复】让我补充一下。美国的一些懦夫式战斗。
1、日本遭受原子弹轰炸。不能像男人一样面对面战斗？那就轰炸他们的妇女和儿童吧。
2、越南战争。美国在丛林里被打得屁滚尿流，于是他们在森林里扔下橘色剂。

Prabhat Sharma
Nuclear weapons with long range delivery capabilities are the greatest antidote to wars. Because they assure mutual destruction. It is why North Korea is not attacked despite they openly flaunting their capabilities. But Iraq was accused of possessing WMD which they did not, and was attacked. Therefore, posturing, war mongering, minor skirmishes may happen but all out war among countries with such weapon and delivery capabilities are most unlikely.

【回复】具有远程投送能力的核武器是战争的最大解药。因为它们能确保相互摧毁。这就是为什么朝鲜尽管公开炫耀自己的能力却没有受到攻击的原因。但伊拉克被指控拥有大规模杀伤性武器，而他们并没有，所以遭到了攻击。因此，装腔作势、战争煽动和小规模冲突可能会发生，但拥有此类武器和投送能力的国家之间的全面战争是最不可能发生的。

Gregg Williams
No. That was never why North Korea was not attacked. If it were not for China, that failed State would have ceased to exist long ago.

【回复】不，这从来不是朝鲜没有受到攻击的原因。如果没有中国，这个失败的国家早就不复存在了。

Prabhat Sharma
I know that North Korea is a failed state but for Chinese support, food etc.may be. But my point is limited- would anyone dare attack it after it has both nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles to anywhere in the world?

【回复】我知道朝鲜是一个失败的国家，但说到中国的支持，粮食之类的可能有。但我的观点只限于——在朝鲜拥有核武器和投送工具后，还有人敢攻击它吗？

Monica Alvarez Sage
It makes me sad to think that I’d be among those killed in a war with China when they invade the mainland soil because the US, my home, pisses them off for a stupid ass reason, and I’d die simply because I’m an American civilian…
I want my country to realize it’s not the biggest, strongest, ultraconservative badass anymore. If we don’t get that shit out of our heads, we are FUCKED.

【回复】一想到我也会在与中国的战争中丧生，我就很难过。我的祖国美国，由于一个愚蠢的理由惹恼了他们，当他们入侵本土的时候，我只会因为我是美国平民而简单地死去...
我希望我们国家意识到，它不再是最大、最强、极端保守的坏蛋了。如果我们不摆脱这种想法，我们就完了。

Tsung-Chow Su
I think the fundamental question needs to be addressed is why should US go to war with China. Have China invaded any US territory? Difference in opinion, different in color, different in government should not be the reason go into war.

【回复】我认为需要解决的根本问题是，美国为什么要与中国开战？中国入侵过美国领土吗？观点不同、肤色不同、政府不同不应该成为开战的理由。

Pasons
When the smart kid get more marks on the exams, bullies gonna act against him.

【回复】当聪明的孩子在考试中得到更多分数时，欺凌者就会对他采取行动。

Dharam Nanan
Has the US won a major War? WWII was won by the Soviets. Had it not been for the Atomic bomb, do you think US would have beaten Japan? US lost the Korean and Vietnam Wars. US lost Afghanistan War and is ashamed to pull out. US goes to War not to win, but for the War hogs to make money, and the American people pays the price and suffer the consequences. WAKE UP PEOPLE! Take an interest in yourself and in America!

【回复】美国赢过重大战争吗？二战的胜利者是苏联。如果没有原子弹，你认为美国会打败日本吗？美国输掉了朝鲜战争和越南战争。美国输掉了阿富汗战争，并羞愧地撤军。美国参战不是为了获胜，而是为了战争贩子赚钱，美国人民付出了代价，也承受了后果。大家醒醒吧！关注自己，关注美国！

Huang Euchai
From what I have been told, the Japanese were already running out of resouces to continue the war even before that day, The bomb simply made things move faster.

【回复】据我所知，日本人甚至在那天之前就已经耗尽了继续战争的资源，那枚原子弹只是加快了事态的发展。

Charles Chin
Yes and No. It took 2 bombs. not 1.

【回复】是也不是。用了两枚原子弹，而不是一枚。

Chip Young
Just a side note: we lost the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq was a disaster with thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqis killed and the birth and the rise of ISIS. Our military men and women were heroic, but as in Viet Nam, were hamstrung by incompetent civilian and military senior leaders who continually falsely espoused positive progress.

【回复】顺便一提：我们输掉了阿富汗战争，伊拉克战争是一场灾难，成千上万无辜的伊拉克人丧生，ISIS 诞生并崛起。我们的军人英勇无畏，但与越南战争一样，他们受到了无能的文职和军事高级领导人的束缚，这些领导人不断虚假地鼓吹取得积极进展。

The Truth is Out There
Lockheed Martin has the largest budget spent on lobbying DC politicians of all US companies. This explains why $1 Trillion of my tax dollars were wasted on the failed F-35 fighter jet. That is why these posts show up here. War is a very lucrative business. Who cares how many young American men and women die. The military industrial complex will make big profits and that is all they care about. It is a shame that our country has devolved into this tailspin that will be the end of the US as the world’s number one superpower. China does not have to do anything….just wait and watch at how we are bringing ourselves down by spending so much money on defense and fighting wars we cannot afford.

【回复】在所有美国公司中，洛克希德-马丁公司用于游说华盛顿政客的预算最多。这就解释了为什么我们 1 万亿美元税款被浪费在了失败的 F-35 战斗机上。这就是这样的帖子出现在这里的原因。战争是一门利润丰厚的生意。谁会在乎有多少年轻的美国男女丧生。军工企业将赚取巨额利润，这就是他们所关心的。遗憾的是，我们的国家已经陷入了这种混乱，美国作为世界头号超级大国即将终结。中国不必做任何事情.... 只需静观其变，看看我们是如何通过在国防上花费巨资和打我们负担不起的战争而自取灭亡的。

Dave Ellis
Maybe the fact that millions of Afghani people got to experience life's basic freedoms for the first time over the last 2 decades makes it worth it.. I know Id do it more for my own.

【回复】也许在过去 20 年里，数百万阿富汗人第一次体验到了生活的基本自由，这就值得了... 我知道这样做更多是为了我们自己。

Pasons
i never thought i would find a intelligent american. Here’s your crown, King!

【回复】我从没想过我会遇到一个聪明的美国人。这是你的王冠，国王！

Moonbeam
How much money and how many lives do you think has been lost by the US in Afghanistan? Have you really thought this through?

【回复】你认为美国在阿富汗损失了多少金钱和生命？你真的想清楚了吗？

KNG HOCK GUAN ABEL
The US had spent two decades and trillions of dollars fighting the Telebans in Afgan and lost. Do you think the US can defeat China a major nuke power? Please see a doctor to have your brain examined.

【回复】美国花了二十年的时间和数万亿美元在阿富汗与塔利班人作战，结果输了。你认为美国能打败中国这个核大国吗？请去看医生，检查一下你的大脑。

David Leong
US can’t beat Vietnam, Iraq , North Korea and Afghanistan’s Taliban and now want to fight against China? Best scenario; hundreds of thousands of Americans dead and US impoverished. Worst case scenario ; end of the civilised world as both countries are nuked to extinction!

【回复】美国打不过越南、伊拉克、朝鲜和阿富汗的塔利班，现在又想打中国？最好的情况是：数十万美国人死亡，美国陷入贫困。最坏的情况是：两个国家都被核弹毁灭，文明世界就此终结！

Peter Chan
I am sure US would stand a good chance to win China… if China invades US.
But the fact of the matter is US would have to travel 3000+ miles for this war… the logistic alone would be a killer.

【回复】如果中国入侵美国，我相信美国有很大机会赢得中国。
但事实是，美国将不得不为这场战争奔波 3000 多英里......单是后勤保障就足以致命。

Claus Appel
Because the US isn’t stark raving mad?
I dunno, man. The last several years seem to suggest otherwise.

【回复】因为美国没有完全疯了？
我不知道，兄弟。最近几年的情况似乎并非如此。

Andy Moore
China's military isn't even in the top 10 over half their troops aren't even adequately supplied plus their body armor and weapons are made in China aka cheaply made junk

【回复】中国军队甚至连前 10 名都排不上，一半以上的军队甚至没有足够的补给，而且他们的防弹衣和武器都是中国制造，又名廉价垃圾。

Jonathan.fry
Why doesn't the US go to war with China? Probably because Americans don't want cats to be the new masters of the planet

【回复】美国为什么不和中国开战？大概是因为美国人不想让猫成为地球的新主人吧
-------------------------------------------------------

Keith Sear Studied Software Engineering (Graduated 2000)
Why doesn't the US declare war on China - For what purpose?
Since they're probably gonna end up going to war sometime anyway - Based on what?
I have a better idea…
Maybe they should declare war on Canada instead, expand their territory north, build a land link to Alaska, grab some more oil and gas.

【回答】软件工程专业（2000年毕业）
为什么美国不向中国宣战——目的是什么？
反正他们可能迟早都会打起来的——基于什么？
我有个更好的主意...
也许他们应该向加拿大宣战，向北扩张领土，修建一条通往阿拉斯加的陆路通道，捞取更多的石油和天然气。

Adrian Lacno Former Manager
War for what? Declare war on China because some is better than US? Declare war because China is a competitor? That would be so funny. Would you beat up someone because someone win the marathon race? Yea, that is what you are implying here. What kind of human rights is that? A big human right violator!

【回答】前经理
为什么而战？因为中国比美国好而向中国宣战？因为中国是竞争对手而对他们宣战？那就太可笑了。你会因为某人赢得马拉松比赛而揍他一顿吗？是的，这就是你的意思。这算什么人权？一个严重侵犯人权的国家！

Lynn Oddy
It can be easely won in seas, just sink aĺl Chinese ships

【回答】
在海上可以轻松取胜，只需把中国所有的舰船击沉即可
-------------------------------------------------------

Lynn Oddy
Even if the US managed that they wouldn’t have won. Control of the seas is only one factor in a war. The US had control of the seas and air in Vietnam and still lost. Same in Afghanistan although as a landlocked country there were no Afghan ships to sink.

【答主回复】即使美国做到了，他们也赢不了。制海权只是战争中的一个因素。美国控制了越南的海空，但还是输了。在阿富汗也一样，尽管阿富汗是一个内陆国家，没有船只可以击沉。

Pavel Wolkow
But Chjna can not sustain itself under blocade, CCP will surrender completely

【回复】但中国在封锁下难以为继，中共将彻底投降

Lynn Oddy
Have you even looked at a world map? No one can blockade China by sea. Not with all the land borders it has. Furthermore China is in a much better position to sustain itself than the US - it relies on its own production for most essentials.

【答主回复】你看过世界地图吗？没人能从海上封锁中国。中国有那么多陆地边界。此外，中国比美国更有能力自给自足，大部分生活必需品都能依靠自己生产。

Pavel Wolkow
As i read in american media, the plan is simple first seablocade, than strikes on railways from China to cause crisis and hunger

【回复】正如我在美国媒体上所读到的，计划很简单，首先是海上封锁，然后是袭击中国的铁路，引发危机和饥饿。

Lynn Oddy
Ah, some journalist has come up with an idea which they think might work. “Strikes on railways” sounds so easy until you ask what with? Long distance bombers and missles aren’t accurate enough to hit a railway. Carrier based strike aircraft haven’t the range to reach most of China.
We haven’t even considered how China might respond yet. Up to and including using their ICBMs to deliver nuclear weapons to US cities.

【答主回复】啊，一些记者想出了一个他们认为可行的点子。“袭击铁路”听起来很简单，但你要问用什么袭击？远程轰炸机和导弹的精确度不足以击中铁路。舰载攻击机的航程也不足以到达中国大部分地区。
我们甚至还没有考虑中国会怎么应对。包括使用洲际弹道导弹向美国城市发射核武器。
-------------------------------------------------------

Richard Kenneth Eng I love China. I love the Smalltalk programming language.
USA doesn’t have the upper hand. USA is totally unprepared to wage a war with China. Fighting a war in China’s own backyard is a fool’s errand.
China bristles with anti-ship missiles, including hypersonic missiles. USN’s supercarrier strike groups will keep their distance from the Chinese coast.
China has the world’s largest navy in terms of number of ships (destroyers, frigates, corvettes, missile boats, submarines, aircraft carriers, etc.). Most of these ships are relatively new, too, having been built in the last 20 years. USN’s fleet has a large number of old, antiquated ships from the Cold War era that haven’t been fully updated.
China’s capacity for building ships vastly exceeds America’s capacity.
USA is incapable of landing hundreds of thousands of troops on Chinese soil. China has the world’s largest standing army of over 2 million active military personnel.
China has some of the world’s most advanced stealth fighters.
USA won’t risk nuclear war with China, which has over 400 nuclear weapons by the Pentagon’s own admission.

【回答】我喜欢中国。我喜欢 Smalltalk 编程语言。
美国不占上风。美国完全没有准备好与中国开战。在中国自己的后院打仗是很愚蠢的事情。
中国拥有包括高超音速导弹在内的大量反舰导弹。美国海军的超级航母打击群将与中国海岸保持距离。
中国拥有世界上舰艇数量最多的海军（驱逐舰、护卫舰、轻型护卫舰、导弹艇、潜艇、航母等）。其中大部分舰艇也相对较新，是在过去 20 年中建造的。美国海军舰队有大量冷战时期的老旧舰艇，尚未完全更新。
中国的造船能力远远超过美国。
美国没有能力在中国领土上登陆数十万军队。中国拥有 200 多万现役军人，是世界上最大的常备军。
中国拥有一些世界上最先进的隐形战斗机。
五角大楼自己也承认，中国拥有 400 多枚核武器，美国不会冒险与中国爆发核战争。

Brady Milton Former Manager Training and Personnel Development at Goodyear Tire (company)
Why dont America concentrate on fixing their own problems insted of using war as an excuse to drag back others who can and are doing it better faster and cheaper than you ever could.

【回答】前固特异轮胎（公司）培训与人事发展经理
美国人为什么不集中精力解决自己的问题，而要以战争为借口，拖那些比你们做得更好、更快、更便宜的国家的后腿呢？

Roberto Eduardo Lives in Aruba (1970–present)
The USA did not accomplish its aims in North Korea during the Korean War, was thrown out of Vietnam and now from Afghanistan and was thrown out of China although it had given a lot of help to Chiang Kai-shek. All the time having first rate hardware in comparison with the opponent.

【回答】住在阿鲁巴（1970 年 - 至今）
美国在朝鲜战争的目的没有达到、被赶出了越南、现在又被赶出了阿富汗，虽然它给了蒋介石很多帮助，但还是被赶出了中国大陆。与对手相比，美国一直拥有一流的硬件。