中国和美国，谁才是朝鲜战争的赢家，或者两国打成平手了吗

Did America or China win the Korean War, or was it a draw?

中国和美国，谁才是朝鲜战争的赢家？或者两国打成平手了吗？

以下是Quora网友的评论：

Rick Gauger

America and its allies in the UN won the war, because the Co unist invasion of South Korea was a failure. The invasion did not change the map, and South Korea is still independent from North Korea and China.

美国和其在联合国的盟友打赢了，因为中国进攻韩国并没有取得成功，他们没有改变地图，韩国仍然独立在朝鲜和中国之外。

Robert Vannrox

Well, good question.

这是个好问题。

If you are an American, the narrative is that America won the war, and fought the co unists to draw. Then after the co unists begged for the war to end, General MacArthur agreed to partition Korea into two separate countries. You know, as a kind act of benevolence.

如果你是美国人，你会觉得美国赢了。在中国提出停战要求后，麦克阿瑟将军同意将朝鲜半岛分成两个独立的国家。你知道的，这是美国人大发慈悲呢。

If you are Chinese, the narrative is that China fought the Americans the moment they started bombing Chinese territory. Then, hordes of ill-equipped volunteers beat the Americans back. Mr. Mao agreed to end the war once the United States agreed to evacuate the Korean peninsula, and stop all hostilities.

如果你是中国人，你会觉得从美国人轰炸中国领土的那一刻起，中国就开始奋起反抗了。然后，装备不良的志愿军战士击退了美国大兵。只要美国同意撤离朝鲜半岛，停止一切敌对行动，中国愿意停战。

If you are North Korean, the narrative is that the United States tried to take over Korea, and the Koreans fought back with help from China and Russia. The war never ended, as the United States turned Southern Korea into a vassal state, that one day will reunite with the North.

如果你是朝鲜人，会认为是美国试图占领朝鲜半岛，朝鲜人民在中国和俄罗斯的帮助下进行了反击。战争从未结束，因为美国把韩国变成了自己的附属国，但总有一天韩国和朝鲜会重新统一。

If you are South Korean, the narrative is that the from both Russia and China tried to annex Korea. But the South Koreans fought the mindless hordes back with support from a coalition of de ocracies. They believe that the world came to Korea’s rescue, and the only reason that Korea is divided up is because South Korea wanted it that way.

如果你是韩国人，你会认为俄罗斯和中国试图吞并韩国。但韩国人民在皿煮国家联盟的支持下，击退了这些愚蠢的小人。他们认为全世界都是来拯救韩国的，朝鲜半岛分裂的唯一原因就是韩国想要独立。

You, my dear reader, probably fit into one of the a fore mentioned narratives depending on who propagandized you.

And, I suppose that is just fine.

But the actual reality is that after world war II, and the United States being the sole and only nuclear-armed nation in the world, pretty much could get away with anything it wanted. And you know what? It wanted GLOBAL DOMINATION.

而你们，我亲爱的读者，可能你们就属于上述的群体之一，取决于谁在负责宣传。

我觉得这也无可厚非。

但现实情况是，二战后，美国是世界上唯一一个拥有核武器的国家，总是为所欲为。你知道吗？美国想要主宰全球。

So it went forth and started setting up the global “chess board” so as to vanquish the two remaining threats to American global dominance. These were, of course, Russia and China.

Key to that was to place a wedge between the two nations. After all, both were very weak after prolonged wars in Asia. China was especially weak with ruined cities, hordes of uneducated, poverty stricken peasants, while Russia was still recovering from the massive desolation wrought about by the German Invasion.

所以，美国开始着手在全球下一盘“棋”，想要消灭两个对美国的全球主导地位造成威胁的对手。这两个对手自然是俄罗斯和中国。

解决这个问题的关键，就是在两国之间制造隔阂。毕竟，这两个国家在亚洲经历了旷日持久的战争，早已国力疲弱。其中中国更为虚弱，城市被毁，大批贫困农民都是文盲。俄罗斯也还未从德国侵略造成的疮痍中完全恢复。

The key was Korea.

From Korea, a spring board into the “belly” of Asia could be acquired, and with careful planning, nuclear armed bombers could be stations there, and invasion forces positioned there, for an eventual land grab that would slice the two societies into easily digestible nations. One at a time.

Both Stalin and Mao understood this. As Mao famously said, as he stood up from his desk, and pointed to the map table… “if you do not fight and win now, we will need to fight ten thousand battles later” Or something similar. (I am paraphrasing the Chinese statement.)

美国的目标就是韩国。

借由韩国，美国可以获得一个进入亚洲“腹地”的跳板，只要妥善规划，就可以将核武装轰炸机部署在当地，还可以将部队驻扎在当地，最终夺取韩国的土地，将两个社会国家分裂成势单力薄的小国。一口一个地吞并掉。

斯大林和毛主席都明白这一点。毛主席曾说过一句名言，当时他站在书桌前，指着地图说：“中国不能置之不理。打得一拳开，免得百拳来。”

So what of the war? Who won?

China and Russia won. The United States punted, and decided to “fight the battle on another day”. Which is why the United States has set up the QUAD. So that the 1950 dream of World Domination can actually be realized.

那么这场战争的真相是什么？到底谁赢了？

胜利属于中国和俄罗斯。美国决定撤军，“日后再战”。这就是美国建立四方集团的原因。由此，美国1950年统治世界的梦想才能真正实现。

Tony Adams

Look at the objectives each fought to achieve:

North Korea: Invade South Korea, defeat the SK military, force unification with NK. LOST

China: Originally, remove foreign troops from North Korea, after the first few months, changed their objective to invade South Korea, defeat opposing forces, forcible unite South Korea to North Korea under NK rule. LOST

US/ UN: Save and defend South Korea from forces. Repulsed the original 1950 North Korean invasion and then the early 1951 Chinese invasion. WIN

看看每个人努力实现的目标：

朝鲜：入侵韩国，击败韩国军队，实现朝鲜半岛统一，但是朝鲜失败了。

中国：最初只是想把外国军队赶出朝鲜，但几个月后中国改变了主意，开始攻入韩国，击退敌对势力，想让韩国加入朝鲜。可惜并未成功。

美国/联合国：拯救和保护韩国免受进攻。他们击退了1950年的朝鲜入侵和1951年初的中国进攻，取得了胜利。

Simon Baker

There's no conclusive winner of the Korean War, in fact, as Michael Palin noted when he visited the Demilitarised Zone in the 1990’s during filming of his “Full Circle” series (where he travelled round the Pacific Rim), it's technically still going:

事实上，朝鲜战争没有决定性的赢家，正如迈克尔·佩林在20世纪90年代拍摄他的《完整的圆圈》(Full Circle)系列(他在环太平洋旅行)期间访问非军事区时指出的那样，从技术上讲，战争仍在继续:

“From the way they [the GI’s] talk, you'd think the Korean War ended yesterday. In fact it's never officially ended. For all the Military talk the fact remains that these are the world's least successful Peace Talks, MAC, the Military Armistice Commission, has been trying to turn a ceasefire into a peace for 43 years (and to this day the Korean War still hasn't ended). Most of the time seems to have been spent discussing the placement of the Microphones or the height of the tables…

“如果单看他们(美国大兵)的谈话方式，你会以为朝鲜战争昨天就结束了。但事实上，战争从来没有正式结束。尽管大家发表了各种军事言论，但事实仍然是，这是世界上最失败的和平谈判，军事停战委员会在过去 43年来一直试图将停火协定变成和平局面(但直到今天，朝鲜战争仍未结束)。大部分时间，委员会似乎都在讨论麦克风的位置或桌子的高度……

“No one seems to care about what happens here. The military get their training, the South Koreans get their border looked after, and those like me, who believe in human contact, get depressed. It's a place deserted by common sense. Even when we are allowed a clear view of North Korea, the village we can see is just another piece of propaganda, no one lives there.”

”似乎没有人真正关心这里发生了什么。军队一直在训练，韩国人的边境线有了保护伞，而像我一样信奉人类和平共处的人，只会感到沮丧。这里是一片常识的荒漠。即便我们可以清楚地望见边境那头的朝鲜，但我们看到的村庄也只是一种宣传工具，没有人居住。”

When North Korea invaded the South in June 1950, they made massive progress. When the UN forces flanked the North Koreans, they then made massive gains to push the North Koreans almost to the Chinese border. China's entry into the war saw the tide swing again. However, after 1951, there were no Titanic swings of momentum, with the war descending into stalemate. At the time the ceasefire agreement was signed in 1953, the frontline was more or less where the border had been when it all began.

1950年6月朝鲜入侵韩国时曾势如破竹。当“联合国军”从侧面包抄朝鲜时，他们取得了巨大的进展，几乎将朝鲜军队赶到了中国边境。中国加入战局后，又扭转了战场局势。但1951年后，随着战争陷入僵局，战场局势不再发生巨大变化。1953年双方签署停火协议时，前线几乎还维持在最初的边境线位置。

Andrew James Wright

Not an easy answer.

From a military point of view it was a draw. America and China couldn’t take all of Korea and hold it.

From a domestic point of view China probably got more points as it was an inferior power that stalemated America, and its controlled media could sell the result as a win to its people. By contrast Americans tired of the war eventually and cared less.

From a geopolitical view America and China both did well but America did better.

这个问题不太好回答。

从军事角度来看，双方打成了平局。美国和中国都没能占领并控制整个朝鲜半岛。

从中国国内的角度来看，中国可能占了上风，因为中国以贫穷落后的劣势让美国陷入僵局，中国的国家媒体可以向中国民众宣传中国战胜美国的结果。相比之下，美国人厌倦了无休止的战争，对战争漠不关心。

从地缘政治的角度来看，美国和中国的表现都还不错，但美国做得更好。

China created a buffer zone with North Korea, and got respect for standing toe to toe with America, but it lost a lot of soldiers, and became increasingly seen as a rogue nation. I’d also argue Chinese resentment against Russia increased, because Russia let China fight and bleed in Korea alone, and made China pay for the weapons it sent it. This helped lead to the Sino-Soviet split later on.

Meanwhile, America guaranteed its alliances and deterrence of com nism by standing in Korea, even though the war ended in stalemate.

中国与朝鲜建立了缓冲地带，还因为敢于对抗美国而赢得了尊重，但中国牺牲了很多志愿军。我认为，中国对俄罗斯的不满也增多了，因为俄罗斯让中国独力在朝鲜战场上战斗牺牲，还让中国为俄罗斯提供的武器买单。这也导致了后来中苏的分道扬镳。

与此同时，美国通过在朝鲜驻军来确保威慑，但战争最终还是以僵持不决而告终。

Because by 1950 America wasn’t doing well in the Cold War: Russia got the nuke in 1949, had absorbed Czechoslovakia into its fold, and challenged the West with the Berlin Airlift. China had gone co unist, and co unist backed insurgencies were rising in Indochina, Malaya, and elsewhere. Whether you agree with either side is one thing, but American credibility was at stake.

After the war American allies were more reassured, China was more internationally isolated, and the world realized America wouldn’t retreat into isolation as it hoped.

1950年时，美国在冷战中表现不佳：俄罗斯在1949年研制出了核武器，将捷克斯洛伐克纳入苏联版图，并通过柏林空投向西方发起了挑战。美国的信誉岌岌可危。

战后，美国的盟友对美国更有信心了，中国则在国际上越来越孤立，世界意识到美国并不会如自己所愿那般陷入孤立。

John Smith

NK kicked SK ass with ease

USA kicked NK ass with ease

China sucker punched the USA hard

USA got back up and fought China to a draw

朝鲜轻而易举地打败了韩国

美国轻而易举地打败了朝鲜

中国狠狠地收拾了美国

美国回过神来，和中国打了个平手

Pher Kimhuat

There is always no winner in a war, only for US to further enrich its politically influential defence industry - military industrial like what happen to the endless Israel-Hamas and Russia-Ukraine wars.

在战争中是永远没有赢家的，只有美国得以进一步丰富了具有政治影响力的国防工业-军事工业，就像无休止的以色列-哈马斯和俄罗斯-乌克兰战争一样。

Alvin Lee

There is no winner in any war. Both sides are losers. In any with gun fires and bombs, money, lives, buildings are all wasted. China do not want to have wars of any kind. But when the enemies are at your front gate of barged into your home lands, you just need to defend your families.

So, please don’t ask silly question of who win in the Korean War. Ask why was there a war take place by someone who came thus far away to kill someone else ?

任何战争都没有赢家，只能是两败俱伤。只要使用了枪支弹药，就会造成金钱、生命、建筑物的损失。中国不想卷入任何形式的战争。但如果敌人已经逼近你的家门口，即将闯入你的家园时，你能做的就是努力保护家人。

所以，不要再问谁才是朝鲜战争的赢家这种愚蠢问题。相反，你应该问一下这个问题：为什么有人要远渡重洋，发动战争来杀人呢？

Victor Luke

Draw since the borders didn’t change. The US couldn’t beat North Korea but they lost almost a million people. The US lost 50K.

我觉得双方打成了平手吧，因为边境线没有改变。美国无法打败朝鲜，但朝鲜损失了近100万兵力，而美国损失了5万兵力。

Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty

What was the aim of the US (NOT THE UN)?

Unite both Koreas under a Western government.

What was the Chinese aim?

Liberate North Korea.

The US failed and China succeeded.

美国(不是联合国)的目的是什么呢？