印度自信回来了 - “种族主义”漫画引发争议几周后，德国陷入衰退（二）
正文翻译
Weeks After Row Over "Racist" Cartoon, Germany Enters Recession | Vantage with Palki Sharma
“种族主义”漫画引发争议几周后，德国陷入衰退
Weeks After Row Over "Racist" Cartoon, Germany Enters Recession | Vantage with Palki Sharma
“种族主义”漫画引发争议几周后，德国陷入衰退
评论翻译
@rodneyroberts2834
India has been portrayed as the aggressor, specifically focusing on the 1971 East Pakistan-Bangladesh conflict. While the events of that period are complex and multifaceted, it is important to acknowledge the arguments raised by critics regarding India's alleged aggression. Please note that I am presenting these arguments for the purpose of debate and not endorsing or validating any claims.
Military Intervention: In 1971, a bloody conflict ensued between East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and West Pakistan, resulting in widespread violence and human rights abuses. India, during this period, provided support to the Mukti Bahini, a guerrilla force fighting for the independence of East Pakistan. Critics argue that India's extensive military and logistical support to the Mukti Bahini can be seen as an aggressive act, intervening in the internal affairs of a neighboring country.
印度被描绘成侵略者，特别关注1971年东巴基斯坦-孟加拉国冲突。尽管这一时期的事件是复杂和多方面的，但重要的是要承认批评者就印度所谓的侵略提出的论点。请注意，我提出这些论点是为了进行辩论，而不是支持或证实任何主张。
军事干预：1971年，东巴基斯坦（现在的孟加拉国）和西巴基斯坦之间发生了血腥冲突，导致了广泛的暴力和侵犯人权行为。在此期间，印度向争取东巴基斯坦独立的游击队孟加拉自由战士武装(Mukti Bahini)提供了支持。批评人士认为，印度向孟加拉自由战士武装(Mukti Bahini)提供广泛的军事和后勤支持可以被视为一种侵略行为，干涉邻国的内政。
India has been portrayed as the aggressor, specifically focusing on the 1971 East Pakistan-Bangladesh conflict. While the events of that period are complex and multifaceted, it is important to acknowledge the arguments raised by critics regarding India's alleged aggression. Please note that I am presenting these arguments for the purpose of debate and not endorsing or validating any claims.
Military Intervention: In 1971, a bloody conflict ensued between East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and West Pakistan, resulting in widespread violence and human rights abuses. India, during this period, provided support to the Mukti Bahini, a guerrilla force fighting for the independence of East Pakistan. Critics argue that India's extensive military and logistical support to the Mukti Bahini can be seen as an aggressive act, intervening in the internal affairs of a neighboring country.
印度被描绘成侵略者，特别关注1971年东巴基斯坦-孟加拉国冲突。尽管这一时期的事件是复杂和多方面的，但重要的是要承认批评者就印度所谓的侵略提出的论点。请注意，我提出这些论点是为了进行辩论，而不是支持或证实任何主张。
军事干预：1971年，东巴基斯坦（现在的孟加拉国）和西巴基斯坦之间发生了血腥冲突，导致了广泛的暴力和侵犯人权行为。在此期间，印度向争取东巴基斯坦独立的游击队孟加拉自由战士武装(Mukti Bahini)提供了支持。批评人士认为，印度向孟加拉自由战士武装(Mukti Bahini)提供广泛的军事和后勤支持可以被视为一种侵略行为，干涉邻国的内政。
Annexation Concerns: Another point raised by critics is the perception that India's support for the independence of East Pakistan stemmed from a desire to annex or exert control over the region. The strategic location of East Pakistan, with access to the Bay of Bengal, could have been viewed as a tempting prize for India. Critics argue that India's actions during the conflict were driven by territorial expansionist motives rather than a purely humanitarian concern for the rights of the people of East Pakistan.
Border Skirmishes: The 1971 conflict was not limited to East Pakistan but also saw clashes along the India-West Pakistan border. Critics argue that India's military actions, including airstrikes and ground operations, extended beyond supporting the liberation movement and escalated the conflict with West Pakistan. These actions have been interpreted by some as acts of aggression, further exacerbating tensions between the two nations.
Violation of International Law: Critics contend that India's military intervention in East Pakistan went against the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states as enshrined in international law. They argue that India's active involvement in the conflict, regardless of its motivations, set a precedent that undermined the concept of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
吞并问题：批评者提出的另一个观点是，印度对东巴基斯坦独立的支持源于吞并或控制该地区的愿望。东巴基斯坦的战略位置可以通往孟加拉湾，对印度来说可能是一个诱人的战利品。批评者认为，印度在冲突期间的行动是出于领土扩张主义动机，而不是出于对东巴基斯坦人民权利的纯粹人道主义关切。
边境冲突：1971年的冲突不仅限于东巴基斯坦，还发生在印度-西巴基斯坦边境。批评人士认为，印度的军事行动，包括空袭和地面行动，超出了支持解放运动的范围，还加剧了与西巴基斯坦的冲突。这些行动被一些人解读为侵略行为，进一步加剧了两国之间的紧张关系。
违反国际法：批评者认为，印度对东巴基斯坦的军事干预违反了国际法规定的不干涉主权国家内政的原则。他们认为，印度积极参与冲突，无论其动机如何，都开创了一个破坏国家主权和领土完整概念的先例。
Border Skirmishes: The 1971 conflict was not limited to East Pakistan but also saw clashes along the India-West Pakistan border. Critics argue that India's military actions, including airstrikes and ground operations, extended beyond supporting the liberation movement and escalated the conflict with West Pakistan. These actions have been interpreted by some as acts of aggression, further exacerbating tensions between the two nations.
Violation of International Law: Critics contend that India's military intervention in East Pakistan went against the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states as enshrined in international law. They argue that India's active involvement in the conflict, regardless of its motivations, set a precedent that undermined the concept of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
吞并问题：批评者提出的另一个观点是，印度对东巴基斯坦独立的支持源于吞并或控制该地区的愿望。东巴基斯坦的战略位置可以通往孟加拉湾，对印度来说可能是一个诱人的战利品。批评者认为，印度在冲突期间的行动是出于领土扩张主义动机，而不是出于对东巴基斯坦人民权利的纯粹人道主义关切。
边境冲突：1971年的冲突不仅限于东巴基斯坦，还发生在印度-西巴基斯坦边境。批评人士认为，印度的军事行动，包括空袭和地面行动，超出了支持解放运动的范围，还加剧了与西巴基斯坦的冲突。这些行动被一些人解读为侵略行为，进一步加剧了两国之间的紧张关系。
违反国际法：批评者认为，印度对东巴基斯坦的军事干预违反了国际法规定的不干涉主权国家内政的原则。他们认为，印度积极参与冲突，无论其动机如何，都开创了一个破坏国家主权和领土完整概念的先例。
India's alleged aggression.
The 1965 Indo-Pak War: India's initiation of the 1965 conflict is often viewed as an act of aggression. The war erupted when Indian forces launched a pre-emptive strike on Pakistani territory, without a formal declaration of war. Indian military actions in the border region of Rann of Kutch and the subsequent infiltration into Pakistan-administered Kashmir suggest a proactive approach by India.
The Kargil Conflict (1999): The Kargil conflict is another instance where India has been criticized for its aggressive actions. Indian forces discovered Pakistani infiltrations in the Kargil region of Indian-administered Kashmir. While the conflict can be seen as a result of territorial disputes, critics argue that India's decision to launch airstrikes and military operations across the Line of Control (LoC) was an aggressive move, escalating the situation and risking wider conflict.
The Siachen Conflict: The Siachen conflict, which began in 1984, is often portrayed as India's unilateral aggression. Indian forces occupied the Siachen Glacier region in the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, despite the lack of any agreed-upon demarcation in that area. Critics argue that India's military presence in Siachen was an aggressive act, leading to heightened tensions between the two countries.
印度所谓的侵略。
1965年印巴战争：印度挑起的1965年冲突通常被视为侵略行为。当印度军队在没有正式宣战的情况下对巴基斯坦领土发动先发制人的打击时，战争爆发了。印度在库奇兰恩边境地区的军事行动以及随后对巴控克什米尔的渗透表明印度采取了积极主动的做法。
卡吉尔冲突（1999年）：卡吉尔冲突是印度因其侵略行为而受到批评的另一个例子。印度军队在印控克什米尔的卡吉尔地区发现了巴基斯坦的渗透。虽然这场冲突可以被视为领土争端的结果，但批评人士认为，印度决定在控制线（LoC）上空发动空袭和军事行动是一个激进的举动，使局势升级，并有可能引发更广泛的冲突。
锡亚琴冲突：始于1984年的锡亚琴冲突经常被描述为印度的单方面侵略。印度军队占领了查谟和克什米尔争议领土上的锡亚琛冰川地区，不过该地区没有任何商定的划界。批评者认为，印度在锡亚琛的军事存在是一种侵略行为，导致两国之间的紧张局势加剧。
The 1965 Indo-Pak War: India's initiation of the 1965 conflict is often viewed as an act of aggression. The war erupted when Indian forces launched a pre-emptive strike on Pakistani territory, without a formal declaration of war. Indian military actions in the border region of Rann of Kutch and the subsequent infiltration into Pakistan-administered Kashmir suggest a proactive approach by India.
The Kargil Conflict (1999): The Kargil conflict is another instance where India has been criticized for its aggressive actions. Indian forces discovered Pakistani infiltrations in the Kargil region of Indian-administered Kashmir. While the conflict can be seen as a result of territorial disputes, critics argue that India's decision to launch airstrikes and military operations across the Line of Control (LoC) was an aggressive move, escalating the situation and risking wider conflict.
The Siachen Conflict: The Siachen conflict, which began in 1984, is often portrayed as India's unilateral aggression. Indian forces occupied the Siachen Glacier region in the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, despite the lack of any agreed-upon demarcation in that area. Critics argue that India's military presence in Siachen was an aggressive act, leading to heightened tensions between the two countries.
印度所谓的侵略。
1965年印巴战争：印度挑起的1965年冲突通常被视为侵略行为。当印度军队在没有正式宣战的情况下对巴基斯坦领土发动先发制人的打击时，战争爆发了。印度在库奇兰恩边境地区的军事行动以及随后对巴控克什米尔的渗透表明印度采取了积极主动的做法。
卡吉尔冲突（1999年）：卡吉尔冲突是印度因其侵略行为而受到批评的另一个例子。印度军队在印控克什米尔的卡吉尔地区发现了巴基斯坦的渗透。虽然这场冲突可以被视为领土争端的结果，但批评人士认为，印度决定在控制线（LoC）上空发动空袭和军事行动是一个激进的举动，使局势升级，并有可能引发更广泛的冲突。
锡亚琴冲突：始于1984年的锡亚琴冲突经常被描述为印度的单方面侵略。印度军队占领了查谟和克什米尔争议领土上的锡亚琛冰川地区，不过该地区没有任何商定的划界。批评者认为，印度在锡亚琛的军事存在是一种侵略行为，导致两国之间的紧张局势加剧。
The Pulwama Crisis (2019): In the aftermath of the Pulwama attack, where a terrorist group based in Pakistan targeted Indian security forces, India launched airstrikes inside Pakistani territory. Critics argue that India's decision to conduct these airstrikes without seeking diplomatic channels or exhausting peaceful options was an aggressive move, escalating the situation and risking a larger conflict.
Water Disputes: The sharing of river waters, particularly the Indus River system, has been a contentious issue between India and Pakistan. Critics argue that India's construction of dams and diversion projects, such as the Baglihar Dam and Kishanganga Hydroelectric Plant, without adequate consultation with Pakistan, can be seen as aggressive actions that impact Pakistan's water resources.
While these instances highlight allegations of India's aggression, it is important to approach this debate with an understanding that conflicts between nations are complex and multifaceted. Historical events must be examined from various perspectives, taking into account broader political, historical, and regional dynamics to form a comprehensive understanding.
India may have perceived acquiring Bangladesh as a way to strengthen its geopolitical position. The acquisition would have granted India control over vital waterways and access to the Bay of Bengal, enhancing its maritime influence.
普尔瓦马危机（2019）：在普尔瓦马袭击事件发生后，，一个以巴基斯坦为基地的恐怖组织以印度安全部队为目标，印度在巴基斯坦境内发动了空袭。批评人士认为，印度在没有寻求外交渠道或用尽和平选择的情况下进行空袭的决定是一种侵略性举动，使局势升级，并有可能引发更大的冲突。
水资源争端：河流水资源的共享，特别是印度河水系，一直是印度和巴基斯坦之间一个有争议的问题。批评人士认为，印度在没有与巴基斯坦充分协商的情况下建造大坝和引水项目，如巴格里哈尔(Baglihar)大坝和吉萨冈戈(Kishanganga水电站，可以被视为影响巴基斯坦水资源的侵略行动。
虽然这些事件突出了对印度侵略的指控，但重要的是要理解国家之间的冲突是复杂和多方面的。必须从各种角度审视历史事件，考虑到更广泛的政治、历史和地区动态，以形成全面的理解。
印度可能认为占领孟加拉国是加强其地缘政治地位的一种方式。占领它将使印度获得重要水道的控制权，并进入孟加拉湾，增强其海上影响力。
Water Disputes: The sharing of river waters, particularly the Indus River system, has been a contentious issue between India and Pakistan. Critics argue that India's construction of dams and diversion projects, such as the Baglihar Dam and Kishanganga Hydroelectric Plant, without adequate consultation with Pakistan, can be seen as aggressive actions that impact Pakistan's water resources.
While these instances highlight allegations of India's aggression, it is important to approach this debate with an understanding that conflicts between nations are complex and multifaceted. Historical events must be examined from various perspectives, taking into account broader political, historical, and regional dynamics to form a comprehensive understanding.
India may have perceived acquiring Bangladesh as a way to strengthen its geopolitical position. The acquisition would have granted India control over vital waterways and access to the Bay of Bengal, enhancing its maritime influence.
普尔瓦马危机（2019）：在普尔瓦马袭击事件发生后，，一个以巴基斯坦为基地的恐怖组织以印度安全部队为目标，印度在巴基斯坦境内发动了空袭。批评人士认为，印度在没有寻求外交渠道或用尽和平选择的情况下进行空袭的决定是一种侵略性举动，使局势升级，并有可能引发更大的冲突。
水资源争端：河流水资源的共享，特别是印度河水系，一直是印度和巴基斯坦之间一个有争议的问题。批评人士认为，印度在没有与巴基斯坦充分协商的情况下建造大坝和引水项目，如巴格里哈尔(Baglihar)大坝和吉萨冈戈(Kishanganga水电站，可以被视为影响巴基斯坦水资源的侵略行动。
虽然这些事件突出了对印度侵略的指控，但重要的是要理解国家之间的冲突是复杂和多方面的。必须从各种角度审视历史事件，考虑到更广泛的政治、历史和地区动态，以形成全面的理解。
印度可能认为占领孟加拉国是加强其地缘政治地位的一种方式。占领它将使印度获得重要水道的控制权，并进入孟加拉湾，增强其海上影响力。
Cultural and Linguistic Ties: Supporters of the notion of India's desire to acquire Bangladesh often highlight the cultural and linguistic similarities between West Bengal (a state in India) and Bangladesh. The shared language, Bengali, and cultural heritage could be seen as a basis for potential integration, as witnessed during the Indian independence movement.
1971 Liberation War: The events surrounding the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War have been interpreted by some as evidence of India's interest in acquiring Bangladesh. India provided support to the Bangladesh Mukti Bahini (freedom fighters), and ultimately intervened militarily to assist in the liberation of Bangladesh from Pakistan. Critics argue that India's intervention may have been driven by motives beyond just humanitarian concerns, including the desire for territorial expansion.
Border Disputes: India and Bangladesh have experienced border disputes over the years. Critics contend that these disputes indicate India's ambition to assert control over parts of Bangladesh. Although these conflicts have primarily revolved around demarcation and security concerns, they have been used to support the argument that India has territorial ambitions.
Political Influence: India has undoubtedly exerted political influence over neighboring countries, including Bangladesh. Critics argue that this influence can be viewed as a stepping stone towards eventual acquisition. Economic aid, military cooperation, and diplomatic engagement have been cited as tools that India uses to maintain its influence and control over Bangladesh's affairs.
文化和语言联系：印度希望获得孟加拉国的支持者经常强调西孟加拉邦(印度的一个邦)和孟加拉国在文化和语言上的相似之处。正如印度独立运动期间所见证的那样，共同的语言、孟加拉语和文化遗产可以被视为潜在融合的基础。
1971年解放战争：围绕1971年孟加拉国解放战争的事件被一些人解读为印度有意占领孟加拉国的证据。印度向孟加拉国自由战士武装（Mukti Bahini）提供了支持，并最终进行了军事干预，协助孟加拉国从巴基斯坦手中解放出来。批评者认为，印度的干预可能是出于人道主义考虑之外的动机，包括对领土扩张的渴望。
边界争端：多年来，印度和孟加拉国经历了边界争端。批评者认为，这些争端表明印度有野心控制孟加拉国部分地区。尽管这些冲突主要围绕着划界和安全问题，但它们被用来支持印度有领土野心的论点。
政治影响力：毫无疑问，印度对包括孟加拉国在内的邻国施加了政治影响力。批评者认为，这种影响力可以被视为最终占领它的垫脚石。经济援助、军事合作和外交接触被认为是印度用来维持其对孟加拉国事务的影响力和控制的工具。
1971 Liberation War: The events surrounding the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War have been interpreted by some as evidence of India's interest in acquiring Bangladesh. India provided support to the Bangladesh Mukti Bahini (freedom fighters), and ultimately intervened militarily to assist in the liberation of Bangladesh from Pakistan. Critics argue that India's intervention may have been driven by motives beyond just humanitarian concerns, including the desire for territorial expansion.
Border Disputes: India and Bangladesh have experienced border disputes over the years. Critics contend that these disputes indicate India's ambition to assert control over parts of Bangladesh. Although these conflicts have primarily revolved around demarcation and security concerns, they have been used to support the argument that India has territorial ambitions.
Political Influence: India has undoubtedly exerted political influence over neighboring countries, including Bangladesh. Critics argue that this influence can be viewed as a stepping stone towards eventual acquisition. Economic aid, military cooperation, and diplomatic engagement have been cited as tools that India uses to maintain its influence and control over Bangladesh's affairs.
文化和语言联系：印度希望获得孟加拉国的支持者经常强调西孟加拉邦(印度的一个邦)和孟加拉国在文化和语言上的相似之处。正如印度独立运动期间所见证的那样，共同的语言、孟加拉语和文化遗产可以被视为潜在融合的基础。
1971年解放战争：围绕1971年孟加拉国解放战争的事件被一些人解读为印度有意占领孟加拉国的证据。印度向孟加拉国自由战士武装（Mukti Bahini）提供了支持，并最终进行了军事干预，协助孟加拉国从巴基斯坦手中解放出来。批评者认为，印度的干预可能是出于人道主义考虑之外的动机，包括对领土扩张的渴望。
边界争端：多年来，印度和孟加拉国经历了边界争端。批评者认为，这些争端表明印度有野心控制孟加拉国部分地区。尽管这些冲突主要围绕着划界和安全问题，但它们被用来支持印度有领土野心的论点。
政治影响力：毫无疑问，印度对包括孟加拉国在内的邻国施加了政治影响力。批评者认为，这种影响力可以被视为最终占领它的垫脚石。经济援助、军事合作和外交接触被认为是印度用来维持其对孟加拉国事务的影响力和控制的工具。
@rock4600
Most of the world is cheering for India and want to see India succeed.
Let this century be India's.
Much love from Australia
世界上大多数国家都在为印度欢呼，希望看到印度成功。
让这个世纪属于印度。
来自澳大利亚的爱
Most of the world is cheering for India and want to see India succeed.
Let this century be India's.
Much love from Australia
世界上大多数国家都在为印度欢呼，希望看到印度成功。
让这个世纪属于印度。
来自澳大利亚的爱
@JamMajor
It's hard to accept but in order for India to truly prosper is by trying to ease relations with both China and it would need stability in Pakistan
I think India and China withdrawing from the Himalayas was a good first step and both sides should study how China and Russia was able to solve their border issues back then. Cause right now we see that China and Russia working together benefits both countries more than being against one another. And I think that's applicable to India as well.
Pakistan is also improtant because yes there were multiple issues in the past. But Pakistan is still a major neighbor of India and instability there may cause instability in India.
这很难接受，但为了让印度真正繁荣，它需要努力缓和与中国和巴基斯坦的关系
我认为印度和中国从喜马拉雅山撤军是一个很好的第一步，双方都应该研究中国和俄罗斯当时是如何解决边境问题的。因为现在我们看到，中国和俄罗斯的合作而没有彼此对立对两国都有好处。我认为这也适用于印度。
巴基斯坦也很重要，因为过去确实存在多个问题。但巴基斯坦仍然是印度的主要邻国，那里的不稳定可能会导致印度的不稳定。
It's hard to accept but in order for India to truly prosper is by trying to ease relations with both China and it would need stability in Pakistan
I think India and China withdrawing from the Himalayas was a good first step and both sides should study how China and Russia was able to solve their border issues back then. Cause right now we see that China and Russia working together benefits both countries more than being against one another. And I think that's applicable to India as well.
Pakistan is also improtant because yes there were multiple issues in the past. But Pakistan is still a major neighbor of India and instability there may cause instability in India.
这很难接受，但为了让印度真正繁荣，它需要努力缓和与中国和巴基斯坦的关系
我认为印度和中国从喜马拉雅山撤军是一个很好的第一步，双方都应该研究中国和俄罗斯当时是如何解决边境问题的。因为现在我们看到，中国和俄罗斯的合作而没有彼此对立对两国都有好处。我认为这也适用于印度。
巴基斯坦也很重要，因为过去确实存在多个问题。但巴基斯坦仍然是印度的主要邻国，那里的不稳定可能会导致印度的不稳定。
@basook6116
India should be in the permanent UN security Council, to counter WESTERN
印度应该成为联合国安理会常任理事国，以对抗西方
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
India should be in the permanent UN security Council, to counter WESTERN
印度应该成为联合国安理会常任理事国，以对抗西方
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@KardoxPolis
@basook6116 the council is not ready to share power bro. It would take sometime, let India become the 3rd biggest nominal gdp by 2026-2027. India would be far stronger militarily and economically. Surely, India has to be in the council then.
联合国安理会还没准备好分享权力，兄弟。这需要一些时间，让印度在2026-2027年成为第三大名义GDP。印度将在军事和经济上强大得多。当然，印度必须加入安理会。
@basook6116 the council is not ready to share power bro. It would take sometime, let India become the 3rd biggest nominal gdp by 2026-2027. India would be far stronger militarily and economically. Surely, India has to be in the council then.
联合国安理会还没准备好分享权力，兄弟。这需要一些时间，让印度在2026-2027年成为第三大名义GDP。印度将在军事和经济上强大得多。当然，印度必须加入安理会。
@basook6116
@KardoxPolis I wish well for India, and you made good point, 3rd biggest nominal gdp. many so called rich country don't use the term nominal gdp anymore. Japan, for example have small nominal gdp, even though in the WEST, Japan is very big economy, even it produces very little inside of Japan
我祝愿印度一切顺利，您提到了一个很好的观点，即印度是第三大名义国内生产总值的国家。许多所谓的富裕国家不再使用名义国内生产总值这个术语。例如，日本名义国内生产总值小，尽管日本国内实际生产规模很少，但在西方世界被认为是一个非常大的经济体。
@KardoxPolis I wish well for India, and you made good point, 3rd biggest nominal gdp. many so called rich country don't use the term nominal gdp anymore. Japan, for example have small nominal gdp, even though in the WEST, Japan is very big economy, even it produces very little inside of Japan
我祝愿印度一切顺利，您提到了一个很好的观点，即印度是第三大名义国内生产总值的国家。许多所谓的富裕国家不再使用名义国内生产总值这个术语。例如，日本名义国内生产总值小，尽管日本国内实际生产规模很少，但在西方世界被认为是一个非常大的经济体。
@KardoxPolis
@basook6116 yea, India has many reasons to be at top. India has 109 unicorn companies with uation over billion dollars which is the 3rd highest in the world after USA and China while Japan has just 12 such companies. Japan is a big economy only for exports of certain things like electronics and motors whereas India is an overall economy with both agriculture, service sector and manufacturing sector contributing to the economy.
是的，印度有很多位居榜首的理由。印度有109家估值超过10亿美元的独角兽公司，排名世界第三，仅次于美国和中国，而日本只有12家这样的公司。日本是一个大型经济体，只出口电子产品和电机等特定产品，而印度则是一个综合性经济体，农业、服务业和制造业都为经济做出了贡献。
@basook6116 yea, India has many reasons to be at top. India has 109 unicorn companies with uation over billion dollars which is the 3rd highest in the world after USA and China while Japan has just 12 such companies. Japan is a big economy only for exports of certain things like electronics and motors whereas India is an overall economy with both agriculture, service sector and manufacturing sector contributing to the economy.
是的，印度有很多位居榜首的理由。印度有109家估值超过10亿美元的独角兽公司，排名世界第三，仅次于美国和中国，而日本只有12家这样的公司。日本是一个大型经济体，只出口电子产品和电机等特定产品，而印度则是一个综合性经济体，农业、服务业和制造业都为经济做出了贡献。
@basook6116
@KardoxPolis USA is mostly service sector, therefore it relies on printing money
美国主要是服务业，因此依赖印钞
@KardoxPolis USA is mostly service sector, therefore it relies on printing money
美国主要是服务业，因此依赖印钞
@tolykozin
the work that India is doing to lift up her citizens will speak for itself. I personally believe that India has to pick and choose her battles. Trying to confront cartoons and magazine articles does not forbode well for India, making it look petty and trite. Keep doing the hard work and the world will look up to you! God bless!
说的是，印度正在为提高国民生活水平所做的工作将会证明其自身价值。我个人认为，印度必须有所取舍。试图与漫画和杂志文章对抗并不利于印度，这会让它看起来琐碎而无足轻重。继续努力工作，世界将会尊敬你们！上帝保佑！
the work that India is doing to lift up her citizens will speak for itself. I personally believe that India has to pick and choose her battles. Trying to confront cartoons and magazine articles does not forbode well for India, making it look petty and trite. Keep doing the hard work and the world will look up to you! God bless!
说的是，印度正在为提高国民生活水平所做的工作将会证明其自身价值。我个人认为，印度必须有所取舍。试图与漫画和杂志文章对抗并不利于印度，这会让它看起来琐碎而无足轻重。继续努力工作，世界将会尊敬你们！上帝保佑！
@mylifemyrule4580
You are absolutely right. But people goes blind when nationalism reigns supreme.
你说得很对。但当民族主义至高无上时，人们往往会变得盲目。
You are absolutely right. But people goes blind when nationalism reigns supreme.
你说得很对。但当民族主义至高无上时，人们往往会变得盲目。
@Supreme-tk1hi
as a Chinese, and also a manager of an Indian team, I think both China and India are the fastest locomotives pulling the world economy, Germany as a benefited country from our market has no position to laugh at neither of us. Also as a manager of a Chinese + Indian team, I fully trust people in these two countries can work very well together as it is proven in my company. There are a lot in common than differences.
作为一个中国人，同时也是一个印度团队的经理，我认为中国和印度都是拉动世界经济最快的火车头，德国作为一个从我们的市场中受益的国家，没有资格嘲笑我们两个。作为中印团队的经理，我完全相信这两个国家的人可以很好地合作，这在我的公司得到了证明。两者的共同点多于不同点。
as a Chinese, and also a manager of an Indian team, I think both China and India are the fastest locomotives pulling the world economy, Germany as a benefited country from our market has no position to laugh at neither of us. Also as a manager of a Chinese + Indian team, I fully trust people in these two countries can work very well together as it is proven in my company. There are a lot in common than differences.
作为一个中国人，同时也是一个印度团队的经理，我认为中国和印度都是拉动世界经济最快的火车头，德国作为一个从我们的市场中受益的国家，没有资格嘲笑我们两个。作为中印团队的经理，我完全相信这两个国家的人可以很好地合作，这在我的公司得到了证明。两者的共同点多于不同点。
@abhishekpas
We share the same culture. Taoism is Hinduism. Lao Tzu is shiva. We share the same ancient wisdom.
我们拥有相同的文化。道教就是印度教，老子是湿婆。我们拥有同样的古老智慧。
We share the same culture. Taoism is Hinduism. Lao Tzu is shiva. We share the same ancient wisdom.
我们拥有相同的文化。道教就是印度教，老子是湿婆。我们拥有同样的古老智慧。
@keerthi3086
We are two oldest neighbouring civilizations after all.
我们毕竟是两个相邻的最古老的文明。
We are two oldest neighbouring civilizations after all.
我们毕竟是两个相邻的最古老的文明。
@Supreme-tk1hi
@abhishekpas exactly, by looking at history, 99% time Between India and China are positive and only 1% of time is negative , I believe modern time is no exception, things will normalize soon.
没错，从历史上看，印度和中国之间（关系）99%的时间是乐观的，只有1%的时间是消极的，我相信现代也不例外，事情很快就会正常化。
@abhishekpas exactly, by looking at history, 99% time Between India and China are positive and only 1% of time is negative , I believe modern time is no exception, things will normalize soon.
没错，从历史上看，印度和中国之间（关系）99%的时间是乐观的，只有1%的时间是消极的，我相信现代也不例外，事情很快就会正常化。
@Supreme-tk1hi
@keerthi3086 yes, and we shared a lot through the thousands of years
是的，几千年来我们分享了很多东西
@keerthi3086 yes, and we shared a lot through the thousands of years
是的，几千年来我们分享了很多东西
@hindustannews7660
People have to do it... Government is for people not other way around. All the best ??
人们不得不这么做，政府是为人民服务的，而不是相反，愿一切顺利。
People have to do it... Government is for people not other way around. All the best ??
人们不得不这么做，政府是为人民服务的，而不是相反，愿一切顺利。
@hitenshukla8536
We share a common past with China, we both were cheated, looted, plundered, rediculed and insulted by the west. One century for China, 3 centuries for India...
我们和中国有着共同的过去，我们都被西方欺骗、抢劫、掠夺、嘲笑和侮辱，中国经历一个世纪的时间，印度是经历了三个世纪。
We share a common past with China, we both were cheated, looted, plundered, rediculed and insulted by the west. One century for China, 3 centuries for India...
我们和中国有着共同的过去，我们都被西方欺骗、抢劫、掠夺、嘲笑和侮辱，中国经历一个世纪的时间，印度是经历了三个世纪。
@Sandip6521
The Chinese Communist Party always does aggression in the Indo China Border !! So , even if there is no difference but also there are no similarities !!
India is a Democracy and China is an autocracy !! So India will never start a war but China can !! Because C has all power in his hand but in India people have that power and can overthrow gov any time if they start a war without any reason
中国总是在中印边界进行OO!所以，即使没有区别也没有相似之处!!
印度是民主国家，中国是DC国家!所以印度永远不会发动战争。。。
The Chinese Communist Party always does aggression in the Indo China Border !! So , even if there is no difference but also there are no similarities !!
India is a Democracy and China is an autocracy !! So India will never start a war but China can !! Because C has all power in his hand but in India people have that power and can overthrow gov any time if they start a war without any reason
中国总是在中印边界进行OO!所以，即使没有区别也没有相似之处!!
印度是民主国家，中国是DC国家!所以印度永远不会发动战争。。。
@Supreme-tk1hi
@Sandip6521 the world is not so extreme, it is not just communism or democracy, there are lots of middle zones, in my view, apart from some countries like North Korea and some Nordic countries that are purely communism or democracy, most other countries in the world are in middle zone, the differences is only more to left or right, and if you observe why 2 nuclear countries guard their borders with iron sticks, you can understand neither side wants to have an escalation. I am confident this dispute will be solved with peace and wisdom. Give it some time.
世界没有那么极端，它不只是共产主义或民主，在我看来，除了像朝鲜和一些北欧国家这样纯粹的共产主义或民主国家之外，还有很多中间地带,世界上大多数其他国家都在中间地带，差别只是偏左或偏右,如果你观察一下为什么两个核国家用铁棒守卫边境（不许动枪），你就会明白，双方都不希望局势升级。我相信这场争端将以和平与智慧的方式得到解决，给它一些时间吧。
@Sandip6521 the world is not so extreme, it is not just communism or democracy, there are lots of middle zones, in my view, apart from some countries like North Korea and some Nordic countries that are purely communism or democracy, most other countries in the world are in middle zone, the differences is only more to left or right, and if you observe why 2 nuclear countries guard their borders with iron sticks, you can understand neither side wants to have an escalation. I am confident this dispute will be solved with peace and wisdom. Give it some time.
世界没有那么极端，它不只是共产主义或民主，在我看来，除了像朝鲜和一些北欧国家这样纯粹的共产主义或民主国家之外，还有很多中间地带,世界上大多数其他国家都在中间地带，差别只是偏左或偏右,如果你观察一下为什么两个核国家用铁棒守卫边境（不许动枪），你就会明白，双方都不希望局势升级。我相信这场争端将以和平与智慧的方式得到解决，给它一些时间吧。
@goodfriend4773
The tragic train accident demands a self-introspection more than finding loopholes in a cartoon
比起在漫画中挑刺，这次悲惨的火车事故更需要自我反省
The tragic train accident demands a self-introspection more than finding loopholes in a cartoon
比起在漫画中挑刺，这次悲惨的火车事故更需要自我反省
@jatinshah2549
No India will never conquer the world.
India will ruled through her philosophy and kindness and compassion not through guns like western world.
不，印度永远不会征服世界。
印度将通过她的哲学、善良和同情心来统治，而不是像西方世界那样通过枪来统治（世界）。
No India will never conquer the world.
India will ruled through her philosophy and kindness and compassion not through guns like western world.
不，印度永远不会征服世界。
印度将通过她的哲学、善良和同情心来统治，而不是像西方世界那样通过枪来统治（世界）。
@Matthew_Loutner
Chinese people keep saying that exact same comment.
中国人一直在说同样的话。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Chinese people keep saying that exact same comment.
中国人一直在说同样的话。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
很赞 1
收藏