考虑到迈克·庞培将中国视为敌人，他将如何把美国和中国推向战争? [美国媒体]

Considering that Mike Pompeo sees China as an enemy, how will he push the United States and China into war?

考虑到迈克·庞培将中国视为敌人，他将如何把美国和中国推向战争?




Mas Miwa, former Engineer at Hughes Space and Communications
休斯空间通信公司前工程师
The problem for the US, created by Trump, is both Mike Pompeo and John Bolton are hawks. Of the two Bolton is the stronger war hawk. Between the two, they could plan a strategy for China to cause an incident that could pull the US into a physical war. Trump has a simple mind and though he talks a friendly game with China, his actions are the opposite. Our top generals also are verbalizing the China threat. Or are they just angling for more defense dollars? The South China Sea could be the cause. An preemptive strike against North Korea could be another. The only thing holding back these two is Congress. Congress decides if we declare war. But, like Bush, he could declare a police action or national emergency to get things started. Two fanatic ‘yes men’ and their erratic narcisstic leader could lead us to war. Trump still seems worried about Mueller’s investigation and keeps diverting attention from it. We’ll find out soon enough who is crazy enough to pull the trigger. Problem with politicians is they only look at their reality and it behooves them to change it. Maybe a loss of face. If the congressional hearings are true, we are not prepared for war. China is. China follows ‘The Art of War’ by Sun Tzu. They are prepared for an asymmetric battle. The Chinese fleet is more modern than the US, has more subs and lesser boats, but she is behind the US in carriers. In a defensive war, carriers are not the primary weapon. China’s subs, anti-ship missiles, fast missile boats, attack aircraft, and air defense systems are the major defense weapons. On the ground, it’s tanks, anti-tank weapons, special forces, ground to ground missiles, artillery, and guerilla warfare. Like North Korea, China has numerous tunnels that hide her weapons of war. Our politicians keep forgetting Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. We win battles but lose wars. Many say our forces are battle hardened and experienced. Then, why do our troops coming back have so many cases of PTSD.(Post Traumatic Stress Disorder)?

由特朗普创造的美国的问题是，迈克•庞培(Mike Pompeo)和约翰•博尔顿(John Bolton)都是鹰派人物。在这两个人中，博尔顿是一个更强硬的鹰派。在这两者之间，他们可以为应对中国策划一项战略，以引发一场可能将美国拖入一场战争的事件。特朗普头脑简单，尽管他嘴上对中国表示友好，但他的行动却恰恰相反。我们的高级将领也在用语言表达中国威胁。或许他们只是想获得更多的国防资金?南海问题可能是原因之一。对朝鲜先发制人的打击可能是另一个原因。唯一阻碍这两者的是国会。国会决定我们是否要宣战。但是，就像布什那样，他可以通过宣布一项警察行动或国家紧急状态来开始行动。两个狂热的“好战男人”和他们古怪的总统可能会导致我们发动战争。特朗普似乎仍在担心米勒的调查，并一直在转移注意力。我们很快就会知道谁会疯狂到扣动扳机。政客们的问题是，他们只关注自己的现实，他们理应改变这种现状。这也许是很丢脸。如果国会听证会上的内容是真的，那我们还没有准备好发动战争。而中国已经准备好了。中国奉行孙子兵法。他们为一场不对称战争做好了准备。中国舰队比美国更现代化，拥有更多的潜艇和较小的舰艇，但她在航母方面落后于美国。在防御战争中，航母不是主要武器。中国的潜艇、反舰导弹、快艇、攻击机和防空系统是主要的防御武器。地面上有坦克、反坦克武器、特种部队、地面导弹、火炮和游击战。和朝鲜一样，中国也有许多隐藏着战争武器的隧道。我们的政治家总是忘记越南、伊拉克、阿富汗和叙利亚。我们赢得战斗，却输掉战争。许多人说我们的军队是久经磨练和沙场的。那么，为什么我们的军队会有如此多的PTSD(创伤后应激障碍)病例呢??

“The hearing highlighted substantial readiness and capacity issues within each of the services:
- Army: Of 58 total brigade combat teams (the Army’s main combat building block), only three are considered ready for combat.
-Navy: The Navy’s fleet is the smallest it has been in nearly 100 years. This makes ship repairs harder to complete, as those vessels are needed on the waterways.
-Marine Corps: Eighty percent of Marine aviation units do not have even the minimum number of aircraft they need for training and basic operations.
-Air Force: The Air Force is the smallest and, in terms of many of its aircraft, oldest it has ever been. The service had 8,600 aircraft in 1991 while today it only has 5,500, and those aircraft are an average of 27 years old. Worse, fewer than half of those aircraft are prepared to take on and defeat our adversaries.

“听证会强调了在以下每一项中都存在大量的备战和能力问题:
陆军:共58个旅的战斗队伍(陆军主要战斗组成单元)，只有3个被认为为备战良好。
海军的舰队是近100年来最小的。这使得船舶修理更难完成，因为这些船只需要在水上巡逻。

-海军陆战队:80%的海洋航空部队甚至达不到最低的训练量和满足基本操作所需的最低飞行时长。
空军是史上最小规模的空军，有许多飞机是有史以来服役时长最长的。1991年空军有8,600架飞机，而今天只有5,500架，而这些飞机的平均年龄为27岁。更糟糕的是，只有不到一半的飞机准备好迎战并击败我们的对手。

These troubling findings by the services echo those laid out by The Heritage Foundation in its 2017 Index of U.S. Military Strength, which rated the Army as “Weak” and the other three branches as “Marginal” in terms of their ability to fight and win major conflicts.”
If Pompeo understands the above stats, he will back off, even with Bolton shouting in the wings. Now is not the time. China is winning the economic war. If we have a physical war, barring a nuclear showdown, it’s game over for the US, both politically and economically.
As a side note, Russia went bankrupt because it tried to keep up with the US in defense spending. I wonder about the US. Are we militarizing to bankruptcy? Our problem is the same but has different issues, we are overextended, our troops and equipment are tired from so many battles, and our national debt is out of control.

这些令人不安的调查结果与美国传统基金会(Heritage Foundation)在其2017年美国军事力量指数(U.S. Military Strength)中所列出的结果相呼应。该指数认为美国陆军是“软弱”的，而其他三个方面在对抗和赢得重大冲突方面的能力“微不足道”。

如果Pompeo了解以上的统计数据，他就会怯步，即使是博尔顿也会对他大喊大叫。现在还不是（开战的）时候。中国正在赢得经济战争。如果我们之间爆发一场真实的战争，除非是核摊牌，不然无论是在政治上还是经济上，美国都输了。
另一方面，俄罗斯因试图紧跟美国的国防开支而破产。我想知道美国会如何应对同样的情况。我们是会因军事化而走向破产吗?我们的问题是一样的，但具体而言又有所不同，我们的战线过长，我们的军队和装备因为太多的战斗而疲惫不堪，我们的国家债务已经失去控制。

Johannes Sulistyo, Has been an enthusiast since 1990
China is the world’s largest backer of US Dollar value. Their role to US being given too much leeway to print more US Dollars and in turn pay the white house gardeners baseless fiat paper money, is very significant. Because China is actually stupid enough to trust the US government, especially the US Dollar.
But it also save them from loaded questions like this, generally asked by uninformed people.
If the US went to war with China, some of it will be funded using the money they borrowed to the US, and some are paid by complaining American tax payers. China will take drastic actions by dumping US treasury bonds, erasing their assets, and make the US debt rating to go junk. The US Dollar value will then plummet and Americans need to pay $50 to buy a Big Mac meal. Then the US government can no longer finance its lavish military spending. The war ended not long before it began, due to money.

中国是世界上最大的美元储备国。他们的角色给了我们太多的余地去印刷更多的美元，反过来又给白宫的园丁们支付毫无根据的报酬，这是非常重要的。因为中国真的愚蠢到相信美国政府，尤其是相信美元。
但这也能帮助他们避免如下一类的问题，这些问题通常是由不知情的人提出的。

如果美国与中国开战，其中一些战争资金将是用的他们借给美国的钱，而另一些则是来自充满抱怨的美国纳税人的钱。中国将采取严厉措施，抛售美国国债，抹去他们的资产，让美国的债务评级变成垃圾级。美元价值将大幅下跌，美国人需要支付50美元才能买到一顿巨无霸汉堡。然后，美国政府再也无法为其庞大的军费开支提供资金。战争在开始之前就很快结束了，因为钱。

Honestly, you don’t go to “war” with those parties holding tight grip upon the value of your money. Many Asian countries did that against George Soros and a couple of speculative investors in 1997. As a result, our money became much less valuable. Initially, when the crisis hit, we need to pay 3 times more for the same price of goods, and it went worse to 13 times, before we bring our acts together. That is like your Starbucks Caffe latte suddenly becoming $39 for a grande cup.
Will it also hurt China? Well, badly too. Suddenly, the US can no longer afford Chinese imports, and their industry died. Millions became jobless, and beginning to cause social problems. By then, we won’t be sure if the regime can still maintain its power and authority.

诚实地说，你不会跟那些紧紧攥住你的钱的价值的政党“开战”。1997年，许多亚洲国家对乔治•索罗斯(George Soros)和一些投机投资者采取了这种做法。结果，我们的钱变得没那么值钱了。一开始，当危机袭来时，我们需要为同样的商品多支付3倍的价格，而在我们共同行动之前，它的价格已经下跌到13倍。这就像你的星巴克咖啡突然变成39美元一大杯。

它会同样伤害中国吗?嗯，同样很糟糕。突然之间，美国再也负担不起中国的进口，他们的产业也随之消亡。数百万人失业，并开始引发社会问题。到那时，我们不确定其政权是否仍能维持其权力和权威。

US will experience shortage on goods and raw materials. Need soap? Too bad, your favourite brands is no longer in the shelves. The next day? The price may double. The day after? It could even get 10 times. So people will stock up, causing even greater goods shortage. I believe the people who live in the richest country in the planet just doesn’t have enough mental capacities to withstand such adversities.
It won’t be like 9/11, where you can safely watch from safe distance away through your home TV. You will feel the effect once your partner or parent yelled over the kitchen: “Honey, we ran out of milk.” Then you go to the nearby Walmart, only to find out that there is a very long queue like it were a new iPhone release day. You found the milk shelves already devoid of any bottles or cartons, already being rushed like crazy the day before. The same goes in Piggly Wiggly, K-mart, and so on. Holy crap, the Costco Wholesale too! The government imposes ration, and opened up its emergency store to prevent unrest. So, say good bye to your favourite breakfast cereal, you will be eating whatever the US government has been stocking for emergencies since 1950s.

美国将面临货物和原材料短缺。需要肥皂吗?太糟糕了，你最喜欢的牌子将不会再出现在货架上了。第二天其价格将翻倍。之后呢?价格甚至可能涨到10倍。所以人们会囤货，导致更大程度的商品短缺。我相信生活在地球上最富裕的国家的人们，没有足够的心智能力来承受这样的逆境。

它不会像9/11那样，你可以通过家里的电视在安全的距离上安全地观看。当你的伴侣或父母对厨房大喊:“亲爱的，我们的牛奶用光了。”“然后你去附近的沃尔玛，发现那里有一个长长的队伍，就像一个新的iPhone发售日。”你发现牛奶货架上已经没有任何瓶子或纸箱了，情况就像前一天一样疯狂。Piggly Wiggly, K-mart（都是美国零售商店）等等也是一样的情况。天啊，连好市多也这样啊!政府强制实行配给，并开设了紧急储备以防止动乱。所以，跟你最喜欢的早餐麦片说再见吧，你将会吃到美国政府自上世纪50年代以来一直在囤积的东西。

That is what we experienced back then. Don’t be stupid, Donald Trump might be a pampered rich kid who never faced much difficulties in life. But I think Mike Pompeo, like everyone else did. And I think Mike knows this very well, reading US embassy reports back during Asian financial crisis era.
China might be “enemy” because they constantly spying on US and made advantage of US own capitalism system, but they are actually admiring the US. They went as far as adopting US Navy’s marshalling hand signal when they operated their first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, instead of coming up with their own original stuff. They already have J-20 stealth fighter, but not good! We need something like F-22 or F-35, so they unnecessarily make the J-31. They already have thousands of local smartphone brands, yet they still buy a lot of iPhones. They treat American products with such reverence so GM has bigger sales there than elsewhere. Who keeps Buick brand afloat and thriving? The Chinese. Who the hell buy Pabst Blue Ribbon in a $44 fancy bottle? The Chinese. So, China is actually admiring the US, like an enstranged fans.

那将是我们曾经经历过的场景。别傻了，唐纳德·特朗普当时可能是一个营养丰富的孩子，他在生活中从来没有遇到过很多困难。但我想迈克·庞贝，会和其他人有一样的经历。在亚洲金融危机时期读美国大使馆的报告，我认为迈克非常了解这一点。
中国可能是“敌人”，因为他们不断地监视我们，并利用美国的资本主义制度，但他们实际上是在欣赏美国。他们在操作第一艘航空母舰“辽宁号”时，采用了美国海军的编组手势，而不是自己去创造。他们已经有J-20隐形战斗机，但不是很好!我们需要像F-22或F-35这样的战斗机，所以他们制造他们不必要的J-31。他们已经拥有成千上万的本地智能手机品牌，但他们仍在购买大量的iphone。他们如此尊敬美国产品，所以通用在中国的销量比其他地方都要大。是谁让别克品牌保持繁荣发展?中国人。谁会买一个价值44美元的大瓶子里的Pabst蓝丝带?中国人。所以，中国实际上是在赞赏美国，就像一个被扼杀的粉丝。

Lawrence Trevethan, Analyst (2017-present)
Your assumption is faulty. It is virtually certain that China will not go to war with the USA in the near or medium term. This is in part because of a general failure to report significant news about China and Asia generally in the USA. It also is because a press hostile to Donald Trump never wants to report anything he ever does is any good, even when (perhaps unusually) it really is.

你的假设是错误的。几乎可以肯定的是，中国在近期或中期都不会与美国开战。这在一定程度上是因为美国普遍没有报道有关中国和亚洲的重大新闻。这也是因为对唐纳德•特朗普怀有敌意的媒体从来不想报道任何他曾经做过的任何好事，即使有时候(或许难得地)确实是好事。

Trump led a delegation of hundreds of businessmen, and a few politicians, to Bejing in 2017 October. One of those politicians, and many of the businessmen, were from (or otherwise related to) Alaska. A deal was penned that will result in the largest construction contract in North American history. It was unusually fast tracked and becomes final in just one year, instead of the customary five for major infrastructure deals. It is already clear (according to a briefing by the majority leader of the Alaska House last month) no snags are getting in the way of approval. The Evironmental Protection Agency fast tracked the process on a schedule which permits completion by 2025 as planned. If you grasp geopolitics, this deal has implications about Xi’s intent: He could buy natural gas from Russia, as well as oil, and move it by pipeline from Russia. Instead, China is contracting to get oil from the Mideast and Africa, and gas from Alaska, to move by tanker. USN could stop tankers in a war. China is unwilling to bet on Russia as a source, and willing to bet it will never have trouble with the USN that would cut off its critical energy supplies.

2017年10月，特朗普率领由数百名商人和少数政治家组成的代表团访问北京。
其中一名政客，以及许多商人，来自阿拉斯加(或与之相关)。一笔将成为北美历史上最大的建筑合同的交易被签订。它的跟进速度异常迅速，在短短一年时间内就达成为了最终的结果，而按照惯例，主要基础设施交易达成之前一般需要五年时间。现在已经很清楚了(根据上个月阿拉斯加众议院多数党领袖的一份简报)，没有任何障碍阻碍了这项交易的批准。环保组织快速跟踪了这个计划在2025年完成的工程。如果你掌握了地缘政治，这一交易暗示了XI的意图:他可以从俄罗斯购买天然气，也可以从俄罗斯购买石油并用输油管从俄罗斯运输过来。另一方面，中国正在从中东和非洲开采石油，从阿拉斯加开采天然气，并以油轮运输回去。美国海军可以在一场战争中阻止油轮。中国不愿把赌注押在俄罗斯身上，并且愿意打赌，美国海军绝不会切断其关键的能源供应。

The US government is bigger than one man, or a handful of men. So is the US economy. The needs of the economy are the most important political drivers. So also is winning elections. The 2016 election was an anomoly, because of frustration with the status quo in Washington. Just barely enough people voted against the status quo to change who nominally is in charge. It is already clear that this didn’t work as they expected, and the few elections we have had lately make it clear that control of the Senate is sure to change, and control of the House and even the White House is likely to change in the short term. That may not work out very well for our national interests either, but the institutions of government are still substantially working, and will survive - as they always survive - changes in nominal leadership. Ask someone old enough to remember the Carter era. Jimmy Carter, a graduate of USN’s Nuclear Power School, was probably the most intelligent President, and the most technically educated, of all time. Yet his administration was a disaster in multiple senses. He lacked wisdom, and in particular failed to appoint a quality and competent staff, which is necessary in this era. But the nation survived his policy blunders and has all but forgotten them. Add a few more virtues to the list - Jimmy Carter was uncommonly honorable in his heart for a US senior politician. He was successful in the USN as a leader, and in private business when he left to save his family’s business. Being honest, religious, and a competent and ethical businessman were not enough to be a successful President. He always did things alone - and as President scheduled 14 hour work days. Leading to exhaustion. This, combined with lack of competent staff, made almost every decision made wrong. A terrible state of affairs for national administration. But we still survived.

美国政府不是一个人或几个人可以左右的。美国经济也是如此。经济的需求是最重要的政治驱动力。选举也是如此。由于对华盛顿现状的不满，2016年的选举是一场反常的选举。仅仅是勉强够用的人投票反对维持现状，以改变名义上是谁说了算。已经很清楚的是，这并没有像他们预期的那样奏效，而且我们最近的几次选举表明，参议院的控制权必将发生变化，对众议院乃至白宫的控制权在短期内可能也会发生变化。这可能对我们的国家利益也不是很好，但政府机构仍在大量工作，并且将在名义领导权地位的改变中幸存下来，因为他们总是能幸存下来。问一个年龄大到还记得卡特时代的人。吉米·卡特(Jimmy Carter)毕业于美国海军的核子能学校，他可能是有史以来最聪明的总统，也是技术水平最高的总统。然而，他的政府在多种意义上都是一场灾难。他缺乏智慧，特别是未能任命一名合格的工作人员，这在这个时代是必要的。但这个国家在他的政策失误中幸存下来，几乎把他们遗忘了。再加上一些优点——在吉米•卡特(Jimmy Carter)心目中作为一位美国资深政治家是一种不寻常的荣誉。他在胜任美国海军领袖上很成功，在私人商业方面，当他离开海军经营家族的私人企业时做的也很成功。但诚实、虔诚、有能力、有道德的商人不足以成为一个成功的总统。他总是一个人做事情——而作为总统，他每天要工作14个小时。导致疲劳。再加上缺乏称职的员工，几乎所有的决策都是错误的。国家行政管理状况糟糕。但是我们仍然幸存了下来。

Ben Kelley, Strong interest in geopolitics and defence对地缘政治和国防有着浓厚的兴趣
Hes a hawk’s hawk, Tea party, one eyed Trump supporter. Also ex-Army (reminding me a bit of Bannon but maybe more capable), Trump seems quite happy with a brinkmanship approach to everything. I think this is where Tillerson and Trump really didn’t see eye to eye. Tillerson had many flaws, but he was measured, he was somewhere in the moderate belief structure. Everyone out side of the US seemed to like this approach. With Tillerson and Mattis, the world though, ok, things might end up stable at least for a while. There was some sort of safety on the Trump crazy.

他是鹰派中的鹰派人物，茶党(Tea party)，是特朗普的盲目支持者。此外也是特朗普的前班底(让我想起了一些班农，但或许更有能力)，他似乎对所有事情都采取边缘政策的做法感到非常高兴。我想这就是蒂勒森和特朗普的看法不一致的地方。蒂勒森有很多缺点，但他是有节制的，他是一个信仰架构适中的人。美国的所有人似乎都喜欢这种方式。有蒂勒森和马蒂斯在，这世界还算安稳，事情可能至少会稳定一段时间。在特朗普的疯狂中还有一些安全的立身之处。

There were a few people around that were also a bit more normal.
Pompeo is likely to continue support direct and openly aggressive action and is likely to come up with new ideas Trump will like. He certainly seem that way inclined on North Korea and wasn’t shy about it. There is no safety, in fact, we have oil the mechanism reduced the trigger pressure to fire, so now a light touch will set it off.
CIA chief signals desire for regime change in North Korea

周围也有一些人，也更正常一些。
Pompeo可能会继续支持直接和公开的富有侵略性的行动，并且可能会想出特朗普喜欢的新点子。他显然是倾向于对朝鲜咄咄逼人，并且对此毫不避讳。这样没有安全，事实上，我们现有的机制降低了触发战争的压力，所以现在轻轻一触会引发战争。
中央情报局局长表示希望朝鲜政权更迭。

What ever is going to happen, you can be sure it won’t be a Obama type strategy. We won’t have the President saying one thing and the State department doing something else a bit more moderate. This will be Trump, unchained.
If Trump tells the state department to wear purple pants, they will now wear purple pants. If he says there is a trade deficit with Canada, there is a trade deficit with Canada. If North Korea needs regime change, then the state department will now be at full attack on rallying the globe to the idea of regime change.

无论发生什么，你都可以确定这不会是奥巴马式的策略。我们不会让总统说一件事，而国务院会却做另一些更温和的事情。
这将是特朗普，毫无顾忌的特朗普。
如果特朗普告诉美国国务院要穿紫色裤子，他们现在会穿紫色的裤子。如果他说对加拿大有贸易逆差，那就是对加拿大的贸易逆差。如果朝鲜需要政权更迭，那么美国国务院现在将全力发动全球对政权更迭的想法。

If you read the crazy stuff like Breitbart:
Jim Cramer: Pompeo's Appointment Says to China 'You Are Our Enemy' | Breitbart
That is apparently the message they want to send. They see China as the same direct threat now as the U.S.S.R was back in the day. The enemy at every step, at every point. Physically, intellectually and politically. Us and them.
The question now is how will China and other states react to open and unfetted direct opposition and escalation.

如果你读过一些疯狂的东西，比如Breitbart（右翼媒体）:
Jim Cramer: 任命Pompeo告诉中国，你是我们的敌人| Breitbart。
这显然是他们想传达的信息。他们将中国视为与当年的苏联一样的直接威胁。在身体、智力和政治方面的每一步上，在每一个点上。我们和他们都是敌人。
现在的问题是，中国和其他国家将如何应对开放和不受限制的直接反对和扩大化。

Michel McGill, Born, lived and worked in China.
Pompeo can do nothing about it. During cold war, Soviet and America were contesting for hegemony global wise, and no direct wars between Soviet and America. They had wars by proxy, or to one of the small country in other camp. Now China is not contesting for hegemony. China is only asking for equal , mutual respect and win-win relationship.
China is transcending the conflicts of geopolitics. Also China is viewed by the US as the enemy, however, China is not viewing the US as an enemy. Even though the US choose China as its enemy, but the choice will fail. The US choose China as its enemy because it want o maintain the status quo of its hegemony in the world. Human civilization is progressing. The history will not stop at present time. We are moving toward the future, a better future, and no one can stop it. No country will say they need a hegemony to dictate their domestic affairs. The effort of the US to stop the history is wrong and useless. Now China has a better way running the economy and politics. We should support China for the sake of the peace of the world.

Pompeo对此无能为力。冷战期间，苏联和美国都在争夺全球霸权，苏联和美国之间没有直接的战争。他们的战争是由代理人，或者是其他阵营中的一个小国发动的。现在，中国不是在争夺霸权。中国只要求平等、相互尊重、互利共赢。

中国正在超越地缘政治的冲突。同时，中国也被美国视为敌人，但中国并没有把美国视为敌人。尽管美国选择中国作为其敌人，但选择将会失败。美国选择中国作为它的敌人，是因为它想维持它在世界上的霸权地位。人类文明在不断进步。历史不会在现在终结。我们正在走向未来，一个更美好的未来，没有人能阻止它。没有哪个国家会说他们需要霸权来支配他们的国内事务。美国阻止历史的努力是错误的和无用的。现在，中国有更好的方式来管理经济和政治。为了世界的和平，我们应该支持中国。

Xamba Yangzoim, Armchair General (2015-present)
Military war is unlikely. What Trump administration wants is a trade war to make America great again.
Hopefully cutting off all imports will spur domestic manufacturing sectors, and cutting off immigration will increase wages for domestic workers. The booming manufacturing sector combined with higher wages will encourage our youngsters to study science and engineering instead of Wall street trading.
It is America’s Sputnik moment again. Last sputnik moment greatly revitalized America’s innovation and boosted the economy. It needs to be repeated.

军事战争是不可能的。特朗普政府想要的是一场让美国再次伟大的贸易战。
希望切断所有进口将刺激国内制造业，减少移民将增加国内工人的工资。蓬勃发展的制造业和更高的工资将鼓励我们的年轻人学习科学和工程技术，而不是华尔街的交易。

这是美国的“斯普特尼克时刻”（必须加倍努力，迎头赶上的时刻）。上一次的“斯普特尼克时刻”极大地振兴了美国的创新，促进了经济的发展。这种场景需要再次出现。

Jerry Mc Kenna, I have voted in the US since 1972
The idea that the US could go to war against China is ludicrous. The US borrows money from China. Goods sold by US corporations are often made in China. I tore apart my old pc a few days ago to salvage the parts, everything I could identify was made in China. My new pc is made in China.
Our economic policies which are designed to maximize profit also maximize sourcing from foreign countries. If we go to war that would change. Unless we are prepared for this, and we aren’t right now, we would go into a depression. China, too, would change, it would become a much tougher country after the shock wears off. We would destabilize East Asia. Our policy for 60 years has been to increase East Asian stability, that policy would end and I suggest all our alliances and the treaties that formed them would be meaningless.

认为美国可以与中国开战的想法是荒唐可笑的。美国从中国借钱。美国公司出售的商品通常在中国制造。几天前，我把我的旧电脑拆开来回收零件，我能识别的所有东西都是中国制造的。我的新电脑是中国制造的。

我们的经济政策旨在最大限度地实现利润，同时也最大化地从国外采购。如果我们参战，情况就会改变。除非我们做好了准备，否则我们就会陷入大萧条。中国也会改变，在震荡结束后，它将变成一个更加困难的国家。我们会破坏东亚的稳定。我们60年来的政策是增加东亚的稳定，这一政策将结束，我认为我们所有的联盟和组成它们的条约到时将毫无意义。

Duncan Yum, Keen interest in military history and weapons for 30+ years.
How hard it can be when the US have a record of go to war with Iraq over a small vial of washing powder?



Consider the strike package that bombed Chinese embassy in Belgrade originated from Langley, and Mike Pompeo was the former CIA chief…whoa, I can bet with you they going to cook up some excuses -no matter how cheesy it maybe - to get that Sino-US war.

当美国曾经用一小瓶洗衣粉与伊拉克开战时，这又会有多困难?
想想轰炸了中国驻贝尔格莱德大使馆的攻击计划就来自于于兰利(美国中央情报局本部所在地，位于弗吉尼亚州）,而Mike Pompeo就是美国中央情报局前局长…哇,我可以和你打赌他们会编造一些借口-无论这个借口可能多么不漂亮——来掀起中美战争。

Robert Free
Why do you think having an enemy means war. USA and China have lots of enemies they never went to war with. I don't think they will start now.

为什么你认为有敌人就意味着战争。美国和中国有很多敌人，他们从来没有与这些敌人打过仗。我不认为他们会开战。