繁体中文  
 
世界商讯
 · 九阳全新免清洗型豆浆机 全美最低
 首页 |
 
版主:黑木崖
 · 九阳全新免清洗型豆浆机 全美最低
 
美国能打赢对华战争吗?
送交者:  2018年02月11日21:08:34 于 [世界军事论坛] 发送悄悄话
Can America win a war against China?
美国能打赢对华战争吗?
【美版知乎quora问答】
Sandeep Satone, works at HSBC Bank
Updated Sep 4
Hello ,
CAN AMERICA WIN ? Yes America will win for sure ! Why ? See below
America is NATO nation so AMERICA vs CHINA is 29 Countries vs CHINA. China will lose for sure.
See the defence budget of USA alone !
译文来源:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com/44224.html
1、美国是个北约成员国,美国vs中国,相当于29个国家vs中国。中国肯定会输。
2、看看美国国防预算!
China is no match to it !
War is not a solution to any problem . It will create problems and instability in the ASIAN region.
Peaceful negotiation and mutual co-operation is the only way to grow together.
Thanks
中国不是美国对手!
战争不是问题的解决办法,战争将造成亚洲地区不稳定。和平谈判与相互合作是共同发展的唯一途径。


Michael Reeves, worked at State Government of Victoria (2002-2008)
Answered Dec 31
Originally Answered: Would America win a war against China?
Yes the US would win easily and this is why. Despite US superiority in its military and that the US and its allies vastly outmatch China in most areas it is not conflict that will win the war.
It is control of resources or specifically energy. China imports 80% of its oil from the Persian Gulf. The US Navy controls the Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea and has a large presence in the Indian Ocean, it has dozens of bases throughout all the regions mentioned along with large ground and air forces, let alone naval.
对,美国能轻易获胜。尽管美国军事具有优势,而且美国及其盟友大多数领域都远超中国,但打仗并不是光取决于战场的输赢。
还要看对资源或特殊能源的控制。中国80%的石油进口自波斯湾。美国海军控制着波斯湾、阿拉伯海,在印度洋有着庞大的(军事)存在,在这些地区建立了数十个基地,有庞大的陆军和空军部署,更不用说海军了。
Without this oil supply the Chinese economy would collapse in a matter of weeks. China has no way presently to contest the oceans against the huge US forces present in this region let alone fight the US Navy on the open seas. While China has advantages 1500km from its main land due to land based missiles and aircraft. A blockade of Chinese oil 7000km away in the Persian Gulf results in a collapse of Chinas economy and China has very few military assets that can reach this far, nothing that can challenge the huge US military presence. Oil supplies from Russia can be easily cut with some missiles on the Chinese side of the border, other pipe lines or railways can also be hit which transport oil from international destinations, railways and pipelines don't move. China has no capability to do the same to the US, let alone the US has the majority of its oil supplies under its own feet or from Canada and Mexico. In pure energy supplies the US can conduct a long war while China needs a short sharp war prior to oil supplies running out.
没有石油供应,中国经济将在几周内崩溃。中国目前没有实力与驻扎在该地区的美国军队争夺海洋,更别说在公海上与美国海军作战了。凭借陆基导弹,中国在距离大陆1500公里的海洋内拥有优势。在波斯湾对7000公里外的中国石油运输实行封锁,导致中国经济崩溃,中国几乎没有军事资产能够到达这么远的地方,无法挑战美国庞大的军事存在。
可以轻易地在中国一侧用导弹切断俄罗斯的石油供应,从其他国际地区运输石油的管道或铁路也可能遭打击。中国没有能力对美国采取同样的行动,更别说美国在其周边或加拿大与墨西哥内拥有自己的石油供应。在纯能源供应方面,美国能维持长期战争,而中国必须赶在石油供应枯竭之前打一场短暂的激烈战争。
On top of this what would the loss of China’s exports markets mean, certainly the US market is gone. The EU would also be doubtful along with many of the other US allies which also happen to be Chinas biggest export markets. The US can also force the issue and institute a complete Naval blockade 3000 miles from Chinas coast and China can do very little to prevent this.
最重要的是,中国出口市场的损失意味着,美国市场肯定没了。欧盟以及美国的其他盟国也会对此表示怀疑,这些盟国恰巧也是中国最大的出口市场。美国也可以强行解决这一问题,并在距中国海岸3000英里的地方实施完全海上封锁,而中国将束手无策。
So China is now in a position that it cannot get the oil it needs to keep it’s economy running, let alone keep hundreds of millions Chinese employed. It also lose much of its export markets a double jeopardy. The US can keep most of its oil supply and a large part of its exports to Europe, however exports only make up 11% of US GDP. While China has a large reserve it will not last longer then 3 months if that. I'm sure US strategist know this, in fact the US can play defensive if they like, mustering there forces for months outside of Chinese military capabilities to hit them and launch a large offensive once they know Chinese oil reserves are hurting.
中国的处境是,无法获得维持经济运行所需的石油,更别提数亿中国人的就业问题了。美国可以保留大部分石油供应以及对欧的大部分出口。
尽管中国拥有庞大储备,不过一旦开战,这些储备维持不了超过3个月。我相信美国战略家知道这一点,事实上,如果美国愿意,可以采取防御性的策略,在中国军事能力之外的地方集结军队数月,打击他们,一旦中国石油储备被摧毁,就发动大规模攻势。
How long will the 200 million Chinese vehicles put up with no fuel to drive them. That's a lot of angry people, let alone the hundreds of millions who will be without work. Who will they blame as trains stop working, trucks transporting food stop working, good and services cease to move around the nation.
到时候,中国2亿辆汽车将无油可加。到时候,人们会怨声载道的,更不用说数亿失业者。当火车停运,运送食物的卡车跑不起来,物流无法流通时,他们会怪谁呢。
This is why China wants to move to an all electric car fleet by 2030 which is very ambitious, as they understand they cannot win a war vs the US under present conditions. China can certainly do a sudden strike and a limited war but should the US choose to fight and prolong the war using its strategic advantage in energy and time China loses. This is another reason for Chinas play in the south china sea to try and tap its vast resources oil and gas, however even these are easily targeted by long range missiles. Oil rigs are easy targets.
中国希望在2030年之前实现汽车电动化,这极具野心。在当前条件下,他们不可能打赢一场对美国的战争。中国当然可以发动突袭和有限的战争,如果美国利用其在能源的战略优势,来延长战争,中国就会输。这也是中国试图在南海开采资源的另一个原因。然而,打起仗来,石油钻塔是活靶子。
Right now China cannot win a major war vs the US. The only wars China could win is a sudden rapid strike like taking Taiwan prior to the US being able to intervene, then its up to the US if they want to expend the huge resources to expel the Chinese forces. This is the only real way China can fight and win until they can either match the US Navy on the open seas and win (unlikely to ever happen) or it has very limited dependence on foreign oil. Both options are decades away.
目前,中国打不赢一场与美国的大战。要赢,中国唯只能靠突袭,比如在美国干预之前,打下台湾,然后就取决于美国是否想要消耗资源,来驱逐中国军队。
在中国能与美国在公海上对决(这不太可能)之前,或对外国石油依赖有限的情况下,这是中国唯一能取胜的方式。这两种选择都要等几十年。
Chinese intervention in North Korea as an example exposes China to all of the above risks. Let alone the military risks. Look at the map of China, its coast line. All of its Naval ports are well within US striking range from its bases and naval forces. The PLA Navy has no where to hide, it can be targeted and sunk in the opening days of any conflict as it simply has now where to go except deep up river and into the interior for ships that can get that far. While the bulk of the US Navy remains well outside of Chinese weapons range, not able to be sunk in the opening days of conflict. A Chinese Admiral said a few years ago, that in the event of war with the US he would not expect the PLA Navy to last more then 100 hours with the bulk of it sunk for the above reasons. In order for the PLA Navy to survive it needs to break out into the open ocean which wont happen as it needs to pass through Japanese/US controlled areas or that of US allies. With out a Navy China loses its ability to protect its sea lanes, its islands and its territorial claims.
中国干预朝鲜,就会面临上述各种风险。更别提军事风险了。看看中国的地图,漫长的海岸线。海军港口都在美国海军基地和部队的打击范围内。中国海军没有藏身之处,在冲突开始的几天里,可能被击沉
大部分美国海军仍在中国武器射程之外,不会在冲突刚开始就被消灭。几年前,一位中国海军上将说,如果与美国发生战争,他不指望中国海军能维持超过100小时。如果没有海军,中国就会失去保护其海上航道、岛屿和领土主张的能力。
Unfortunately for China it cannot devote the resources required to beat the US Navy let alone the US, Japanese, Australian and likely British and other allies that will aide the US. China has to many potential enemies on all sides with massive land borders, its needs a large Army to protect its borders unlike the US. The US can focus on its Navy and Air forces and project power while China has limited ability to do so. If China fails to keep a large Army it risks being defeated on land which opens it up to invasion, let alone the ability to put down int*ts. China needs to choose, is it a Naval power or a Land power.
不幸的是,中国无法投入足够资源去击败美国海军,更别说美国、日本、澳大利亚等,英国及美国盟友将支持美国。
与美国不同,中国陆地边界要面对许多潜在敌人,中国需要一支庞大的军队来保护边境。美国可以把重点放在其海军和空军上,而中国这样做的能力有限。
如果中国不能维持一支庞大的军队,可能遭受陆地入侵。中国需要做选择,是要成为一个海上强国,还是要做一个陆战强国。
Like Zhukov once said to a Russian Admiral when they wanted to build spend more resources on a Russian Navy prior to World War II. Zhukov said, why. In every war Russia has fought in the last 200 years the Russian Navy has scuttled itself in the opening phases, meaning scuttled or been sunk. Land powers should invest in their advantages. If Germany had built more submarines and forgot about a surface fleet then victory in the Atlantic may have occurred, starving Britain out of the war. China will lose most of its fleet in any war vs the US, against anyone else they could certainly win one on one, against the US and its allies it has no hope so why waste the resources. China would be better off focusing on nuclear attack submarines in massive numbers, forget the surface fleet. Keep a limited fleet to fly the flag, invest in Subs and more subs as power projection. This would certainly keep US Admirals awake a night far more then a Chinese Carrier or 3. Learn the lessons of history, you cannot defeat the established naval powers at such a disadvantaged. Submarines however offer an ability at least for now. Even that though is being eroded as the US develops swarms of drone Subs which seems to be the future of underwater warfare.
I think that's enough of an answer.
二战前,俄罗斯海军要求加大投入,对此,朱可夫元帅对一位俄罗斯海军上将说,为什么这么做。在过去的200年里,俄罗斯海军每次打仗,就在战争初期被打败。陆上大国应该加强自己的优势。
如果德国造更多潜艇,打造更强大的水面舰队,那么德国就可能已经实现大西洋的胜利,在战争中困死英国。无论如何,中国在与美国战争时将损失大部分舰队,而与其他国家一对一的战斗他们当然会赢,和美国及其盟友战斗则毫无胜算,为什么要浪费资源(建设舰队)呢。
中国最好专注发展核攻击潜艇,打造水面舰队就算了吧。保留一支有限的舰队维护国家。比起1艘或3艘中国航母,核潜艇才会让美国海军将领们彻夜难眠。

从历史中吸取教训,你处于弱势,是无法打败老牌的海军大国的。然而,潜艇至少提供了一种能力。尽管如此,美国已经研发出一大批无人潜艇,这似乎就是水下战争的未来。
http://www.santaihu.com/44224.html


0%(0)
0%(0)
标 题 (必选项):
内 容 (选填项):
实用资讯
美国名厂保健品一级代理,花旗参,维他命,鱼油,卵磷脂,30天退货保证.买百免邮.
一周点击热帖 更多>>
一周回复热帖
历史上的今天:回复热帖
2017: 川普重申一中是为了经济上的攻势做准备
2017: 安倍的打手《日本经济新闻》社和《产经
2016: 江南愤青谈香港问题!
2016: 朝鲜发射卫星,其实对战略稳定贡献很大
2015: 大陆增加军力 高华柱有对策?
2015: 中国巨舰访荷兰遇提问:这么大军舰是租
2014: 东湾一死一伤,Hayward
2014: 美媒:美对中国开战越早越好 趁解放军还
2013: 庄则栋病逝
2013: 70万精锐部队被打残:淞沪会战注定惨败
 
Jobs. Contact us. Privacy Policy. Copyright (C) 1998-2015. CyberMedia. All Rights Reserved.