美国应视中国为地区玩家而非全球玩家 [美国媒体]

-------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



In dealing with China American leaders are making a big strategic mistake: they are treating China as a global rather than a regional player. That’s what China really is.

在与中国打交道时，美国领导人犯了一个重大战略错误：他们把中国视为全球玩家而不是地区玩家。而中国实际上是地区玩家。


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

Paul Albrecht a day ago
Yeah dumb article. China has the capability to destroy all life on earth. Just because we have the capability to do the same x10 or x20 or whatever the MAD number is does not = “Supremacy” as much as it might = “insanity”. That is only looking at conflict in the Hot sense there are more forms of adversarial engagement than you can count on your fingers and toes. Rethink rewrite.

愚蠢的文章。中国有能力摧毁地球上的所有生命。即使我们的这方面能力比中国强上10倍或20倍，那也不能说明我们就具有绝对霸主的地位，也不能说明我们就可以变得疯癫起来。这还仅是看得见的热冲突，还有更多其他方式的敌对行为是看不见的。所以再好好思考一下再来写文章吧。

Panos Mourdoukoutas a day ago
Did you read the article Paul? My main arguments come from Foreign Affairs. That’s a respectable publication.

楼上的，你读完文章了吗？我的主要论点来自于《外交事务》杂志，这可是相当可敬的一本杂志。

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

Keneth Davis a day ago
I disagree china already knows they are a superpower when they bailed out the US from a economic collapse in 2008 or have you forgot about that they already know their power when many countries relocated to china and so as the trades from most of the world. China has the worlds largest military personnel with the population over the size of the entire US population. China’s military hardware will be caught up to meet that population as it is underway now more aircraft carriers more fighters tons of missiles and warheads and warship. The US knows that china lifeline is that sea lanes in the china sea that the US wants to control to stop china progress on building up their country and their military

我不赞同，当中国在2008年将美国从经济崩溃中解救出来时中国就已经知道自己是超级强国了。你忘了吗，现在好多国家的重点都放在中国身上，世界大部分贸易也都去往中国。中国拥有最多的军人数量，人口是美国的好多倍。中国现在在建造更多的航母，战机，导弹，弹头和战舰。美国知道南海航道是中国的生命线，所以美国想控制南海以阻止中国的经济和军事建设。

tian xu 20 hours ago
Again very bad reply.

又一个非常糟糕的回复。
 
Panos Mourdoukoutas 18 hours ago
Rescued the US? How?

拯救美国？如何拯救？

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

Calibre a day ago
Quit lying Panos Mourdoukoutas! Name a Chinese brand name on US store shelves. Don’t lie pushing Made in China is a Chinese product. Is Apple a Chinese company. It’s made in China. The fact is the majority of China’s exports are foreign corporations that outsource to China. SO quit lying that the US is open to Chinese products while real Chinese companies have difficulty getting the US market partly because of US government paranoia. Like the high speed rail deal between Los Angeles and Las Vegas was just cancelled because federal regulations require trains to be made in the US. So when count your fake figures on the trade imbalance you cut 60%-70% and that’s in the ball park of the real number. And the hypocrisy to complain about Chinese military aggression… I don’t see China bombing anyone not has one person been killed over territorial tensions. US allies in the region have killed innocent civilians over territory. How many military attacks has the US been involved in in the last 30 years? Before that each American generation has experienced war.

Panos Mourdoukoutas请不要再说谎了！ 你有本事叫出在美国超市货架上摆放的商品的中国品牌！不要再欺骗大众把在中国制造的商品当做中国品牌。苹果是中国公司吗？它只是在中国组装的。真相是大部分中国出口的商品只是外国公司外包给中国生产的。所以请不要再撒谎说美国市场对中国商品开放，事实上由于美国政府的偏执中国公司进入美国市场是有困难的。洛杉矶和拉斯维加斯之间的高铁项目刚刚被取消，就是因为联邦政府要求高铁列车必须在美国生产。所以当你拿着削减了60%-70%贸易逆差的造假数据来计算就像拿着棒球场上的号码来计算一样可笑。更可笑的是你抱怨中国军队侵略性的虚伪，我从没看见中国去轰炸任何人，更没看见在主权冲突时有任何人被中国杀害。倒是美国在该地区的盟友在主权冲突时杀害了不少无罪平民。在过去的30年中美国卷入了多少次军事冲突呢？在此之前每一代美国人都经历过了战争。

-------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Panos Mourdoukoutas a day ago
Did you read the article? Did you see the quotes from Foreign Affairs?

你读了这篇文章？你看了外国事务的引述了吗？
 
Alan Liang a day ago
Hateful or abusive content

可恶的或滥用的内容
 
Panos Mourdoukoutas a day ago
I don’t hate anyone Alan. I have great respect for China’s rich culture.

我不恨任何人，楼上的。我很尊重中国丰富的文化。

-------------译者：724519871-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Simon Datta 21 hours ago
I agree with the writer that China is not a Global Player. China has neither the maturity or the influence to turn the world opinion in its favour. It is with odds with most in Asia be bit Japan Taiwan Korea Vietnam PhilippinesMalaysia Indonesia India or Australia including its own Hong Kong. Most are wary of its dominance and ways of working do not look up to it for comfort. Even a small country like Myanmar wants to keep out of its influence. Despite nuking Japan and fighting a long protracted war with Vietnam both feel secure with US. China wants to influence others by military might and economic influence. It has been unable to settle territorial matters with Japan in the East China sea nor in the SCS with several others. it failed on both counts. It failed in Afghanistan and in reining in Pakistan of its terrorist activities. North Korea too does not listen much as its ally. It has border disputes with India too. Its role in the Middle East has been minimal infact India has been very effective. Its relations with the US is frosty too and now the EU too is questioning its role in the SCS
It is also not a strong military superpower nor is technologically superior to others. In which way is a Global Power?? Just by big Physical size population and economic nos?? India is the 3rd biggest on PPP terms..can you call it a Global Power on its economic ascendancy alone??

我同意作者的观点，中国不是一个全球玩家。中国没有达到将意愿施加给世界的那种成熟度或者影响力。他与许多亚洲国家都有纠纷，其中有日本、台湾、韩国、越南、菲律宾、马来西亚、印尼、印度、澳大利亚，以及他的香港。许多国家害怕被他统治，他的处事方式让人感到不适。即使像缅甸这样一个小国也在摆脱他的影响力。尽管核爆了日本，与越南打了很长时间的战争，这两个国家却都感到和美国在一起的安全。中国试图通过军力和经济去影响他国。他不能够解决与日本在东海领土争端，也不能解决与其他国家在南海的争端。他所有的打算都失败了。他在阿富汗和遏制巴基斯坦的恐怖主义努力失败了。朝鲜作为他的盟友，也不听他的。他与印度也存有边界争端。他在中东的影响力很小，而印度实际上更加有作用。他和美国的关系也很冷淡，欧盟也对他在南海的角色表示质疑。
他不是一个超级军事大国，也没有超过其他国家的科技实力。他在哪个方面是一个全球大国？仅仅是依靠人口规模和经济规模吗？印度按PPP算是第三大国……你能仅仅因为他的经济优势说他是全球大国吗？

-------------译者：724519871-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Panos Mourdoukoutas 18 hours ago
Good points Simon. Thanks for filling in.
 
好观点，simon。谢谢你的补充

tian xu 20 hours ago
You probably shouldn’t write something this aggressively if you’re just quoting sources. It’s obvious you are not an expert and have absolutely zero business writing about China although your sentiments are not far off depending on how you interpret regional. It is definitely technologically and militarily far behind but it is gearing up to become a super power. And not one the US can ignore. The reason US is where it is right now is because it has a history of being able to presciently map out players and future menaces not because some random clueless writer for forbes.
 
如果你仅仅是引用他人的看法，那么我觉得你不应该写得这么直白。很明显，你不是一个专家，没有写中国的经验，尽管你对区域大国的理解还不算离谱。他的技术和军事的确远远落后，但是他将会成为一个超级大国。美国不能忽视任何一点。美国现在很明智，因为他有应对对手和未来危险的先见之明，不是因为一些愚蠢的福布斯作家写了什么。

-------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Lin Nelson 18 hours ago
A book published in 1999 hardly proves anything. Not with the rapid economic growth since then.

一本1999年出版的书很难证明什么。它没涉及自那之后快速的经济增长。 
 
Douglas Jackson 20 hours ago
Well I am glad someone who writes these articles have got one that is right. I was in the in the US army for 22 years and he is right. They cannot even come close to matching us in military might.

好吧，我很高兴在某人写了这么多的文章中找到一篇正确的。我在美国军队里服役了22年，他是对的。在军事力量上，中国与我们相差太悬殊。 
 
Panos Mourdoukoutas 16 hours ago
Thanks for filling in Douglas. A student of mine wrote his thesis on the PLA and he agrees with you.

谢谢楼上的补充。我的一个学生写了关于解放军的论文，他同意你的观点。

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

Lin Nelson 18 hours ago
Chinese improvements and accomplishments in their education system has largely gone unnoticed outside of academia. Further more test results in Science and math suggest they have surpassed the United states. I do not think it is reasonable to presume China cannot match or exceed technological advancements around the world.

中国在教育系统上的提升和成就几乎不为学界以外的人所注意。此外，中国在科学和数学上的考试结果都已经超越了美国。所以我不赞同中国在技术上将永远落后的假设。
 
Panos Mourdoukoutas 16 hours ago
Education is the necessary but not the sufficient condition for leadership in technology.

教育是必要的，但是单凭教育是无法成为技术领头羊的。

-------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Frederick Kuo 9 hours ago
The author clearly has little to no understanding of China today. China is already a global power its not a point of contention.

作者显然对今天的中国缺乏了解。中国已经是个世界强国，这无需争论。
 
Panos Mourdoukoutas 8 hours ago
What about the authors of this article? https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2016-04-13/once-and-future-superpower

这篇文章的作者怎么样？https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2016-04-13/once-and-future-superpower