If Imperial Japan’s past turns out to be a Rising China’s prologue, Beijing could well order a Pearl Harbor-style attack on America, possibly within a decade. Potential targets range from American aircraft carriers in the Taiwan Strait and bombers on the runways of Okinawa and Guam to the military satellite network serving as the eyes and ears of the U.S. high command. Even civilian infrastructure like America’s electricity grid may be at risk.
如果大日本帝国的历史只算是中国崛起的序曲的话，那么北京很可能在十年内也会对美国发动一场珍珠港式的袭击。在台湾海峡附近的美国航空母舰，冲绳、关岛机场跑道上的轰炸机和作为美国最高指挥部耳目的军事卫星网络设施，甚至是民用基础设施比如美国的电网，都可能面临被攻击的危险。
chaostar ? 23 minutes ago
America bases around China, not inverse.
America ships cruise around China, not inverse.
America declares to "return Asia"/"Asia rebalance", not China.
America involves wars all over the world, not China.
Now this article is even worrying about China might strike America first.
是美国基地群包围着中国，而非反之
是美国军舰巡游包围中国，而非反之
是美国宣布“重返亚洲/亚洲再平衡”战略，而不是中国
是美国在插足全世界所有的战争，而不是中国
而现在这文章居然在担心中国会首先攻击美国~！
The Way ? 13 minutes ago
Hmm...Let me see, China invade Perl harbor...
嗯……劳资等着看，中国入侵珍珠港……
I could be diagnosed with cancer, diabetes, leporsy and ebola tomorrow,
but I think I'll leave worst case scenarios to the editors of "The
National Interest".
我明天可能会被确诊患有癌症、腹泻、麻风或者埃博拉，但是我想最坏的消息还是由《国家利益》的编辑来公布吧。
Serge Krieger ? 24 minutes ago
Frankly, I do believe it might come to this. It is the way Asian powers operate. Japan surprised USA in Pearl Harbor and Russia in Port Arthur. China surprised USSR in 1969.
However, USA must be aware that modern China resources and industry wise is not Japan circa 1940. China also got allies and keeping good relations with Russia would ensure China resources flow would not be disrupted. .
坦白说，我确实相信可能如此。这是亚洲政权运作的方式。日本在珍珠港与亚瑟港让美国与俄国搞了突然袭击。中国也在1969年对苏联来了一手（珍宝岛事件）。
然而，美国必须留心的是，在资源和工业能力方面，现代中国可不是1940年代的日本。中国有着不少盟友的同时也与俄国保持着良好的关系。这使得中国的资源流不被中断得到了保证。
Bankotsu Serge Krieger ? 15 minutes ago
Germany also surprised USSR in 1941.
德国也在1941年突然袭击了苏联。
Justanotherviewer ? 25 minutes ago
Another doomsday article by Navarro, China is not Japan and Russia is not Germany as they are both stronger economically and financially and more importantly are more rational state actors.
This article is just another fear mongering attempt.
又一篇来出自Navarro手笔的末日论文章。中国不是日本，俄罗斯也并非德国。这两个有着强大的经济与财政能力的国家行动会更加趋于理性。
这文章只是再一次地尝试散播恐惧。
Vevoli ? 43 minutes ago
Okay, lots of generalizations of little merit.
But Japan of present is regressing to its autarchic past by trading less and less, with its geriatric population unable to compete in the digital age.
China may want to be a hegemon, but it is more likely to lose badly to more determined and focused adversaries.
好吧，许多都是些没有干货的归纳。
但是，当下由于贸易的萎缩，日本的老龄化人口也无法在数字化时代产生竞争力，日本正在回归成它原来的专制国家模式。
中国可能想成为一个霸主，但是她更可能会被更坚定和专注的对手打败。
Bankotsu Vevoli ? 42 minutes ago
Who are the "more determined and focused adversaries"?
谁是“更坚定和专注的对手”？
Vevoli Bankotsu ? 41 minutes ago
All of China's neighbors.
中国所有的邻国。
Bankotsu Vevoli ? 41 minutes ago
lol.
呵呵。
Bankotsu ? 44 minutes ago
I wonder what North Korea would do.
I don't think they will launch a "pearl harbour" style strike on U.S.
North Korea will launch nuclear first strike.
我想知道朝鲜会怎么做？
我不认为朝鲜人会对美国发动一次“珍珠港”式的袭击。
朝鲜会首先发动核袭击。
TDog ? an hour ago
The major failing of this article: China is not Japan. I suppose it's an easy mistake to make if one is of the mindset that "all Asians look alike", but for those of us with a bit more of a capacity to engage in nuance and discern entirely different cultures from one another, this article is about as academic as a discourse on who would win: Superman or the Hulk?
本文的不足之处在于：中国不是日本，我想认为所有亚洲人都一样这个思维定式是很明显错误的，我们中若有人对这两个国家的文化的细微之处有所了解的话，这篇文章就像在讨论超人和绿巨人谁会赢？
Furthermore, classifying China as "aggressive" ignores a few things, namely that its neighbors have been no less "aggressive" and that there is a world of difference between being assertive and aggressive. China is being assertive and that we've grown somewhat spoiled and entitled doesn't make their actions wrong or hostile so much as it means we've grown thinner skins and louder mouths.
更进一步，说中国具有侵略性大概忽略了一些事，中国的邻国也没少有侵略性，并且有侵略性和自信是完全两码事。或许是我们强权久了，中国是在变的自信，但这并不意味着他们做的就是错误或有敌意的，这就像我们肤色浅，说话大声一样，这很正常。
To answer the question "will China launch a Pearl Harbor style attack", the answer is likely not. China has been very clear about its intentions and has thus far not launched a single campaign without ample warning - that most people ignore these warnings is once again no fault of China's. The US was warned in 1950, India was warned in 1962, and Vietnam was given warning in 1979. There is no tradition of sneak attacks and given what China knows about World War II, the chances that they would imitate Japan are remote. Pearl Harbor got Japan two nukes and decades of occupation... China's not going to risk that.
“中国会对美国发起‘珍珠港式的’袭击吗？”，这问题的答案是不大可能。中国意图明确，动手前会提醒勿谓言之不预，不能把人们忽略这些警告也算到中国头上。美国在1950年被提醒过，印度在1962年被提醒过，越南在1979年也被提醒过。中国没有偷袭的传统，对二战也很清楚，他们可不会步日本后尘，偷袭珍珠港使日本吃了两颗蛋蛋，并且现在还被占领着。中国可不会冒这个险。
Bankotsu ? an hour ago
'Would China Launch a "Pearl Harbor-Style" Strike on America?'
How about a "U.S. style" embassy strike? I don't see why not? Or maybe a "turkish" style strike on U.S. jets?
Fresh evidence that NATO's bombing of Chinese embassy in Belgrade was deliberate
https://www.wsws.org/en/articl...
”中国会对美国进行珍珠港式的偷袭吗？“
那为什么不问中国会来一个美国式的使馆袭击？莫名其妙啊？为什么不说中国对美国飞机来个土耳其式的击落呢？
对了，有最新证据表明，中国作为中立国其驻南斯拉夫的使馆是北约故意轰炸的。
Also from this website: http://nationalinterest.org/fe...
Failing to embrace the new realities leads to far more dangerous alternatives. The worst outcome would be a new bipolarity: the emergence of a grouping around China and Russia against the United States, with its European and Asian allies. In such a world, U.S. capacity would be stretched to the breaking point. Washington couldn’t manage an escalation of tensions with Russia and China at a time of increased conflict in the Middle East.
不能及时应对新情况将导致更危险的局面。最坏的结果是变成又一个两极世界：出现一个以中、俄为核心的集团对抗美欧及其亚洲盟友。在这样一个世界里，美国的能力将被拉扯至濒临崩溃的极限。在中东冲突不断加剧的情况下，华府甚至无法应对与中俄紧张关系的升级。
Real push from China is RMB internationalization. Its successful would take away US' mean of support its huge military structure by taking Fed's printing press away. Military strength is only used to deter US thus US has no way to ask for a Plaza Accord like it did to Japan.
中国真心想推进的是人民币国际化。一旦这个计划成功了，这样美联储可以失去了肆意印钞权利，而由这种特权所支撑的大规模美国军事力量的体系就结束了。而中国的军事力量只用来制止美国，这样美国就没有办法像要求日本那样要求中国签订广场协议了。
