Why do we need over a hundred military bases around the world when Russia and China don't have anywhere near that many?

为什么我们美国需要在世界各地建立一百多个军事基地，但俄罗斯和中国都没有那么多？

以下是Quora网友的评论：

Larry Paise

For those that study US history, you would know that there have been strong periods of “America First” nationalist-isolationist movements in our past. At least two of those periods turned out to be extremely expensive to the US in terms of blood and treasure ultimately expended when others took advantage of those periods.

对于那些研究美国历史的人来说，你会知道美国历史上有过长期“美国至上”的标榜民族优越感的孤立主义运动时期。其他国家利用了美国的孤立主义，对美国来说，美国至少在2个时期遭受了大量的伤亡和经济损失。

One occurred in the years prior to our entry into WW I and the other pretty much right up to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Coming out of WW II, many were convinced that it was in our national interest to be a leader in world and not to simply withdraw back to within our borders, leaving the rest of the world to fend for itself.

一次发生在美国参加第一次世界大战的前几年，另一次发生在珍珠港突袭之前。

二战结束后，许多人相信，美国应该成为世界领袖，这更符合我们的国家利益，好过退回美国边境，让世界各国自生自灭。

It has served us well. Growing the largest economy in the world, larger than the next four combined. That was no accident. But it comes at a price.

When an upstart terror group threatens global ship in the Red Sea, who steps up?

The US and its Allies.

That is just one example.

You can't do that without global reach.

这对我们很有好处。我们逐步成为全球最大的经济体，比排在后四位的国家加在一起还要大。这并非偶然。但这也是有代价的。

当一个新的恐怖组织威胁到红海的全球航运时，谁会挺身而出？

美国及其盟友。

这只是一个例子。

如果没有全球影响力，你就无法做到这一点。

Anna Liu

because the united states needs to control others.

for the record, any coutries’ military base should not exst in other countries.

quit your protection bullshxt, the correct word is invasion.

因为美国需要控制其他国家。

郑重声明，任何国家都不应该在其他国家设立军事基地。

别扯什么保护了，都是胡说八道，正确的说法是入侵。

Chen

The controlling network that the US has been putting on the international community is a multi-dimensionally systematic one.

美国对国际社会的控制网是一个多维度的系统。

1. Militarily (Dominant military power as a leverage of negotiation as well as an ultimate measure of solution to problems)

2. Resources (e.g. Petrodollar and the pricing power on many kinds of vital materials, The best rewarding and the most well-equipped institutions to attract the finest human resources)

1. 军事方面(军事优势，作为谈判杠杆和解决问题的最终手段)

2. 资源方面(如石油美元和许多重要原料的定价权；最丰厚的奖励和最一流的院校，可以吸引最优秀的人才)

3. Technology (e.g. Huawei Sanction, Chip ban)

4. Financially (e.g. US Dollar, the Fed, SWIFT)

5. Politically (e.g. Ursula von der Leyen, American de ocracy, Color revolution)

6. Culturally (e.g. Media, Hollywood)

3. 科技方面(如制裁华为、芯片禁令)

4. 金融方面(如美元、美联储、SWIFT)

5. 政治方面(如乌苏拉·冯德莱恩，美式皿煮，颜色革命)

6. 文化方面(如媒体、好莱坞)

It's a loop of interactions (so-called "the rule-based order"?), with 1 being the strongest and seemingly the most costly, and 6 being the softest and seemingly the easiest.

To conclude, AMERICA FIRST FOR GOOD

这是一个相互作用的闭环(所谓的“基于规则的国际秩序”?)，第1点是最厉害的，也是最昂贵的，第6点是最温柔的，似乎也是最简单的。

总而言之，美国至上。

As a Chinese with sane, I would say good job America, and good luck, but please drop those false and unfaithful deeds towards your competitors which might seemingly hit the spot in no time though is going to bite you in the back in the future. We Chinese have been looking up to you in many aspects since a century ago, straight-up competitions are always welcomed and respected, double standards and false accusations were not the ones that have brought you where you are.

作为一个理智的中国人，我会说美国好样的，祝好运，但请你们放弃对竞争对手的虚伪不忠的行为，这些行为也许可以一击即中，但将来会让你们自食苦果。一个世纪以来，我们中国人在很多方面都很尊敬你们，公平竞争会受到欢迎和尊重，双重标准和诬蔑抹黑不是你们得以取得如今成就的原因。

S Kam

Russia and China lack the projection to maintain long supply chains, so there basing options are limited to port cities. However, US doctrine doesn't mske that distinction due to their ability to go to most places and bring a huge logistical chain with them. That projection allows them to fight a war near or on the enemies home turf....

俄罗斯和中国没有维持较长后勤供应链的实力，因此它们的基地通常仅限于港口城市。但美国没有这种限制，美国有能力去到大多数地方，并配备庞大的后勤供应系统，所以美国可以在敌人附近或领土上作战....

Eric C Ruybal

We are a world power and can project power world wide.

The other two country you mentioned are nothing more than regional powers.

We are seeing that Russia only looks strong on paper, the real world is an entirely different thing!?

我们是世界大国，可以向世界各地派驻兵力。

而你提到的另外两个国家只不过是地区大国。

俄罗斯只是纸老虎罢了，现实世界是完全不同的地方！

Who knows what an actual engagement with China would result in and how effective they are or are not!?

The U.S. technology is in use and active. There is no wonder how it would perform, it surpasses expectations repeatedly!!

谁知道和中国交战会发生什么，中国的战斗力究竟如何？

美国的科技实用性强，也很活跃，所以美国的表现毫无悬念，总能超出人们的预期！！

Seamus Luke

Who is/are “we”? Westerners/non Chinese and non Russians in general? NATO and allies? Would you like Russia and Chinese to have more military presence in the world? Btw: military presence comes on many forms - e.g. Russian Federation in sub Saharan Africa.

“我们”指的是谁？西方人/中国人和俄罗斯以外的人？北约和盟国的人？你希望俄罗斯和中国在全球拥有更多军事活动吗？顺便说一句：军事活动有多种形式—例如俄罗斯在撒哈拉以南的非洲。

Another response to your question is that “we” (In Australia) as allies of USA are happy to have military connections and links including the odd base with US and other allies. Russia is NOT at all an attractive or welcome ally and China, while a trading partner that we are improving relations with, is quote happy to maintain its own military presence in different places.

对你的问题，我还要说另外一点，“我们”(澳大利亚)作为美国的盟友，很高兴跟美国和其他盟友建立军事关系，包括各种各样的基地。俄罗斯不是一个有吸引力或受欢迎的盟友，而中国，作为一个和我们的关系不断改善的贸易伙伴，很希望在不同地区设立军事驻点。

Kevin D

Propaganda as originally written: Why do we need over a hundred military bases around the world when Russia and China don't have anywhere near that many?

宣传原文：俄罗斯和中国的军事基地不多，为什么我们需要在世界各地设立100多个军事基地？

First off, a lot of these “bases” are less than a hundred troops, most a mix of advisors and intel types working with the local government, a small communications contingent, an even smaller admin staff, and a very little security. And usually about equal numbers of contractors- not mercenaries, but the staff for the dining facility, laundry, tech reps from Boeing, Ratheyon, General Motors, and some contracted security. We pay rent and sit in the corner of some military base belonging to the host country.

News flash- most of NATO has camps like this in the continental United States for their troops. It’s not evil, it’s allies.

首先，很多“基地”只有不到100人的驻兵，大多都是跟当地政府合作的顾问和情报人员，一支小型通讯特遣队，一个更小的管理层，加上很少的安全人员。合同工的数量通常也差不多—这些合同工不是雇佣兵，而是餐厅、洗衣店的员工，波音、雷龙、通用汽车的技术代表，以及一些保安。我们支付租金，呆在某些属于东道国的军事基地的角落里。

快讯—大多数北约国家都在美国大陆为部队设立了这样的基地。这不是什么坏事，我们是盟友。

Secondly, you think Russia and China don’t have the facilities? Don’t be delusional. Most of theirs are spook shops containing “civilian” intelligence personnel and while some of the “advisors” are corporate reps others are mercs. China and Russia have big bases to, overt ones.

第二，你认为俄罗斯和中国没有这种基地吗？别想当然了。他们的多数基地都是“平民”情报人员的间谍店，有些“顾问”是公司代表，另一些是雇佣兵。中国和俄罗斯都拥有庞大的军事基地。

But the OP is probably some anti-Western “I want to be agitator when I grow up” scumbag who’s hiding behind freedom of expression where that’s a thing.

但是题主可能正是那种“长大后想成为搅屎棍”的反西方败类，躲在言论*由的背后肆意妄为。

Jane Wang

What do you think of Blinken's recent remarks on geopolitics that says "If your not at the table, you are on the menu"?

In Chinese, its meaning is akin to "if you're not the knife and the chop board, you'll be the fish and meat on the board." It's uncommon for the chief diplomat of a superpower to publicly convey such a harsh and chilling perspective of the world, indicating the unapologetic hegemonic thinking of current American diplomacy.

你怎么看布林肯最近关于地缘政治的言论：“人为刀俎，我为鱼肉”

在中文中，这句话的意思类似于“如果你不做菜刀和案板，那就得做案板上的鱼和肉。”一个超级大国的首席外交官公开表达如此冷酷刺耳、令人不寒而栗的世界观，实属罕见，这清楚表明了当前美国外交中毫无悔意的霸权思维。

This is not the first time Blinken has made such remarks. On January 24, 2022, during a forum, Blinken used this same phrase to elucidate the China-US relationship, emphasizing that in competition with China, they should make sure that the US is "at the table," but not on the menu.

He may also be intended to create a sensationalistic effect of intimidation. In the US Congress, there is a mobilization of public opinion on the strategy of containment against China, while internationally, the US is coercing other countries to take sides between it and China, or else they will end up on the menu.

这已经不是布林肯第一次公开发表这样的言论了。2022年1月24日，布林肯就在一次论坛上用这句话形容了中美关系，强调在中美竞争中，必须保证让美国“手握生杀大权”，绝不能沦为鱼肉。

他也可能是有意为之，制造耸人听闻的恐吓效果。在美国国会，人们正在围绕遏制中国战略的舆论进行动员，而在国际上，美国也正强迫其他国家在美国和中国之间选边站队，否则就杀鸡儆猴。

Former US president Woodrow Wilson once said "the small states of the world have a right to enjoy the same respect for their sovereignty and for their territorial integrity that great and powerful nations expect and insist upon." However, centuries later, the chief diplomat of the US seems more convinced of power politics, and unashamedly uses the privilege of "sitting at the table with a Western knife and fork to prey on others" to pressure and entice other countries. It must be said that this is also the tragedy of American diplomacy.

美国前总统伍德罗·威尔逊曾说过：“世界上的小国有权享有对其主权和领土完整的尊重，这是大国所期望和坚持的。”但在几个世纪之后，美国的首席外交官的言行显示，他似乎更相信强权政治，甚至无耻地利用“手握西方的生杀大权胁迫他国”的特权，对其他国家施加压力和诱惑。必须说，这也是美国外交的悲剧。

Today's world is not a private restaurant monopolized and controlled by individual superpowers, but a broad stage where all countries should share prosperity, bear responsibilities, and compete fairly. The vast majority of countries in the international community share the common desire for peace over war, justice over hegemony, and cooperation over confrontation. No country is destined to become the fish on the menu.

今天的世界不是被个别超级大国垄断和控制的私人餐厅，而是各享繁荣、共担责任、公平竞争的广阔舞台。要和平不要战争、要正义不要霸权、要合作不要对抗，是国际社会绝大多数国家的共同愿望。没有哪个国家应该成为案板上的鱼肉。

Alex Rowan

Because Russia and China are not peers of the USA.

In particular, the USA is held in high esteem around the world and has over 50 formal alliances. Those military bases are simply the US kee to the terms of it’s alliance treaties. The fact that those bases are extremely useful to the US is balanced by the fact that the US is a big local spender in every case and brings considerable economic benefit to the host countries.

因为俄罗斯和中国跟美国不在同一水平上。

美国在世界范围内享有很高的声誉，拥有50多个正式联盟。这些军事基地只是美国遵守其联盟条约的措施。这些基地对美国非常有用，但与此同时，美国在任何情况下都是当地的消费大户，为东道国带来了可观的经济利益。

Whereas, almost nobody likes Russia and China. China has two allies, North Korea and the Solomon Islands. Russia has a handful left over from the Cold War (Belarus, Cuba etc) plus a couple of African drs who need help in rip off their countries’ resources.

但没有什么人会喜欢俄罗斯和中国。中国有两个盟友，朝鲜和所罗门群岛。俄罗斯有几个冷战遗留下来的盟国(白俄罗斯、古巴等)，还有几个需要俄罗斯助力掠夺本国资源的非洲国家。

Mitch Mitchel

Location, response time, logistics. Our involvement is by invitation unless there are circumstances dictated by policy that serves the best interests of the United States, and the best interests of our country is protecting the citizens.

位置，响应时间，后勤。我们在当地设立基地是受到邀约的，除非有些情况是为了满足美国最佳利益的政策要求，而我们国家的最佳利益就是保护公民。

继续阅读：军事   美国   基地

此文由 三泰虎 编辑，未经允许不得转载！：首页 > 大国 » 为什么美国需要在世界各地建立一百多个军事基地，中国和俄罗斯都没有那么多？