Was the Great Wall of China really a failure?

中國(guó)長(zhǎng)城真的是一個(gè)失敗之作嗎？

評(píng)論翻譯

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.com ?轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Patrick Koh, former Government, Consultant, Business Man
Updated Jan 7
No, quite effective.
Looking at overall effectiveness over 2300 to 2700 years, the wall was as effective as it could possibly be. If the walls were not useful, many Kings wont have built them, and the First Emperor would not have spent so much resources to link them up. The costs is astronomical.

不，相當(dāng)有用?？纯催@2300-2700年來(lái)長(zhǎng)城所發(fā)揮的作用。如果沒(méi)用的話，就不會(huì)有這么多國(guó)王去建造它了，而中國(guó)的首個(gè)皇帝花了大力氣將這些城墻連接起來(lái)。成本是天文數(shù)字級(jí)別的。

How did Genghis Khan breach China Great Wall?
Even the mighty Manchus didn’t want to attack the wall, they get General Wu to collude and that is another story (Transition from Ming to Qing - Wikipedia)

成吉思汗是如何打破中國(guó)長(zhǎng)城的？即使是強(qiáng)大的滿族都不想攻擊長(zhǎng)城，于是他們勾結(jié)吳三桂。

Let me share other aspects.

讓我們來(lái)看看其他方面。

Size of Troops: How much troops do you think would be needed to secure such a long border. The costs of the troops and supply would be very high, and hard to sustain. The huge number of troops needed to be tied down depriving the emperor from other strategic purpose. It would be so long and porous, and Chinese troops have no idea when or where the barbarians will attack. And enough troops won’t have the time to respond to the right location nor able to stop enemies from escaping. With the wall, only a small number is needed to act as sentry and first response. Reinforcements are then deployed to the danger spots.

軍隊(duì)規(guī)模：要用多少軍隊(duì)才能保護(hù)這么長(zhǎng)的邊界。軍隊(duì)和供給成本將會(huì)非常高，而且很難持續(xù)。這樣就占用了大量的軍隊(duì)，使得皇帝無(wú)法使用軍隊(duì)實(shí)現(xiàn)其他的戰(zhàn)略目的。邊界那么長(zhǎng)，很容易被滲透，中國(guó)軍隊(duì)根本不知道蠻人會(huì)從哪里開(kāi)始攻擊。即使軍人足夠多，也沒(méi)有時(shí)間做出反應(yīng)，或者也無(wú)法阻止敵人逃跑。有了長(zhǎng)城以后，只需要一小部分的軍人作為哨兵，來(lái)進(jìn)行緊急響應(yīng)。然后增援部隊(duì)就可以部署到危險(xiǎn)地帶。

Negating Enemy Advantage: Their superior cavalry was also negated as walls were built at locations that will not favor the use of cavalry or attack. Arrows flying down would be far more dangerous than shooting up. Advanced high power projectiles on the walls would be an added combat advantage, shooting longer distances. So the barbarians would not have an advantage even when they are larger in number.

抵消敵人優(yōu)勢(shì)：對(duì)方更強(qiáng)的騎兵優(yōu)勢(shì)也會(huì)被抵消，因?yàn)殚L(zhǎng)城建在了不適合騎兵攻擊的地點(diǎn)。射下來(lái)的弓箭比往上射的弓箭可怕多了。在長(zhǎng)城上進(jìn)行先進(jìn)的高能投射也會(huì)增加戰(zhàn)斗優(yōu)勢(shì)，攻擊更遠(yuǎn)的目標(biāo)。所以即使蠻人數(shù)量更多，也沒(méi)有優(yōu)勢(shì)。

Even Trump also wants a wall. We shall see if US divisive politics allows and whether it is effective for 2700 years or just 20? Or will it hold the next new tourist record for the most tourists (more than 10 million a year which by the way may cover the material cost of construction in just some decades)

即使是川普都想要建墻，我們等著看美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)是否能達(dá)成共識(shí)真的建墻，看看這座墻能維持2700年還是只有20年？或者能成為擁有最多游客的旅游景點(diǎn)？（每年超過(guò)1000萬(wàn)游客的話，就能在幾十年內(nèi)收回建筑材料成本）