好消息！中国和俄罗斯：美国军队大收缩 [美国媒体]

-------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------



Every year at this time, we see the same kind of headlines: “U.S. biggest military spender in the world.” They're are all based on the release of the global military spending database, an annual report compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

每年的这个时候，我们都能看到同一类头条：“美国是世界上最大的军事开支国”。这些都是基于全球军事开支数据库发布的，该年度报告由斯德哥尔摩国际和平研究所（SIPRI）汇总编辑。

What the headlines usually miss is that U.S. defense spending is going down while global military spending is going up. The fact that the U.S. spends more on defense than any other individual nation dramatically misses the point.

这些头条经常会遗漏一点：美国国防开支正在下降，而全球军费开支正在上涨。美国国防开支比任何其他国家更大这一事实根本不得要领。

 -------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

First, we live in a world of growing threats against U.S. vital interests. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are driving the details of the Pentagon's latest defense budget proposal. In the 2016 Index of U.S. Military Strength, China, Russia, and Iran were assessed as being particularly aggressive against the interests of the United States, while North Korea was rated as downright hostile. Each of these countries is actively attempting to coerce and bully its neighboring nations, and they all pose high to severe threats to the United States and our interests.

首先，我们生活在一个美国重要利益受到日益增长的威胁的世界。中国、俄罗斯、伊朗和朝鲜正在推动五角大楼最新国防预算提案的细节。在2016年美国军事力量指标中，中国，俄罗斯和伊朗被评估为对美国利益特别有侵略性，而朝鲜则被评为彻头彻尾的敌对。这些国家正积极尝试着去胁迫和欺凌他们的邻国，他们对美国和我们的利益造成严重的威胁。

 -------------译者：布拉格鸽子蛋-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

Second, the U.S. military budget has been cut by 25 percent in the last five years. This has resulted in dramatic declines in the U.S. military's ability to fight and win. Fifteen years of conflict and years of tight budgets have taken a grave toll, worsened by these budget cuts. Top military leaders have told Congress that their readiness is, as the vice chief of staff of the Air Force recently put it, “at a near all-time low due to continuous combat operations, reduced manpower, an aging fleet, and inconsistent funding.”

再次，美国之所以保持庞大的军事力量，很大程度上是因为我们已经了解到欧洲、中东和亚洲的重要冲突将会摧毁我们的经济。

Third, a big part of why the U.S. maintains a large military is because we have learned that major conflict in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia can be devastating to our economy.

其次，美国军事预算在过去五年中已被削减了25%。这导致美国军队在战争中胜出的能力大幅下降。十五年的冲突和数年的紧张预算已经付出惨痛的代价，且被预算削减进一步恶化。最高军事领导人已经告诉国会，正如空军副参谋长最近提及，“由于连续作战，人员削减，舰队老化，资金不到位，（军力）目前已接近历史低谷。”


-------------译者：z8975623-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

Randal
"First, we live in a world of growing threats against U.S. vital interests. "
Only if "US vital interests" include things like who forms the government in longstanding Russian allies like Ukraine and Syria, who gets to control military traffic an industrial activity in the seas next to China and on the other side of the world from the US, and exactly how super-dominant an already militarily dominant particular US ally is going to be made in the Middle East, by US subsidies and military interventions.

“首先，我们生活在一个美国切身利益受到日益增长的威胁的世界。”
如果你所说的“美国切身利益”包括了谁当任俄罗斯长期盟友乌克兰和叙利亚政府的领导人，谁在（远离美国万里的）中国附近海域控制那里的军事交通和工业活动，以及如果在美国的资助和军事干预下在中东建立拥有军事主宰力量的美国盟友的话，那么“美国的切身利益”确实受到了威胁。

wawoo
Mostly correct, "longstanding Russian allies..." being more than a stretch.

（回LS），大部分都对，不过“俄罗斯长期盟友...”这句话有些言过其实。

Benny
How and why.
Because only the US is 'entitled' to allies,heh?

这是为什么？
因为只有美国有资格拥有盟友，是吗？

-------------译者：阳光灿烂的标叔-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

brindisi
Global stability is a vital national interest for a status quo power. That means preventing larger nations from bullying other nations like Russia is doing in Eastern Europe and China in the pacific.

全球稳定对于一个现状强权来说就是一个重要的国家利益。那意味着阻止其他更大的国家欺凌别国，如俄罗斯在东欧和中国在太平洋的所为。

You look at the map of NATO bases that Russian apologists keep trotting out like it's some how NATO causing tensions. I see the singular failure of Russian foreign policy that so many see them as a threat.

俄罗斯辩护者所提供的北约基地地图让人觉得是北约在找麻烦。俄罗斯的外交政策是个巨大的失败，所以有那么多国家视俄罗斯为威胁。

astutemind
"Global stability is a vital national interest for a status quo power." That statement can be considered true.

“全球稳定对于一个维持现状的势力是一个巨大的益处”这个声明可以视为正确的。

"That means preventing larger nations from bullying other nations like 
Russia is doing in Eastern Europe and China in the pacific."

“那意味着阻止其他更大的国家欺凌别国，如俄罗斯在东欧和中国在太平洋的所为。”

That's where your post became intellectually dishonest. Notice how you didn't say like the US did to Iraq or how the US is trying to do with Iran. It's a nice trick though. You start off with a mostly true statement followed with [insert a self serving statement that fits my hypocritical agenda here].

这就是你的主张在智力上不诚实的地方。注意到你不怎么提到如美国对伊拉克所为和试图对伊朗所为。尽管这是一个好把戏。你以一个正确的声明开头却紧跟着插入一个为自己服务的符合我的伪善议程的证据。

-------------译者：cpcchina-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

Bromhidrosis American
Hmm, your statement is quite interesting, it is like a real Killer accusing others to be potential killers.

嗯……你说的话真有意思，听着就跟真正的杀人犯控告别人是潜在的杀人犯一样。

BHUBJOHNNY
America did not win WW1 or WW2:They always arrive late. in fact, the U.S. has never won any MAJOR WARS.It was the Russian's who were responsible for defeating the Germans.The U.S. and Europe was no where near eastern Europe, so the Russians did that on their own, with a little help from the winter(lol).The U.S. couldn't even defeat North Korea with the help of the United Nations or Vietnam.Vietnam was the first and only communist country to defeat the U.S. militarily.America dropped more bombs in Vietnam than they did in ALL of WWII and they still lost.What a waste.So America is now finding out military spending and adventurism is getting expensive, since they are exporting their jobs to China ( who help the Viet Congs to whoop their a$$) and a shrinking middle class.Reality is now setting in.

美国没有赢得一战或者二战：他们总是来得太迟。事实上，美国根本就没赢过什么大仗。是俄罗斯人击败了德国人。美国和欧洲国家在东欧那边都没个影儿，所以俄罗斯人就单打独斗去了，还有冬日送来的一点小小帮助（哈哈）。在联合国军的协助下美国都没拿下朝鲜，越战也没赢。越南是第一个也是唯一一个击败美军的共产党国家。美国在越南投下的炸弹比他们在整个二战过程中投下的都要多，但他们还是输了。真是浪费。现在美国佬终于发现军事开销与冒险主义的代价越来越昂贵了，因为他们正在把工作拱手相让给中国（越共的大佬），中产阶级也在萎缩。现实不饶人啊。

-------------译者：cpcchina-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

minoan
True. If it were not for the Soviets, the Western world would probably be saluting the Swa stika and hailing to the N azi Party. Come to think of it, Donald Trump would probably be a member of that party.

说得对，如果没有苏联的话，西方世界恐怕就要对着十字致意，向纳粹党高呼万岁了。现在想来，川普可能会成为纳粹党的一员吧。

Ionosphere
Military aid from the United States to the Soviet Union during WWII saved the Soviets from being overrun. Stalin admitted this himself. If not for Lend-Lease, the Soviets would have run out of arms and ammunition. The Germans would have easily subjugated them.

美国在二战期间对苏联的军事援助使得苏联免于被蹂躏。斯大林亲口承认的。如果不是租借法案的话，苏军手头的武器和弹药都会耗尽，德军能轻而易举地将他们拿下。

JDL51
When the Russians arrived in Berlin for their rapefest in April of '45, the city, and most other cities and industries in Germany, were all in ruins. If the Germans had only to worry about the eastern front and not invasions in Africa, Sicily, Italy and Germany, plus the day and night strategic bombing campaign, Russia would have been conquered by their former allies in 1942. Might want to check out how much war material was shipped to Russia by the U.S., especially trucks and ammo.

当1945年4月红军来到柏林烧杀抢掠的时候，这座城市以及德国许多其他城市和工业都已经被破坏殆尽了。如果德国只投入东线战事，而不是去入侵非洲和西西里并且还要顾及意大利的话，加上日夜轰炸的战术，俄国肯定在1942年就被他们之前的盟友击败了。你需要查一查美国给毛子运输了多少战略物资，尤其是卡车和弹药。

-------------译者：cpcchina-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

Vasya Pypkin
Bravo, I like stand up comedians. you are the best!

说得真好，我喜欢自己站出来的喜剧演员。你是最棒的！

Elvis
We already have a powerful military that is fully capable of achieving its constitutionally mandated mission, which is to protect the continental United States (plus Alaska & Hawaii). What America needs to debate is what else, if anything is also our national interest. It is high time that debate be had.
All these commentators and foreign policy elites automatically default to the position that our worldwide network of alliances and military bases is a necessity. That these authoritarian powers need to be contained, then confronted, and eventually overthrown (by force or via a color revolution). Naturally to achieve the aforementioned, they say that we need to spend much, much more on defense.
It is the American citizenry which needs to determine if that is true. If the American public agrees, then we increase the defense budget and continue to maintain & expand our network of allies & bases. If the public disagrees, we then shrink our defense budget and reduce or perhaps even eliminate the network of allies & bases.

我们已经有了一支强大到足以完成宪法赋予它的使命，也就是保护美国（包括阿拉斯加和夏威夷）的军队了。美国需要讨论的是如果有的话还有其他什么事情是美国的国家利益。是时候进行这样的辩论了。
这些评论员和外交专家总是自动落入我们的联盟以及军事基地是必不可少的错误观点，他们总觉得这些独裁主义的力量需要被抑制，之后开战，最后被推翻（通过武力或颜色革命）。自然为了达到这个目的，他们会说我们需要花更多更多的钱在国防上。
应该由美国人民来决定这些是对是错。如果美国公众同意的话，那么我们就增加国防预算来扩张我们的联盟与军事基地。如果公众不同意的话，我们就削减开支并且缩小联盟与基地。

-------------译者：cpcchina-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

astutemind
And you write like someone who's uninformed and confused. He never said anything about isolationism. He said we should have a debate and let the American people decide vs having you decide for them.

你说的话就像个愚昧无知的傻瓜说出来的一样。他从来没说过关于孤立主义的任何话。他说的是我们应该进行辩论，让美国人来决定而不是让你来为我们决定。

Springfire
"The fact that the U.S. spends more on defense than any other individual nation dramatically misses the point"
Why this fact misses the point, eh?
US defense spending is well beyond its own defense needs. The only rational explanation for its astronomical spending figure is, US is trying to enslave the whole world.

“美国比任何国家的国防开支都要高这个事实显然没有抓住要点“
怎么就没抓住要点了，嗯？
美国的国防开销早就超过了它所需要的开销。对这种天文数字唯一的合理解释就是美国想要变成美帝。

-------------译者：cpcchina-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

brindisi
We're spending less as a share of gdp than we have in 70 years. We're spending 16% of the federal budget, 3.3% of GDP. It's been a cataclysm in the military.
We have the smallest army since WWII, the oldest and smallest airforce in it's history and the smallest navy since WWI.
Obama has destroyed the US military to his ever lasting shame.

比起过去的70年，我们国防开支所占的GDP比重已经下降了。现在我们花的是联邦预算的16%，占GDP的3.3%。这对于军队来说真是一场大灾变。我们现在的陆军规模是二战以来最小的，空军是建军以来最小最老的，海军是一战以来规模最小的。

Upstate831
The Republicans forced the sequester and Bush squandered resources in the middle east for a decade...Oh well don't let reality get in the way of hating Obama.

共和党人非要搞什么削减国防预算，小布什又在中东乱局挥霍无数物资……你们就接着看不到事实怪奥巴马吧。

-------------译者：cpcchina-审核者：龙腾小少爷------------

brindisi
How do you figure? Even now the 2 year budget deal was only possible because the Republicans caved. If Obama sent up a budget today increasing military spending, it would pass by wide margins in both chambers on a bipartisan vote. It's only his Veto that is preventing it.
Watch some hearings on cspan. House armed services/Senate armed services/Senate foreign relations. Any of them. Congress is more panicked about these cuts than the pentagon.[-

你咋知道的？就算是现在，两年预算也是由于共和党人同意才通过的。如果奥巴马现在提交一份增加国防开支的预算，它肯定会以相当的票数在议院和两党投票中通过的。是奥巴马的反对票葬送了它。
去c-span网站上多看看一些听证会视频吧。众议院海陆空三军、参议院海陆空三军、参议院外交关系。这些关键词都行。对于削减国防，国会比五角大楼还惊慌。

Chirpoevec
Why only Russia and China? That's a good news for whole Planet, USA included.

为啥只对中国和俄罗斯是好消息？对于全球都是好消息，包括美国自己。