美军不好的地方是什么？ （一）
正文翻译
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：吕洞宾！ 转载请注明出处
What is the US military bad at? We Americans generally think of the US military as the best in the world, but surely there is something to work on.
美军不好的地方是什么？ 我们美国人普遍认为美军是世界上最好的军队，但肯定还有一些需要做的工作。
Niklas Kager Kofler, just interested in WWII What is the US military bad at? Well, that is a difficult question to be honest. Because the days of “bad” militaries and when you still could get away with blatant incompetence are long over and the US military is already a well-established institution that had enough time to weed out such deficiencies that I wouldn''t give them the strong and unfair predicate “bad”.
尼古拉斯·卡格·科夫勒（Niklas Kager Kofler）对二战很感兴趣
美军不好的地方是什么？ 好吧，说实话，这是一个很难回答的问题。 因为所谓的“坏”军人以及仍困于如何摆脱公然无能状态的的时代已经过去了，美军已经是一家行之有效的机构，有足够的时间来消除这种缺陷，以至于我不会给予他们这个偏激又不公正的称谓：“坏”。
The only problem I see is the fact some people indeed consider the “US military the best in the world” and mistake having a giant budget and them being the mightiest fighting force in the known universe for some sort of innate American military prowess and superiority. But those people are few and as long as you avoid such a fallacy, the US military should be fine. Because sometimes a bit of modesty doesn''t hurt and less bragging is appreciated.
我看到的唯一问题是，是有人错误地掌握着海量的巨额预算并且觉得由于美国某种先天的军事实力和优越性 所以“美军是世界上最好的”，是已知宇宙中最强大的战斗部队。
好在这种人很少，只要避免真的陷入这种谬论美国军方就不会出现大碍。有时谦虚一点不会让你受伤，少吹点牛更值得人赞赏。 【下边第一个回答是原作者引述另一个回答者的内容。】
How much stronger is the United States military as compared with the next strongest power?
The first answer I get.
与第二强国相比，美国军事力量多强大？ 我拿到了一血（第一个回答这个问题）。
Daniel Kearns, former Paratrooper 82nd Airborne at U.S. Army 1,000 times. Maybe more. No other military or combination of militaries could even begin to inflict the slightest numbers of casualties on the United States Military in a conventional war. Consider: The US spends close to what the entire rest of the world spends in defense. 711 Billion. Per year. The next closest is China at 143 Billion.
丹尼尔·基恩斯（Daniel Kearns），美国陆军第82空降师
（美军实力是第二名的）一千倍，或更多。 考虑到美国的支出接近全世界其他国家在国防上的支出的综合，每年7110亿。紧随其后的中国只有1,430亿美元。所以在常规战争中，没有其他任何军事或军事联盟能对美国军方造成最少的伤亡。
The M1 Abrams tank has seen more combat than just about any other tank on the battlefield today. It has never been knocked out by enemy fire. (Completely killed) Ever. China has less than five hundred Type 99 tanks, that have just been developed, and are not even close to being as good as the Abrams. We have 8,700 Abrams. We have 10 super aircraft carriers. And another 10 smaller carriers. Everyone else has 10. Combined. And they are mostly small ships that can launch helicopters. No one else has a super carrier.
Fighting a conventional war against the US would be like a 3 year old child playing chess against Gary Kasparov. They wouldn''t even know what they were supposed to be looking at. *Edit. The purpose of the answer is not borne out of some nationalistic sense of pride, although I am a US Veteran and consider myself patriotic, but rather to call attention to how much larger the US Military Industrial Complex is than the entire rest of the world. I truly believe that the rest of the world really has no clue just how powerful the US Military is. We must begin to question the disparity of lethality between the US and the rest of the world. But we must also question, if not the US, who? Who do we want to have the largest military? China? North Korea? or an ally like the UK? Do we need to have 1,000 times the lethality of the closest military in strength? Or would 100 times suffice? I don''t have the answer to those questions, nor am I purporting to. But I think it''s important to begin a dialogue.
与美国进行常规战争就像是一个3岁的孩子和加里·卡斯帕罗夫（俄罗斯国际象棋棋手，前国际象棋世界冠军。）下棋。他们甚至都不知道眼该往哪儿看。 *编辑。答案的目的并非出于某种民族主义的自豪感，尽管我是美国退伍军人，并自认为是名爱国主义者，但人们需要注意的一点是美国军事工业联合体的规模比世界其他地区大得多。
我相信，世界其他地区真的不知道美国军力有多强大。从现在开始我们必须要质疑美国与世界其他地区之间的杀伤力差距（是否过大了）。但是我们还必须质疑，如果不是美国，那该是谁呢？我们想让谁拥有最强大的军队？中国？北朝鲜？还是像英国这样的盟友？我们是否需要拥有比最接近的军事力量强1,000倍的杀伤力的实力？还是100倍就够了？我没有这些问题的答案，也不打算这样做。但是我认为开始对话（对大家）都很重要。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：吕洞宾！ 转载请注明出处
What is the US military bad at? We Americans generally think of the US military as the best in the world, but surely there is something to work on.
美军不好的地方是什么？ 我们美国人普遍认为美军是世界上最好的军队，但肯定还有一些需要做的工作。
Niklas Kager Kofler, just interested in WWII What is the US military bad at? Well, that is a difficult question to be honest. Because the days of “bad” militaries and when you still could get away with blatant incompetence are long over and the US military is already a well-established institution that had enough time to weed out such deficiencies that I wouldn''t give them the strong and unfair predicate “bad”.
尼古拉斯·卡格·科夫勒（Niklas Kager Kofler）对二战很感兴趣
美军不好的地方是什么？ 好吧，说实话，这是一个很难回答的问题。 因为所谓的“坏”军人以及仍困于如何摆脱公然无能状态的的时代已经过去了，美军已经是一家行之有效的机构，有足够的时间来消除这种缺陷，以至于我不会给予他们这个偏激又不公正的称谓：“坏”。
The only problem I see is the fact some people indeed consider the “US military the best in the world” and mistake having a giant budget and them being the mightiest fighting force in the known universe for some sort of innate American military prowess and superiority. But those people are few and as long as you avoid such a fallacy, the US military should be fine. Because sometimes a bit of modesty doesn''t hurt and less bragging is appreciated.
我看到的唯一问题是，是有人错误地掌握着海量的巨额预算并且觉得由于美国某种先天的军事实力和优越性 所以“美军是世界上最好的”，是已知宇宙中最强大的战斗部队。
好在这种人很少，只要避免真的陷入这种谬论美国军方就不会出现大碍。有时谦虚一点不会让你受伤，少吹点牛更值得人赞赏。 【下边第一个回答是原作者引述另一个回答者的内容。】
How much stronger is the United States military as compared with the next strongest power?
The first answer I get.
与第二强国相比，美国军事力量多强大？ 我拿到了一血（第一个回答这个问题）。
Daniel Kearns, former Paratrooper 82nd Airborne at U.S. Army 1,000 times. Maybe more. No other military or combination of militaries could even begin to inflict the slightest numbers of casualties on the United States Military in a conventional war. Consider: The US spends close to what the entire rest of the world spends in defense. 711 Billion. Per year. The next closest is China at 143 Billion.
丹尼尔·基恩斯（Daniel Kearns），美国陆军第82空降师
（美军实力是第二名的）一千倍，或更多。 考虑到美国的支出接近全世界其他国家在国防上的支出的综合，每年7110亿。紧随其后的中国只有1,430亿美元。所以在常规战争中，没有其他任何军事或军事联盟能对美国军方造成最少的伤亡。
The M1 Abrams tank has seen more combat than just about any other tank on the battlefield today. It has never been knocked out by enemy fire. (Completely killed) Ever. China has less than five hundred Type 99 tanks, that have just been developed, and are not even close to being as good as the Abrams. We have 8,700 Abrams. We have 10 super aircraft carriers. And another 10 smaller carriers. Everyone else has 10. Combined. And they are mostly small ships that can launch helicopters. No one else has a super carrier.
Fighting a conventional war against the US would be like a 3 year old child playing chess against Gary Kasparov. They wouldn''t even know what they were supposed to be looking at. *Edit. The purpose of the answer is not borne out of some nationalistic sense of pride, although I am a US Veteran and consider myself patriotic, but rather to call attention to how much larger the US Military Industrial Complex is than the entire rest of the world. I truly believe that the rest of the world really has no clue just how powerful the US Military is. We must begin to question the disparity of lethality between the US and the rest of the world. But we must also question, if not the US, who? Who do we want to have the largest military? China? North Korea? or an ally like the UK? Do we need to have 1,000 times the lethality of the closest military in strength? Or would 100 times suffice? I don''t have the answer to those questions, nor am I purporting to. But I think it''s important to begin a dialogue.
与美国进行常规战争就像是一个3岁的孩子和加里·卡斯帕罗夫（俄罗斯国际象棋棋手，前国际象棋世界冠军。）下棋。他们甚至都不知道眼该往哪儿看。 *编辑。答案的目的并非出于某种民族主义的自豪感，尽管我是美国退伍军人，并自认为是名爱国主义者，但人们需要注意的一点是美国军事工业联合体的规模比世界其他地区大得多。
我相信，世界其他地区真的不知道美国军力有多强大。从现在开始我们必须要质疑美国与世界其他地区之间的杀伤力差距（是否过大了）。但是我们还必须质疑，如果不是美国，那该是谁呢？我们想让谁拥有最强大的军队？中国？北朝鲜？还是像英国这样的盟友？我们是否需要拥有比最接近的军事力量强1,000倍的杀伤力的实力？还是100倍就够了？我没有这些问题的答案，也不打算这样做。但是我认为开始对话（对大家）都很重要。
评论翻译
很赞 2
收藏