爱学记
美国人喜欢战争吗？
本文详解SEO优化核心要素，包含标题关键词布局技巧，提供长尾词选择方法及概述撰写指南，帮助提升搜索引擎排名与网站流量。重点解析标题优化策略及内容概述撰写要点，适用于网站运营者与数字营销人员。
原文标题
o Americans Love War?
来源连接:http://www.ptfcn.com/bencandy.php?fid=51&id=895
Jan 24 2011, 1:45 PM ET By Dominic Tierney 18
Of course not, goes the traditional answer. Americans have always been reluctant warriors. "Of all the enemies to public liberty," wrote James Madison in 1795, "war is, perhaps the most to be dreaded." Our literary heritage is full of anti-war classics like Ernest Hemingway's A Farwell to Arms. U.S. military campaigns have often been unpopular, sparking protest movements. Americans didn't love fighting in Korea in the 1950s, or Vietnam in the 1960s -- and neither do they enjoy battling insurgents today in Iraq and Afghanistan.
当然不，这是传统回答。美国人总是不情不愿地被推上战场的。“对于所有人民自由的敌人来说，”James Madison在1795年写道，“战争大概是最有威慑性的。”我们的文学遗产充满着一流的反战作品，像是海明威的《永别了，武器》。美国的军事行动总是得不到支持的，反战行走一再上演。美国人并不想在1950年代在朝鲜半岛打战，也不想在1960年代在越南引起战火——他们今天也不想在伊拉克和阿富汗镇压起义。
Absolutely, Americans love war, responds Andrew Bacevich. As the author of the recent Washington Rules puts it, we've "fallen prey to militarism." Enthralled by the sword, Americans have a "penchant for permanent war." After all, the U.S. defense budget almost matches the rest of the world's military spending put together. Many of America's wars were popular -- at least at first. In 2001, around 80 percent of Americans backed the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Two years later, about seven in 10 Americans supported the invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein.
当然，美国人爱战争，Andrew Bacevich回答。他最近发行的《华盛顿法则》上写到，我们已经“是军国主义的牺牲品”。美国人被大剑迷惑，“沉迷于永不终结的战争”。毕竟，美国的军费相当于世界上所有国家军费的总和。美国的战争总是受民众欢迎的——至少一开始是这样。2001年，80%美国人支持对阿富汗塔利班的镇压。2年后，七成美国人支持以推翻萨达姆为名的入侵伊拉克。
But neither of these views is completely right. The truth is that we do love war -- but only a certain kind of war. To understand what this kind is, sit on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C., and look toward the Capitol.
可这两种观点都不完全正确。真实的情况是，我们的确喜欢战争——但只是某种特定的战争。为了让你明白这种战争是什么，让我们试着坐在位于华盛顿特区的林肯纪念堂的台阶上，向前看着国会大厦。
Behind us is a marble Abraham Lincoln, architect of the crusade to free the slaves and save the Union. Straight ahead lie the fifty-six pillars and the giant arches of the World War II Memorial, signifying America's common purpose, when the greatest generation united to crush evil. Anchoring the military vista, at the far end of the Mall, is a statue of Civil War general Ulysses S. Grant. A triumphant tale unfolds before us, with World War II bookended by the Civil War titans, Lincoln and Grant.
在我们身后，是亚伯拉罕 林肯的大理石像。他是解放奴隶和拯救美国的总设计师。在我们的正前方是56根柱子，和二战纪念堂的巨型拱门。他们代表着美国人的共同理想，伟大的一代人团结一致，击退邪恶。伫立在军事长廊上，林荫路的末端是南北战争将军Ulysses S. Grant（Ulysses Simpson , 1822-1885, 美国南北战争时北军总司令, 第18任总统)的雕像。一个胜利的传说铺展在我们眼前。他们是二战，独立战争，里肯和Grant。
This is the type of war we love, where we fight for decisive victory, regime change, and the noblest of ideals -- in short, a magnificent crusade. "Good" wars like the Civil War and World War II produce epic heroes like Grant, MacArthur, and Patton, and stirring anthems like "The Battle Hymn of the Republic."
这样的战争才是我们喜欢的。我们为了必然的胜利奋斗，更替政权，实现高尚的理想——总而言之，这些是高尚的斗争。像南北战争和二战这样的“好”的战争，诞生了许多英雄人物。Grant，麦克阿瑟(美国五星上将)和巴顿，（小乔治·史密斯：(1885-1945) 美国将军。在第二次世界大战中，他率第三军团横扫法国进入德国(1944-1945年）），还有激动人心的战歌，如《共和国赞歌》。
But if we broaden the view from the Lincoln Memorial, our peripheral vision reveals a less comfortable military narrative. Over on the right, 19 men, cast in stainless steel, slug their way uphill, shivering under ponchos, commemorating the 1950-1953 Korean War.
但如果我们把目光移开，看看里肯纪念堂的四周，眼角的余光可以看见一个不怎么让人舒服的军史。就在右边，19个男人，不锈钢制品，匍匐着上山，在雨披下瑟瑟发抖。这是纪念为了铭记1950-1953年的朝鲜战争。
The campaign started out so gloriously -- like World War II all over again. U.S. troops liberated South Korea, and then marched into North Korea to overthrow the enemy regime. In the fall of 1950, Jimmie Osborne even released a celebratory record Thank God for Victory in Korea.
这场战争的开始是多么的辉煌——就像是二战辉煌的重演。美国成军解放了南韩，然后长驱直入北韩扫荡敌方政权。在1950年的秋天，Jimmie Osborne 甚至准备好了庆祝在朝鲜的胜利。
But Osborne sang too soon. China suddenly intervened and sent U.S. forces hurtling back down the peninsula. President Harry Truman abandoned the goal of decisive victory, and fought instead for a draw.
但Osborne 得赞歌唱得太早了。中国突然介入并迅速使美国军队溃退回南朝鲜半岛。杜鲁门总统放弃了就要到手的胜利，改为为议和而战。
We don't love this kind of war, where the objective is less than unconditional surrender. Why should Americans, as the saying went, "die for a tie"? The glue binding together public support for the Korean War came unstuck.
我们不爱这样的战争。我们不接受让他们无条件投降以外的一点点妥协。为什么美国人要，就像俗语说的那样，“为打成平手而死”？公众支持朝鲜战争的凝聚力开始崩溃。
Meanwhile, over to the left on the Mall, there is an even darker vision of warfare. A sunken black wall memorializes the campaign in South Vietnam from 1965 to 1973. Vietnam was a nation-building mission, where we stabilize foreign lands, oversee elections, or fight insurgents.
同时，在的左边，更黑暗的战争景象。一段残破的黑墙，纪念1965到1973年的越南战争。在越南，我们要负责建国。我们稳定外国势力，视察选举，镇压起义。
We don't love nation-building at all. Instead, we usually see it as a failed quagmire, whether in Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, or Iraq. We even dislike nation-building when we succeed -- like the recent stabilization of Bosnia and Kosovo. These missions rarely produce heroes. And instead of the "Battle Hymn," we sing protest songs like Country Joe McDonald's "I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixing-to-Die Rag."
我们压根不爱建立一个国家。相反，我们一般认为这是个失败的困境，不管这发生在越南，索马里，阿富汗或伊拉克。甚至，即使我们胜利了我们也不爱建立国家，比如说最近的稳定波斯尼亚和科索沃。这些使命并不能诞生英雄，更不用说战争赞美诗了。我们高唱抗议，就像乡村歌手Joe McDonald的《我觉得我在收拾破烂儿》。
The trouble is that America's military future may lie, not in our blinkered view of idealized war, but in our peripheral vision of uncomfortable conflict. Modern technology is so destructive that we can't always battle for regime change. We might have to fight more wars like Korea, and fewer like World War II. And the challenges posed by rogue states, failed states, and terrorism, will likely lead the United States down the path of nation-building again.
问题在于，美国未来的军事恐怕仍然不是我们狭窄视野中的理想战争，而仍然是我们看不上眼的那些恶心的冲突。现代科技太具有破坏性了，以致我们不能总是为了政权更替而作战。我们也许还要打很多项朝鲜一样的战争，而不是像二战一样的战争。流氓国家、失败的国家和恐怖主义所下的战帖，很肯能会把美国再次拖下建立国家的浑水。
Tomorrow's wars may be far from a love affair.
明天的战争也许远远不能让我们暴爽一把。
评论翻译
Gepap 1 month ago
This essay feels incomplete without mentions of the War of 1812 (which was highly controversial in the country), the Mexican-American War (perhaps mentioning Lincoln's opposition to this war would have been nice), the Spanish-American War and the subsequent operations in the Philipinnes (which rarely garner any attention), and finally the First World War.
3peopleliked this.
这篇文章感觉不是很完整。他们没有提到1812年战争（这场战争在当时的美国国内很有争议），美墨战争（也许还应该提提林肯反对这场战争），美西战争，还有接下来在菲律宾的军事行动（这并没有得到多少关注），还有，最后，第一次世界大战。
Noibn48 1 month ago in reply to?Gepap
There wasn't a huge amount of support for Korea either. And, we had sort of a decisive victory in hand until MacArthur decided HE was CIC and went to the Yalu.
Except for the (some) of the frothing right, it's not exactly a "love affair" now...as long as Iraq and Afghanistan remain on page 6 or at the bottom of the screen. G.W. Bush knew what he was doing by banning photographs and clips of flag draped coffins during most of his Iraq debacle. .
The American "love" of war is a relatively recent phenomenon. The total victory in WW2 made us cocky. And blind. We believed that we could swagger in anywhere and soon we would be accepting the enemy's sword. Ike knew different. So did the purged State Department Asia hands.
We also got used to a semi-national emergency situation with the Soviets and that added to the "bear any burden, pay any price" ethos. So we have had war after frustrating war from Korea through the present and we've gotten used to it. We've gotten used to "send the Marines!" to the point where perhaps we don't believe there's any policy alternative.
Why else would we still be spending close to USD 1 trillion on a defense designed to fight off an non-existent industrial enemy like the Soviet Union once was?
1personliked this.
朝鲜战争也没有得到多少支持。并且，我们的确掌握了一些决定性的胜利，直到麦克阿瑟把他自己当成最高司令官然后迫近鸭绿江。
除了对一些虚有其表的右派以外，这事儿现在不完全是个“甜蜜爱恋”。小布什知道他在干什么。大多数情况下，伊拉克的战役溃败以后，他禁止了对盖着国旗的棺材拍照和摄像。
美国人对于战争的“热爱”相对来说只是近来的现象。在二战中的完全胜利让我们自负。让我们盲目。我们认为我们可以大步践踏世界上任何一个角落，不费吹灰之力的收缴敌人的武器。
和苏联冷战时，我们习惯了国家总是处在半紧急状态中。所以我们在朝鲜战争的失败到现今的这段时间内，我们还是在打仗。我们已经习惯了。我们习惯于帅气地喊“派遣海军！”，甚至到了我们不相信有任何第二选择政策的地步。
为什么我们之中还有人把将近一万亿美元砸在国防上，而这国防是为了对付一个像曾经的苏联一样的工业假想敌？
Barry_D 1 month ago
I'd point out that WWI was unpopular (and need massive propaganda, censorship and political restrictions), WWII was not so lightly popular as the sanitized picture painted afterwards, and neither was the Civil War.
Don't confuse the pictures painted by propagandists (during and after a war) with what people actually thought.
5peopleliked this.
我想要指出一战并不受欢迎（所以当时有大量的宣传、言论审查和政治限制），而二战也不像是战后美化的那样轻松地得到支持。南北战争也不是。
不要把被宣传美化的历史（无论是战时或战后）和人们真正的想法搞混了。
Alex Pilewski 1 month ago in reply to?Barry_D
This is true. The 'Peace Democrats' and General McClellan may have beaten Lincoln in the election of 1864 if not for Sherman's decisive capture of Atlanta. However, this essay may or may not (I don't know the writer's intention) be speaking for those people. I think it could be speaking for the people of today, and by God we love the Civil War, World War II, and the Revolutionary War.
There will always be a prominent anti-war section to these United States, during every war, but dominant notion of American history is one of righteous conquest and blundering quagmire, just as the essay states.
Flag
2peopleliked this.
这是事实。如果没有谢尔曼夺取亚特兰大这一决定性事件的话，“和平民主党”和麦克莱伦将军也许就不会在1864年大选中输给林肯了。然而，这篇文章可能也可能不是（我不知道作者的意图）为这些人说话的。我认为作者也许在为今天的人们说话。老天，我们热爱南北战争，二战和独立战争。
在美国，强而有力的反战实力总是存在的，每一场战争都是。但在美国历史中，主流的思想不是正义的征服，就是愚蠢的泥淖。
Noibn48 1 month ago in reply to?Barry_D
WW2 was popular because it put folks back to work and it let white ethnics, one or two generations removed form Ellis Island, shed their hyphen. Only in late 1944, with the ever mounting casualties (especially in the Pacific) and victory on the horizon did folks begin to tire of the war and its restrictions at home.
1?person?liked this.
二战受欢迎受欢迎是因为它让人民重新得到工作，仅仅在1944年后半年，每一个伤亡人数（特别是在太平洋）和胜利的增加，都让人们对战争和在家里的约束感到厌倦
Richard 1 month ago
War is a money making industry. During the Vietnam War Bell replaced 1500 UH-1's. The US Air Force had darn near a dozen different strike and fighter aircraft in it's arsenal. The US Navy had as nearly as many different strike and fighter aircraft within it's arsenal.
The Pentagon did not have to look very far for the next best thing in fighter and attack aircraft. Politicians with districts that were home to manufacturers of equipment necessary to fight a war, were telling the Pentagon what would be purchased next.
Politicians trying to command our war fighters are a main reason we have a defense budget that totals more than the rest of the worlds nations combined. We need to let the war fighters order what is necessary to fight wars not allow politicians to dictate what will be used.
Gates, listen to the Military Commanders around you. Seems that that is what they are there for. Order what we need to get the job done so that the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen can come home as early as possible.
3peopleliked this.
战争是个赚钱的行当。在越南战争期间我们消耗了1500架UH-1。美国空军在军工厂中缝补了一打不同的strike和fighter（我琢磨着这些是战机？）美国海军的军工厂中藏着几乎相同数量的strike和fighter。
五角大楼在fighter和attack aircraft的好处上不需要看的太远。如果政治家们的选区是军工业，战争的必需品，的地盘，那么他们会告诉五角大楼接下来要买什么。
政治家们想要告诉我们的战士我们军费占世界一半的主要原因。我们应该让我们的战士决定为什么而战，而不是让政治家下令要是用什么。
盖茨，听听你身边的军事指挥官的话吧。那应该是他们的工作。寻找我们需要的，然后搞定它，这样一来，士兵，水手，潜水艇和飞行员们就可以尽早回家了。
Hudson 1 month ago in reply to?Gene Callahan
The Japanese got to keep the Emperor, though in a diminished, figurehead status.
日本应该留着他的天皇，尽管只是个傀儡。
arvay 1 month ago
Public opinion surveys have , and still continue to show that Americans are isolationists. Shows the vast difference between the will of the people and those who actually rule us.
3peopleliked this.
民意调查一直显示出美国人是孤立主义者（绥靖？）。统治者和人民的想法是不一样的。
rhandy 1 month ago
Many American defense corporations certainly love war.
2?people?liked this. Like ReplyReply
美国的军火公司肯定爱死战争了。
Hudson 1 month ago
The author makes good distinctions about real wars. However...
As Sam Shepherd observed: "
eace is boring."
As H. Rap Brown observed: "Violence is as American as apple pie."
As D.H. Lawrence observed: "Americans are born killers."
The theme of countless American stories is that the hero is reluctantly drawn into conflict. He makes gestures toward peace, practices meditation, whatatever; but somewhere in the second act of our ongoing action-adventure mythology, he straps on the gun and goes after the bad guys.
Yup. Peace is boring.
2?people?liked this. Like ReplyReply
本文作者很好的说明了真正的战争的特性，但是——
和平很无聊——Sam Shepherd
暴力和苹果派一样，都是美国的——H. Rap Brown
美国人都是激情杀手——D.H. Lawrence
无数美国的故事的主题都是英雄被卷入了斗争，他想要和平，思考人生云云，但是从某时开始就像我们的动作冒险神话（电影？）一样，他拿起枪跟着坏人走了。
没错，和平很无趣。
Ryan Anchors 1 month ago
We love war because we don't understand it.
We look at how great the WWII generation was and wish we could have that back.
The times, the stories, even the war transcend the crappy, self-serving world we live in today.
If only people my age (21) could walk a mile in a WWII Soldier/Marine's shoes they would probably stop complaining about their iPhones, Facebook, and BMWs.
Flag
3?people?liked this. Like ReplyReply
我们喜爱战争是因为我们完全搞不清楚状况。
我们看见 二战的一代 是多么的伟大，然后希望这伟大再来一次。
那个时代，那些故事，甚至那场战争都超越了我们今天生活的这个恶心自私的世界。
只要跟我同龄的（21岁）人们能够穿着二战士兵的鞋子走上一里，他们就会闭上嘴巴不再抱怨他们的iPhone，Facebook和宝马了。
celeidth 1 month ago
I'm not so sure that we "love" war as much as we love working in industries that are connected to war. Cut the defense budget and you cut some of the few high paying jobs left outside of the financial industry. Find an engineer, for example, who is not in some way connected to the defense juggernaut. And for the less educated the armed services are one of the few ways out of dead end jobs. War has become an addictive economic drug.
我不确定我们会向喜欢和战争有关的工业一样喜欢战争。削减国防预算就等于削减了除金融业以外的了了高薪职位。比如说，找和国防没有关系的一个工程师给我看看。对于非高学历的人来说，军队是一件较有生气的工作。战争是会让人上瘾的经济灵药。
noslack2327 1 month ago
If you were ever in one you wouldn't love it. The longest period of peace in U. S. history was the period after the Civil War and before the adventurism that was the Spanish American War. The duration of the peace was no doubt because so many Americans had fought in the Civil War, during which there was so many casualties.
如果你经历过战争，你不会喜欢他的。美国历史上最长的和平时期是在南北战争以后，美西战争冒险主义之前。不用怀疑和平的时长，因为很多美国人参加了南北战争，也有很多伤亡。
Scar2 1 month ago in reply to?noslack2327
I doubt if the Plains Indians and the U.S. soldiers who fought them (many of whom -- like Custer, Sheridan and countless others -- had fought in the Civil War) felt like the period between the Civil War and the Spanish-American War was particularly peaceful.
I suspect the long period without an "official" declared war had more to with the fact that we were busy pushing West, had no local enemies to fight (having more or less stabilized our borders with Canada and Mexico), and weren't yet strong enough to project ourselves around the world as a global power.
我很怀疑平原印第安人和攻击他们的美国士兵们（有很多这种人，像卡斯特，乔治·阿姆斯特朗：(1839-1876) 美国士兵。他在23岁时就成为准将，在小比格霍恩被由坐牛和疯马（嘿，疯马的巨型雕像不知怎么样了？）领队的苏族和夏安族的印第安士兵杀死，他的手下全军覆灭，谢尔顿和不计其数的其他人）会认为南北战争和美西战争之前的那段时期会是多么和平的年代。
我怀疑没有官方宣战的漫长时期内情况更糟糕。我们忙着西进，邻国没有敌人（我们和加拿大、墨西哥的边界比较稳定），也没有强壮的可以成为世界霸主。
billwald 1 month ago
Like most every nation, we love wars that are clear wins and dislike losing. This his how our sin nature operates. Other people, like the Afghans, love killing and don't care who it is, although they prefer killing strangers.
像其他的国家一样，我们喜欢胜利而不喜欢失败。这是我们的原罪所致。其他人呢，像是阿富汗人，喜欢杀戮，而从来不管被害者是谁，尽管他们更喜欢屠杀陌生人。
Rick Geissal 1 month ago
The author should know that Abraham Lincoln was not an architect of the crusade to free the slaves - or of any crusade at all other than preserving the Union.
Americans love to control; sometimes that means war. We are never "drawn into" war, nor do we "have to fight." We choose to because we want to be in control.
"What are we fightin' for? I don't give a damn; next stop is Viet-Nam."
1?person?liked this. Like ReplyReply
作者应该要知道亚伯拉罕林肯并不是奴隶解放运动——或是任何改革运动的总设计师，他仅仅是保全了联邦。
美国人喜欢控制，又是那意味着战争。我们从来不会“被陷入”战争，我们也不会“不得不打仗”。我们选择战争，因为我们想要把事情掌控在我们的控制之下。
“我们在为什么而战？我不是要谴责谁。下一站，是越南。”
o Americans Love War?来源连接:http://www.ptfcn.com/bencandy.php?fid=51&id=895
Jan 24 2011, 1:45 PM ET By Dominic Tierney 18
Of course not, goes the traditional answer. Americans have always been reluctant warriors. "Of all the enemies to public liberty," wrote James Madison in 1795, "war is, perhaps the most to be dreaded." Our literary heritage is full of anti-war classics like Ernest Hemingway's A Farwell to Arms. U.S. military campaigns have often been unpopular, sparking protest movements. Americans didn't love fighting in Korea in the 1950s, or Vietnam in the 1960s -- and neither do they enjoy battling insurgents today in Iraq and Afghanistan.
当然不，这是传统回答。美国人总是不情不愿地被推上战场的。“对于所有人民自由的敌人来说，”James Madison在1795年写道，“战争大概是最有威慑性的。”我们的文学遗产充满着一流的反战作品，像是海明威的《永别了，武器》。美国的军事行动总是得不到支持的，反战行走一再上演。美国人并不想在1950年代在朝鲜半岛打战，也不想在1960年代在越南引起战火——他们今天也不想在伊拉克和阿富汗镇压起义。
Absolutely, Americans love war, responds Andrew Bacevich. As the author of the recent Washington Rules puts it, we've "fallen prey to militarism." Enthralled by the sword, Americans have a "penchant for permanent war." After all, the U.S. defense budget almost matches the rest of the world's military spending put together. Many of America's wars were popular -- at least at first. In 2001, around 80 percent of Americans backed the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Two years later, about seven in 10 Americans supported the invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein.
当然，美国人爱战争，Andrew Bacevich回答。他最近发行的《华盛顿法则》上写到，我们已经“是军国主义的牺牲品”。美国人被大剑迷惑，“沉迷于永不终结的战争”。毕竟，美国的军费相当于世界上所有国家军费的总和。美国的战争总是受民众欢迎的——至少一开始是这样。2001年，80%美国人支持对阿富汗塔利班的镇压。2年后，七成美国人支持以推翻萨达姆为名的入侵伊拉克。
But neither of these views is completely right. The truth is that we do love war -- but only a certain kind of war. To understand what this kind is, sit on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C., and look toward the Capitol.
可这两种观点都不完全正确。真实的情况是，我们的确喜欢战争——但只是某种特定的战争。为了让你明白这种战争是什么，让我们试着坐在位于华盛顿特区的林肯纪念堂的台阶上，向前看着国会大厦。
Behind us is a marble Abraham Lincoln, architect of the crusade to free the slaves and save the Union. Straight ahead lie the fifty-six pillars and the giant arches of the World War II Memorial, signifying America's common purpose, when the greatest generation united to crush evil. Anchoring the military vista, at the far end of the Mall, is a statue of Civil War general Ulysses S. Grant. A triumphant tale unfolds before us, with World War II bookended by the Civil War titans, Lincoln and Grant.
在我们身后，是亚伯拉罕 林肯的大理石像。他是解放奴隶和拯救美国的总设计师。在我们的正前方是56根柱子，和二战纪念堂的巨型拱门。他们代表着美国人的共同理想，伟大的一代人团结一致，击退邪恶。伫立在军事长廊上，林荫路的末端是南北战争将军Ulysses S. Grant（Ulysses Simpson , 1822-1885, 美国南北战争时北军总司令, 第18任总统)的雕像。一个胜利的传说铺展在我们眼前。他们是二战，独立战争，里肯和Grant。
This is the type of war we love, where we fight for decisive victory, regime change, and the noblest of ideals -- in short, a magnificent crusade. "Good" wars like the Civil War and World War II produce epic heroes like Grant, MacArthur, and Patton, and stirring anthems like "The Battle Hymn of the Republic."
这样的战争才是我们喜欢的。我们为了必然的胜利奋斗，更替政权，实现高尚的理想——总而言之，这些是高尚的斗争。像南北战争和二战这样的“好”的战争，诞生了许多英雄人物。Grant，麦克阿瑟(美国五星上将)和巴顿，（小乔治·史密斯：(1885-1945) 美国将军。在第二次世界大战中，他率第三军团横扫法国进入德国(1944-1945年）），还有激动人心的战歌，如《共和国赞歌》。
But if we broaden the view from the Lincoln Memorial, our peripheral vision reveals a less comfortable military narrative. Over on the right, 19 men, cast in stainless steel, slug their way uphill, shivering under ponchos, commemorating the 1950-1953 Korean War.
但如果我们把目光移开，看看里肯纪念堂的四周，眼角的余光可以看见一个不怎么让人舒服的军史。就在右边，19个男人，不锈钢制品，匍匐着上山，在雨披下瑟瑟发抖。这是纪念为了铭记1950-1953年的朝鲜战争。
The campaign started out so gloriously -- like World War II all over again. U.S. troops liberated South Korea, and then marched into North Korea to overthrow the enemy regime. In the fall of 1950, Jimmie Osborne even released a celebratory record Thank God for Victory in Korea.
这场战争的开始是多么的辉煌——就像是二战辉煌的重演。美国成军解放了南韩，然后长驱直入北韩扫荡敌方政权。在1950年的秋天，Jimmie Osborne 甚至准备好了庆祝在朝鲜的胜利。
But Osborne sang too soon. China suddenly intervened and sent U.S. forces hurtling back down the peninsula. President Harry Truman abandoned the goal of decisive victory, and fought instead for a draw.
但Osborne 得赞歌唱得太早了。中国突然介入并迅速使美国军队溃退回南朝鲜半岛。杜鲁门总统放弃了就要到手的胜利，改为为议和而战。
We don't love this kind of war, where the objective is less than unconditional surrender. Why should Americans, as the saying went, "die for a tie"? The glue binding together public support for the Korean War came unstuck.
我们不爱这样的战争。我们不接受让他们无条件投降以外的一点点妥协。为什么美国人要，就像俗语说的那样，“为打成平手而死”？公众支持朝鲜战争的凝聚力开始崩溃。
Meanwhile, over to the left on the Mall, there is an even darker vision of warfare. A sunken black wall memorializes the campaign in South Vietnam from 1965 to 1973. Vietnam was a nation-building mission, where we stabilize foreign lands, oversee elections, or fight insurgents.
同时，在的左边，更黑暗的战争景象。一段残破的黑墙，纪念1965到1973年的越南战争。在越南，我们要负责建国。我们稳定外国势力，视察选举，镇压起义。
We don't love nation-building at all. Instead, we usually see it as a failed quagmire, whether in Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, or Iraq. We even dislike nation-building when we succeed -- like the recent stabilization of Bosnia and Kosovo. These missions rarely produce heroes. And instead of the "Battle Hymn," we sing protest songs like Country Joe McDonald's "I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixing-to-Die Rag."
我们压根不爱建立一个国家。相反，我们一般认为这是个失败的困境，不管这发生在越南，索马里，阿富汗或伊拉克。甚至，即使我们胜利了我们也不爱建立国家，比如说最近的稳定波斯尼亚和科索沃。这些使命并不能诞生英雄，更不用说战争赞美诗了。我们高唱抗议，就像乡村歌手Joe McDonald的《我觉得我在收拾破烂儿》。
The trouble is that America's military future may lie, not in our blinkered view of idealized war, but in our peripheral vision of uncomfortable conflict. Modern technology is so destructive that we can't always battle for regime change. We might have to fight more wars like Korea, and fewer like World War II. And the challenges posed by rogue states, failed states, and terrorism, will likely lead the United States down the path of nation-building again.
问题在于，美国未来的军事恐怕仍然不是我们狭窄视野中的理想战争，而仍然是我们看不上眼的那些恶心的冲突。现代科技太具有破坏性了，以致我们不能总是为了政权更替而作战。我们也许还要打很多项朝鲜一样的战争，而不是像二战一样的战争。流氓国家、失败的国家和恐怖主义所下的战帖，很肯能会把美国再次拖下建立国家的浑水。
Tomorrow's wars may be far from a love affair.
明天的战争也许远远不能让我们暴爽一把。
评论翻译
Gepap 1 month ago
This essay feels incomplete without mentions of the War of 1812 (which was highly controversial in the country), the Mexican-American War (perhaps mentioning Lincoln's opposition to this war would have been nice), the Spanish-American War and the subsequent operations in the Philipinnes (which rarely garner any attention), and finally the First World War.
3peopleliked this.
这篇文章感觉不是很完整。他们没有提到1812年战争（这场战争在当时的美国国内很有争议），美墨战争（也许还应该提提林肯反对这场战争），美西战争，还有接下来在菲律宾的军事行动（这并没有得到多少关注），还有，最后，第一次世界大战。
Noibn48 1 month ago in reply to?Gepap
There wasn't a huge amount of support for Korea either. And, we had sort of a decisive victory in hand until MacArthur decided HE was CIC and went to the Yalu.
Except for the (some) of the frothing right, it's not exactly a "love affair" now...as long as Iraq and Afghanistan remain on page 6 or at the bottom of the screen. G.W. Bush knew what he was doing by banning photographs and clips of flag draped coffins during most of his Iraq debacle. .
The American "love" of war is a relatively recent phenomenon. The total victory in WW2 made us cocky. And blind. We believed that we could swagger in anywhere and soon we would be accepting the enemy's sword. Ike knew different. So did the purged State Department Asia hands.
We also got used to a semi-national emergency situation with the Soviets and that added to the "bear any burden, pay any price" ethos. So we have had war after frustrating war from Korea through the present and we've gotten used to it. We've gotten used to "send the Marines!" to the point where perhaps we don't believe there's any policy alternative.
Why else would we still be spending close to USD 1 trillion on a defense designed to fight off an non-existent industrial enemy like the Soviet Union once was?
1personliked this.
朝鲜战争也没有得到多少支持。并且，我们的确掌握了一些决定性的胜利，直到麦克阿瑟把他自己当成最高司令官然后迫近鸭绿江。
除了对一些虚有其表的右派以外，这事儿现在不完全是个“甜蜜爱恋”。小布什知道他在干什么。大多数情况下，伊拉克的战役溃败以后，他禁止了对盖着国旗的棺材拍照和摄像。
美国人对于战争的“热爱”相对来说只是近来的现象。在二战中的完全胜利让我们自负。让我们盲目。我们认为我们可以大步践踏世界上任何一个角落，不费吹灰之力的收缴敌人的武器。
和苏联冷战时，我们习惯了国家总是处在半紧急状态中。所以我们在朝鲜战争的失败到现今的这段时间内，我们还是在打仗。我们已经习惯了。我们习惯于帅气地喊“派遣海军！”，甚至到了我们不相信有任何第二选择政策的地步。
为什么我们之中还有人把将近一万亿美元砸在国防上，而这国防是为了对付一个像曾经的苏联一样的工业假想敌？
Barry_D 1 month ago
I'd point out that WWI was unpopular (and need massive propaganda, censorship and political restrictions), WWII was not so lightly popular as the sanitized picture painted afterwards, and neither was the Civil War.
Don't confuse the pictures painted by propagandists (during and after a war) with what people actually thought.
5peopleliked this.
我想要指出一战并不受欢迎（所以当时有大量的宣传、言论审查和政治限制），而二战也不像是战后美化的那样轻松地得到支持。南北战争也不是。
不要把被宣传美化的历史（无论是战时或战后）和人们真正的想法搞混了。
Alex Pilewski 1 month ago in reply to?Barry_D
This is true. The 'Peace Democrats' and General McClellan may have beaten Lincoln in the election of 1864 if not for Sherman's decisive capture of Atlanta. However, this essay may or may not (I don't know the writer's intention) be speaking for those people. I think it could be speaking for the people of today, and by God we love the Civil War, World War II, and the Revolutionary War.
There will always be a prominent anti-war section to these United States, during every war, but dominant notion of American history is one of righteous conquest and blundering quagmire, just as the essay states.
Flag
2peopleliked this.
这是事实。如果没有谢尔曼夺取亚特兰大这一决定性事件的话，“和平民主党”和麦克莱伦将军也许就不会在1864年大选中输给林肯了。然而，这篇文章可能也可能不是（我不知道作者的意图）为这些人说话的。我认为作者也许在为今天的人们说话。老天，我们热爱南北战争，二战和独立战争。
在美国，强而有力的反战实力总是存在的，每一场战争都是。但在美国历史中，主流的思想不是正义的征服，就是愚蠢的泥淖。
Noibn48 1 month ago in reply to?Barry_D
WW2 was popular because it put folks back to work and it let white ethnics, one or two generations removed form Ellis Island, shed their hyphen. Only in late 1944, with the ever mounting casualties (especially in the Pacific) and victory on the horizon did folks begin to tire of the war and its restrictions at home.
1?person?liked this.
二战受欢迎受欢迎是因为它让人民重新得到工作，仅仅在1944年后半年，每一个伤亡人数（特别是在太平洋）和胜利的增加，都让人们对战争和在家里的约束感到厌倦
Richard 1 month ago
War is a money making industry. During the Vietnam War Bell replaced 1500 UH-1's. The US Air Force had darn near a dozen different strike and fighter aircraft in it's arsenal. The US Navy had as nearly as many different strike and fighter aircraft within it's arsenal.
The Pentagon did not have to look very far for the next best thing in fighter and attack aircraft. Politicians with districts that were home to manufacturers of equipment necessary to fight a war, were telling the Pentagon what would be purchased next.
Politicians trying to command our war fighters are a main reason we have a defense budget that totals more than the rest of the worlds nations combined. We need to let the war fighters order what is necessary to fight wars not allow politicians to dictate what will be used.
Gates, listen to the Military Commanders around you. Seems that that is what they are there for. Order what we need to get the job done so that the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen can come home as early as possible.
3peopleliked this.
战争是个赚钱的行当。在越南战争期间我们消耗了1500架UH-1。美国空军在军工厂中缝补了一打不同的strike和fighter（我琢磨着这些是战机？）美国海军的军工厂中藏着几乎相同数量的strike和fighter。
五角大楼在fighter和attack aircraft的好处上不需要看的太远。如果政治家们的选区是军工业，战争的必需品，的地盘，那么他们会告诉五角大楼接下来要买什么。
政治家们想要告诉我们的战士我们军费占世界一半的主要原因。我们应该让我们的战士决定为什么而战，而不是让政治家下令要是用什么。
盖茨，听听你身边的军事指挥官的话吧。那应该是他们的工作。寻找我们需要的，然后搞定它，这样一来，士兵，水手，潜水艇和飞行员们就可以尽早回家了。
Hudson 1 month ago in reply to?Gene Callahan
The Japanese got to keep the Emperor, though in a diminished, figurehead status.
日本应该留着他的天皇，尽管只是个傀儡。
arvay 1 month ago
Public opinion surveys have , and still continue to show that Americans are isolationists. Shows the vast difference between the will of the people and those who actually rule us.
3peopleliked this.
民意调查一直显示出美国人是孤立主义者（绥靖？）。统治者和人民的想法是不一样的。
rhandy 1 month ago
Many American defense corporations certainly love war.
2?people?liked this. Like ReplyReply
美国的军火公司肯定爱死战争了。
Hudson 1 month ago
The author makes good distinctions about real wars. However...
As Sam Shepherd observed: "
eace is boring." As H. Rap Brown observed: "Violence is as American as apple pie."
As D.H. Lawrence observed: "Americans are born killers."
The theme of countless American stories is that the hero is reluctantly drawn into conflict. He makes gestures toward peace, practices meditation, whatatever; but somewhere in the second act of our ongoing action-adventure mythology, he straps on the gun and goes after the bad guys.
Yup. Peace is boring.
2?people?liked this. Like ReplyReply
本文作者很好的说明了真正的战争的特性，但是——
和平很无聊——Sam Shepherd
暴力和苹果派一样，都是美国的——H. Rap Brown
美国人都是激情杀手——D.H. Lawrence
无数美国的故事的主题都是英雄被卷入了斗争，他想要和平，思考人生云云，但是从某时开始就像我们的动作冒险神话（电影？）一样，他拿起枪跟着坏人走了。
没错，和平很无趣。
Ryan Anchors 1 month ago
We love war because we don't understand it.
We look at how great the WWII generation was and wish we could have that back.
The times, the stories, even the war transcend the crappy, self-serving world we live in today.
If only people my age (21) could walk a mile in a WWII Soldier/Marine's shoes they would probably stop complaining about their iPhones, Facebook, and BMWs.
Flag
3?people?liked this. Like ReplyReply
我们喜爱战争是因为我们完全搞不清楚状况。
我们看见 二战的一代 是多么的伟大，然后希望这伟大再来一次。
那个时代，那些故事，甚至那场战争都超越了我们今天生活的这个恶心自私的世界。
只要跟我同龄的（21岁）人们能够穿着二战士兵的鞋子走上一里，他们就会闭上嘴巴不再抱怨他们的iPhone，Facebook和宝马了。
celeidth 1 month ago
I'm not so sure that we "love" war as much as we love working in industries that are connected to war. Cut the defense budget and you cut some of the few high paying jobs left outside of the financial industry. Find an engineer, for example, who is not in some way connected to the defense juggernaut. And for the less educated the armed services are one of the few ways out of dead end jobs. War has become an addictive economic drug.
我不确定我们会向喜欢和战争有关的工业一样喜欢战争。削减国防预算就等于削减了除金融业以外的了了高薪职位。比如说，找和国防没有关系的一个工程师给我看看。对于非高学历的人来说，军队是一件较有生气的工作。战争是会让人上瘾的经济灵药。
noslack2327 1 month ago
If you were ever in one you wouldn't love it. The longest period of peace in U. S. history was the period after the Civil War and before the adventurism that was the Spanish American War. The duration of the peace was no doubt because so many Americans had fought in the Civil War, during which there was so many casualties.
如果你经历过战争，你不会喜欢他的。美国历史上最长的和平时期是在南北战争以后，美西战争冒险主义之前。不用怀疑和平的时长，因为很多美国人参加了南北战争，也有很多伤亡。
Scar2 1 month ago in reply to?noslack2327
I doubt if the Plains Indians and the U.S. soldiers who fought them (many of whom -- like Custer, Sheridan and countless others -- had fought in the Civil War) felt like the period between the Civil War and the Spanish-American War was particularly peaceful.
I suspect the long period without an "official" declared war had more to with the fact that we were busy pushing West, had no local enemies to fight (having more or less stabilized our borders with Canada and Mexico), and weren't yet strong enough to project ourselves around the world as a global power.
我很怀疑平原印第安人和攻击他们的美国士兵们（有很多这种人，像卡斯特，乔治·阿姆斯特朗：(1839-1876) 美国士兵。他在23岁时就成为准将，在小比格霍恩被由坐牛和疯马（嘿，疯马的巨型雕像不知怎么样了？）领队的苏族和夏安族的印第安士兵杀死，他的手下全军覆灭，谢尔顿和不计其数的其他人）会认为南北战争和美西战争之前的那段时期会是多么和平的年代。
我怀疑没有官方宣战的漫长时期内情况更糟糕。我们忙着西进，邻国没有敌人（我们和加拿大、墨西哥的边界比较稳定），也没有强壮的可以成为世界霸主。
billwald 1 month ago
Like most every nation, we love wars that are clear wins and dislike losing. This his how our sin nature operates. Other people, like the Afghans, love killing and don't care who it is, although they prefer killing strangers.
像其他的国家一样，我们喜欢胜利而不喜欢失败。这是我们的原罪所致。其他人呢，像是阿富汗人，喜欢杀戮，而从来不管被害者是谁，尽管他们更喜欢屠杀陌生人。
Rick Geissal 1 month ago
The author should know that Abraham Lincoln was not an architect of the crusade to free the slaves - or of any crusade at all other than preserving the Union.
Americans love to control; sometimes that means war. We are never "drawn into" war, nor do we "have to fight." We choose to because we want to be in control.
"What are we fightin' for? I don't give a damn; next stop is Viet-Nam."
1?person?liked this. Like ReplyReply
作者应该要知道亚伯拉罕林肯并不是奴隶解放运动——或是任何改革运动的总设计师，他仅仅是保全了联邦。
美国人喜欢控制，又是那意味着战争。我们从来不会“被陷入”战争，我们也不会“不得不打仗”。我们选择战争，因为我们想要把事情掌控在我们的控制之下。
“我们在为什么而战？我不是要谴责谁。下一站，是越南。”
很赞哦！ (1025)
相关文章
微信收款码
支付宝收款码