陆克文：中美两国能避免战争吗? （评论） [美国媒体]

Can China and the United States Avoid War?

陆克文：中美两国能避免战争吗? （评论）

stlouisix
The scope of Communist China's rising threat in our hemisphere and the world needs to be understood which begs the obvious question, "Whatever happened to The Monroe Doctrine?" Oops, I forgot, it was renounced by Kerry.
China want's world dominance. Make no mistake about that. The Chinese are all over Latin America making deals which will ensure that those dealing with them will be indebted to them in perpetuity! It's called "debt trap diplomacy".

我们要清楚中国崛起对我们半球和世界的威胁，那么我们就要问一个明显的问题，“门罗主义到底怎么了?”哦，我忘了，克里宣布放弃了。
中国想影响世界。别搞错了。中国人在拉丁美洲到处做生意，而这些交易将确保那些与他们打交道的人将永远欠中国的债!这就是所谓的“债务陷阱外交”。

China's aggressive policy toward our Military is a matter of record to include blinding our pilots with lasers and coming dangerously close to our planes and ships in international air space and waters. They are building bases next to our strategic bases worldwide. Which begs the obvious question, "What the heck is our State Department doing about all of this?"

中国对美国军事咄咄逼人的政策都是记录在案的，包括用激光致盲我们的飞行员，在国际空域和水域危险地接近我们的飞机和船只。在我们全球战略基地的旁边建立基地。这就又出现了一个显而易见的问题:“我们的国务院到底在做什么?”

China is on record of believing that they can defeat the U.S. in a war with China now courting Portugal to gain access to the Azores. The Argentine President just wrapped up a deal with Xi. We're paving the way for China to take over a runway in the Azores. We're giving up a Military base there and essentially the Chinese are going to take it. Nothing like making it easier for the Chinese Military to be flying over the Atlantic.

有记录显示，中国相信自己能够在战场上打败美国，中国正在争取通过葡萄牙进入亚述尔群岛。阿根廷总统刚刚与中国达成了一项协议。我们正在为中国接管亚速尔群岛的一条跑道铺平道路。我们放弃了那里军事基地，基本上中国人会拿下那座军事基地。没有什么比让中国军队飞越大西洋更容易的了。

What those doing business with China don't seem to understand is that Communist China wants world dominance, it wants to have the world ask it for permission to do anything. All those who do so worldwide had better be careful. China is like a trap-door spider! We're talking about a ruthless totalitarian state that asks its citizens to let it know anyone who won't obey its dictates with the offenders conveniently disappearing. It's on record of monitoring its population to see who's in violation of its thought control which is what it wants for the rest of the world. Never forget that those doing business with China are basically subsidizing China's Military BIG TIME in regard to intimidating the world into submission, a world that will realize too late the mistake it made. We've seen all this before, I seem to recall - the mantra of dictators from time immemorial as history forgotten is history repeated!

那些和中国做生意的人似乎不明白，中国想影响世界，希望世界允许她做任何事情。世界上与中国做交易的人最好小心点。中国就像活板门蜘蛛!我们谈论的是一个无情的极权主义国家，一个要求公民向政府坦白交代谁不愿服从命令的国家，一个冒犯者很容易消失的国家。永远不要忘记，那些与中国打交道的人就是在资助中国军事，而中国发展军事力量目的是为了影响世界，现在让世界清醒地意识到中国犯下的错误已经太晚了。我似乎还记得，我们以前见过这一切——从远古时代起，独裁者的咒语就像被遗忘的历史一样不断地重复!

old guy
I agree with all that you have stated, EXCEPT, that it will not be military combat, since the Chinese are carefully setting up a defensive sphere of influence, with enough show of power to keep us running, while they, quietly put us out of the industrial and commercial businesses, and control the world markets and resources. Just look at their purchase and loan pattern.
For example, the Canadian steel company, hit by our recent tariffs, is 100% Chinese owned.

你说的我都同意,除了一点，那就是不会出现军事冲突,因为中国人小心翼翼地建立了防御势力范围,有足够的实力把我们吓跑,虽然中国悄悄地把我们排除在工业和商业之外，控制全球市场和资源。看看中国采购的东西和贷款模式。
例如，受到我们最近的关税打击的加拿大钢铁公司，现在已经100%归中国所有了。

stlouisix old guy
Good comment with which I'm in complete agreement. The stakes are very high indeed! I'm an old guy too, btw, 72 year old Navy Vet of the Security Group Command during the Vietnam War whose youngest son got his wings at NAS Pensacola last May and is now flying jets in a Fleet Replacement Squadron. He will be deployed next summer.

评论很好，我完全同意。风险确实非常大!顺便说一句，我也是个老头，72岁的海军老兵，越战期间在安全部队司令部服役。去年5月，我最小的儿子加入了纳斯彭萨科拉了空军，在舰载机替换中队驾驶战斗机。明年夏天将被部署。

Got to scratch your head in regard to just what did all those who fought, suffered and died for our country since the Revolution do that for? It wasn't to let tyranny reign supreme in our country due to the enemy within and around the world applauding our enemy within by kowtowing to dictators who have have much blood on their hands in the deaths of multi-millions worldwide.
God help us all. We're going to need it!
Take care!

让你疑惑不解的是，革命以来那些为国家战斗、受苦和牺牲的人到底是为了什么？我们为了不让暴政统治我们的国家，国内外的敌人，通过向独裁者叩头为敌人喝彩，全世界数百万人因此而死亡，这些独裁者们手上沾满了鲜血。
上帝保佑我们。我们需要它!
保重

abhay.k
why is entire jammu and kashmir, tibet, taiwan and inner Mongolia being shown part of china in the map. since when did U.S. Naval Institute became mouth peace of chinese communist party.

为什么地图上显示查谟-克什米尔邦、西藏、台湾和内蒙古都是中国的领土?美国海军学院从什么时候开始成为中国的喉舌。

bbray USNI abhay.k
Good morning and thank you for the comment. The U.S. Naval Institute is a mouthpiece for no one. The map depicts the world from Beijing's perspective, as best we understand it and as explained in the caption.
Bill Bray
Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Proceedings

早上好，谢谢你的评论。美国海军研究所不是任何人的喉舌。这幅地图是从北京的角度绘制的，这样我们才能更好的理解，而且标题中已经解释了。
比尔布雷
副主编

Matthew W. Hall
Rudd is just a sophisticated apologist for the Chinese ruling elite. His analysis is entirely one-sided. He makes no mention of the internal sustainability of the Chinese economy. It's hard to take over the world when the floor is crumbling under your feet.

陆克文是久经沙场的中国统治精英辩护者。他的分析完全是片面的。他没有提到中国经济的内部可持续性。脚下的地板摇摇欲坠时，很难掌管整个世界。

Duane Matthew W. Hal
If Rudd were just a China apologist, he would not have supported the large buildup in Australian naval forces during his administration. The main purpose of that navy is to defend against Chinese aggression.
He is not advocating any particular policy, but is laying out facts that we and our regional allies simply have to confront, not paper over or pretend do not exist.

如果陆克文只会替中国辩护，他执政期间就不会支持澳大利亚大规模扩充海军力量。澳大利亚海军的主要目的是防御中国。
他不是为某些特定的政策辩护，他只不过在阐述我们和我们的地区盟友必须面对的事实，而不是隐瞒或假装不存在。

Matthew W. Hall Duane
Rudd supported the build up in the Australian Navy as cover for his pro-china stance. He wouldn't allow anyone to say he was leaving Australia weakened. More Importantly, the Australian Navy is a glorified coast guard. The U.S. Navy does the heavy lifting in the South Pacific.

陆克文支持建立澳大利亚海军，是为了替他的亲中国立场打掩护。他不允许任何人说他留下了一个虚弱的澳大利亚。更重要的是，澳大利亚海军不过是被美化了的海岸警卫队。真正在南太平洋承担重任的是美国海军。

Duane Matthew W. Hall
You realize how silly you sound?
Like saying Ronald Reagan's massive defense buildup in the 1980s was just a cover for his being a real closet Democrat and pro-union guy .. which of course he was all of the above, during the 30s and 40s and early 50s, before he started to change his mind.

你知道你听起来有多傻吗?
就像说里根在20世纪80年代大规模的国防建设只是为了替他是民主党和亲工会的人打掩护。当然，上个世纪30，40和50年代初期，改变主意之前他确实是这样的人。

Matthew W. Hall Duane
Do you realize how simplistic you sound?
The U.S. and Australia are not analogous. Australia's military is a peace-keeping/monitoring/ coast guard force. It's not an internationally significant military. No Australian military decision is militarily significant. It's just a way of signaling Australian intentions and interests symbolically. The U.S. military exists in a parallel universe. Reagan's defense build up was a recognition that only U.S. military power mattered. Rudd, unlike you, understood that Australia's existence depends on the willingness of other countries to allow it to exist. Australia can't actual defend itself. It can't have credible deterrence. He sees China's rise as an opportunity to play the U.S. and china off against each other, so he welcomes China's rise.

你知道你听起来有多单纯吗?
美国和澳大利亚没有相似之处。澳大利亚军队是一支维持和平、监测、保卫海岸的部队。澳大利亚军队不是一支具有国际影响力的军队。澳大利亚的军事决定也没有任何军事意义。军队只是象征性地表明澳大利亚的意图和利益。而美国军队则存在于平行宇宙。里根的国防建设是因为他认识美国军事力量才是最重要的。陆克文和你不同，他明白澳大利亚的存在取决于其他国家的意愿。实际上澳大利亚无法自卫。也不可能有令人害怕的威慑力。他认为中国的崛起是让美国和中国相互制衡的机会，因此他欢迎中国的崛起。

Duane Matthew W. Hall
No nation stands alone, including the USA. No nation on earth can stand alone, or go it alone. From the very birth of the United States, we depended on foreign allies, without which we would not have survived our Revolutionary War. We allied with other nations in every major war we fought in last 101 years.

没有哪个国家是没有盟友的，包括美国。世界上没有一哪个国家能够单独存在，也不能独来独往。从美国诞生之日起，我们就依赖外国盟友，没有他们，我们在独立战争中就无法生存。过去101年里，每一场大战我们都与其他国家结盟。

Matthew W. Hall Duane
The U.S. not only stands alone militarily, it helps Australia, and many other countries to defend themselves against authoritarianism.

美国不仅在军事独立，还帮助澳大利亚和许多其他国家抵御独裁主义。

old guy
I don't know who started this RIDiCULOUS drumbeat, but it is dangerous to even suggest it. The DoD is prepared for ANY hostile act, by any potential adversary. Smart alec blabber, can promote adversarial relatioships. The REAL competitive relationship with China is what we should be addredding.

我不知道是谁开始鼓吹中国崛起的，即便只是建议也很危险。国防部已经准备好应对任何潜在对手的敌对行动。喋喋不休只能促进敌对关系。而我们真正应该解决的是与中国的竞争关系。

American Gunslinger old guy
You want to know who started the drumbeat? It wasn't the Americans and it wasn't the Chinese.
To find the answer, ask who would profit most from a conflict between China and the US. Who has been driving the "inevitable rise of China" drumbeat? Look there and you will find the answer my friend. We know where to point the finger. They've done it before. They're not American, but they get free access to the cover of USNI.

你想知道是谁先鼓吹的吗?不是美国人，也不是中国人。
要想找到答案，那就看谁从中美冲突获益最多。谁在大张旗鼓地宣传“中国崛起不可避免”?朋友，往这方面想，你就会找到答案。你们应该知道我指的是谁。他们之前就这么干过。不是美国人，但是他们可以自由地登上美国海军学院的封面。

They're building our ships or trying to convince us to buy ships made by them. We talked about it in another article.
And yes, by speaking, we get marked, but we cannot be silent. We cannot allow them to drag us to yet a third global war. Let's recognize this for what it is and fight it. It's a drumbeat to war that they're building here within the naval community. It's reprehensible.

他们正在帮我们造船，或者正在说服我们买他们造的船。我们在另一篇文章中讨论过。
是的，讨论这个我们会被网站标记，但我们不能沉默。我们不能让他们把美国拖入第三次世界大战。我们要看清事实，并与之斗争。他们在这里，在美国海军论坛大肆宣扬战争。这应该受到谴责。

old guy American Gunslinger
I concur, but to a point. That point is, we have what you say, but we also have the third party influence, which in this case, I believe it is the EU, and maybe, even the UN.

我同意你的意见，除了一点。问题是，你说得没错，但是我们也受到第三方的影响，我觉得是欧盟，甚至可能是联合国。

Duane
The bottom line is that China is set on a path to dominate the world and eventually supplant the USA. That does not mean they are likely to achieve their aim, it is just a statement of where they intend to go.
The question is, what do we do about it? Constructive engagement did not work. Something new is required.

最本质的是，中国已经走上了影响世界并最终取代美国的道路。当然这并不意味着中国有可能实现目标，我只不过是想说明中国未来打算要做的事。
问题是，我们该怎么做?建设性的接触不起作用。必须得来点新东西。

The best way to handle China in my opinion is to focus on strengthening our alliances .. in other words, do the opposite of what Trump has been doing for the last two years. Rejoin TPP, and keep China out. Work with the major powers to assist them in building up their military forces, particularly naval forces. Work with other powers - NATO, EU, Japan, India, etc. to develop a competitive alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative, so that developing nations are not literally forced into selling their souls to China for a few bucks.

在我看来，对付中国最好的办法是加强联盟。换句话说，就是完全推翻过去两年来特朗普的所作所为，重新加入跨太平洋伙伴关系协定，把中国排除在外。与主要大国合作，协助他们建立军事力量，特别是海军力量。与北约、欧盟、日本、印度等其他大国合作，发展一个具有竞争力的方案，来取代中国的“一带一路”倡议，这样发展中国家就不会为了区区几美元的价格而向中国出卖灵魂。

In other words, make this competition not "China vs. the United States" but "China vs. the World". In that formulation, China loses. At least, they lose their bid for hegemony.
And whether China can sustain a debt to GDP ratio of 2.6 to 1 for long, and forever keep their people imprisoned by despots, well, what can't go on forever won't go on forever. The Soviets learned that. China isn't the Soviet Union, but its current program seems rather unsustainable in the long run. Eventually China will be succeeded by another leader, and we do not know today whether his successor will be a China mini me or someone more like Deng.

换句话说，这场比赛不是“中国对美国”，而是“中国对世界”。按照这种构想下中国就会输。至少，他们将失去对霸权的追逐。
中国能否长期维持债务与GDP之比2.6比1，是否能永远把人民关在专政统治的牢笼里，无法永远持续的东西就不会永远持续下去。苏联人对此深有体会。中国不是苏联，但从长远来看，中国目前的计划相当不可持续。

Chesapeakeguy Duane
Ahh, here you go again. You just can't help yourself, can you Duane? The usual Democrat party blather. You, and they, hate it that Trump is doing something that has been absent for quite a while in US policy, and that is endeavor to reverse some of the aspects of the one-way so called trade 'deals' that are increasingly detrimental to the USA. That and holding those supposed allies accountable when it comes to their own defense. TPP as it is presently written is a disaster, and hence the reason it was never ratified by our own Senate.

啊，又来了。你就是控制不了自己，是吧楼上的?民主党一贯胡言乱语。你们，还有他们，都讨厌特朗普的一些政策是美国相当长一段时间没有的政策，那就是努力扭转所谓的单向贸易“协议”的某些方面，而这些方面对美国越来越不利。并让那些所谓的盟友承担自己的防务责任。正如目前所写的那样，跨太平洋伙伴关系协议就是一场灾难，因此我们自己的参议院从未批准过它。

With China the ChiComs have demonstrated that they are holding true to their communist roots. It was recently revealed that the 'richest individual in China' is a Communist Party member. Big surprise there, eh? That means that these communists are using capitalist means to achieve their communist goals. In other words, they have merely changed their approach, not their stripes. Yes, alliances will be important, but only if ALL members lf them carry their weight.

换句话说，他们只是改变了策略，而不是改变颜色。是的，联盟确实很重要，不过必须所有成员都承担起自己的责任才行。

Grumpy Guy
We've been on a path to war since 1989. The U.S. has been buying cheap goods and avoiding thinking about the long term implications. China has been much more realistic about how this ends. The situation in the Pacific has eerie echoes of 1937.

1989年以来，我们一直在走向战争。美国一直在购买廉价商品，不愿意考虑这带来的长期影响。中国在这种结果就要现实得多。太平洋地区目前的局势简直是1937年的可怕回声。

American Gunslinger
First, American policy needs to be driven first and foremost by Americans, not by Australians or the British. Let's get that clear.

首先，推动美国政策最不遗余力的应该是美国人，而不是澳大利亚人或英国人。这个我们要搞清楚。

Second, I ask who would benefit the most from a conflict between the US and China. Please see my First answer for guidance. Yes, the Europeans would benefit the most. So, we have to manage those guys. They've already led us down the path of two world wars. Let's not let them guide us down to a third.

其次，我想问美中冲突谁受益最大。请参考我的第一个答案。是的，欧洲人将受益最大。所以，我们必须好好管理这些家伙。他们已经两次把我们引向了世界大战。不要让他们把我们带入第三次世界大战。

Third, China only has 7% arable land and a population of 1.4 billion people. They need oil and food. I firmly believe that what we are doing is observing China through a decidedly Western colonial / balance of power lens and I think we should try to look at them through a Chinese lens instead. What does China want? What has China always wanted? And no, they haven't forgotten about the British ramming opium into their ports by force or that little little Japanese invasion rumble back in the 1930s....anymore than the Jewish people have forgotten about that thing called the Holocaust (Who would blame them....those wounds haven't healed guys).

第三，中国佣金有的7%的耕地养活了14亿人口。他们需要油和食物。我坚信，我们所做的是通过明显的西方殖民和权力平衡的角度来观察中国，我认为我们应该试着用中国的角度来观察他们。中国想要什么?中国一直想要什么?不,他们还没有忘记英国利用武力将鸦片进入中国的港口，没有忘记1930年代小日本侵略中国...而且比犹太人对大屠杀的记忆都要深刻(谁会责怪他们，毕竟伤口都还没愈合呢。

Guest
War between China and America is probably inevitable. The pattern of conflict between a rising power and a status quo power was recognized by Thucydides. Athens and Sparta, Carthage and Rome, Germany and Britain, Germany and Russia, Russia and America, China and America. The easiest course of action is stop resisting the inevitable acquisition of nuclear weapons and long range ballistic missiles by Taiwan, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea, Australia, et al. Further, America must defuse its hostile relationship with Russia. Russian neutrality will be important. Additionally, it would be wise to shape American public opinion in order to prepare for the coming conflict. Mainland Chinese should have second thoughts about studying, investing, immigrating to, or visiting the United States. Btw, Rudd is no friend of the American people.

中美之间的战争可能不可避免。修昔底德认识到崛起的大国与现有大国之间的冲突模式。雅典和斯巴达，迦太基和罗马，德国和英国，德国和俄罗斯，俄罗斯和美国，中国和美国。最简单的做法是别再阻止日本、越南、韩国、澳大利亚等过获得核武器和远程弹道导弹。此外，美国必须缓和与俄罗斯的敌对关系。俄罗斯的中立非常重要。此外，为了为即将到来的冲突做好准备，塑造美国公众舆论将是明智的。中国大陆人在学习、投资、移民或访问美国时应该三思而后行。顺便说一句，陆克文不是美国人民的朋友。

boonteetan
Former Australian premier Rudd writes objectively, he often has something good to say about China, believing that it has no hegemonic intention globally. In which case, the question of its war with any country (particularly US) does not arise unless being intruded. Beijing is ambitious in wanting to trade with as many nations worldwide as possible bilaterally, frank and transparent. Let it be.

澳大利亚前总理陆克文客观地写道，他经常对中国说一些好话，认为中国没有称霸全球的意图。在这种情况下，中国与任何国家(特别是美国)的战争都不会出现，除非受到入侵。中国雄心勃勃，希望与尽可能多的国家进行双边、坦率和透明的贸易。随它去吧。