motoboy 03:20 PM on 12/29/2010
Carriers are silly these days. The battleship was obsoleted by the carrier, the carrier now obsoleted by smart missiles. Were going to have to cut defense spending drasticall-y, and carriers should be the first to go, followed by submarines-, followed by all manned aircraft.
"We’re at the sundown as an imperialis-t power, and we cant have credit card imperialis-m. We cant be the policeman of the world anymore, because we cant afford it. Were gonna have to cut defense drasticall-y." -- David Stockman, former budget director for President Ronald Reagan
这些日子说航母真是傻啊 战舰被航母取代 航母现在要被智能导弹取代了 我们要大规模削减军费了 航母应该首当其冲 其次就是潜水艇 再次是所有载人飞机
“我们作为帝国主义力量已然江河日下了 我们再也不能做世界警察 因为我们负担不起 我们需要大规模削减将军费”——David Stockman 里根总统前预算办公室主任
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sam Badger 03:42 PM on 12/29/2010
I agree, this is more or less what Im thinking. Our Aircraft carrier fleet, which was perfect from the start of WWII to the end of the Cold War, has now become a floating waste of money. Much as the dozens of Battleship-s and Battlecrui-sers the British and Japanese had in 1940. The Chinese have just one-upped us, by finding a cheaper if more limited counter to US sea power.
同意 我差不多也是这么想的 我们的航母舰队 从二战伊始到冷战结束都无人能敌 现在却成了一坨漂浮着浪费资金的废物 就像1940年英国和日本的战舰一样 中国人先我们一步 找到了一种更便宜的可以制服美国海洋力量的方法
Z-Liberator 03:46 PM on 12/29/2010
Think again, Satellite guided munitions are vulnerable in the case China shoots down US Satellites in Space. then we are back to Dum-b wars.
想想看 卫星制导武器在中国击落美国太空卫星的时候将变得脆弱不堪 这样我们又回到愚蠢的战争中了（应指没有高科技下的战争状态）
Dnietz 04:16 PM on 12/29/2010
pretty much missiles and drones have obsoleted everything else
they are going to start beating the drums for war, because it may be the only way to save the USD
our nations financial system is in peril
Deparis 03:19 PM on 12/29/2010
America, Keep fighting wars and building war toys while China does business around the world and increasing-ly becomes an economic giga-behem-oth.
美国 继续打仗和制造战争玩具吧 与此同时中国正在和全世界做生意 变成一个经济方面的庞然大物
Dnietz 04:17 PM on 12/29/2010
i think you just descbribed the actual plans of the two nations correctly in one sentence
proshot22 03:17 PM on 12/29/2010
So it has begun for us. No nation or empire, no matter how vast or strong, last forever. Ancient empires lasted nearly a thousand years, but through the centuries as technology and warfare improved, the time frames of empires has only decreased from a millennium-, to centuries, to decades. This century is going to be the rise of the Chinese in dominance. The US still doesnt realize that short-term threats like Al-Qaeda or the Taliban has little relevance when compared to strategic national threats like the emergence of a 1.5 billion strong military, economic, and cultural power like China. History will laud the rise of China in this century far more likely than the conquering over terrorism by the US. The US being involved in a open-ended War On Terrorism will only bleed this country dry and accelerate the emergence of Chinas global ambitions.
那么 我们已经开始了 无论有多强盛 没有任何国家或者帝国 可以永远维持的 古帝国维持了近一千年 但当科技和战争发展时 帝国的维持时间只能从千年 到百年到几十年了 这个世纪将会是中国统治的开始 美国仍没有意识到短时间的威胁 如基地组织或者塔利班 相比起有组织有策略的国家威胁根本不算什么 比如有15亿军队（您是来乱的吗？）经济 和文化影响力的中国 历史会赞扬这个世纪中国的崛起 而不是美国征服恐怖主义 美国卷进结局未定的反恐战争只会耗尽美国力量 加速形成中国在全球的雄心
Dnietz 04:18 PM on 12/29/2010
it started for us the day we elected reagan
this day was inevitable
we are fools
lets hope we wise up on our way down and rescue what we can
and at least not make too many more people mad because others will be more powerful than us soon.
dave1111 03:12 PM on 12/29/2010
Silkworm (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encycloped-ia
The HY-2 Haiying, known in Western media as the Silkworm missile, is an anti-ship series. The missile is also designated as C-201.
guveqzero 02:57 PM on 12/29/2010
We already lost the war with China. They used our own factories against us. Next, total destructio-n.
我们已经打输了和中国的战争 他们用我们自己的工厂来对付我们 接下来 全面毁灭
OpposingViewpoint 03:03 PM on 12/29/2010
No...we have lost the economic war with China not because "they" used our factories against us but rather, because our politician-s and corporate America "exported" our factories to them. He//, we even provide tax breaks to those companies that moved their manufactur-ing infrastruc-tures to foreign lands. Worse, we consumers continue to buy the foreign products made by these corporatio-ns like there is no tomorrow. No...the Chinese used our own ign0rance against us. You really cant fault the Chinese.
不 我们输掉和中国的经济战争不是因为“他们”用我们的工厂对付我们 而是因为我们的政治家和美国公司“出口”我们的工厂给他们 该死的 我们甚至给那些把设备移到外国的公司减税！更糟的是 我们的消费者还在买这些公司的外国货 好像没有明天一样 不 中国人用我们的无知来对付我们 你根本不能责怪中国人
DAE 04:06 PM on 12/29/2010
The Chinese were smart enough and patriotic enough to do what was best for developing their economy. Americans are st*pid enough and greedy enough to sell-out their country for a quick buck.
中国人够聪明 够爱国 做的是对经济发展最有利的事情 美国人够傻够贪婪 仅仅因为蝇头小利就把国家卖掉
DAE 04:14 PM on 12/29/2010
Its been said that Reagans arms buildup helped bankrupt the Soviet Union during the cold war arms race. Looks like the Chinese are taking a page out of Reagans book. We cant afford a new arms race. Were fighting multiple wars, our economy is tanked, were indebted to China to the tune of trillions of dollars. The Chinese on the other hand have a fast growing economy, the manufactur-ing infrastruc-ture and a low cost price structure that will allow themselves to do so. Interestin-g poker game. Who would you bet on?
传言里根在冷战军备竞赛时的军队建设加速了苏联的垮台 看起来中国人在里根的意料之外 我们负担不起一场新的军备竞赛了 我们到处打仗 我们的经济岌岌可危 我们欠了中国天文数字的债务 而中国呢 有飞速增长的经济 生产设施和低成本的模式 很有意思的扑克游戏 你押哪边？
beauwulff 02:45 PM on 12/29/2010
Does this mean the U.S. is going to ask China for a loan to create some sort of multi-bill-ion dollar countermea-sure? The military-i-ndustrial complex sure hopes so.
dave1111 02:49 PM on 12/29/2010
Going to???? We are borrowing $billions from them on a WEEKLY basis.
Bat Wrangler 02:41 PM on 12/29/2010
Time is on Chinas side. If the current economic forecasts hold true, Chinas GDP is expected to reach $120 billion by 2040, while the US only climbs to $42 billion. That means China could potentiall-y develop and build the worlds most advanced military. Other trends, such as the falling math and science scores of American youth, the cost of American weapon systems, the breadth of global US military commitment-s and treaty obligation-s, the looming expenses of non-discre-tionary budget items (entitleme-nts) all point to a weakening of Americas position. China, on the other hand, is excelling academical-ly, theyve become the worlds banker, are beginning to expand their influence, have begun modernizin-g their military and recently, built the worlds fastest super-comp-uter. During the Cold War, the US always had the economic resources to outpace the Soviet Union. The arms build-up of the 1980s helped speed the USSRs collapse, but in the years to come, the roles will be reversed, and it may be China bankruptin-g us.
形势在中国的一边了 如果现在的经济预测是准确的 中国的GDP将会在2040年达到1200亿美元 而美国只能到429亿美元 那意味着中国有可能发展和建设世界上最先进的军队 而另外一方 比如美国年轻人挂掉的数学和科学成绩 美国武器系统的庞大花销 美国在全球的军事承诺和条约义务 以及不可预见的预算项目都指明了美国被弱化的处境 而中国呢 擅长于学术（作为一个混在理工科的菜鸟 这话给我压力好大）他们已经成为了世界的银行家 正在开始扩展他们的影响力 开始了军队的现代化建设并且在最近 建造了世界上最快的超级计算机 在冷战时 美国总是在经济资源上领先苏联一步 1980年代的军备竞赛加速了苏联的垮台 而在接下来的几年里 角色将反演 也许有可能中国让我们垮掉
pa30 02:47 PM on 12/29/2010
Amen.Add to that that we supply arms and force to places like Afghanasta-n, while the Chinese already operate a new copper mine( with no secrity force from them).Ther-e new highway into Pakistan and India is infrastruc-ture for more growth into those nations for natural resources.-They lease up Kajakastan farm land at the expense of the locals( recal the Irish Potato Famine) They have even patented green technology systems we want and control the rare earth needed to make them work.
阿门 加上我们向阿富汗提供军队 而中国已经开始挖新的铜矿（没有安保力量）通往巴基斯坦和印度的高速公路是比自然资源让这些国家经济增长更快的基础设施 他们以当地的价格租下Kajakastan（这个是哪里？）的农田（回想一下爱尔兰的土豆饥荒吧）他们甚至注册了我们想要的绿色科技系统的专利并且控制了运行它们所需的稀土元素
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gvscmr 02:48 PM on 12/29/2010
"What goes around comes around..." is the short version of your statement
Johnathan Plate 02:55 PM on 12/29/2010
Their is one flaw in your arguement. OIL, and the reason this is the flaw is that unlike the US which has Oil, china doesnt, at least not in enough quanities to support a large sustained war effort.
All that Oil has to be shipped to China somehow, and that oil would be traveling through countries that would not be happy with China if it tried to take out the US. India for one believes it should have equal footing as the US and China, and The indians case is better then the Chinese case. Then you got South east asia, If you think those countries are happy with china, then you dont know south east asian history very well. Japan has and could control the seas very easy in the area.
I am sorry but to think that china is trually going to take over the global spotlight alone is wrong. Too many countries could and do give china a run for their money.
Please remember that the Indian middle class has more people in it then the population of The USA.
你的论证过程中有一个失误 石油 为什么这是个失误的原因在于 美国有石油儿中国没有 至少没有足够的量来支撑一场旷日持久的战争
所有的石油都可以运往中国 然而那些油会经过那些不喜欢中国的国家 比如印度 印度认为它应与中美比肩 印度的情况比中国的情况好 然后你会到达东南亚 如果你认为这些国家喜欢中国的话 那么你就不是很了解东南亚的历史了 日本拥有并可以很轻易的控制那片区域
抱歉 我认为中国会成为世界聚光灯的焦点是错误的 太多的国家为了自己的钱都可以给中国捣乱
Dan Stewart 03:02 PM on 12/29/2010
India has 1.2 billion people. The US has 307 million. So, 25% of Indias population constitute-s its middle class? Define middle class.
印度有12亿人口 美国有3070万 所以 25%的印度人口组成了它的中产阶级？请定义中产阶级（lz我算了一下 不知道这位是怎么个逻辑）
Johnathan Plate 03:10 PM on 12/29/2010
How do you define middle class? In america, or india. Is it a income or is it a comfort level? What is the middle class in todays world economy is the question.
Is it the stuff we own, the money we make, or is a level of comfort in out lives and happy with what we do have?
There are more internet users in india then their are in the US.
是我们拥有的东西 我们挣的钱 还是我们生活的舒适程度和对我们所已经拥有的快乐？