[2021-10-18]Quora：中国40年来没有经历过一场战争，这会对他们不利吗？

Kanthaswamy Balasubramaniam Lawyer
Heres the thing
The Germans were the Finest fighting force on the planet.
Why did the US or UK or Russia win WWII?
Strategy? Weapons?
No
Manufacturing, outproducing the Germans 4 to 1 in Tanks, Craft etc.
Outnumbering the Germans 3 to 1 especially on the Eastern Front.
Thats how wars are won. Battles may be won by strategy but a War is won only by Supplies, Rate of replenishment of men and weapons, technology.
China has all of these only next to USA. In fact US is the Big Daddy so lets not even talk of US which is miles ahead of the world.
So this inexperience is not a factor at all. China can continuously send wave after wave after wave of men, manufacture equipment at frantic pace and keep the War machine going.

【回答】
事情是这样的。
德国人曾有这个星球上最优秀的战斗部队。
而为什么美国、英国或者俄罗斯赢得了二战？
是战略？还是武器？
不是。
制造业上，坦克、舰艇等的产量是德国人的4倍。
投入人力上，是德国的3倍，特别是在东线。
战争就是这样打赢的。战斗可以靠战略取胜，但战争只能靠补给、人力和武器的补给率、技术取胜。
中国拥有所有这些，仅次于美国。事实上，美国是老大，所以我们甚至不要谈论美国，美国领先世界好几英里。
所以，所谓缺乏经验完全不是一个问题。中国可以不断地派出一波又一波的人力，以疯狂的速度制造装备，让保持战争机器运转。

China can flood money and keep the War economy going for a long time
No Country can last against such waves of men and equipment and money (US obviously not included)
Now the Anti China brigade has two choices
If they say “Wars” no longer require wave after wave of people and its all about Hacking or Cyber warfare etc - Then China cannot be called inexperienced. The 40 yr inexperience is meaningless due to the changing of the nature of war and every nation is on the same footing.
If they say China hasnt fought a war for 40 years and so has a disadvantage - then China has wave after wave of people, manufacturing ability and economic clout - which matters more than experience in a War
Anyone who thinks Chinas inexperience - is a certified Idiot
They are the second most powerful nation after the US and without US involvement can defeat any nation on earth in a long drawn war or even a non US alliance.

中国可以用大量的资金来维持战时经济的长期运行。
没有哪个国家能够抗衡如此大规模的人力、装备和资金(美国显然不包括在内)
现在反华大队有两个选择：
如果他们说“战争”不再需要一波又一波的人力，而只是关于黑客或网络战等，那么中国不能被称为缺乏经验。由于战争性质的改变，40年里缺乏战争经验是没什么意义的，每个国家都有同样的地位。
如果他们说中国已经40年没有打过一场战争了，所有处于劣势，那么中国有一波又一波的人力、制造能力和经济影响力，这比战争中的经验更重要。
如果有人认为中国缺乏经验，那他就是一个十足的白痴
他们是仅次于美国的第二强大的国家，在没有美国参与的情况下，他们可以在一场旷日持久的战争中击败地球上任何一个国家，甚至是一个非美国的联盟。
-------------------------------------------------------

Gayathri Palaniappan
Kantha Sir, Please sleep. You wrote this answer around 3'o clock.

【回复】答主先生，请好好休息，你是在半夜3点左右写的这条回答。

Bailey Yan
The man is just too passionate!

【回复】这个人实在太有激情了！

Gayathri Palaniappan
True that :)

【回复】的确如此 :)

Mihir Maheswary
Sir,why US is not trying to increase their population,if they have 700 800 million population they can easily beat china in everything.

【回复】先生，为什么美国不打算增加他们的人口，如果他们有7到8亿人口，他们可以轻易地在任何方面击败中国。

Arumoy Chakraborty
Yes, Biden took note of this and he’ll be signing an executive order for “mandatory boink” early next year. 😂
US is not a chicken farm. It’s a nation, of humans.

【回复】是的，拜登注意到了这点，他将在明年年初签署一项“强制行房”的行政命令。
美国不是一个养鸡场，而是一个人类组成的国家。

Rashmah Nox
You have to consider the quality of life, living costs and present economic situation of the country and its population as well.
Just look at China - They lifted the One-Child Policy several years ago, but mainland Chinese people are reluctant to have more than one child, considering the rising cost of living associated with increase in the quality of life, especially in urban regions. And China is a rapidly-developing nation.
Right now, with the global and national economy at its lowest points since the Great Depression and with growing number of Americans living paycheck-to-paycheck, you’d think they are more worried about their next meal than deciding to have a family and/or more children.
And speaking of India, once your country reaches the same level of development status, literacy and quality of life as China is right now (i.e. more people are moving up the economic ladder into middle-class), India will also experience the same thing with decline in the birth rate as well. It’s the same elsewhere around the world.

【回复】你还必须考虑到生活质量、生活成本以及国家和人口目前的经济状况。
看看中国，他们几年前解除了一胎政策，但是考虑到生活成本的上升伴随着生活质量的提高，特别是在城市地区，中国大陆的人们不愿意多生一个孩子。中国是一个快速发展的国家。
现在，全球经济和国家经济都处于大萧条以来的最低点，越来越多的美国人生活拮据，你可能会认为他们更担心自己的下一顿饭，而不是决定要一个家庭或更多的孩子。
说到印度，一旦你们国家达到中国目前的发展水平、识字水平和生活质量(也就是说，越来越多的人向中产阶级迈进)，印度的出生率也会出现下降。世界其他地方也是如此。

A N
this is Indian mentality. we are not living in stone age where men ride on horseback. wars are fought on technology like drones, submarines, fighter jets etc. they still have the best brains from all over the world, best enterprises from aerospace, defence, IT etc . If still nothing works you can nuke the shit out of the whole planet 3 times over. Nowadays world war types of war wont be fought ever.

【回复】这就是印度人的心态。我们不是生活在骑在马背上石器时代。战争是用无人机、潜艇、战斗机等技术进行的，他们仍然拥有来自世界各地的最优秀的人才，航空航天、国防、 IT 等领域的最优秀企业。如果还是没有效果，你可以用核弹把整个星球炸上三遍。现在世界大战类型的战争永远不会发生。

Bharath Jagadeeshwaran
Completely agree.

【回复】完全同意。

Yatharth Sachdeva
that time is 42 years before, to be correct. A lot has changed, now China has a self sustaining defense industry and a GDP more than 3 times than ours even at PPP and real terms.
And given the huge difference in per capita income, the growth rate differential is not good enough for India to soon catch up.
Plus aggressive posturing — India is weak here. In Cuban Missile crisis, Kennedy was on the brink of the nuclear exchange, same throughout cold war, In WW2 US navy was loosing till Midway (1942), China lost 200000+ soldiers to save North Korea. Indian politicians till now dont have the spine to be in such precarious positions, that is needed to show yourself as a world power.
If at all we can develop a counter to this, China's threat will be non existent in the long run

【回复】准确地说，是42年的时间。很多事情都改变了，现在中国有了自给自足的国防工业，GDP是我们的3倍，即使按购买力平价和实际价值计算也是如此。
鉴于印度人均收入的巨大差异，增长率的差异无法让印度很快赶上。
再加上咄咄逼人的姿态，而印度在这方面很弱。在古巴导弹危机中，肯尼迪处于核交战的边缘，整个冷战期间都是如此。在二战中，美国海军一直在失利，直到中途岛战役(1942年)，中国为了拯救朝鲜牺牲了超过20万名士兵。到目前为止，印度的政客们还没有勇气站在如此危险的位置上，这是展示自己作为世界强国的必要条件。
如果我们能够找到一种对策，那么从长远来看，中国的威胁将不复存在。

Ram Krishnaswamy
We do have nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Besides, having seen India and comparing it with China, no Chinese will want to take on the onerous burden of running India as occupied territory!
Like, will India ever want to occupy Bangladesh? :)

【回复】我们确实有核武器作为一种威慑。此外，看过印度并与中国相比，没有哪个中国人会愿意承担把印度作为被占领土地的沉重负担！
比如，印度会想要占领孟加拉国吗？:)

Rashmah Nox
No sane Chinese leaders would ever want to occupy India, be assured of that.
Come on, how do you want the PLA troops to climb the Tibetian pleatau, cross the Himalayan mountains and ome down to New Delhi? It’s very energy and cost consuming to do just that, let alone setting administrative systems over occupied India.
I would rather blow up mountain cliffs and bore tunnels through the Himalayas so that highways, railways and high speed rail systems can be laid down in order to connect between China and India. However, the engineering challenges would be on another level, considering the seismic activities in the Himalayans - politics seem to be an easy part compared to this.

【回复】任何理智的中国人都不会想要占领印度的，这一点可以肯定。
拜托，你希望中国军队如何翻越西藏高原，穿过喜马拉雅山脉，到达新德里？这样做既耗费精力又耗费成本，更不用说在被占领的印度建立行政系统了。
我宁愿炸毁高山峭壁，开凿喜马拉雅山的隧道，以便铺设高速公路、铁路和高速铁路系统，连接中国和印度。然而，考虑到喜马拉雅山脉的地震活动——政治似乎是比较容易的一部分，而工程上的挑战将在是另外一个水平。

Yatharth Sachdeva
its simple. No one wants India annexed.
Because they want No Man's land and sparsely populated land to show their domination. Also the peaks on the road to Ladakh captured so we are at their peril, their machanised divisions can launch an offensive as they please.

【回复】原因很简单，没有人希望印度被兼并。
因为他们想要无人区和人烟稀少的土地来显示自己的统治地位。此外，通往拉达克道路上的山峰被占领了，所以我们处于危险之中，他们的机械化师可以随心所欲地发动进攻。

Venkat Tote
He has good knowledge and info. But he is committed China supporter and blind Jodi hater / Congress supporter. This lens distorts his replies.

【回复】答主有很好的知识和信息。但他是忠实的中国支持者和盲目的莫迪仇视者/国大党支持者。这个立场扭曲了他的回答。

Ram Krishnaswamy
Where did you get “blind Jodi hater / Congress supporter” ?
Is that your prejudice showing?!
I’ve never seen him being a blind anything. He always gives reason (whether you agree with it or not) for his likes/dislikes and support/opposition. So, where did you get the tern BLIND from?

【回复】你从哪里得到“盲目的莫迪仇视者/国大党支持者”的？
这就是你的偏见吗！
我从没见过他盲目什么。他总是给出他喜欢/讨厌和支持/反对的理由(不管你同意与否)。那么，你是从哪里得到“盲目”这个词的？

Manj Singh
Do you know anything how many Russians lost their lives in WW2 winning over German occupied areas. Any idea? Secondly Germany gave tough competition to Allied forces for more than 2.5 yrs of total 4 years of war. Its only after successful Normandy op. and Russia's Stalingrad recapturing that allied forces started seeing some chances of winning the war.
Germany alone gave tough competition for two years to US, UK and Russia, of these one was world superpower - UK, second was regional military and economical power Russia, third economical and military power of that time US, later became superpower.
Yes logistics and technology did played an important part but US's experience of civil war, independence war, WW1 and UK's experience of colonial wars also helped a lot but their combined strategy, technology and manpower also helped.

【回复】你知道有多少俄罗斯人在二战中战胜德国占领区时而失去了生命吗。有什么想法吗？其次，德国在长达4年的战争中，与盟军展开了长达两年半的激烈竞争。只有在诺曼底行动成功之后，俄罗斯的斯大林格勒重新夺回，盟军才开始看到了赢得战争的一些机会。
两年来，仅德国就与美国、英国和俄罗斯进行了激烈斗争，其中一个是世界超级大国——英国，其次是地区军事和经济强国俄罗斯，当时美国是第三大经济和军事强国，后来成为超级大国。
是的，后勤和技术确实发挥了重要作用，但美国的南北战争、独立战争、一战和英国殖民战争的经验也起到了很大作用，它们的战略、技术和人力结合也有帮助。

Kanthaswamy Balasubramaniam
Who won?
Who lost?
Thats what matters
In a mere 3 years - Germans lost and retreated
And its mainly due to the eastern front, due to the cold, the numbers and the logistics
Civil war experience???😂😂😂😂
That was 85 years ago, with Mule Cannons. Not even 0.00000001% was influenced by Civil War
Even WWI was a no no. No trench warfare or planes flying 900–1100 feet high

【答者回复】谁赢了？谁输了？
这才是最重要的
仅仅3年时间，德国人就输了，并且撤退了
而这主要是由于东部前线，由于寒冷，数量和后勤
南北战争的经验？
那是85年前的事了，当时还有骡子炮，甚至不到0.00000001%的原因有南北战争经验的影响。
即使是一战的经验也不是原因，没有壕沟战或者飞机在900-1100英尺高空飞行。

Manj Singh
who won is what matters in the end. But what made them won is also important that should not be ignored.

【回复】谁最后赢了是最重要的。但是，让他们获胜的原因也很重要，这一点不容忽视。

Rashmah Nox
Speaking of experience, in case you forgot, Germany (and mainland Europe) does have their own fair share of experiences in warfare leading up to WW1 (and WW2). Of course, my answer is way simplified.

【回复】说到战争经验，提醒你一下，德国(和欧洲大陆)在一战(以及二战)前的战争中确实有他们自己的经验。当然，我的答案很简短。

Piyush Singh
Well Germany and USA clearly won, UK and USSR lost.

【回复】德国和美国显然赢了，英国和苏联输了。

Yatharth Sachdeva
Apart from not much domestic defense weapons manufacturing, poor economy, our problem is a this. The Pakis are 1/6 the population, 1/10 the GDP and yet give a tough match to us, through nuclear weapons, proxy war, actual wars, Siachen, everywhere.
Our both enemies anticipate our peaceful compromising behaviour before they plan their offensive. Our leadership wants to create a narrative to get votes (we showed a strong face and all) but media would not highlight much if things go south. Our politicians need to assume responsibility be whatever the outcome, be completely transparent to the max extent possible. And opposition has to keep shut if Govt doesn't make compromised in favour of China.
Secondly —Be whatever your views on China, many of which I accept, but no matter how the Govt handles it diplomatically, if it is not willing to loose land to the enemy, Galwan will remain unavoidable, due to salami slicing by the adversary. Its the enemy at doors.
Jai Hind

【回复】除了国内国防武器制造不多，经济不景气，我们的问题就是这个。巴基斯坦人口是印度的1/6，GDP的1/10，但却通过核武器、代理人战争、真正的战争、锡亚琴等等，给我们带来了艰难的斗争。
我们的两个敌人在策划进攻之前，都预料到了我们的和平妥协行为。我们的领导层希望创造一种获得选票的叙事方式(我们表现出强硬的面孔和所有的一切)，但如果事情变糟，媒体也不会强调什么。我们的政客需要承担责任，无论结果如何，都要尽可能完全透明。如果政府不做出有利于中国的妥协，反对派就必须闭嘴。
其次，不管你对中国的看法是什么，我接受其中的许多观点，但是不管政府如何在外交上处理这件事，如果它不愿意把土地让给敌人，由于对手的切香肠，加尔旺仍不可避免。它是门口的敌人。
印度万岁。

Kanthaswamy Balasubramaniam
I agree
My point is that China is not to be underestimated as is very very very powerful. Thats all
Not for India to tamely buckle down

【作者回复】我同意
我的观点是，不可低估中国，它非常非常非常强大，就是这样。
对印度来说，是必须全力以赴的对象。

Arumoy Chakraborty
It took 3 battle hardened country, among which one had a global empire to source materials and men, one lost a generation & one was isolated by massive oceans on two sides to keep industrial production running, to beat Germany. Oh and all 3 nations, (4 if you count France) were really really full of smart people, very industrialised, had a combined supply chain wrapping around the world and didn’t lack money by any metrics.
And all this, to speak nothing of internal sabotage, when German nuclear scientists wilfully delayed building a nuclear bomb, Vichy France was swarming with resistance fighters & Italians on the border were more than happy to rat out and summarily execute any Nazi at sight, Poles feeding info to allies, Norwegians spying through Scottish Northern Isles, to name a few things.
People really underestimate Nazi Germany, and how much battle experience counts for.
I believe China is a formidable force in a war, they have a ton of strengths to run with, but lack of experience is one thing that is their weakness.

【回复】这需要三个久经沙场的国家，其中一个国家拥有全球帝国来采购原材料和人力，一个国家失去了一代人，一个国家被两边巨大的海洋隔离以保持工业生产运转，才打败了德国。哦，所有这三个国家(如果算上法国的话，是四个)有很多真正聪明的人，非常工业化，有一个覆盖全球的联合供应链，以任何标准来看都不缺钱。
所有这一切，更不用说内部破坏了，当时德国核科学家故意推迟制造核弹，维系法国到处都是抵抗战士，边境上的意大利人非常乐意揭发并立即处决任何纳粹分子，波兰人向盟友提供信息，挪威人在苏格兰北部群岛进行间谍活动，这只是其中几个例子。
人们真的低估了纳粹德国，以及战斗经验的重要性。
我相信中国在战争中会是一支令人敬畏的力量，他们有大量的优势可以发挥，但缺乏经验是他们的弱点之一。

Sunil Mandava
Let's talk energy sir. USA is by far most energy independent advanced economy, if push comes to shove and war is inevitable, China will fall short on that front, petrol diesel, gas and even electricity tbh.

【回复】我们来谈谈能源吧，先生。美国是迄今为止最能源独立的发达经济体，如果逼不得已，战争不可避免，中国在这方面会有所不足，汽油、柴油、天然气甚至电力都是如此。

Ajay Sinha
Manpower is going to be irrelevant in future wars. Drones and missiles will decide the outcome. And nobody can doubt Chinese efficiency in these areas.

【回复】在未来的战争中，人力将变得无关紧要。无人机和导弹将决定结果。没有人会怀疑中国在这些领域的效率。

Pawandeep
Like Germany China cannot fight multiple front and I think you know this.
Yes it is true 40 year of inexperienced mean nothing.Victory means everything.

【回复】就像德国一样，中国不可能打多条战线，我想你知道这点。
是的，40年里缺乏战争经验确实毫无意义。胜利意味着一切。

Ajit Managoli
Wars are won due to economic strength and technological advances and terrain advantages… China is way ahead of India in first two… That's why we are content to defend.

【回复】战争的胜利取决于经济实力、技术进步和地形优势…而中国在前两点遥遥领先印度... 这就是为什么我们满足于防御的原因。

Zhang Le
The third is also largly on Chinese side.
Indian capital is very near the China-Indian border. On the indian side-high polulation density, economy center of India. While on the Chinese side, totally desolate land. Also Chinese hold the high ground- the Tibetan plateau!
If i am a sane Indian, i would searously consider the consequence of a war with China.

【回复】第三点(地形优势)中国也很大程度拥有。
印度首都非常靠近中印边境。印度的一侧：高人口密度，是印度的经济中心。而中国的一侧：完全是一片荒凉的土地。还有中国人占据着高地——青藏高原！
如果我是一个理智的印度人，我会认真考虑与中国开战的后果。

Karthi Keyan
In war time is it possible for manufacturing.In 1945.there are no missiles are there.what will happen if enemies countries destroy the manufacturing.capacity at the time of war through missile?

【回复】在战争时期，制造能力还有可能吗？在1945年的时候没有导弹，如果敌国在战时用导弹摧毁制造能力，会发生什么？

Kanthaswamy Balasubramaniam
Difficult to penetrate China and target manufacturing facilities. China has a lot of antimissiles, enough for any country except US.
They manufacture in 1000s of places.
Near imposible
Not like Iraq or Iran

【作者回复】很难穿透中国并瞄准制造设施。中国有很多反导弹武器，对除美国以外的任何国家足够了。
他们可以在一千多个地方制造。
几乎不可能的，
它不像伊拉克或伊朗。

Lewis Parker
More men would lead to clear victory when nukes were not there. Now US can just nuke all the cities and there won’t be any men left for war machine.

【回复】在没有核武器的情况下，更多的人力将取得明显的胜利。而现在美国可以核爆所有的城市，就没有人来制造战争机器了。

Terry Wong
It's a wakeup call for the armchair generals and war mongers. Reality is like jumping into a cold lake.

【回复】这是给那些纸上谈兵的将军们和战争贩子们的警钟。现实就像跳进一个冰冷的湖里。

Rishi Raj
How would they secure raw materials?

【回复】他们如何保证原材料的安全？

Kanthaswamy Balasubramaniam
Through the Russian Route
As i said, they can pull it on till the other nation is crunched due to strain and time and breaks badly.
Except the US or its Involvement. US can crunch China in the same way

【作者回复】通过俄罗斯路线
就像我说的，他们可以一直拖下去，直到其他国家因为劳累和时间而严重崩溃。
除了美国或美国的介入，美国也可以用同样的方式来对付中国。

Samraat Rathore
Its known fact that we Indians can't see our Neighbor's development ..We must learn from it instead of underestimating it for our mere self satisfaction . When a country can emerge from 0 to hero in mere 35 years only a fool will understimate it and overestimation will always be considered as safer side for such country .

【回复】众所周知的事实，我们印度人看不到邻国的发展... 我们必须从中学习，而不是仅仅为了自我满足而低估它。当一个国家能够在短短35年内从0崛起成为英雄时，只有白痴才会低估它，对这样的国家来说，高估它始终是一种更安全的考虑。

Venkat Tote
Very impressive Chinese supporter

【回复】非常令人印象深刻的中国支持者

Arulanand Dayalan
Germany did not loose because of manufacturing.. it lost because it used wrong strategies. What matters in war is strategies and keeping your supply lines open.

【回复】德国并没有因为制造业而失败...它失败是因为它使用了错误的策略。在战争中重要的是战略和保持你的补给线畅通。

Dheeraj Kodimala
What if it's a nuclear war

【回复】如果是一场核战争如何
-------------------------------------------------------