（下）一旦中国赢得贸易战，美国会采取军事行动吗？ [美国媒体]

一旦中国赢得贸易战，美国会采取军事行动吗？（下）



Patrick Koh
TRILLION dollar question.
A small minority think Thucydides is unavoidable looking at the way USA is behaving.
Most reasonable dont think so, as a hot war between these two nuclear giants would be a disaster for all.
No matter what CHINA do or not do, the ball is really in US court.

这是个极具价值的问题。
看看美国的所作所为，少数人认为“修昔底德陷阱”不可避免。（注：“修昔底德陷阱”是指一个新崛起的大国必然要挑战现存大国，而现存大国也必然会回应这种威胁，这样战争变得不可避免。此说法源自古希腊着名历史学家修昔底德，他认为，当一个崛起的大国与既有的统治霸主竞争时，双方面临的危险多数以战争告终。）
最合理的想法是不要这样认为，因为这两个核大国之间的热战对所有人来说都是一场灾难。
无论中国做与不做，取决权在美国。

CHINA has done its very best, not even firing a single bullet for 40 years to grow peacefully. It wants cooperation and win-win. It wants US as a partner in economics and politics to keep the world safe and prosperous. But what does the USA expects of CHINA? Today, more than 400 American military bases encircle China… how many Chinese encircle USA???
The world already can see many of the hawks pushing to be more aggressive towards China. There are many nuclear close calls (mistake), and I think one was for launch into China at least. The world has again become a very dangerous place. For the recent South China Sea incident between of Chinese and US ships, understood Sec Def Mattis called his China counterpart to defuse the tense situation after the incident , that was a good sign of cool heads. If both sides have open channels of comms, then less likelihood of conflicts.

中国已经尽了最大努力，甚至40年来没有发射一颗子弹来实现和平增长。它需要合作和双赢。它希望美国在经济和政治方面成为伙伴，以保持世界的安全和繁荣。但是美国对中国的期望是什么呢？今天400多个美军基地包围着中国…但有多少中国基地在包围美国？
世界已经看到许多鹰派人士在推动对中国采取更强硬的态度。有许多核事故险些发生，我想其中至少一个就是要发射到中国。世界再次变得危险。对于最近在南海发生的中美军舰事件，据了解美国国防部长马蒂斯在事件发生后致电中国国防部长，以缓和紧张局势，这是一个冷静的好迹象。如果双方都有开放的交流渠道，那么发生冲突的可能性就会降低。

For once in history, USA is hitting CHINA on all fronts - economy, military and ideology - which has never happened before, it seems. So it is unsettling and frightening indeed. When US wants to pull out its troops from Middle East,some think that is because Trump dont see that as good business for USA and they want to shift forces towards Asia … I hope that is not the case.
Right now, I think it is up to the true character of the only super power to decide how history will view its contribution to world peace and human development for 21 st century. Wise, sensible and enlightened or something totally opposite. China has repeatedly state its promise for a peaceful rise, but she will be on alert and defensive, should USA become irrational, That is all it can do for now.

历史上美国在经济、军事和意识形态等各个方面都在打击中国，这似乎是前所未有的。所以这确实是令人不安和恐惧。当美国想从中东撤军时，一些人认为这是因为特朗普不认为这对美国是件好事，他们想把军队转向亚洲……我希望不是这样。
现在我认为，历史如何看待美国对21世纪世界和平与人类发展的贡献，取决于其作为唯一超级大国的真正特性。聪明、理智、开明或完全相反。中国一再承诺和平崛起，但要保持警惕和防御，如果美国变得不理智这是它目前能做的一切。

Anthony Pun
The short answer to the question is NO and there is no winner in this trade war.
Since WW2, the US has been involved in 14 conflicts: 1950-1953Korean War, 1961 Cuba, 1961-1973Vietnam War,1965 Dominican Republic, 1982 Lebanon, 1983 Grenada, 1989 Panama, 1991 Gulf War (Kuwait and Iraq), 1993 Somalia, 1994 Haiti, 1994-1995Bosnia, 1999 Kosovo, 2001-2014Afghanistan, 2003-2010Iraq War.

对这个问题的简短回答是否定的，这场贸易战没有赢家。
二战以来，美国参与了14场战争:1950-1953年朝鲜战争、1961年古巴战争、1961-1973年越南战争、1965年多米尼加共和国战争、1982年黎巴嫩战争、1983年格林纳达战争、1989年巴拿马战争、1991年海湾战争(科威特和伊拉克)、1993年索马里战争、1994年海地战争、1994-1995年波斯尼亚战争、1999年科索沃战争、2001-2014年阿富汗战争、2003-2010年伊拉克战争。

In these wars, the US were involved in small and weaker countries and despite the lack of modern armaments in these countries, the US was unable to win any of the wars and the downside was the cost of these wars. For example, it was estimated that the US spend $6 trillion on war in the Middle East.
Alibaba’s Jack Ma had commented that if the US had not gone to war and divert these resources to build infrastructure in the US, then there is no need for a US-China trade war. Unfortunately, the current political climate uses fear and blame to secure votes.

在这些战争中，美国卷入了弱小国家，尽管这些国家缺乏现代军备，但美国未能赢得任何一场战争，不利的反倒是这些战争的代价。例如，据估计美国在中东战争上花费了6万亿美元。
阿里巴巴(Alibaba)的马云(Jack Ma)曾表示，如果美国没有发动战争，并将这些资源用于在美国基础设施建设，那就没有必要发动美中贸易战。不幸的是，目前的政治氛围利用恐惧和指责来获得选票。

The encounter of US forces with Chinese troops in the Korean War and the experience in the Vietnam war, clearly illustrate the superior advantage of troops fighting for a cause, particularly when the war is in their own country.
The Japanese also learned the lesson from penetrating too deep into China and faced guerrilla warfare and their supply lines cut; and were constantly ambushed.

美国军队在朝鲜战争中与中国军队的遭遇，以及在越南战争中的经历，清楚地说明了为事业而战的军队的优势，尤其是在战争发生在自己国家的时候。
日本人也吸取了深入中国的教训，面临游击战和补给线被切断的危险，以及经常遭到伏击。

Alyasa Gan’s answer showed that China has prepared for any contingency should the US decided to take military action. Even if the US had intervened before Chiang’s retreat to Taiwan, her chances of winning a land battle in China is remote for the simple reason that the Chinese will sacrifice their lives for the defense of their homeland.
In today’s world, sanity should prevail because in a nuclear war, there is no winner and Einstein said “After WW3, the next war will be fought with sticks and stones”

甘文华的回答表明，如果美国决定采取军事行动，中国已做好应对任何突发事件的准备。即使美国在蒋介石撤退到台湾前进行了干预，其于中国大陆赢得一场陆地战役的机会也微乎其微，原因很简单，那就是中国人会为了保卫祖国而牺牲自己的生命。
在当今世界，理智应该占上风，因为在核战争中没有赢家，爱因斯坦说过:“第三次世界大战之后，下一场战争将是用棍子和石头打的。”

Wes Frank
Good grief, no. Where did you dig up this notion?
Are you aware that it isn’t the 19th Century anymore? Nations don’t attack each other over trade, as the British did during the Opium Wars. We have international laws against it. The United States has been supporting the international legal system for a century specifically because it prefers to settle trade matters peacefully and found that doing so was always best for the United States in the long run.
In any case, when was the last time you know of that a trade war led to a real war among modern nations?

天哪，美国当然不会发动战争。你从哪儿听到这个想法的?
你知道现在已经不是19世纪了吗?国与国之间不会因为贸易问题而互相攻击，就像英国在鸦片战争期间所做的那样。我们有国际法禁止这些。一个世纪以来，美国一直特别支持国际法律体系，因为它更喜欢和平解决贸易问题，并发现这样做从长远来看是对美国有利的。
无论如何，你最后一次知道贸易战导致现代国家之间的真正战争是什么时候？

The United States and China are the world’s largest trading partners and will continue to be so after Trump’s little temper tantrum has come and gone. They have been at peace for sixty years. Neither has fought a war over trade with anyone in that time. The answers that talk about this “military action” as a possibility are going to be from people who only know about how the modern world works through political propaganda.
Relax. I’m typing this on a computer with chips made in China and assembled in Korea. Some of the food in my kitchen is from South America and my clothes were made in Indonesia. Watch British TV and listen to Kpop. World society is more united than you think.

美国和中国是世界上最大的贸易伙伴，在特朗普的小脾气来来去去后，两国将继续如此。他们和平相处了六十年。在那段时间里，两人都没有就贸易问题与任何人打过一场战争。把这种“军事行动”说成是一种可能性答案的人，他们只知道现代世界如何通过政治宣传来运作。
放轻松点。我正在用中国制造、韩国组装的芯片在电脑上打字。我厨房里的一些食物来自南美，我的衣服是印度尼西亚制造的。看英国电视，听韩国流行音乐。世界社会比你想象的更团结。

Battle of Plassey, 1757. A trade war between France and Britain becomes a key event in the history of India.
The most successful trade war in modern history. Dutchman Piet Hein captures the Spanish gold fleet at Matanzas Bay in Cuba in 1628.
The greatest victory ever in a European trade war. The Venetians pay crusaders to capture and sack Constantinople in 1204.

（历史上因贸易而引发的几次战争）
英法贸易战是印度历史上的一件大事：1757年的普拉西战役。
现代史上最成功的贸易战：1628年，荷兰人Piet Hein在古巴马坦萨斯湾俘虏了西班牙黄金舰队。
欧洲贸易战有史以来最伟大的胜利：1204年，威尼斯人雇佣十字军攻占并洗劫君士坦丁堡。

James Harbaugh
It would be a fool’s errand to do so in accordance with “never start a land war in Asia.” Nukes are off the table unless we’re aiming to end humanity rather than admit a loss. The next tool the US would us would be it’s superior navy with the flotillas that are aircraft carriers. But China has invested in knocking out such a problem with rapid fire, high speed rockets. I’m sure you’ve heard of those artificial islands in the south China Sea and they’re armed for this purpose. It’s more in the sake of peace that they let the fleets pass by as war would be a waste of their economic output.

按照“永远不要在亚洲发动陆战”的原则行事，将是徒劳无益的。除非我们的目标是毁灭人类而不是承认损失，否则就不谈核武器。美国下一个手段是拥有航母舰队的超级海军。但中国已经投资于快速发射、高速火箭来解决这一问题。我相信你一定听说过南海上的那些人工岛，它们是为此目的而建造的。他们允许舰队通过，这主要是为了和平，因为战争会浪费他们的经济产出。

The air force is the next force and as far as conventional jets go, it would be a waste of time. Russia is putting up S-400 missile defense systems in any region seeking it’s assistance and they’re whip out most forces trying to reach key targets. There would be gaps for harassment but that just doesn’t make sense when dealing with a heavily armed nuclear nation. China’s Army is massive but it’s not well trained for most member (thought it doesn’t need a lot with the numbers). They wouldn’t be able to touch the US in conventional means and that’s part of the strategy. The US has become a flailing monstrosity invading weak nations for a never ending war and it’s draining the country. China’s just bidding it’s time with a cheap enough deterrence defense while ballooning it’s physical economy and weaving into the eastern globe.

空军是下一支力量，就常规战机而言这是在浪费时间。俄罗斯正在任何寻求帮助的地区建立S-400导弹防御系统，他们正在抽调试图攻击关键目标的大部分部队。这无法造成骚扰，在对付一个全副武装的核国家时毫无意义。中国军队规模庞大，但对大多数成员来说，它没有经过良好的训练(尽管它并不需要太多的兵力)。他们不能用传统的方式与美国相提并论，这是战略的一部分。美国已经变成了一个为了一场永无休止的战争而侵略弱小国家的怪物，它正在耗尽这个国家的精力。中国是时候以足够便宜的价格（价格战）进行威慑防御了，同时其实体经济也在不断膨胀，并在全球东部蔓延。

The US and China will likely both slow but look at the fruits of the two competing power houses. One has almost nothing to show for it’s growing debt other than some tech improvements and scorched earth. The other has Herculean infrastructure including high speed rail, massive futurist planned cities , growing economic allies, and most of the tech that the US was foolish enough to expose for cheap labor. I love my country but it’s been one giant headache after another for some time now.

美国和中国可能都会放慢脚步，我们来看看这两个大国相互竞争的成果。美国除了不断增长的债务、一些技术进步和焦土之外，几乎没有什么东西可以展示了。另一个国家（中国）拥有庞大的基础设施，包括高铁、大规模未来化城市，日益增长的经济盟友，以及美国愚蠢地暴露在廉价劳动力面前的大部分技术。我爱我的国家，但一直以来它都十分让人头痛。

Lance Chambers
No l don't. America is scared of the rise of China of that we can be certain given the response from the USA over Chinase meteoric rise in wealth, respect, power, technolgical innovation, etc., etc.
Is this a reason to go to war? Maybe for a mad man but l would expect saner heads to stop any such moves by the US government, the President, or even an armed guard who would ensure the ‘button' is never pushed.

我们不会。美国害怕中国的崛起，考虑到美国对中国在财富、人权、实力、技术创新等方面的快速增长所作出的反应，我们可以肯定这一点。
这是开战的理由吗?也许对一个疯子来说是这样，但我希望头脑更理智的人能阻止美国政府、总统、甚至武装警卫采取任何此类行动，确保永远不按下“按钮”。

America should just lift its game and start investing in things that actually create wealth. Things like better education and free at that, better health care, investing in innovation, new technologies, etc. Beat China, if they can, in trade, fixing infrastructure that is vital for efficient delivery of goods, ramp up soft-services such as consulting, accounting, entertainment, music, etc. around the world. America should concentrate on what they are really good at not trying to compete making flags, and MAGA caps, chopsticks, and so on.

美国应该提升它的竞赛水平，开始投资那些真正创造财富的东西。比如更好的、免费的教育，更好的医疗保健，投资创新和新技术等等。如果可能的话，在贸易方面打败中国，修复对高效物流至关重要的基础设施，在全球范围内加强咨询、会计、娱乐、音乐等软服务。美国应该专注于他们真正擅长的，而不是试图去竞争制造旗帜、马甲帽、筷子等等。

However, there is a really big problem for America and that is they have starved the country of all the fundamental things that are vital to progress and it may be far too late to get back up to speed now — this may be why the trade war started! No American in government is willing to stop elites from draining the money that is needed to truly Make America Great.
If war is the only answer America has to winning the trade war then the world needs to band together and bomb it back to the stoneage as soon as we can.

然而对美国来说，有一个非常大的问题，那就是它已经让这个国家失去了所有对进步至关重要的基本东西，现在重新开始可能为时已晚-这可能就是贸易战开始的原因！政府中没有一个美国人愿意阻止精英们抽走真正让美国变得强大所需的资金。
如果战争是美国赢得这场贸易战的唯一答案，那么世界就需要团结起来，尽快把它炸回正轨上来。

Lei Zhang
No. Logic follows:
1.America wants to be and stay #1.
2.China is challenging that so America wants to keep China #2 or below.
3.Starting a military war will keep China way down, but will also take America down.
4.America does not want to be down (see bullet point 1).
Therefore America will not resort to Military if trade-war fail.

不会发生战争，逻辑如下:
1.美国希望成为并保持第一。
2.中国正在挑战这一点，所以美国想把中国留在第二或更低的位置。
3.发动一场军事战争会让中国走下坡路，但也会让美国走下坡路。
4.美国不想地位下降(见要点1)。
因此，如果贸易战失败，美国将不会诉诸武力。

The problem with US is that US wanted the world to do all the cheap labor, environmentally dirty, easy to replace stuff while US do the brain stuff; which is fine BUT.
The US focused on military tech, semi-conductor and chips tech, security and a lot of other tech that it cannot or does not want to export to other countries. The commercial stuff such as Apple, Facebook, BOEING, Ford, GM, etc is not enough to cover the imported trinkets and everyday items, hence the trade deficit.
And it is losing its edge on next gen commercial tech that can earn them a lot of money such as self driving cars, Solar, VR, AI, etc. that it is panicking. If the US government stop spending money in wars (5.6 trillion since 9/11, 1 trillion on F35) and spend it on AI or self driving cars (tax incentives, grants, investments), US would not have much of a trade deficit and Americans will have a much better economy.

美国的问题是想让世界其他国家做廉价劳动力，包括那些环境污染、容易替代的东西，自己做脑力劳动; 想的挺美然而.....
美国专注于军事技术、半导体和芯片技术、安全以及许多它不能或不想出口到其他国家的技术。苹果、Facebook、波音、福特、通用等商业产品不足以弥补进口小饰品和日常用品，从而造成贸易逆差。
美国正在失去下一代商业技术的优势，这些技术可以赚很多钱，比如自动驾驶汽车、太阳能、VR、人工智能等，这让它感到恐慌。如果美国政府停止战争开销(9/11以来为5.6万亿美元，F35上为1万亿美元)，把钱花在人工智能或自动驾驶汽车(税收优惠、拨款、投资)上，美国就不会有很大的贸易逆差，经济也会好得多。（注：F-35战斗机，绰号Lightning II即“闪电Ⅱ”，是美国一型单座单发战斗机/联合攻击机，在世代上属于第五代战斗机，是世界上最大的单发单座舰载战斗机和世界上唯一一种已服役的舰载第五代战斗机）

Clifford Nelson
There are two reasons countries start wars.
1.They are sure they can win the war. There was little fear that the US could not win the Mexican American War, or the Spanish American War, or WW1 or WW2 by the time the Americans joined.
2.A country feels very threatened at it existence or well being, and attempts to win the war that it expects to occur anyway with a first strike.
The US knows that it really cannot win a war with China (it also cannot lose a war with China, but the war will hurt). China is just way to big. Also, China has currently no way to directly threaten the US with invasion, and no way to truly economically threaten the US. Therefore, unless something escalates, it will attempt to avoid such a war.

国家发动战争有两个原因。
1.他们确信能赢得这场战争。几乎没有人担心美国在墨西哥战争、西班牙战争、第一次或第二次世界大战中失败。
2.一个国家感到其生存或福祉受到威胁，并试图通过第一次打击来赢得它所期望的战争。
美国知道自己无法真正打赢对华战争(也不能输掉对华战争，但这场战争会造成伤害)。中国正变得越来越强大。此外，中国目前没有办法直接威胁美国的入侵，也无法真正威胁到美国的经济。因此除非事态升级，中国会试图避免战争的发生。