如此：所有比中国某些方面稍强的各国都是贸易战的敌人。西方人老早发明的、两次世界大战证明已失效、冷战期间苏联上过大当、在当今被工业和经济全球化取代的一个过时的”地缘政治“，这个混淆的概念或诱骗了聪明的中国人。所谓的“贸易战”：作为世界最大的市场它已经被哪些对中国持有高额贸易顺差的世界经济技术列强（例如德、意、日、俄、澳、韩等）所瓜分了。这不已经是在现实的世界大战之中了吗？
Therefore, all peoples who are in certain aspects stronger than China become trade enemies. Long-ago invented by European, in two WW proven was no longer effect, made USSR a big drag during the Cold War, and now replaced by industrial and economic globalization, that obscure object called “geopolitics” may have otherwise cheated the smart Chinese. About the so-called Trade War: as the world largest market it has been divided and occupied by trading opponents and economic-technological powers (such as German, Italy, Japan, Russia, Australia, Korea, and so on) who earn high trade surpluses to China. Isn’t this already in a present WWIII against China?
关于“中美贸易战”：About the Sino-US Trade War:
- 对粗钢粗铝进口的美方增税，须付出的是美国本土的精钢精铝制造业和通用建筑业。我不懂为什么美国的本土重工业不肯生产粗制原材料（就如本土页岩采油业），尤其当前其很多劳力水平也只能做粗活。US duties applying to low-grade steel and aluminium import from China: this made US onshore high-grade steel and aluminium industry and construction industry paying respectively 25% and 10% more. I don’t understand, why US domestic industries refuse to produce raw materials (like its domestic oil mining industry does)? Especially in present there are a lot of US labours are only capable to manufacture low-end products.
- 针对粗钢粗铝进口的美方的增税，中方对美国进口的糙粮、食物和食品增税，须付出的是中国的消费者。我不懂为什么中国的消费者为什么不得不依赖进口食品甚至食物和日用品。消费市场上亟需的食物食品都要被国家高征税（25%关税＋17%增值税），这贸易战岂不先打成了一国政府从自己消费民众之间获利？Against US’s duty-increase on import low-grade aluminium and steels, China increased duties on US import of better foods and processed foods. This makes China consumers paying as a higher 42% (duty + VAT) taxes against before up to 34%. I don’t understand why Chinese consumers have to depend on imported processed food, raw food and life supplies. This “trade war” makes a government collecting more money from its own consumer, the people.
- 美方征税于中国的“十大先进科技产品”进口，便被看作了是在“不公平地抑制中国制造2025”。其实中国当前在这些方面对美国的出口体量很小，远不构成中国的大宗出口损失。是否公平，须比较中国在这十大方面从美国进口产品所征收的税率是什么？若双方拉到同等的25%进口税，似倒是美国在事先提高“中国制造2025”的声誉（虽然它还未成气候）。或是对中国有利无弊？US applying tax upon “10 major advanced technological products” imported from China, that was treated a “unfair repression to Chin Manufacture 2025”. Actually China now has little export to US in these aspects, the duties applied are far to make major damages of China export. How fair would be? It should have to be in the same aspects to compare China’s current import duties. If both sides collect the same 25% as import duty, it would sound like US is in advance promoting a huge credit to “China Manufacture 2025” (although it is not to the scale yet). Could this actually a plus to China?
- 要抑制中国非公平地在境外知识侵权，这个欧美日韩有同感，但并没有量化的结果。我不懂为什么把一个商业道德上的问责当作是与中国作对？中国是世界专利大国，怎么解释需要舶来的技术？迟早总要有真实的中国自主发明吧？Wanting to block China’s intellectual property infringement: This could be the same feeling among European, American, Japanese and Korean. But there is no quantized measurement about how. I don’t understand why China treat this commercial-ethic questioning as an opposition. How do we explain China as the one possessing the largest number of the world’s patents, would need imported technologies? Soon or later China have to show its proprietary owned inventions, doesn’t it?
- “中国制造2025”是总理两年前在巴西初次提出的。它翻译成英文变得模糊了：到底是“2025年中国成为制造产品的世界强国”或是“2025中国将成为世界制造业强国”？由于中国并没有自己的高科技工业制造设备和工艺专有技术能力，其实尚不具备在几年内进入世界行列向欧美出口的能力。强调这方面的长远意图，现阶段自然就会受到欧美日韩这些掌握该领先技术国家的计较。我不懂这个口号同时面向“金砖“各国是个什么含义，因为巴西、俄罗斯、印度、韩国和南非也都想把自己早就成世界制造业强国，而且还在如上方面的水平和程度上早已领先于中国。Made in China 2015 is a slogan by Chinese prime ministor first-time announced when he was visiting Brazil. Its English translation is rather confusiong: Is it meant “by 2025 China becomes a super power of making products (capable to made products)”, or “by 2025 China becomes super power of manufacture (capable in manufacture process of products)”? The letter is harder due to China would not be capability for few years to achieve the pioneer in high-tech manufacture equipment and to process manufacture process know-hows, and those cannot export those to Europe or North American. Of cures this will be resisted by European and American. Then I don’t understand what the emphasis is applying to the other BRIKS countries now? Those countries also want to soon become manufacture superpower of the world. And they are more advanced and in front of China in those mentioned high-tech aspects.
还与大洋对岸的遥远美国打什么贸易战！还是学习《孙子兵法》吧：或”远交近攻“方能胜算？就如在二战艰难中的英国用道义取得了美国联手，打赢了大战。当然，其中还是要有盟国一起取胜。世上、史上并没有一家打败全体的例证呀。Still why fighting the far-away US a trade war? Let’s go back to study Art of War: Or shall we “allying the far-away countries for fighting the immediate neighbouring enemies?” For example, UK in the crises united American with ethics, so that it won the WWII. By the way certainly there ar allies have to win together though any wars. In the world, and in the history, there has been no case of one who wins agains all others.