Alex Johns
There ware Britishers who were corrupt and all Indian's werehonest.
Indians were poor but they were happy.
All Indian's were dreaming of free India where there wouldnot be any poverty, corruption, racism, untouchability.
All Indians wanted water, food, house in british rule, butthey never got it.
Winston Churchill told in British Parliament, if we willgive independence to India then India will be ruled by thief's and corruptleaders. How true he was......

英国人是腐败的，而所有印度人都是诚实的。
印度人很穷，但他们很幸福。
所有印度人都梦想着自由的印度，那里不会有任何贫穷、腐败、种族歧视和贱民。
在英国统治下，所有的印度人都需要水、食物和房子，但他们从来没有得到过这些。

但温斯顿·丘吉尔在英国议会上曾经说：如果我们将独立还给印度，那么印度将被盗贼和腐败的领导人统治。他说的真是太对了。。。。。

Anonymous
I asked my grandfather about this. He said life was rathernormal at that time. In fact a lot normal as compared to what is shown in themovies. He was a horse cart driver. He said that Britishers were rathergenerous to give a lot in tips and treated him with respect. Just a littlerudeness sometimes. He very rarely saw the brutalities that are evident in alot of stories that we have heard.
In reality, I don't know how frequently those thingshappened. He may just have been lucky to never see or experience them.

我问过我祖父这个问题。他说那时的生活很正常。事实上，和电影里的相比，很正常。他是一名马车司机。他说英国人慷慨地给他很多小费，并且对他很尊重。只是偶尔有点粗鲁。他很少看到我们现在所听到的许多故事中的残酷经历。

事实上，我不知道这些事情发生的频率。可能他只是幸运地从未见过或经历过它们。

谁才是美国总统中的NO.1？


quora网友：你要么做为一个英雄死去 ，要么活得足够长看着自己堕落。——黑暗骑士。学术界的共识（七十多年来进行的数十次调查）是前五位总统分别为林肯，富兰克林·罗斯福，华盛顿，杰斐逊和西奥多·罗斯福.......

原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：兰陵笑笑生 转载请注明出处
论坛地址：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-467065-1-1.html

Who was the all time best President of the United States of America?

谁是美国有史以来最好的总统？

原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：兰陵笑笑生 转载请注明出处
论坛地址：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-467065-1-1.html

Balaji Viswanathan
You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself as a villain
-- The Dark Knight
The academic consensus [dozens of surveys conducted over 7 decades] is that the top 5 Presidents are Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Washington, Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt.
All of them were exceptional leaders. However, the top two folks - Lincoln and FDR had the benefit of dying in the office - at the peak of their careers [talking of coincidence, they both died exactly 5 months after winning their last elections]. They died a hero without having the time to become a villain.
Lincoln won the civil war, but the tough job of reconstruction was left to his successor [who fumbled it badly]. People saw the thing he did best [lead the country in war] while not seeing his fairly average performance when it comes to the economy or other things. Had he finished both his terms and then lived a life after that, it is possible that his ranking might have slipped a couple of places.
In case of FDR, war in Europe was almost over when he died in April 1945. Germany surrendered merely 2 weeks later. Unlike his successor Truman, he didn't have to face the question of how he would take Japan and the controversial use of the Atom bomb. FDR led the country through the Depression and the Second World War, but didn't have to face some of the tough post-war questions [such as what to do with USSR and how to reconstruct Germany].
George Washington was once again exceptional in leading the troops in the war, but his performance in other areas were quite average. However, he "died" a hero by exiting the President's office in 2 terms. Had he ruled longer, he might have seen his rank slip a plenty [in many modern democracies like India this happened - where a victorious hero stayed long enough in the office to lose the allure].
That leaves Theodore Roosevelt and Thomas Jefferson. I believe those are the best leaders US had as their skills were far more diverse than just leading the country in a war. However, Roosevelt had an average later period as he tried to contest his own protege - Taft. He lost badly to his mentee in 1912 and also found it hard to manage the Congress in his second period.
Jefferson to me is among the most respectable. He was not just a war commander, but an intellectual leader - something very rare in large countries. He was the key man behind the Declaration of Independence. He doubled the size of the US through the Louisiana Purchase, without losing a single soldier. That is one smart leader. He cut the troops and dramatically reduced the federal deficit, without which the young republic could have become bankrupt. However, even with his remaining troops he was able to push free trade by defeating the Barbary pirates near Tunisia.
He commissioned the Lewis & Clark expedition that helped the Americans greatly understand the land they lived and made slave trade illegal. He was far more intelligent than any of the other leaders and still managed to survive the White House [didn't get painted white yet]. He was religious, yet ran a secular office. He willingly retired from office [it had not become a custom yet - only Washington did that before].
Although he was not able to fight slavery fully, he tacitly provided support to the Slave revolution in Haiti as well as abolish international slave trade. He pushed for an abolishment of slavery west of the Great Lakes, but lost the bill in Congress by 1 vote. He had to cow-tow to the south and was not a perfect liberal in the subject, but was still ahead of most top leaders of his era.
Jefferson lived long enough, but he still died a hero [coincidentally on July 4].

你要么做为一个英雄死去 ，要么活得足够长看着自己堕落。
——黑暗骑士
学术界的共识（七十多年来进行的数十次调查）是前五位总统分别为林肯，富兰克林·罗斯福，华盛顿，杰斐逊和西奥多·罗斯福。

他们都是杰出的领导者。然而，前两名林肯和罗斯福都有一个好处是他们都是死于任上——在他们事业的巅峰时期。[说到巧合，他们都是在赢得连任5个月后去世的。]他们死时是个英雄，没有时间去做恶棍。

林肯赢得了内战，但把艰难的重建工作留给了他的接班人（他没有把这件事搞好）。人们看到了他做得最好的事[领导这个国家赢得内战]，但却无法看到他在在经济或其他方面的平均表现。如果他能平安度过他的两个任期，然后平静地度过余生，那他的排名可能就会下滑几位。

罗斯福的情况是，当他在1945年4月去世时欧洲战场已经快要结束了。。德国在两周之后就投降了。与他的继任者杜鲁门不同，他不必面对如何处置日本和使用有争议的原子弹的问题。罗斯福在整个大萧条和第二次世界大战期间领导着整个国家，但是他不必面对一些棘手的战后问题（比如如何处理苏联和如何重建德国）。

乔治·华盛顿再次在战争中领导军队，但他在其他领域的表现相当普通。然而，他在完成了两个总统任期之后在还是一个英雄时“死去”了。如果他统治的时间再长一点，他可能会看到他的军衔不断下滑。[在许多现代民主国家，比如印度，都发生过这种情况--在那里，一个胜利者在办公室呆了足够长的时间，以至于失去了英雄的吸引力]。

剩下西奥多·罗斯福和托马斯·杰斐逊。我相信这两个是美国最好的领导人，因为他们的技能远不止在战争中领导国家。然而，罗斯福在试图扶植自己的门徒 - 塔夫脱时，有一个平庸的晚期。他在1912输给了他的学生，同时在他的第二任期期间他也发现他已经难以对国会进行管理。

杰佛逊是我最尊敬的人之一。他不仅仅是一个战争指挥官，还是一个知识分子领袖——这在大国里十分罕见。他是“独立宣言”背后的关键人物。他通过“路易斯安那州购买法案”不费一兵一卒就把美国的国土扩大了一倍。这是一个聪明的领导者。他削减了部队，大大减少了联邦赤字，不然的话，这个年轻的共和国可能就破产了。然而，即使只用剩下的部队，他也能通过击败突尼斯附近的巴贝里海盗来推动自由贸易。

他委托刘易斯和克拉克探险队帮助美国人得以非常了解他们居住的土地，并使奴隶贩卖成为非法行为。他比任何其他领导人都聪明得多，仍然设法在白宫生存了下来（当时没有被涂成白色）。他是信教的，但却管理着一个世俗的办公室。而且他是自愿退休的。[这在当时还没有成为一种 俗--在此之前只有华盛顿这样做了。]

尽管他无法充分打击奴隶制，但他默许了对海地奴隶革命的支持，并取消了国际奴隶贸易。他推动废除大湖以西的奴隶制，但以1票的劣势在国会输掉了这项法案。他不得不顺从南方，在这个问题上他不是一个完美的自由派，但仍然领先于他那个时代的大多数最高领导人。

Marc Bodnick
Lincoln is the best US president, followed by Washington or FDR.
Lincoln's leadership during the Civil War resulted in (1) the continued union of our country, (2) the ending of slavery, and (3) the passage of the 13th amendment.
This was a very difficult / very uncertain war and required incredible resolve and leadership on Lincoln's part. And Lincoln's personal commitment to end slavery as part of a successful resolution of the war was critical to that outcome.
Lincoln's success is all the more remarkable considering his modest background and limited experience.

林肯是美国最好的总统，其次是华盛顿或罗斯福。
林肯在内战中的领导导致了（1）我们的国家没有被分裂（2）奴隶制的终结（3）第13次修正案（解放黑人法案）的通过。

这是一场非常艰难的/非常不确定的战争，需要林肯的坚定决心和领导才能。林肯对战争结束后结束奴隶制的个人承诺，作为成功解决战争的一部分，对这一结果至关重要。
考虑到林肯的背景和有限的经验，他的成功显得尤为引人注目。

Akyra DuPont
It depends on what you mean by 'best'. I, as well as most others, would have presidents such as Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and FDR on the list. However, if we look at who was the most successful compared to what they promised in their campaigns, James K. Polk would be the winner.
Now, I'm not the biggest fan of Polk, for I don't support how he initiated the Mexican-American War. However, every single thing he promised to do while president he did.
His Promises:
1.Serve only one term - Which he did, and he was the first president to voluntarily do so.
2.Lower Tariffs
3.Acquire California from Mexico - Polk did this and the war gave the US more land than just California.
4.Settle the Oregon Dispute - Polk proposed where the border of Oregon should be placed, and with minor modifications a treaty was signed with Britain
5.Establish a sub-treasury
Since Polk fulfilled everything he promised to do, he could be argued as the best (as in the most successful) President.

这取决于你所说的“最佳”是什么。我和其他大多数人都会把林肯，乔治·华盛顿和罗斯福等总统列入名单。但是，如果我们看看与他们在竞选活动中所做的承诺相比最成功的人选，詹姆斯·K·波尔克将是胜利者。
现在，我不是波尔克最大的球迷，因为我不支持他像那样发起墨西哥战争。然而，他所做的每一件事情，都是他在竞选的时候承诺要做的。

他的承诺：
1.只做一个任期 -他做到了，他是第一个自愿这样做的总统。
2.降低关税
3.从墨西哥获得加利福尼亚州 -波尔克做了，这场战争给美国带来了更多的土地，而不仅仅是加州。
4.解决俄勒冈州的争端 -波尔克提议把俄勒冈州的边界设在那里，并在稍作修改后与英国签署了一项条约。
5.建立一个分库
由于波尔克履行了他答应做的一切，他可以被认为是最好的（如最成功的）总统。

Mike Schoultz
In my mind, Abraham Lincoln, hands down.
There is probably no better example of failure and persistence that I know of. Let me share Lincoln’s life history with you. This was a man who failed in business at the age of 21 ; was defeated in a legislative race at age 22; failed again in business at age 24; overcame the death of his sweetheart at age 26; had a nervous breakdown at age 27; lost a congressional race at age 34; lost a senatorial race at age 45; failed in an effort to become vice-president at age 47; lost a senatorial race at age 49; and was elected president of the United States at age 52.
Would you dare call him a failure? He could have quit anywhere along the line. But to Lincoln, defeat was a detour and not a dead end. And a great source of learning.
He worked to achieve mastery in law and politics. He gave his toughest rivals power and autonomy. In fact, he surrounded himself with rivals who excelled in areas where he was not strong. And despite his many failures, his life was an immense success.

在我看来，是亚伯拉罕·林肯。

据我所知，没有比这更好的失败和坚持的例子了。让我和你分享分享林肯的人生历史。这是一个21岁失业，在22岁的立法竞赛中被击败; 24岁时再次失败; 在26岁的时候克服了他的爱人之死; 27岁时精神崩溃; 在34岁时输掉了一次国会的竞选; 45岁时参加了一场参议院竞选; 未能在47岁时成为副总统; 49岁时参加了一场参议院竞选; 并在52岁时当选美国总统的人。

你敢说他失败了吗？他确实可能在某个事件上会一蹶不振。但对林肯来说，失败是一条弯路，而不是死胡同。也是一个很好的学 来源。

他努力使自己精通法律和政治。他给了他最强硬的对手权力和自主权。事实上，他身边的竞争对手在他不太强大的领域表现出色。尽管他失败了很多次，但他的生活还是取得了巨大的成功。

Sasha Trubetskoy
Certainly, many great and talented men have held the office. Some, such as Jackson or Grant, were perhaps more talented in other domains. But when it comes to choosing the best president ever, historians almost unanimously choose one of the three: Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Franklin Roosevelt.
I could make a solid case for either of the three, but my personal favorite is Abraham Lincoln.

当然，许多伟大而有才华的人担任过这一职务。有些人，如杰克逊或格兰特，在其他领域也许更有才华。但是当谈到选择有史以来最好的总统时，历史学家们都几乎会一致从三位总统中选择一位：亚伯拉罕·林肯、乔治·华盛顿、富兰克林·罗斯福。

我可以为这三个人中的任何一个提出确凿的理由，但我个人最喜欢的是亚伯拉罕·林肯。

Peter Flom
Of course, this is partly a matter of opinion. There have been quite a few surveys of historians and there is general consensus on the top 3: Lincoln, FDR and Washington. Only Lincoln and FDR were ranked in the top 3 by every survey.
Lincoln would get my vote, as well.

当然，这在一定程度上是一个主观的问题。历史学家进行了相当多的调查，并在前三方面达成了普遍共识：林肯，罗斯福和华盛顿。只有林肯和罗斯福在每次调查中都排在前3位。
林肯也会得到我的选票。

Dan Holliday
The best overall leader (for critical thinking, clear-sightedness, ambition, communication, decisiveness) was Lincoln. He was up against the most difficult odds of any president. Washington had the unwavering support of the nation for most of his administration. Roosevelt was up against fascism, but had a rubber-stamp Congress and -- by and large -- a nation who walked behind him. Lincoln was hated by everybody in the south and wasn't much better off in the north.
The most important president and the best president in terms of ramifications on the republic was Washington. That's because he could have aspired to greater things (dictator, president for life, king), he set the tone and standard for future office-holders that was respected for more than a century and a half. He laid the foundation upon which this successful republic sits.

林肯在整体上（批判性思维，清晰的视野，野心，沟通能力，果断）是领导中最好的。他面临着所有总统中最困难的命运。华盛顿得到了全国人民对他的政府的坚定支持。罗斯福要对抗法西斯主义，但他的背后是国会和几乎整个国家的支持。林肯被南方的每个人所憎恨，在北方也不见得更好。

在对共和国的影响方面，最重要和最好的总统是华盛顿。那是因为他本可以追求更伟大的事物（独裁者，终身总统，国王），但他却为将来的官僚制定了一个多世纪以来的基调和标准，奠定了这个成功的共和国的基础。

Don Graham
I agree with Mark and John: Lincoln was given the hardest job (that of winning the Civil War), and had to combine infinite wisdom and patience to do it. He was let down by general after general who served under him, then found the man who won the war and backed him against much advice not to.
In addition, he was the best writer among Presidents—and possibly the best writer of any American ever. And on top of everything else, bills creating the transcontinental railroad and the land-grant colleges act passed during his tenure.

我同意马克和约翰的观点：林肯被赋予了一份最艰难的工作（那就是赢得内战），并且必须结合无限的智慧和耐心才能做到这一点。在他手下的将军不断让他失望之后，他之后终于找到了能赢得战争的那个人，并且力排众议坚定地支持他。
此外，他是总统中最好的作家，也可能是美国历史上最好的作家。最重要的是，在他任内通过了创建跨大陆铁路和土地补助学院的法案。

Joseph Wang
George Washington. If he messed up, there wouldn’t any been any other Presidents.
Abraham Lincoln comes in second for similar reasons.

乔治·华盛顿。如果他搞砸了，就不会有其他总统了。
亚伯拉罕·林肯也因此只能名列第二。

Murray Godfrey
It's a pretty tough choice between George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
I'm going to say Washington. I say that because he had no precedent to draw on - he had to do everything from scratch and make precedent. Also, he did more with less.
The country was truly more vulnerable from 1788-96 as a small republic with no military or economic base to speak of. Washington was brilliant in avoiding war with Britain and dealing with the U.S.'s debt problem. A second war with Britain at that period would have been disastrous. Britain could have beaten us badly militarily and even if they didn't a war would have destroyed the U.S.'s finances that had still not recovered from the Revolution. That probably would have resulted in some kind of resumption of control or at least financial dominance by Britain because the U.S. would have been completely bankrupt.
Comparatively, by 1860 the U.S. was about 4 times physically larger than in 1788 with access to both oceans, the population was about 9 times larger, it had won an international war (against Mexico), was one of the largest agricultural suppliers worldwide, and had a relatively small, but robust and growing industrial base.
Even though secession and civil war were very, very bad crises, Lincoln had more to work with.
Also, I take into account how and when Lincoln died. His 2nd term would have been pretty rough dealing with reconstruction. Southerners and many democrats from the time hated him and their hate would have lingered for many decades.
However, because Lincoln was tragically assassinated, he reached mythic hero status overnight and avoided having to preside over reconstruction, which would have been a no-win situation for him. It's quite possible he could have opposed or used his influence to significantly alter the 14th and/or 15th amendments, and a strong possibility is that the 15th amendment would never have been passed. Those were pushed by the radical republicans who were were far more pro-African American than Lincoln. I find it unlikely Lincoln would have seen eye to eye with the radicals.
Furthermore, the 1866 elections would probably have not gone so well for the republicans with Lincoln instead of Andrew Johnson as president, reducing the chance that a 15th amendment gets passed. That would have tarnished Lincoln's reputation in the modern era since he would have been seen as repressing black civil rights. Since he died when he did we can see him as the president that issued the emancipation proclamation and defeated the slave-holding confederacy; he never had to address the difficult question of blacks having citizenship or voting.

在乔治·华盛顿和亚伯拉罕·林肯之间，这是一个相当艰难的选择。
但我会选华盛顿。我这么说是因为他没有先例可循--他必须从头做起，开创先例。而且，他做得相当不错。

从1788-96年间，这个国家作为一个没有军事或经济基础的小共和国，确实更加脆弱。华盛顿在避免与英国的战争和处理美国的债务问题方面表现出色。当时如果与英国进行第二次战争将是灾难性的。英国本可以在军事上打败我们，即使他们不这样做，战争也会摧毁美国的财政状况，而美国的财政还没有从革命中恢复过来。这可能会导致英国在某种形式上对美国恢复控制或至少是财政支配，因为美国将会完全破产。
相比之下，到1860年，美国在体型上比1788年大了4倍，抵达了两个大洋，人口增长了9倍，赢得了一场国际战争（针对墨西哥），是世界上最大的农业供应国之一，其工业基础相对较小，但却非常强劲的和不断增长。
尽管分裂国家和内战是非常非常严重的危机，但除此之外林肯还有更多的工作要做。

此外，我还考虑到林肯是如何和何时去世的。他的第二任期会遇上相当艰难的重建问题。南方人和当时的许多民主党人都非常恨他，他们的仇恨会持续几十年。
然而，由于林肯不幸被暗杀，他在一夜之间达到了神话英雄的地位，避免了不得不主持重建工作，这对他来说可能会是一个失败的的局面。他很有可能会反对或利用他的影响力来显著改变第十四和/或第十五修正案，而第十五修正案很有可能永远不会获得通过。推动这些法案的是比林肯更亲非裔美国人的激进共和党人。我觉得林肯不太可能与激进分子意见一致（注：第十四修正案：这一修正案涉及公民权利和平等法律保护，最初提出是为了解决南北战争后昔日奴隶的相关问题。修正案备受争议，特别是在南部各州，这些州之后为了能恢复联邦国会中的议席而被迫通过修正案。 第十五修正案：该法案禁止联邦或州政府根据公民的种族、肤色或以前曾是奴隶而限制其选举权。这条修正案于1870年2月3日通过，是三条重建修正案的最后一条）。

此外，1866年大选如果是林肯取代了安德鲁·约翰逊（林肯被暗杀后的继任者）当总统，这或许对共和党来说可能并没有那么好，因为这会减少第十五修正案获得通过的机会。这将玷污林肯在现代社会的声誉，因为他将被视为压制黑人民权的人物。自从他死后，我们就把他看作是颁布解放宣言并击败奴隶主联盟的总统；他从来不需要解决黑人拥有公民身份或投票等这些困难的问题。

H.L. Chastain
George Washington
Why? When given the option to have complete power, he refused.
The man was the face and life of the American Revolution. His leadership inspired poor immigrants to attempt to fight the British Empire. After the war was won, General Washington resigned from his post and returned to his farm. Caesar, Napoleon, Lenin, etc. All were revolutionaries and all used their status to maintain a power they held til death, except Washington.
George Washington was so popular many historians believe he could’ve been King. He, however, refused to even consider the idea.
George Washington was elected universally. No one challenged him. They didn’t refuse to challenge him by force, but simply because he was so universally loved and trusted no man thought anyone more capable than Washington.
After two terms in office, 8 years total, George Washington proceeded to leave office by his own will. His voters begged him to run for a third term, but Washington simply refused. George Washington had no taste for power, and it is that simple quality that makes him the greatest President.
In fact, it’s said that King George III of Britain even agreed with that assessment…
King George III asked his American painter, Benjamin West, what Washington would do after winning independence. West replied, “They say he will return to his farm.”
“If he does that,” the incredulous monarch said, “he will be the greatest man in the world.”

乔治·华盛顿
为什么？因为当他可以选择拥有绝对的权力时，他拒绝了。
这个人是美国革命的代表和灵魂。他的领导鼓舞了贫穷的移民试图与大英帝国作战。战争胜利后，华盛顿将军辞去了他的职务，回到了他的农场。凯撒、拿破仑、列宁等人都是革命者，他们都用自己的地位来维持自己的权力，至死方休，除了华盛顿以外。

乔治·华盛顿很受欢迎，许多历史学家认为他可以成为国王。然而，他甚至拒绝考虑这个想法。
华盛顿被普选为总统，没有一个人出来挑战他。他们没有打算用武力来挑战他，因为他受到了如此普遍的爱戴和信任，没有人认为任何人比华盛顿更有能力。

乔治·华盛顿在两届任期结束后，即8年后，按照自己的意愿离职。他的选民请求他参加第三任期，但华盛顿拒绝了。乔治·华盛顿对权力没有兴趣，正是这种简单的品质使他成为最伟大的总统。
事实上，英国国王乔治三世甚至同意这一评估...

“乔治三世国王问他的美国画家本杰明韦斯特，华盛顿赢得独立后会做什么。韦斯特回答说：“他们说他会回到他的农场。”
“如果他那样做，”这位表示怀疑的君主说，“他将是世界上最伟大的人。””

中俄文化有哪些惊人的不同点？

quora网友：关于俄罗斯人，有一件事总是被我父亲提起。每一次我们谈论俄罗斯人（对我们北方兄弟的亲切称呼）的时候，我父亲就要说：“你知道整个二战期间有多少俄罗斯人叛逃？”我父亲总是以问话开始......

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

What do you find startlingly different in Chinese culture vs. Russian culture?

中俄文化有哪些惊人的不同点？

①Feifei Wangupxed Feb 8
There's one thing about Russians my dad always brought up. Every time we talked about them “Old hairy dudes" (as we call our northern brethren with affection) my dad would bring it up.

关于俄罗斯人，有一件事总是被我父亲提起。每一次我们谈论“老毛子”（对我们北方兄弟的亲切称呼）的时候，我父亲就要说：

“Do you know how many Russians ended up defecting during WWII?” My dad always started with a question.
“No. How many?” (I know the answer but I played along)
“A few thousands.”

“你知道整个二战期间有多少俄罗斯人叛逃？”我父亲总是以问话开始。
“不知道。有多少？”（我知道答案，但是配合他。）
“几千。”

Looking up north we often observe a certain nobility in Russian people. Sure like other “white ghosts" (or foreign devil) we often poke fun at their short (?) history 500 years ago Moscow was some regional medi town by some river. But you can’t deny their heroism first against Napoleon then against Hitler.

往北看，我们总能发现俄罗斯人民表现出的某种高尚品格。当然，如其他“白鬼子”（或洋鬼子）一样，我们总是笑话其历史短暂，500年前，莫斯科还是个建在河边上，地区级的中世纪城镇。但你否认不了他们的英雄主义情节，先是反抗拿破仑，后是希特勒。

“It's their winter" as my dad often say “it hardens people unlike us. We bend over backwards at the first sign of overwhelming force". In other words Chinese we don't do Alamo.
Russians do. And they have winter on their side.

“是他们的冬天”——正如我父亲常说的那样——“磨练了其人民，不像我们。我们一看到压倒性的军队力量，就会屈服。”换句话说，中国人打不了阿拉莫战役那样的仗。俄罗斯人能，而且还有冬天做他们的帮手。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Joseph Wang Feb 1
There were way more than a few thousand K supporters of the Germans. The big difference is what happens afterwards.
If after you defected to the Japanese you then redefected back to work for the Motherland all was forgiven and whatever you did for the Japanese was swept under the rug.

当时支持德国的（俄罗斯）人远不止几千人。最大的不同是在战后。如果你在投奔日本人后重回祖国为其抗争，那之前你替日本人卖力所犯下的一切行径都会被原谅，将既往不咎。

The Russians that worked for the Germans were pretty much all killed after the war. Once you cross the line there was nothing you could to do cross back.

而为德国人卖力的那些俄罗斯人战后基本上都被杀光了。一旦你越过那条界限，不管做什么你都无法回到最初。

Igor Fazlyev Feb 1
Actually only a rather small proportion were executed the vast majority were given long labor camp sentences that were commuted after Stalin died so most of them ended up serving about 10 years in labor camps.

实际上只有小部分人被执行死刑了，大部分人在斯大林死后则被减刑，被判处长期的劳改刑期，所以他们中的很多人最后是服了大概10年劳改营的刑期。

-------------译者：碧天云外-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Kang-Hahn Seo Jan 31
Eastern Societies unfortunately are prone to slow rot; a type of rot where it is slow and hard to notice causing a very slow decay of the Society in question unlike the fast rot of Western Societies which either kills the Society and reforms it into something new and stronger or forces reform and the killing of the Rot.
I don't know which is worse.

不幸的是东方社会倾向于缓慢地腐朽；以一种缓慢且难以察觉的方式导致社会在质疑之中逐渐地衰变，而西方社会则不同，是那种要么颠覆原有社会并将其改造为新的、更强大的社会，要么迫使其改革并将腐败根除的急剧性腐败。我不知道哪一种更糟糕。

Nin Mok Jan 31
Gotta disagree on the lack of violence part. Back in the golden days of youth gangsterism in the 90s basketball yards in Hong Kong's public estates were notorious for being the battlegrounds of choice for knife-wielding mobs.

不同意缺少暴力现象这一条。回顾90年代，青年黑帮组织的黄金时期，香港公租房的篮球场曾是恶名昭著的黑帮们持械斗殴的场所。