Robert Vannrox
Former Operator at Office of Naval Intelligence (1981–2007)
前海军情报局职员(1981-2007)
Because the United States will lose very, VERY badly.

I suppose you don’t want to hear that answer. You want to hear, or read something that makes you feel good about yourself, or your life.
But, I hate to break the news to you, all indications are quite clear. The United States would lose.
    All RAND studies say so.
    All of the American War Colleges say so.
    Historical comparisons indicate that this will be the case.
    Social predictions say so.
    Even remote viewing of the future say so.

因为美国将输得非常非常惨。

我猜你不想听到这个答案。你想听到或读到一些让你自己感觉良好的东西。
但是,我不想告诉你这个消息,所有迹象都表明。美国将会失败。
兰德公司的所有研究都是这样说的。
所有的美国战争学院都这么说。
历史对比表明情况将是这样。
社会预测是这样说的。
就连预言家也这么说。

Oh.
It doesn’t sell newspapers, and it isn’t “sexy”. But it is the truth.
China is a fortress, with peer or above peer military capabilities. It has created a defensive umbrella that is lethal. It’s military is huge, well trained, and enormously armed. It is a nuclear armed nation, and any attacking nation should consider the massive nuclear Armageddon that could be unleashed on their home cities, and peoples.
As overwhelming as the evidence is, there are a small number of people that say something different. And since their conclusions make many people in the Weest feel good, their conclusions are repeated endlessly. Even though the documents are openly ridiculed inside the halls of the Pentagon.

哦。
它是为了不卖报纸,也不“性感”。但这是事实。
中国是一个堡垒,拥有同级别或高于同级别的军事能力。它创造了一个完美的国家防御系统。它的军队规模庞大,训练有素,装备精良。它是一个拥有核武器的国家,任何发动攻击的国家都应该考虑到大规模的核武器爆发的世界末日,这可能会对他们的家乡城市和人民产生影响。
尽管证据确凿,但仍有一小部分人持不同意见。由于他们的结论让许多西方人自我感觉良好,他们的结论被不断地重复。尽管这些文件在五角大楼的大厅里被公开嘲笑。

Who writes these papers?
These are [1] military-industrial complex funded “think tanks”, and [2] politically-connected “Studies”.
In every instance, they promote the idea that if military and weapons spending is increased; GREATLY, that the United State would prevail in a “hot” war against China. It’s simply a matter of funding the right weapons systems, and placing them in the right locations.
You cannot argue that they have been unsuccessful. In fact the very opposite is true. These “reports” and “studies” have been very successful in increasing the United States federal budget to surpass the $30 trillion dollar mark.
If you believe that money solves all problems, then you will agree with these outliers. For as long as there are trees, the United States can simply print unlimited amounts of “green backs” to solve festering problems.
Otherwise, I suggest that you listen to RAND.

So it is up you to decide.

这些论文是谁写的?
这些是[1]军工联合体资助的“智库”,[2]与政治相关的“研究”。
在每一个例子中,他们都宣扬这样一种观点:如果军事和武器开支增加;很大程度上,美国将在一场针对中国的“热战”中获胜。这只是为了购买武器提供资金,并将其部署在正确的位置的问题。
你不能说他们不成功。事实上,情况正好相反。这些“报告”和“研究”非常成功地将美国联邦预算增加到30万亿美元以上。
如果你相信钱能解决所有问题,那么你就会同意这些异常增加的联邦预算。只要还有树,美国就可以无限量地印刷“绿色钞票”来解决日益恶化的问题。
否则,我建议你听兰德公司的。

所以由你来决定。