美国陆军正为大国战争做准备（想想中俄） [美国媒体]

-------------译者：三棵树-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



The Army is developing its weapons, technologies and platforms with a greater emphasis on being ready for great-power, mechanized force-on-force war in order maintain cross-the-board readiness and deter near-peer adversaries from unwanted aggression.

美国陆军正在发展武器，技术和平台，重点在于准备应对大国间的机械化的战争，从而做好全面的准备以及阻止同等势力的敌人对我方的入侵。

While the service aims to be prepared for any conceivable contingency, to include counterinsurgency, counterterrorism and hybrid-type conflicts, the Army has been shifting its focus from 15-years of counterinsurgency war and pivoting its weapons development toward major-power war.

虽然军队的目的是为任何可能的突发事件，包括战争、反恐和混合型冲突做准备，但是陆军已经将其重点从15年的反恐战争和以围绕武器发展为中心转向以应对大国间的战争为中心。


-------------译者：laoaoe-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

TDog
The Army couldn't prepare for an annual picnic much less fighting someone like Russia or China. The problem isn't one of firepower or training, but expectations and mentality. The US has been taking on opponents so vastly inferior to it for so long that American military thought has degraded to the point where air superiority, technological superiority, and dominance of the EM spectrum are taken for granted.
The Pentagon can plan for a great power fight, but given how often they redefine benchmarks for their weapon programs, justify various shortcomings via their spokespeople, and/or hide their foul ups only to blame it on the enlisted men and women, it's obvious the Pentagon is better at talking and PowerPoint presentations than actually fighting and winning wars.
The military has turned into a commercial venture and when profit becomes a greater motivator than victory, well, the outcome is going to be fairly predictable. Russia and China won't care about the excuses offered up for the F-35's redefined benchmarks or blaming enlisted personnel for the LCS's crippling itself not once but twice... they'll just line those targets up and shoot them down.
And all the Pentagon will be able to do is cry foul that Russia and China didn't give them a handicap on the battlefield.

美国陆军连一个年度野餐都准备不了更不要说准备和中俄这样的国家的战争了。问题不在于火力或训练这些，而是在于期望和心态。美军长期以来将大量比它弱小的国家树为对手，这使得美军的军事思想退化到了一个地步，以至于他们认为拥有理所应当的空军、科技的优势以及电磁频谱的统治地位。
五角大楼能够准备一场大国间的战争，但是考虑到他们重订武器项目标准的频繁程度、通过发言人为诸多缺陷的辩护、隐藏他们的失误而只是把责任推卸到应征入伍的人身上。很明显，五角大楼更擅长做一个PPT展示而不是真正的打仗并且赢得战争。
在利润成为比胜利更强大的激励因素的时候，军方已经转向商业活动，好吧，结果可想而知。
俄罗斯和中国不会在意美国如何解释F35重订标准或者是因为濒海战斗舰接二连三的事故责怪应征人员...他们只会排好目标然后把它们一个个击毁。

而五角大楼能做的一切就是强烈抗议中俄没有在战场上给他们让分。

-------------译者：maggicqueen99-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Preston
Well good news is, nobody appears to want to fight - which is good. No one knows how to fight a nuclear armed country - I doubt anyone is eager to find out either.

好吧，好消息是，看上去没人想打仗----还不错。没人知道怎么跟一个核国家打仗----我觉得没有人急于想知道这一点。

John Baldwin
Good lord , you people don't have an idea how wars are fought . you actually think the Sherman tank was better than the German tiger . Or American fighter planes were better than the Japanese Zero . In war you don't always have the best weapons you use effectively what you have . China and Russia have just as many problem with their arms as the US does .

老天爷啊，你们根本不知道怎么打仗。你的确认为舍曼坦克比德国虎式坦克好，或者美国的战斗机比日本的零式战斗机好。在战争中，你并不总会有最好的武器，但是你可以有效地使用手头现有的武器。中国和俄罗斯和美国一样，有类似的问题。

Lichdar
There's no willpower to take on any serious casualties, so the idea of a great power conflict is a bit laughable, plus any war against Russia or China will likely bring the other immediately in conflict with the US at least covertly.

现在没人有担当为任何严重的人员伤亡负责，所以大国冲突的想法有点可笑，与中俄当中的任何一方开战，都可能使得其中一方同美国发生冲突，至少是秘密地同美国发生冲突。

-------------译者：mowgly-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

John Baldwin
Isn't that the reason the military is building these kinds of vehicles , so it's more mobile in war a with an enemy like China or Russia.

难道这不是军事正在建这种车的原因吗，因此在与中国或者俄国发生战事时，美军将变得更加机动性。

Vlad
"With a curb weight of roughly 14,000 pounds, the JLTV will provide protection comparable to the 25,000-pound M-ATV"
...while costing like BMP-1.I still don't get it.
"Overall, the Army plans to build roughly 3,000 AMPVs at a cost of $1 million to $1.7 million each."
No.I'm sorry,but 3.7 million each.Which is basically cost of T-15 IFV.Which is an Armata main battle tank with replaced combat module and shuffled interior.
When your IFV costs more than Armata,YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG!
Why is this keeps happening?

“整备质量达14000磅的联合轻型战术车所提供的保护相当于25000磅的防地雷反伏击全地形车”
...然而像BMP-1一样贵。我仍然看不懂。
“总的来说，陆军计划建造3000辆多用途装甲车，每辆成本在100万到170万美元之间。”
不，对不起，是370万美元一辆，这基本上是T-15 IFV的价格。 这可是一辆携带有重置的战斗模块和复合内部的Armata主战坦克。
当你们的IFV价格超过Armata的时候，你们就大错特错了！
为什么这些总在发生？

-------------译者：maggicqueen99-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

John Baldwin
The cost difference is the difference between what an American worker gets paid and what a Russian worker gets paid . The important thing is that the money is spent here in the US and not in China .

成本差异是一个美国工人得到的报酬和俄罗斯工人得到的报酬之间的差价。重要的是，这些钱花在了美国而不是中国。

Vlad
"The cost difference is the difference between what an American worker gets paid and what a Russian worker gets paid "
Hahaha.
No.
It's a difference between what american PRIVATE COMPANY gets paid and how much it's actually costing.

“成本差异是一个美国工人得到的报酬和俄罗斯工人得到的报酬之间的差价。”
哈哈哈。
才不是呢。
这是一间美国私人企业获得的报酬和它实际花费之间的差价。

Vasya Pypkin
Poor USA. it is all you have left to manufacture. Means of destruction. Your country founding fathers turning in their graves.

可怜的美国。这是你们仅剩的制造业了。毁灭的手段。你们的开国元勋在坟墓里要难以入眠了。

-------------译者：偏爱-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Intul i5
A Refurbished M1 Abrams cost a little over $11+ million. Production line closed down decades ago. They don't have the factories to build new tanks nor the money.
Building lite vehicles such as JLTV makes sense for dirt-poor nations. I don't blame the Mad dogs.

翻新的M1艾布拉姆斯坦克成本略微超过1100万美元。生产线几十年前就关停了。他们即没有工厂建立新的坦克，也没有钱建。
建造精简版车辆，比如联合轻型战术车，这对于一贫如洗的国家是有意义的。我不怪疯狗。

Todd Thomas
Brand new M1A2 is about 8-9 million. So i dont see how the refurbished cost 11+ million. when most likely is was upgrade from the A1 spec which cost 4.5 million to build new.

全新的M1A2约800-900万美元。所以我看不出来翻新怎么会花1100+万美元。最有可能的情况是A1的升级版，而A1的成本也不过450万美元。

Todd Thomas
Just as a side note. I really thing they should make the conversion to the diesel engine they are putting in the A3. better millage = cheaper to run...also less maintenance. the turbine broke just sitting in the motorpool.

只是作为一个侧面说明。我真的认为他们应该将正在放入M1A3的引擎改为柴油引擎。更好的续航 = 更低的运行成本...也只需要更少的维修。涡轮机坏掉，直接放到停车场就好了。

-------------译者：maggicqueen99-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

John Baldwin
There's nothing lite about a 14 ton vehicle coming at you at 30 to 60 mph . You sound like a Chinaman , always the greedy smartass .

14吨的车辆以30-60英里的时速向你跑来，这哪还有精简之说。你听起来像个中国佬，总是贪婪而自作聪明。

Todd Thomas
It is considered lite. Anything under 25 tons is a lite vehicle. and the JLTV is 7 tons not 14. 1 ton = 2k pounds JLTV 14k pounds. 25+ ton medium 40+ heavy. Abrams weight in at around 72 tons fully loaded.
none of your post make any sense.

这个被看作是是轻型版的。任何低于25吨的战车都被认为是轻型战车。联合轻型战术车总量7吨，而不是14.1吨=2000磅，联合轻型战术车1.4万磅（这里计算很混乱）。25吨以上是中型战车，40吨以上是重型战车。
埃布拉姆斯主战坦克满载重量大约72吨。
你帖子里的东西没有任何意义。

Marcio
'We are excellent at counterinsurgency'...Enough said

“我们擅长剿匪”…无需多言。

Vector
The growing Taliban would likely disagree. I guess Obama big problem when it comes to counterinsurgency is that he cant figure out if he should arm the terrorist or attack them.

日益扩张的塔利班的很可能不同意。我猜奥巴马遇到的大问题的是：遇到剿匪时，他不知道该武装恐怖分子，还是该打击他们。