1,印度不是發展不起來,而是發展沒有中國快。

2,印度最大的發展阻礙在於地方勢力太強大,中央集權不夠。

3,印度種姓制度確實落後,但這並非印度發展的最大阻礙,有或明或暗等級制度的國家多了,也沒誰發展不了。

4,印度有近200個民族和121種語言,其中主體民族只佔30%,而且主體民族中又有很多種姓。這些民族和團體沒有分裂出去,是因為有共同信仰印度教存在,而種姓是印度教的最重要部分。所以印度不是不想解決種姓問題,而是不能太急切的解決種姓問題。

5,印度和中國既存在競爭關係,也存在合作關係。印度太強,不符合中國利益;印度太弱也不符合中國利益。但可以肯定,印度右翼政府上臺是符合中國利益的。

6,印度人口太多,可預見的時間內中國和印度只有一個國家能成為發達國家,否則地球資源不夠。所以印度不能太強。

7,只看印巴兩國,確實是印度佔上風,壓制了巴國。但從整個環印度洋來看,是哥布林勢力一直在強勢東進,是印度教徒在苦苦阻擋哥布林浪潮的侵蝕。印度教比哥布林教更野蠻更落後,根據劣幣驅逐良幣的原則,也只有依賴他們阻擋哥布林教。

8,南亞對中國最大的危險不是印度,而是孟加拉。孟加拉有2億又窮又哥布林,每年還要對外輸出14萬哥布林難民。中國如果不想像歐洲一樣在難民浪潮中亡國滅種,就不能讓印度太弱,不能讓印度分裂,而且最好是莫迪這種右翼上臺。


剛剛翻譯了一篇外國人關於這個問題的看法,觀點很犀利,適合回答這個問題。

Glenn Luk, Invests in China

Updated Feb 18, 2017 , lives in India

Glenn Luk, 在中國做投資

2017年2月18日更新 , 現居印度

China has largely followed a plan that has modern precedent for lifting nations rapidly out of abject poverty to a moderate level of development ... while India has to date followed a path which has no such precedent.

中國在很大程度上遵循了一項能幫助國家迅速擺脫赤貧,實現中等水平的發展,具有現代先例的計劃。印度迄今為止所走的道路沒有這樣的先例。

In 1980, China and India were both "dirt poor". So to answer this question, I wanted to find examples in the modern era of other "dirt poor" countries that were able to advance to "middle income" status and beyond — and then see how they did it to compare to what China and India have done.

1980年,中國和印度都「一貧如洗」。因此,為了回答這個問題,我想找到其他「極度貧困」的國家在現代能夠提升到「中等收入」或更高水平的例子,然後看看它們是如何做到這一點的,並與中國和印度的成就進行比較。

Now if you look back at data since the end of World War II, there have been a handful of countries that have risen from being "dirt poor" to "middle income status" [1]. These include a number of oil exporters, resource-rich countries in Africa, some small island nations (that rely heavily on tourism) and then two outliers: South Korea and Taiwan [2].

現在,如果你回顧自二戰結束以來的數據,就會發現有少數幾個國家或地區已經從「赤貧」上升到「中等收入國家或地區」的[1]。這些國家或地區包括一些石油出口國、非洲資源豐富的國家、一些小島國(嚴重依賴旅遊業),以及兩個例外:韓國和臺灣地區[2]。

I dont think there are many applicable lessons from the economic history of small island countries and oil exporters. Moreover, South Korea and Taiwan not only transitioned from being "dirt poor" to "middle income" but have since vaulted past the dreaded "middle income trap" into the pantheon of "high income" countries. So when I thought about economic development strategies for "dirt poor" countries, this was the logical place to start.

我認為,從小島嶼國家和石油出口國的經濟史中沒有多少可供借鑒的教訓。此外,韓國和臺灣地區不僅從「赤貧」轉變為「中等收入」,而且自那以來已越過了可怕的「中等收入陷阱」,進入「高收入」國家或地區的殿堂。因此,當我想到「赤貧」國家的經濟發展戰略時,這是一個合乎邏輯的起點。

Ive discussed in more detail in another answer some of the key parallels in how both South Korea and Taiwan attained "middle income" status. In short, they included:

Focused investment in human capital (health and education) during the early years of development.

我已經在另一個答案中更詳細地討論了韓國和臺灣地區取得「中等收入」地位的一些關鍵相似之處。簡而言之,它們包括:在發展的最初幾年集中投資於人力資本(衛生和教育)。

Comprehensive land reform that led to equitable distribution of income/wealth, also early on.

A balanced mix between government intervention and involvement of the private sector with a large export orientation.

也在早期進行了全面的土地改革,實現了收入/財富的公平分配。政府幹預和私營部門參與之間的平衡組合,以大量出口為導向。

Monetary and fiscal policy focused on providing a stable macro-economic environment.

Over the past 30 years, China has followed these principles pretty closely. It hasnt followed them perfectly; for example, its various land reform programs have resulted in a less equitable division of spoils than Taiwan or South Korea. However, it did focus on improving its human capital, it has generally kept the macro-environment very stable, and had a strong export orientation (particularly private sector companies).

貨幣和財政政策的重點是提供穩定的宏觀經濟環境。在過去的30年裏,中國一直非常嚴格地遵循這些原則。但它並沒有完全跟隨他們;例如,它的各種土地改革計劃導致了比臺灣或韓國更不公平的利益分配。然而,它的確注重改善其人力資本,它一般保持宏觀環境非常穩定,並具有很強的出口導向(特別是私營部門公司)。

On the other hand, India has not followed these principles. By many metrics, its human capital development has often lagged countries with lower per capita GDPs (notably next-door neighbor Bangladesh). The economy is largely closed and trade is a much smaller part of its economy than it was for China, South Korea and Taiwan. The government has not provided a very stable macro-economic environment, with persistent inflation issues through the years. India has not built a robust manufacturing sector but instead focused on services.

另一方面,印度沒有遵循這些原則。從許多指標來看,中國的人力資本發展往往落後於人均gdp較低的國家(特別是鄰國孟加拉國)【這點小編表示不理解】。與中國大陸、韓國和臺灣相比,印度經濟在很大程度上是封閉的,貿易在其經濟中所佔的比例也要小得多。政府沒有提供一個非常穩定的宏觀經濟環境,多年來一直存在通脹問題。印度沒有建立一個強大的製造業,而是專註於服務業。

The other key parallel from the Taiwan/South Korea example is the fact that both countries were run by authoritarian / one-party governments during their rise from "dirt poor" to "middle income" status. More importantly, they both liberalized (politically and economically) after attaining "middle income" status in the 1980s and were subsequently able to continue on and attain "high income" status. I dont think this is a coincidence.

另一個與臺灣和韓國相似的例子是,這兩個國家或地區在從「赤貧」上升到「中等收入」的過程中,都是由威權/YD政府管理的。更重要的是,他們在20世紀80年代獲得「中等收入」地位後,都實現了(ZZ上和經濟上的)ZY化,並因此得以繼續保持和獲得「高收入」地位。我認為這不是一個巧合。

Today, you can describe India as a democracy with a relatively closed economy (as shown in the graphic above). I could not find any precedents of countries that had advanced from "dirt poor" to "middle income" with this combination [3].

今天,你可以把印度描述成一個經濟相對封閉的MZ國家(如上圖所示)。我找不到任何這種條件的國家能從「赤貧」到「中等收入」[3]。

Whereas with the South Korea/Taiwan example, there is historical precedent for authoritarian governments with open economies advancing from "dirt poor" to "middle income". And you can now throw China into that mix as well.

以韓國和臺灣地區為例,開放經濟從「赤貧」向「中等收入」發展的quanwei政府,歷史上有過先例。現在你也可以把中國加入其中。

The other really interesting thing is that there is also no modern precedent for authoritarian governments (even with relatively open economies) that have advanced from "middle income" to "advanced status". And with that in mind, it will be very interesting to watch China going forward to see whether it (i) can break that precedent by advancing while avoiding political reform or (ii) actually politically reform and then continue on towards "high income" status.

另一個真正有趣的事情是,也沒有quanwei政府(即使是相對開放的經濟體)從「中等收入」上升到「先進地位」的現代先例。考慮到這一點,觀察中國的未來將是非常有趣的,看看它能否打破這一先例,在推進的同時避免ZZ改革,或實際上進行ZZ改革,然後繼續邁向「高收入」地位。


其實叫我說印度幾乎集齊了所有落後國家的缺點!

1、種姓制度,從思想成面上,讓民眾安於現裝,失去上升動力!

2、教育落後,讓國家空有人口沒有人才!

3、土地過於集中,外國企業來了都拿不到地還談什麼投資,越是重工業用地量越大,越在印度沒法發展,沒有重工業基礎其它的都很難發展!

4、環境太過優越,氣候溫暖,一年能種兩、三季,再加上農民勞動力過於廉價,讓當地主成了一個非常好的買賣,為什麼要投資工業?!

5、地方勢力過於龐大,大到各邦都有獨立的稅權,一個國家內部居然沒形成統一市場!

6、無法解決問題的民主,不過對於印度來說,如果沒有這民主,大約早就內戰了但民主不能解決印度現在的問題,而是在對問題進行和稀泥!

7、產業部局失誤,不重視工業,著力發展第三產業,但這本質上還是土地政策的鍋,第三產業佔地少,發展的阻力也小!


謝邀,照理,先問是不是,再問為什麼

以下內容轉自三泰虎

In a war between USA and India, could USA defeat India and occupy it?

若美印爆發戰爭,美國能打敗並佔領印度嗎?

?

Quora讀者的評論:

Raghav Samodia

The whole thing will go something like this

Firstly

整場戰事可能會是這樣的

首先

1.When USA declares war with with India it will start receiving trade sactions from Russia and other Indian allies

2.Then

3.India will ring a call to Russia to come and defend it.

4.Till then India would have pumped up its defence layed a butt load of mines moved it missile launchers to the coast hidden its naval fleet.moved its air fleet towards south.

5.But us is not the only problem our blood brother out arch rival Pakistan will not leave a chance to attack so Indian army will move in to defend its westen front

6.Lucky for us China will mostly be neutral as being an usa』s enemy but will be cashing on Pakistan

http://7.Us will move troop to Pakistan from the West by that time

8.Just then Us aircraft carrier will arrive they will move in their minesweepers

9.This is where Indian missile and russia will come in use.

10.Without minesweepers us carrier groups will be practically stuck and fight between air Forces will begin

1.如果美國對印度宣戰,它就得面臨來自俄羅斯和其他印度盟友的貿易制裁

2.然後

3.印度將向俄羅斯求助,請俄羅斯來幫忙。

4.在那之前印度會加強國防,埋下地雷,在海岸安置導彈發射器,讓海軍艦隊隱匿待命。把機羣調往南方。

5.但美國不是唯一的麻煩,我們的血親兄弟,我們的主要對手巴基斯坦不會放過進攻我們的機會,所以印度軍隊也需要保衛西部前線

6.幸運的是,中國作為美國的敵人,基本上會保持中立,但他們也會從巴基斯坦身上大撈一筆

7.屆時,美國將從西線向巴基斯坦派遣軍隊

8.然後美國航空母艦會開抵印度,帶來掃雷艦

9.這就是印度和俄羅斯的導彈派上用場的地方。

10.如果沒有掃雷艇,美國航母戰鬥羣將陷入困境,兩軍之間開始空戰。

11.Considering there will be around 5 battle group and each acc has 50 air superiority jet which will f 18 there will around 350 jets which can be trolled easily

12.Now that minesweepers have arrived us navy starts to move forward.

13.There NATO would try limit Russian sending there ships to aid us and Japan will stop Russian Pacific fleet.

14.Iran and Afghanistan will attack and enjoy a meal of Pakistan and Iran will be able to supply oil to India as an link will be established and Russia will move its Sam batteries and and missile launchers to India through the trade corridor built resently

http://15.Us navy ships will almost exaust it self of ammunition by now

16.India and Russia would have cut there supply lines.

17.Leaving them unable to move forward.

18.By this time America would have attemted to bombard most city but no major damage would happen as our air Forces would have stopped them

19.But after much stuggle us will reach land and guerrilla warfare will start.

20.ICBM would have been flying over us and at same time RussiaWould have bombarded us

21.Other NATO countries would attack Russia

22.And say hello to ww3

11.考慮到兩軍之間將會有大約5個戰鬥羣,每個空管中心有50架空中優勢戰機,將會有大約350架F18戰機輪番上陣。

12.現在,掃雷艇已經就位,美國海軍將立刻向前推進。

13.北約將努力阻止俄羅斯向印度派遣援助船隻,日本將攔阻俄羅斯的太平洋艦隊。

14.伊朗和阿富汗將對巴基斯坦發動襲擊,伊朗將有能力向印度供應石油,建立一個聯盟,俄羅斯將通過最近建成的貿易走廊將薩姆導彈和導彈發射器運往印度

15.美國海軍艦艇將面臨彈藥耗盡的局面

16.印度和俄羅斯將切斷美軍的補給線。

17.讓他們無法繼續向前。

18.到那時,美國已經試圖轟炸大多數城市,但由於我們的空軍攔截了他們,所以並沒有造成重大破壞

19.在經過一些列艱苦戰鬥之後,美國將登陸印度,開始遊擊戰。

20.洲際彈道導彈會從我們頭頂飛過,同時俄羅斯也會轟炸美國

21.北約其他國家將攻打俄羅斯

22.第三次世界大戰就此拉開序幕

Shivam Kumar, NDA National Defence Academy Defence (2018)

Never thats impossible. All these stupid idiots Indians you see above are over smart. They didnt know anything about warfare.

When America will attack India . Mostly war will start from water in (1) Indian ocean or in land through (2) pakistan (American forces will land in Pakistan and they will attack us from Kashmir)

(1) If American navy attacks indian navy in their sea. American navy will bring 11 aircraft carriers , 50 to 60 submarines , 50 to 60 destroyers and other normal warships. And India will have 2 or 3 aircraftcarriers (INS vikramaditya , Vikrant and vishal under development) for defending , 15 to 20 destroyers , 15 to 20 submarines and some other normal warships. It seems that american navy will win but with a huge loss of warships . After this American marines , army, with M1 Abrams tanks , apache attack helicopters(300 apache gunships and 5 to 8 thousand Abrams tanks) will enter Indian land through Tamil Nadu or kerela but their indian army will be waiting for them with T-90 bhisma tanks with APC ( means Now our T-90 tanks will be able to kill even a apache gunships) I would like to say that T-90 tanks are better than american Abrams . Our soldiers will be equipped with MCIWS rifles better than american M4 carbines. 13 lakh Indian army verses 14 lakh american army. I think Indian army will easily defend their motherland from american army.

Oops--- I forget the air force… American AIRFORCE will attack Indian AIRFORCE with 900 F-16 , 200 F-22. Lets take a look at F-16 . 314 superkhoi will be defending against 900 F-16 . S-400 airdefence missiles will kill American F-22 easily. Stealth will be useless because we are going to have better radars. Once F-22 will fire a rocket or missile it will be detected and easily killed by our Tejas mark 1A or mark 2 in future. Well we got some more 60 Mig 29 , 60 miraj 36 rafales in near future. I think Indian AIRFORCE will defend Indian airspace from american fighters.

Dont talk about B-22 and B-2 bombers because they are both outdated useless garbage .

(2) If american army lands in Pakistan and attacks from kashmir . then we will easily defend ourselves in kashmir . Because Indian army is In a good condition in Kashmir.

譯文來源:三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com/47337.html 譯者:Joyceliu

那是永遠都不可能的。你上面看到的這些愚蠢的印度人都太聰明瞭。他們對戰爭一無所知。

當美國攻擊印度的時候。大部分戰役將從印度洋的水域或通過巴基斯坦的陸地開始(美軍將在巴基斯坦登陸,從克什米爾進攻我們)

(1)如果美國海軍在印度海域攻擊印度海軍。美國海軍將動用11艘航空母艦、50至60艘潛艇、50至60艘驅逐艦和其他常規軍艦。印度將出動2到3艘航空母艦(維克拉馬蒂亞號、維克蘭特號和維薩爾號正在開發中)用於防守,以及15到20艘驅逐艦,15到20艘潛艇和一些其他常規軍艦。看起來美國海軍會贏,但美國會損失大量軍艦。隨後美國海軍陸戰隊、軍隊、M1艾布拉姆斯坦克、阿帕奇攻擊直升機(300阿帕奇武裝直升機和5 8000艾布拉姆斯坦克)將通過泰米爾納德邦或克拉拉進入印度的陸地,但印度軍隊會用T - 90坦克彼斯瑪APC對付他們(意味著現在我們的T- 90坦克能夠擊落阿帕奇武裝直升機在內的飛機)我想說,T- 90坦克比美國艾布拉姆斯更出色。我們的士兵將裝備比美國M4卡賓槍更好的多口徑步槍。130萬印度軍隊對抗140萬美國軍隊。我認為印度軍隊可以很輕鬆地保衛他們的祖國。

哎呀,我忘了說說空軍…美國空軍將派出900架F-16、200架F-22來打擊印度空軍。我們來看看F-16。314架超級霍伊將對抗900架F-16。S-400防空導彈將輕而易舉地摧毀美國的F-22。隱形戰機毫無用處,因為我們擁有更出色的雷達。一旦F-22發射火箭或導彈,就將被我們的光輝mark 1A或mark 2輕易偵查並擊毀。在不久的將來,我們將新增60架米格 29,60架米勒傑 36陣風戰機。我認為印度空軍將保衛印度領空不受美國戰鬥機的侵犯。

B-22和B-2轟炸機就不用再提了,因為它們都過時了,已經是廢銅爛鐵了。

(2)如果美國軍隊在巴基斯坦登陸並從克什米爾發動襲擊。我們就可以輕而易舉地在克什米爾保衛自己了。因為印度軍隊在克什米爾狀態不錯。

Tim Druck, worked at US Navy Nuclear Propulsion (1994-1998)

Please understand that the US Military is not constructed to occupy territory. Thats not generally what the mission of the US Armed Forces is or should be.

America could very easily defeat even the tough, professional Indian military - the power that the American military can bring to bear in an all-out war is truly frightful - imagine your nation surrounded by 10 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, constant strikes by hundreds of aircraft - dozens of B-2s that dont even appear on radar executing constant precision strikes on industry and military targets, followed up by hundreds of B-52 heavy bombers just pummeling everything they can reach, and they fly so high you cant even shoot at them. 350 F/A-18s flying a dozen sorties a day from flight decks that move before you can find them, day and night. Nearly a hundred submarines in the Indian Ocean, loaded with torpedoes to sink ships and two dozen Tomahawk missiles each to fire at land and sea targets.

Making America angry enough to execute unrestricted conventional warfare against you is a very, very bad idea. Americas armed forces have never actually been fully unleashed in the modern era, since 1945, and Americas military today would hammer the 1945 American military without much effort.

請先明白一件事,美國軍隊並不是為了佔領領土而創建。這通常不是美國武裝部隊的任務是什麼或應該是什麼。

美國可以很容易打敗頑強,專業的印度部隊——美國在一場全面戰爭中可以動用的軍事力量大得可怕——想像一下你的國家悲10艘核動力航空母艦包圍,被數以百計的飛機持續轟炸——幾十架在雷達偵查範圍之外對工廠和軍事目標進行持續精確打擊的B-2隱形轟炸機,接著又有數以百計的B - 52重型轟炸機把所到之處炸成廢墟,它們飛得那麼高,你根本無法向它們射擊。350架F/A -18戰機每天從甲板上起飛十幾架次,晝夜不停,在你偵查到它們之前就出現在眼前。印度洋上有近100艘潛艇,裝載著可以擊沉船隻的魚雷,還有20多枚戰斧導彈,每枚導彈都能擊中陸地和海洋目標。

把美國惹毛了,對你們進行隨心所欲的常規戰爭是一個非常非常糟糕的主意。自1945年以來,美國的武裝力量從未真正在現代得到充分釋放,今天的美國軍隊將毫不費力地擊潰1945年的美國軍隊。

Arun Dinesh Kumar, Graphic designer

Yes, may be.

But why should they waste their war weapons ? Indian leaders are already selling our country for Bribery. You better throw very few money to those wolves, and get all India. They already sold our economy to china and other countries. We are facing a economic war, but our leaders are only concentrated in filling their bellies.

We are a corrupted country in all sides. Even the military helicopters and weapons are not strong as US govts weapons. Corruption is every where, so its easy to capture such a country like us.

British came to india, when were weak, fighting each other. So does the other countries.

US can do such thing, As they did over Iran, Iraq, Afganistan and pakistan. The Next country may be India.

But my beloved questioner, It cant occupy or rule India.

Though we are weak in weapons, education and political system. weve a untold Unity within peoples, I seen it when the floods destroyed chennai. Such unity will do anything for our country sake. May be we have worst politicians, but not worst peoples.

May be we have few religious stupids, who always create Quarrels, but our people, always tried to save each other.

May be were poor in our pockets, not in our Hearts. Our Clothes may have dirts, not our hearts. For Ruling such a people like Indians, US should learn India !

是的,也許可以。

但是他們為什麼要浪費他們的戰爭武器呢?印度領導人為了收受賄賂已經把我們的國家出賣了。你最好少投點錢給那些餓狼,把整個印度都拿下。他們已經把我們的經濟賣給了中國和其他國家。我們正面臨著一場經濟戰,但我們的領導人只想中飽私囊。

我們是一個附敗透頂的國家。就連軍用直升機和武器都不如美國政府的武器強大。附敗無處不在,所以我們這樣的國家很容易就能被俘虜。

當我們軟弱無力、內鬥不斷的時候,英國人侵略了印度。其他國家也是如此。

美國也可以這樣做,就像在伊朗、伊拉克、阿富汗和巴基斯坦問題上所做的那樣。下一個國家可能是印度。

但我親愛的提問者,它無法佔領或統治印度。

雖然我們在武器、教育和政治制度方面很弱。我們民族內部有著不可言喻的團結,我在洪水摧毀金奈的時候就發現了這一點。這樣的團結能為我們的國家實現任何事情。也許我們有最糟糕的政客,但我們的人民不是最糟糕的。

也許我們有一些宗教白癡,他們總是製造爭端,但是我們的人民,總是互助互愛。

也許我們口袋空空,生活貧困,但我們的內心並不窮。我們的衣服可能有污漬,但我們的心並沒有。想要統治像印度人這樣的民族,美國應該向印度學習!

Praveen Mane, M.Tech. from Visvesvaraya Technological University

In the eventuality of a war, it will be an impossible task to defeat India, since it has worlds 3rd largest armed forces and another million in reserves. Though US will make a sufficient dent on India but occupation can be entirely ruled out. One of the examples is the US invasion of Afghanistan which everyone thought it would be a cake walk for US armed forces but turned out to be a nightmare. The US couldnt even eradicate Taliban leave alone occupying Afghan region.

Another factor is distance. The US should fight a war half a world away from their home which will be a major disadvantage for transportation of troops, ammunition and equipment.

India moreover is a vast country and in fact 7th largest country in the world and possesses a diverse geography and demography which will be difficult for occupation.

India also has a major support from countries like Russia, Israel(though it would like to be neutral in such eventuality) and France. India is also a part of BRICS formation which approximately controls more than a quarter of economy, third of land mass, half of world population and has two members in permanent UN security council. Any move by BRICS formation against US can be devastating and can have a long lasting impact. This will be to Indias advantage.

US will also lose its support around the world since invading a worlds largest democracy and also a commonwealth member will be frowned upon

如果戰爭爆發,擊敗印度將是一項不可能完成的任務,因為印度擁有世界第三大武裝力量,還有100萬的預備役。儘管美國能狠狠侵略印度,但佔領印度是完全不可能的。舉個例子,美國入侵阿富汗,每個人都認為這對美國武裝部隊來說是小菜一碟,但結果卻是一場噩夢。美國連塔利班都無法根除,更不用說佔領阿富汗地區了。

另一個原因是距離。美國要在半個地球以外的地方作戰,這對軍隊、彈藥和裝備的運輸來說很不利。

此外,印度是一個幅員遼闊的國家,世界第七大國,擁有豐富的地形和人口,難以佔領。

印度還得到了俄羅斯、以色列(儘管它希望在這種情況下保持中立)和法國等國的大力支持。印度也是金磚國家之一,金磚國家大約控制著四分之一以上的經濟、三分之一的國土、一半的世界人口,並在聯合國安理會擁有兩個常任理事國。金磚國家對美國採取的任何行動都可能是毀滅性的,並可能產生長期持久的影響。這將對印度十分有利。

美國也將因為入侵了一個世界上最大的皿煮國家而失去它在世界各地的支持,而且英聯邦成員國也不會贊成。

Nipun Sawhney, Self Professed Strategist. International Relations Observer.

While a scenario of a full fledged war is unlikely, it is exciting to try to understand the dynamics of a future war such as this. From one to one military stand off point of view. If India and America go to war without the support of any other country, assuming that both nations have independent populations and going by sheer fire power US would be the clear winner, given its military arsenal.

It is unlikely that it will be a military war. It is likely to be one fought with sheer economics and digital warfare tools. Even such a war will have devastating consequences to both nations, resulting the decimation of two of the worlds most powerful economies.

Independent war will likely result in decimation of both the nations and economies with more destruction on the Indian side. However given our nuclear capable submarines, 2 state of the art warships and (a few more to be inducted by 2020) which have second strike nuclear capability and our satellite warfare measures, it is unlikely that any major city in US or India will survive.

儘管全面戰爭不太可能爆發,但分析未來戰爭的局勢令人興奮。如果印度和美國在沒有其他國家支持的情況下發動戰爭,假設兩國都擁有獨立的人口,因為美國的軍火實力,憑藉猛烈火力,美國會是明顯的贏家。

但軍事戰爭發生的可能性不大。很可能會爆發一場完全基於經濟和數字戰爭工具的戰爭。但就算是這樣的戰爭,也會給兩國帶來毀滅性的後果,導致世界上兩個最強大的經濟體遭受滅頂之災。

獨立戰爭可能會導致兩國和經濟的毀滅,印度方面遭受到的破壞會更大。不過考慮到我們的核潛艇、擁有第二次打擊核能力的兩艘最先進的戰艦(到2020年還將有更多艘)以及我們的衛星戰措施,美國或印度的任何大城市都不太可能倖免於難。

When you talk about occupation, consider this major indispensable fact:

3.1 million people Indian Americans lived in USA as of 2013, with a average income of more than 100,000 dollars

As of 2010, 87% of these were Indian born and 44% of them were Indian citizens.

More than 70% of the Indians in America have had undergraduate/ graduate education.

While these numbers are likely to rise drastically, given the increasing inflow of Indians with Indian citizenship in USA, we can safely assume that Indians will form an indispensable part of the polity and economy of USA.

If even half of this population goes into a peaceful non-cooperation protest or even stops working returns to India, the economy of USA will fail, rendering it impossible to continue a war.

Forget occupation of India, it is nearly impossible for United States to control Indian Americans in case of a war. With 1-2% of their population in serious revolt, they will be in shambles internally. For nearly every Indian that suffers there is some relative in USA who will retaliate.

若是談到佔領,需要考慮以下這個很重要、不可缺少的事實:

截至2013年,有310萬印度裔美國人生活在美國,平均收入超過10萬美元

截至2010年,這些人中有87%出生在印度,44%是印度公民。

美國超過70%的印度人受過本科/研究生教育。

考慮到越來越多擁有印度國籍的印度人進入美國,這些數字可能會急劇上升,我們可以放心地假設,印度人將成為美國政治和經濟不可或缺的一部分。

如果這些印度人中有一半進行非暴麗不合作的和平抗議,甚至停工返回印度,美國的經濟就會遭到挫敗,戰爭就不可能繼續下去。

忘掉佔領印度這種事吧,一旦發生戰爭,美國幾乎不可能控制住印度裔美國人。由於1-2%的人口處於嚴重的叛亂,他們國內將一片混亂。

On the military war front, we can safely assume that Russia (due to treaty and dissent against US) and China(due to trade relations with Russia and dissent against US) will aid India either directly or indirectly. While we can assume that NATO will unite against this trio. The world will be divided into two parts and there will be a stalemate. Neutral parties are likely to be Africa, Japan, Israel, Sri Lanka etc. We cant blindly assume that Pakistan will join US. They are more likely to be enemies given the dissent in Pakistan against the American drone strikes. Most of South America will unite with US, given that India doesnt have much sway with these nations. Assuming Canadas defense minister remains the same, it is unlikely that Canada will be joining any side ( ;-) ).

So two very likely ends to the war will occur.

Complete destruction of all major nations in the world.

OR

Stalemate with the world divided on two sides.

However it is extremely unlikely and frankly impossible for US to occupy India or India to occupy US and also highly improbable that there will be any kind of war between the two nations.

在軍事戰爭方面,我們可以有把握地假設,俄羅斯(由於條約和跟美國不對付)和中國(由於與俄羅斯的貿易關係和跟美國不對付)將直接或間接地援助印度。不過北約也可能聯合起來反對這個三國聯盟。世界將被分成兩個陣營,出現僵局。中立黨派可能是非洲、日本、以色列、斯里蘭卡等。我們不能盲目地認為巴基斯坦會跟我們聯手。考慮到巴基斯坦國內反對美國無人機襲擊的不同意見,他們更有可能成為我們的敵人。考慮到印度對這些國家沒有太大的影響力,大多數南美國家將與美國聯手。如果加拿大國防部長不換人,加拿大不太可能加入任何一個陣營。

所以戰爭很可能會有兩個結局。

徹底摧毀世界上所有的主要國家。

陷入僵局,世界分裂為兩個陣營。

然而,美國佔領印度或印度佔領美國是極不可能的,坦率地說,這是絕不現實的,而且兩國之間發生任何形式的戰爭也極不可能。

Digvijay Katoch, Author, Publisher, Solo-preneur

It happened in 1971, but the US and UK』s attacks were simply blocked by Russia and Israel. 1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon』s gunboat diplomacy

Even today, global dynamics dictate that India will always have deterrents and allies.

But, theoretically, in a limited conflict at sea, the US could defeat India. The key word here is 「limited conflict」.

However, occupying India is impossible. Snow covered mountains in the north with no roads, unfriendly jungles 40 times the size of Vietnam in the south, storm/flood prone regions in the east, and a desert that turns into a swamp when it rains in the west. And a standing Indian army that knows the way American soldiers work and think thanks to decades of co-trainings, war games and partnerships.

1971年就發生過類似的戰爭,但是美國和英國的襲擊被俄羅斯和以色列阻止了。1971年戰爭:俄羅斯如何瓦解尼克松的炮艇外交。

時至今日,全球形勢也表明,印度將永遠擁有威懾力量和盟友。

但從理論上講,在一場局部的海上衝突中,美國有可能擊敗印度。這裡的關鍵詞是「局部衝突」。

然而,美國要佔領印度是不可能的。印度北部的山脈被大雪覆蓋,沒有道路,南部是難以進入的密林,面積是越南的40倍,東部是風暴/洪水易發區,西部是沙漠,一下雨就變成沼澤。印度常備軍瞭解美國士兵的作戰方式和思維方式,這都得益於數十年的聯合訓練、軍事演習和夥伴關係。

Kaustubh Kumar Mishra

Simply NO. Its not just the matter of military strength but also the many factors that affect such adventures:

In the case of war, defenders always have upper hand so India will have.

India is the biggest market in the world and the US is the biggest supplier. In the case of war, India can block all the US trades in India causing a major economic blow to US.

India has 2nd largest army and 4th strongest air force which will again be tough challenge for US.

Indias diversified terrine will be a logistical nightmare for US troops in small battle field, let alone the complete occupation.

India will have to face a great damage through US raids for sure but US will not have good chance even to land on Indian soil with out help of NATO.

絕對不可能。這不僅僅是軍事實力的問題,還有許多因素影響著這樣的冒險:

在戰爭中,防守一方總是佔上風,所以印度也佔據上風。

印度是世界上最大的市場,美國是最大的供應商。如果發生戰爭,印度可以叫停美國在印度的一切貿易活動,給美國造成重大的經濟打擊。

3.印度擁有全球第二大陸軍和第四大空軍,這對美國來說將是一個嚴峻的挑戰。

印度各邦分治的領土將成為美軍在小型戰場上的後勤噩夢,更不用說全面佔領了。

印度肯定會因為美國的襲擊而面臨巨大的損失,但若沒有北約的幫助,美國甚至沒有機會登陸印度領土。

Ram Narayan Mannar Appuz, works at Studying

yes, usa can defeat india in a 2 or 3 year battle if nuclear boosted weapons are not used! if it turns out to be a nuclear war still usa will win but usa will never remain as a super power in defence and wealth. it will be a war between two nations having the strongest armed forces in the world. after war there will be no delhi,mumbai,kolkata,chennai,los angeles,new york ,washington dc, etc… all the cities will be burned down in fire! BUT LUCKILY IT WONT HAPPEN! INDIA AND USA ARE GOOD FRIENDS! RUSSIA IS ALSO A FRIEND OF INDIA!the only country that should be fearing india will be PAKISTHAN!

是的,如果不使用核武器,美國可以在2至3年的戰爭中打敗印度!如果是核戰爭,美國仍然會贏,但美國永遠無法在國防和財富方面繼續保持超級大國的地位。這將是世界上擁有最強大武裝力量的兩個國家之間的戰爭。戰後,德里、孟買、加爾各答、金奈、洛杉磯、紐約、華盛頓等城市將不復存在……所有的城市都將被大火燒毀!但幸運的是這種事並不會發生!印度和美國是好朋友!俄羅斯也是印度的朋友!唯一應該懼怕印度的國家是巴基斯坦人!

Tom Gregg, American by birth and also by choice.

Yes, the US could defeat India militarily. No, the US could not occupy India. Its a big country.

This question takes me back to Clausewitz, who taught that the political objective of a war dictates its course and outcome. Its hard to imagine a US-Indian war, but it seems reasonable to assume that in such a case the US political objective would be limited. If so, it wouldnt be necessary to occupy India but only to dominate India militarily, e.g. by sweeping the Indian Navy from the sea. Then the US would be in a position to dictate the terms of peace and India would have good reason to cut its losses. Not all wars demand a fight to the finish.

是的,美國可以打敗印度。但佔領不了印度。印度是一個大國。

這個問題讓我想起了克勞塞維茨,他教導我們,戰爭的政治目標決定戰爭的進程和結果。很難想像美印之間會爆發戰爭,但我們有理由假設,在這種情況下,美國的政治目標似乎十分有限。如果真是這樣的話,沒有必要佔領印度,只需要在軍事上統治印度即可,比如從海上橫掃印度海軍。屆時,美國將能夠決定和平條款,而印度也有充足的理由減少損失。並非所有的戰爭都需要打到底。

Vijay Raghavan

US will suffer badly as India has 30Million stock of science graduates.You will have a battle of Physics,chemistry,genetic,biology,creation sciences,mechanics,oceanography etc etc.They can easily weaponize many things.India will be having 10000 brilliant science graduates who will cause huge damage to the American Military.

由於印度擁有3000萬理科畢業生,美國將遭受重創。你們將面對的是一場物理學、化學、遺傳學、生物學、創造科學、力學、海洋學等學科的戰爭。印度將用10000名傑出的科學畢業生給美國軍隊帶去巨大的損失。

Nithin AK, works at Students

USA cant defeat india…caus..here I am considering no interference from any other nation…….fuel is an important part in war ……..india will be defending her boarders and its easy to mobilize our army ,navy ,air force ,reserve{22 lakh} force against an incoming us attack from sea and air….but transporting their troops(USA) is not easy…..so they cant mobilize their troops …we have already seen it in 1971 were few missiles from Russia makes the great US 7th fleet to flee….And we are talking about the great US MERINS or US ARMY which find extremely difficult to destroy ISIS of strength around 20k.Even this 20 k causing problems to US,then how come they destroy an army of strength 13.5 million,paramilitary of 12 million ,air force ranked 7th.navy along with 125 crore indians.Defeating our army within our boarder is impossible(I repeat ..Defeating india in India…if we go and try to invade USA the story will be different).

美國無法打敗印度…我不考慮其他國家的介入。燃料是戰爭的重要組成部分,印度將保衛她的邊界,很容易動員我們的陸軍、海軍、空軍、預備役(220萬人)部隊來抵禦美國從海上和空中發起的進攻。但是美軍要運送他們的部隊並不容易…所以他們無法調動他們的軍隊,在1971年的戰爭中我們已經發現,俄羅斯的幾顆導彈就讓美國第七艦隊逃之夭夭。偉大的美國海軍或美國陸軍要摧毀2萬左右伊斯蘭國的軍力都非常困難。這區區2萬人都給美國造成了很大的問題,那他們要如何摧毀一支具有1350萬兵力,1200萬的準軍事力量,空軍排名第七的軍隊呢?還有12.5億印度人。在印度境內打敗我們的軍隊是不可能的(我再說一遍…在印度境內打敗印度…如果我們試圖入侵美國,情況又會不同)。

Sanjay Bose, Visiting Mentor and Coach at SAARTHI INSTITUTE FOR CAREER EXCELLENCE, DWARKA-NEW DELHI (2017-present)

If you are a history student, you would know, that even a small nation such us Vietnam could not be occupied by the US with all their might put together. Take another example of Afghanistan.

如果你是一名歷史系的學生,你就會知道,美國就算施展了所有軍事實力,也沒能佔領越南這樣的小國。再給你舉個例子吧,阿富汗。



由是觀之,印度人都認為他們已經是超級大國了,人家都不需要崛起了,連美國都忌憚了,還發展神馬


首先印度市場需求量不算太大,有點小國寡民的那種,我上次去印度,看到印度居然還有貨郎這種存在,而且賣的洗髮水都是那種一袋一袋的那種,為什麼沒有瓶裝的?印度人覺得用不了那麼多。印度還時不時罷工,你說這樣叫資本怎麼逐利。

其次是人文和教育,印度語言不通,去一個地方要帶一個以上的翻譯,而且印度人愛貪小便宜,千萬不要信他們明天說的事,定金一定要當天收齊,直接報最低價,能幹就幹,幹不了算了,不要和他們浪費時間了。印度有近一半的文盲啊

最後是內部資本的吸血和壓迫,地主階級還是存在,官僚腐敗無能,貪污受賄成風,導致基層幹部沒多少不貪污的,分階級,婆羅門和帕麗坦是雲泥之別,壓迫存在

最後是國際環境


因為西方覺得有一個天朝就夠頭疼的了,於是加以限制印度的發展,各種武器花樣賣,就不給鍊鋼技術和生產線


首先得印度您得統一哇??還要統一方言啊??我覺得咱們適合去印度的是看上去很樸實,看上去比不過他們,的產品,照顧他們民族感情,同時帶來真香效應的東西,可以讓他們寫新聞的產品:經測評,比不上我們大印度的本土產品,大家可以買一買,瞅瞅他們有多差 哈哈哈哈。這種的,大家就可能可以商業交流了。

銷售給他們增強他們民族自豪感的東西。啊好繞


推薦閱讀:
相關文章