1979年，中国在一场与越南的战争中被击溃 接下来发生的事令人震惊 [美国媒体]

When the Sino-Vietnamese war ended on March 16, 1979, it was hardly a definite resolution of the conflict. Both sides claimed victory, and Vietnam continued to pressure China’s allies in Cambodia and Thailand. As a result, the PLA continued to apply pressure to Vietnam by launching attacks across the Vietnamese border throughout the 1980s. While casualties were small relative to the tens of thousands who died during the 1979 war, the regimental and divisional scale operations across the border incurred significant casualties on both sides.

当中越战争于1979年3月16日结束时，这场冲突几乎没有得到明确的解决。双方都宣称获胜，之后越南继续对中国的盟友柬埔寨和泰国施加压力，其结果是，中国人民解放军继续向越南施加压力，在整个20世纪80年代对越南边境发动攻击，虽然相对于1979战争中数以万计的死亡人数而言，伤亡人数较少，但跨边界的团级和师级作战对双方都造成了重大伤亡。

Chinese operations against Vietnam in the 1980s are often divided into four phases. In the first, the Chinese and Vietnamese further entrenched their positions along the border. This lasted until 1981. The second and third phase consisted of escalating offensive operations across the border from 1981 to 1987, gradually increasing in intensity. The last phase involved the PLA’s withdrawal from the border region. The political objectives of the Chinese incursions were to “punish” Vietnam for its continued belligerence towards Thailand and Cambodia. Since Vietnamese troops were going into Cambodia, Chinese troops would continue to do the same. Militarily, China saw the border conflict as a way to evolve the PLA from an antiquated fighting force to a modern one, by testing new doctrines and equipment on the border.

中国在20世纪80年代对越南的军事行动通常分为四个阶段。第一阶段，中越双方进一步巩固了边境阵地，这种情况一直持续到1981，第二和第三阶段包括从1981年到1987年跨越边界的进攻行动，逐渐增加强度，最后阶段是解放军撤出边境地区。中国入侵越南的政治目的是“惩罚”越南对泰国和柬埔寨的持续挑衅，只要越南军队进入柬埔寨，中国军队将继续这样做。在军事上，中国将边境冲突视为一种途径，通过在边境测试新的理论和装备，使解放军从一支过时的作战部队演变为一支现代化的部队。

The PLA’s performance in the 1979 war was so bad, even Vietnamese commanders were surprised, according to some sources. This was a result of its reliance on Korean War–style infantry assault tactics, due to the operational inflexibility and stagnation of military thought in the PLA. The layout of the command structure, and the infrastructure that supported it, could not support maneuver warfare by smaller units of higher-quality forces.

根据一些消息来源称，解放军在1979年战争中的表现是如此糟糕，甚至连越南指挥官也感到惊讶。这是由于中国人民解放军军事思想的僵化和停滞，它依赖于朝鲜战争式的步兵进攻战术。指挥结构的布局，以及支撑指挥结构的基础设施，都无法支持规模较小的高质量部队的机动作战。

Following the 1979 war, many reforms and reorganizations occurred within the PLA. Old leadership was removed, and a fresh set of new officers was brought in. Finally, in 1984 the situation presented itself for a test of these reforms. Late in 1983, Deng Xiaoping met with Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia. The prince wanted help, as Vietnamese soldiers were making significant gains inside of Cambodia. As a result, Deng decided to mobilize the PLA for a significant offensive operation in 1984. The offensive’s objectives were to capture the areas of Laoshan and Zheyinshan. After preparatory barrages throughout most of April 1984, the ground offensive was finally launched on April 28. Five infantry regiments assaulted hilltop positions around Laoshan, taking them one by one. This was not a total success story, as these regiments took heavy casualties and used inflexible tactics similar to 1979. The two regiments assigned to assault Zheyinshan fared better. Flexible command allowed the attacks to be postponed until the opportune time, and the attack was a great success, with all Vietnamese positions being captured. The divisional commander in charge of those regiments was soon promoted to command the Eleventh Army, and the attack was cited as a textbook example of what the PLA could now accomplish.

1979年战争以后，中国人民解放军内部进行了许多改革和改组。旧的领导班子被撤掉了，一批新军官被调来了。最后，在1984年，形势上出现了对这些改革的考验，1983年底，邓小平会见了柬埔寨的诺罗敦·西哈努克大公，他需要帮助，因为越南士兵正在柬埔寨境内取得重大进展，为此，邓小平决定在1984动员中国人民解放军进行一次重大的进攻行动。进攻的目标是占领老山和者阴山地区。经过整个1984年4月长时间猛烈的准备性攻击后，地面进攻终于在4月28日开始。五个步兵团袭击了老山周围的山头阵地，一个接一个。这并不是一个完全成功的故事，因为这些兵团伤亡惨重，使用了与1979年类似的僵化战术。派往者阴山的两个团情况较好，灵活的指挥使进攻推迟到适当的时机，这次进攻非常成功，所有的越南阵地都被占领了，负责这些团的师长不久就被提拔为第十一军的指挥员，这次进攻被作为中国人民解放军当时能够完成的任务的教科书例子。

The Vietnamese launched counterattacks in the MD-84 Campaign in an attempt to reclaim the positions they lost in the Laoshan offensive. Counterattacks occurred against the Chinese positions at Laoshan throughout June and July. After-action reports from these offensives suggest that Chinese military modernization proved to be a possible reason for success. Vietnamese veterans recalled being shelled by Chinese artillery even at nighttime, due to the deployment of new Chinese night-vision devices to the frontline. In addition, Chinese logistics achieved new levels of efficiency. One Chinese artillery commander remarked that in repelling the counterattacks, he could execute as many fire missions as he wished without worrying about ammunition supply for the first time in his career.

越南人在MD-84战役中发动反攻，试图夺回他们在老山战役中失去的阵地。整个六月和七月，中国在老山的阵地遭到反攻。这些攻势的事后报告表明，中国军事现代化被证明是成功的可能原因之一。越南退伍军人回忆说，由于中国在前线部署了新的夜视设备，他们甚至在夜间也遭到了中国炮兵的炮击。此外，中国的后勤保障也达到了新的效率水平，一名中国炮兵指挥官表示，在击退反攻的过程中，他可以随心所欲地执行多项火力任务，而不必担心弹药供应，这是他职业生涯中的第一次。

Operations in the Laoshan sector also were the catalyst for the development of greater direct-action capability among the PLA’s reconnaissance units. After a Vietnamese Dac Cong commando unit destroyed a PLA counterbattery radar in 1984, Deng Xiaoping asked the PLA General Staff to create similar capabilities. All Chinese military regions were ordered to organize reconnaissance brigades, which were then rotated throughout the Laoshan sector. Fifteen reconnaissance brigades were created, three to five of which were deployed to the sector at any given time. These brigades were very active in raiding rear areas, and experience gained by them was later used by the PLA to help create their own special-operations forces.

老山地区的行动也是解放军侦察部队发展更大直接行动能力的催化剂。1984年，在一支越南的DAC突击队摧毁了解放军反炮兵雷达之后，邓小平要求中国人民解放军总参谋长创造类似的能力。中国各军区都奉命组织侦察大队，然后在老山一带轮换，成立了15个侦察旅，其中3至5个旅可随时部署到该区。这些旅在突袭后方时非常活跃，他们所获得的经验后来被解放军用来帮助建立他们自己的特种作战部队。

Overall, while the Sino-Vietnamese border wars might have seemed insignificant, they proved to be an effective testing ground for the PLA’s reforms. Trials by fire in the Laoshan sector allowed the PLA to grow a new cadre of forward-thinking leadership. New technologies and organizational structures were also trialed and reformed, and combat experience was gained that lead to the creation of Chinese SOF. In one Chinese general’s words, the border conflict “allowed him to achieve his dream of waging modern war by modern methods.” The Sino-Vietnamese border conflict of 1979 to 1990 can be seen as the crucible in which the modern PLA was born, reformed from the lumbering army that attacked Vietnam in 1979.

总的来说，尽管中越边境战争看上去微不足道，但事实证明，这是解放军改革的一个有效试验场。老山地区的炮火试炼，让解放军培养了一支新的具有前瞻性的领导干部队伍，新技术和新组织结构也得到了试验和改革，并取得了战斗经验，导致了中国特种作战部队（SOF）的创立。用一位中国将军的话来说，边境冲突“让他实现了用现代方法发动现代战争的梦想”。1979至1990年间的中越边境冲突，可以看作是现代解放军诞生的熔炉，从1979年攻击越南的笨重军队转化为一支现代化的作战部队。

Charlie Gao studied political and computer science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national-security issues.

作者查理 · 高在（美国）格林内尔学院学习政治和计算机科学，经常就国防和国家安全问题发表评论。

mightythor
A crucial difference between the Korean War and the Vietnamese incursions, not mentioned here, is that Korea borders Manchuria, which thanks to decades of Japanese occupation was the most highly industrialized region of China, with excellent infrastructure. Military activities on China's southern border in 1979 were severely compromised by lack of infrastructure in that region of the country.

朝鲜战争与越南入侵之间的一个关键区别是，朝鲜与满洲接壤，这得益于数十年的日本占领，这里是中国工业化程度最高的地区，拥有良好的基础设施。1979年，中国南部边境的军事活动因该国该地区缺乏基础设施而严重受损。

realposter Guest  
The irony is that for 15 of those 30 years - the Chinese were helping the Vietnamese... 

具有讽刺意味的是，在这30年里有15年中国人都在帮助越南人。

Bob Caruthers 
1990, China's last conflict with Vietnam, was a long time ago.
How effective will lessons learned by China almost 30 years ago be against a modern army with recent combat experience?

1990年，中国与越南的最后一次冲突，是很久以前的事了。
中国在近30年前吸取的教训对一支有着近期作战经验的现代化军队有多大作用？

Bobby 
what a funny title. I understand that there is a great amount of eagerness to belittle China these days, but please do not lie blatantly in an article title. It really dashes the credibility of NI, if there's any to begin with.

文章标题真搞笑，我知道现在有很多人渴望贬低中国，但请不要在文章标题上公然撒谎，连标题都有问题的话，这真的会降低文章的可信度。

James Black  Bobby 
Way to go Bobby. Although China has modernized itself, I was an Intelligence Officer and one of my CIA guys was there with the Chinese side. He said that, at that time in history China got the snoot beat out of them. Don't throw barbs when you don't truly know historical facts. Thousands of Chinese soldiers killed and wounded.

说的不错，Bobby，毕竟中国已经实现了现代化，我曾是一名情报官员，我的一名中情局人员曾与中方在一起。他说，在当时，中国曾被他们打得落花流水，当你不真正了解历史事实时，不要吹毛求疵，这场战争造成了成千上万的中国士兵伤亡。

Bobby  James Black
not just "Thousands of Chinese soldiers killed and wounded", it's actually tens of thousands of Chinese soldiers killed and wounded in that bloody conflict. However, it's irrelevant and it's also irrelevant to argue which side had more casualties. Both sides had unlimited supplies of young males anyway. China achieved its strategic goal of deterring Vietnam in southeast Asia, and showed the world that at its weakest moment it's still a force to be reckoned with.

不仅仅是“成千上万的中国士兵伤亡”，实际上是数以万计的中国士兵在这场血腥的冲突中死伤。然而，这是无关的，也与争论哪一方伤亡更多无关，不管怎样，，双方都有无限的年轻男性供应。中国实现了在东南亚威慑越南的战略目标，并向世界表明，在最薄弱的时刻，中国仍是一支不可忽视的力量。

Air_Cav 
This article resolves nothing. OK, China got its nose bloodied by PAVN. They were good soldiers and had lots of experience even in 79. The "article" then talks about PLA theoretical upgrades in tactics and operational elements, yet nothing was resolved. Of course they are going to say they have improved effectiveness and efficiency but how much, if any, is unproven. Given their economy and spend, they should be able to humble Vietnam, even if man for man the Vietnamese are more capable. I don't read here they were able to do so

这篇文章什么问题都没解决。好吧，中国的确被越南人民军弄得很狼狈，但他们都是很好的士兵，在79年的时候也有很多经验，这篇文章接着谈到了解放军在战术和作战要素上的理论升级，但没有解释任何原因。当然，你可以会说，他们提高了效率，但如果有的话（有多少），还没有得到证实。考虑到他们的经济和投入，他们应该能够让越南变得老实一点，尽管一对一的单兵对战越南人更有能力，但在这篇文章中什么都没表现出来。

Charlie Gao （作者） Air_Cav
I don't write the titles.
The main issue here is that China managed to take the positions they desired and thus didn't have much incentive to push further into Vietnam, so they weren't able to really test the "higher up" upgrades in the doctrine. They weren't really aiming for a rapid resolution of the situation or a rapid humbling like in 1979. The discrete improvements in their tactics and equipment can be seen in the evolution of new types of infantry weapons (Type 81 was developed during this period and combat tested on the border). 

（文章作者：）
这篇文章的标题不是我写的。
这里的主要问题是，中国设法采取了他们想要的立场，因此没有多少动力推进到越南，所以他们不能真正测试“更高”的升级理论。他们的真正目的并不是要迅速解决问题，也不是像1979那样迅速地使人臣服，他们战术和装备的不同改进可以从新型步兵武器的演变中看出 ( 81杠是在这一时期研制的，并在边界进行了战场试验 )。

James Black Air_Cav 
You are right Air_Cav, China would be sure not to underestimate Vietnam again. China has modernized since those days but Vietnam is slowly modernizing as well. With new Russian submarines and agreements with Russia as well as new relations with the US Vietnam would be a fierce smaller enemy. A Vietnamese General responded to China recently and said; you're big and you can attack us but it's going to sting.

Air_Cav，你说得对，中国肯定不会再低估越南了。自那时以来，中国已经实现了现代化，但越南也在缓慢地现代化，有了新的潜艇、与俄罗斯的协议以及与美国的新关系，越南将成为一个强大的、规模小的敌人。一位越南将军最近回应中国说：“ 你们很大，你可以攻击我们，但你会被蜇疼的。”

kriegspiel
This was almost 3-4 decades ago! The question you must ask is: How much REAL combat experience have N. Korea, China, Iran, Russia had in the last 3 decades? Not much. YET, the US has been waging war since 2002...continuously, on numerous fronts, albeit in a sandbox. The issue is that raw, boots on the ground, tactical/strategic coordination of air/land and sea assets, not to mention SOF's. Many lessons learned, the creation of hardened, battle tested vets AND evolving technology fit to the battlefield situation and situational awareness. Now, if you want to bet money on the most experienced and best outfitted force to be reckoned with, today, my money is on the US!

这几乎是三四十年前的事了！你必须问的问题是：在过去30年里，朝鲜、中国、伊朗、俄罗斯有多少实战经验？不多。而自2002以来，美国一直在许多战线上不断地发动战争，生源、地面部队、空中/陆地和海上资产的战术/战略协调，更不用说特种作战部队的了，我们吸取了许多经验教训，建立了坚强的、经过战斗考验的军人队伍和不断发展的技术，适应了战场形势和态势感知。现在，如果想把赌注押在最有经验和装备最好的军队上，我会选美国！！

BaronR kriegspiel 
Nowadays past wars through emphasis of the use of foot soldiers is probably not the way to go. US has more experience in military combats but its involvements were/are mainly evolved around small weak nations that have no capability to defend themselves.
A more comparable one if one needs to ascertain of US capability is a war with Russia or China. No one can put any bet as to who will come out a winner. Having said that no nation win a war all are losers.
Given the future increased use of high velocity missiles and nuclear bomb, I don't think you would have the opportunity to put any money on any nation.
You won't be around to witness the winner.

过去的战争通过强调使用步兵可能不是现代军事的前进方向。
美国在军事斗争中有更多的经验，但它主要通过打击没有自卫能力的弱小国家发展起来的。
如果想确定美国的实力，还有一个更具可比性的例子是与俄罗斯或中国的战争。谁也不敢说谁一定会胜出。
话虽如此，大国之间的战争是没有赢家的，全都是失败者。
考虑到未来更多地使用高速导弹和核弹，我不认为你有机会向任何国家投入任何赌注。
你见证不到胜利者的。

Redmond
Again, thanks to Uncle Sam. China belongs to a nefarious group of former American beneficiaries that ended up as world trouble makers including Al Qaeda, Abu Sayyaf, and ISIS.

再次感谢山姆大叔。中国属于一个邪恶的前美国受益人群体，他们最终成为了包括基地组织、阿布沙耶夫和ISIS在内的世界麻烦制造者。

DC  Redmond
time to take those meds Gramps!
该吃药了！

Mo Lin Yu  chris holder
Never mind about that Redmond's gibberish. U.S. and its jackals are just plain jealous about China's economical success.

别管那个Redmond的胡言乱语了。美国和它的野狼们只是对中国的经济成就是非常嫉妒。

chris holder  Mo Lin Yu
You forget that we are the buyers and China are the sellers and the buyers hold ALL the power....There isn't a lot of jealousy involved when your country is polluted beyond recognition. The USA would prefer to keep that garbage OVER THERE.

你忘了，我们是买家，中国是卖家，买家掌握着一切权力……当你的国家被污染得面目全非时，你不会有太多嫉妒的。美国更愿意把垃圾放在那里。

realposter  chris holder
ummm not really... The US Treasury and Fed can't go on QE with the currency forever... That's why the US has so much foreign debt now... That's why China has so many Treasury notes... Your seller is also your lender..

嗯，不太对。。美国财政部和美联储不可能永远用货币进行量化宽松。。这就是为什么美国现在有这么多外债。。这就是为什么中国有这么多的国库券。。你的卖家也是你的贷款人。

BaronR  chris holder
Precisely US is a big importer of Chinese goods that's the reason for the large trade deficit US has with China. 
Your logic doesn't make sense. If you think that China is polluted and produced garbage than why US imports so much from China to sell them to its consumers. I am sure there must be a demand of Chinese goods in US to result in this large trade deficit.

确切地说，美国是中国商品的主要进口国，这也是美国对中国贸易逆差巨大的原因。
你的逻辑没有道理。如果你认为中国被污染了，并且制造了垃圾，那为什么美国从中国进口这么多垃圾来卖给它的消费者呢？ 我敢肯定，进口中国商品一定会对我们造成巨大的贸易逆差。

chris holder  BaronR
China labor is cheap and China stuff is cheap. Thats why US companies use China.

中国的劳动力是廉价的，中国的东西是廉价的。这就是美国公司用中国的原因。

Mo Lin Yu  chris holder
What a typical conceited, brazen, nefarious Yankee. If you can afford, you can buy from your jackals like Britain, France, Australia and Japan. You are paying junk and expect the best quality out of it. What a cheapskate! Apple's products are made in China, I expect you call it GARBAGE too. Garbage is for somebody who love garbage or somebody who deserve or cannot afford anything other than garbage.

多么典型的自负，厚颜无耻，邪恶的美国佬。如果你买得起的话，你可以从你的像英国，法国，澳大利亚和日本那里买到。你买的是垃圾，还要求最好的质量，真是个吝啬鬼！苹果的产品是中国制造的，我想你也会说它是垃圾，垃圾是给那些喜欢垃圾又指望质量好又负担不起垃圾以外的东西的人使用的。

chris holder  Mo Lin Yu
Hey, the truth hurts

嘿，真相是残酷的

chris holder  Mo Lin Yu
Mo Lin, I like to debate. I am Asian in my heart, like you but raised in a different country. We both have huge egos for the love of our countries. I wish you the best.
And quality is something China knows nothing about. I'm Japanese and I know what quality is. I have been to China, Japan, Korea and the Philippines. Of all of those countries, China reverse engineers and steals more secrets than any other country....

Mo Lin，我喜欢辩论。在我心里我是个亚洲人，就像你一样，不过在一个不同的国家长大。我们都热爱我们的国家。我祝你一切顺利。至于质量，中国根本就不知道什么叫质量，我是日本人，我知道什么是质量，我去过中国、日本、韩国和菲律宾，在所有这些国家中，中国的逆向工程和窃取的秘密比其他任何国家都多。

Mo Lin Yu  chris holder
Then why Apple's products are not made in Japan?
Yeah, Chris Holder, a Japanese, have been in Japan... You must know a lot about Japan. lol.
Somebody like you must have the hallucination that you were the victim in WWII and everybody else were aggressors. .
The Japanese PM Ape was the first one to pilgrim the lunatic Trump after he won, that tells a lot about your kind.
"China reverse engineers and steals more secrets than any other country...." So you are saying that other countries 'steal' too and the only gripe you have is you wish you could steal more. What a whiner!

那为什么苹果的产品不在日本制造？
你，Chris Holder,，一个日本人，去过日本。。。你一定很了解日本。哈哈。
像你这样的人一定有一种幻觉，以为你们是二战中的受害者，而其他人都是侵略者。。
日本首相安倍是疯狂特朗普他赢了总统竞选之后第一个朝拜他的国家领导人，关于你的同类，这能说明很多问题。
“中国的逆向工程和窃取的秘密比任何其他国家都多...”所以你是说其他国家也“偷”，你唯一的抱怨就是你希望你能偷更多，真是个叨逼牢骚鬼！

chris holder  Mo Lin Yu
Apple tech is created here in the USA. You guys over there just assemble components. You have nothing to do with the innovation, the creation or the development of said products....Ok?
I mean, I do not want to be rude but China has a real issue with not developing their own tech. They reverse engineer Russian and US tech to build there own things. That is fine but the country itself is not prepared for combat.
To answer your question about why Apple products are not made in Japan- the answer is simple. China is cheap and Japan is not. The USA will not pay Japanese people when they can pay Chinese people way less AND treat them like garbage. Forcing them to work 14 hours a day and live at work in crappy complex.

苹果科技是在美国创造的。你们那边的人只是组装零配件。你们与所述产品的创新、创造或开发毫无关系。。好吗？
我并不想表现的很粗鲁，但中国有一个真正的问题，没有开发自己的技术，他们逆向工程俄罗斯和美国的技术，这很好，但这个国家本身并没有为战斗做好准备。
要回答你关于为什么苹果产品不是日本制造的问题，答案很简单，中国便宜，日本不便宜。美国不会向日本人支付工资，因为他们可以向中国人支付更少的钱，把他们当作垃圾对待，强迫他们每天工作14个小时，在糟糕的环境中工作。

realposter  chris holder
"Apple tech is created here in the USA. You guys over there just assemble components."
Oh ok - so then you agree the trade deficit numbers are bogus that Trump and his team are spouting since China gets little of Apple's money for those goods... Good insight.. Go tell your local congress member.

“ 苹果技术是在美国创造的，你们那边的人只是组装零件。” 
哦，好吧，那么你肯定同意，贸易赤字数据是假的，特朗普和他的团队都是在胡说八道，因为中国没有从苹果赚多少钱，观察的不错，去告诉你当地的国会议员。

realposter  chris holder6 days ago
"Of all those countries China reverse engineers and steals more secrets than any other country"
Well if you are Japanese as you claim then you know that's the exact same thing the US said about Japan in the 70's and 80's...

“中国的逆向工程和窃取的秘密比任何其他国家都多...”
如果你是日本人，就像你说的那样，你知道这和美国在70年代和80年代对日本的看法是一样的。