[2021-04-19]网友讨论：这张地图显示了为什么中国不能再被摆布了，解放军的导弹现在已经超出了射程，覆盖了美国在东亚的所有部队。

wood123abc123
When USA has a lot of military bases close to China, they still say that China is threatening USA !

当美国在中国附近有很多军事基地时，他们仍然说中国在威胁美国！

chuanpetro23
How dare China put their country so close to US military bases?? 😤😤😡😡

中国怎么敢把他们的国家放在如此靠近美国军事基地的地方？

MechAITheFuture
US forces outside of SK in Asia is a waste of money. They've never seen action so US economy is better off reinvesting those resources towards domestic infrastructure.

美国在韩国以外的亚洲地区驻军就是在浪费金钱。他们从未见到过行动，所以美国经济最好是把这些资源再投资于国内基础设施建设。

dorian_gray11
US economy is better off reinvesting those resources towards domestic infrastructure.
Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and the rest of the US' weapons manufacturers would all disagree with you.

回复：美国经济最好是把这些资源再投资于国内基础设施建设。
洛克希德 · 马丁公司，波音公司，诺斯罗普·格鲁曼，雷神公司和其他美国武器制造商都不会同意你的观点。

AllieOopClifton
Yep. "US economy" is the MIC and support for that.

是的。“美国经济”是军工复合体对此的支持。

Altruistic_Astronaut
It not a waste of money for the true constituents of the US (MIC).

对于美国的真正选民（军工复合体）来说，这并不是浪费金钱。

D3athwithLaught3r
War is the US infrastructure

战争是美国的基础设施

nonstopredditor
US MIC must find an enemy to boost their profit. No enemy means no revenue.

美国军工集团必须找到一个敌人来增加他们的利润。没有敌人就意味着没有收入。

Zciero
Hawaiian living in Texas here, what the hell is a “domestic infrastructure”?

居住在德克萨斯州的夏威夷人，什么是“国内基础设施”？

Soviet_Saiyan
When you have roads that were paved 90 years ago, duh.

当你的路是90年前铺的，你以为呢。啧。

lijjili
They need to consider the story of France’s Maginot Line and how Hitler completely side stepped the fortifications by going around through Belgium and the Netherlands. China need to consider fronts being opened along India, Mongolia and even Russia (however low the probability that maybe)

他们需要考虑法国马其诺防线的故事，以及希特勒是如何绕过比利时和荷兰完全避开防御工事的。中国需要考虑在印度、蒙古甚至俄罗斯开辟战线(不管这种可能性有多小)

PMMESOCIALISTTHEORY
Indias border is basically the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau, an invasion over it would be suicidal.
Mongolia is deserts, mountains, and steppe. Also a bad decision.
The Paektu mountains are the border between the DPRK and the PRC, who are allies anyway.
Russias border is very wide and hard to traverse, but fair point nonetheless.
The other areas are by Xinjiang, but that border is equally hard to cross into, and Iran is really close.

印度的边界基本上就是喜马拉雅山脉和青藏高原，对它的入侵无异于自杀。
蒙古有沙漠、高山和草原，这也是一个错误的决定。
白头山是朝鲜和中国之间的边界，而中国是朝鲜的盟友。
俄罗斯的边界非常宽广，很难穿越，但这一点还是有道理的。
其他地区与新疆接壤，但是边界同样很难进入，而且伊朗离这里也很近。

chuanpetro23
They would never invade China's territory. They don't want that kind of conflict with China because the US knows that it would kill many American soldiers and would result in an escallation of violence, which would be bad for both sides. What the US would probably do is striking Chinese ships across the strait of Taiwan, without any formal declaration of war. Also, the Chinese border with India is mostly the Himalayas, which are impossible to cross.

他们永远不会侵略中国的领土。他们不希望与中国发生这样的冲突，因为美国知道这会杀死很多美国士兵，并导致暴力升级，这对双方都不利。美国可能会在没有任何正式宣战的情况下，袭击台湾海峡对岸的中国船只。此外，中国与印度的边界大部分是喜马拉雅山脉，这是不可能越过的。

lijjili
Those counties might not invade China, but US and NATO forces flying bombers over them is not beyond the realm of impossibility

这些国家可能不会入侵中国，但美国和北约部队的轰炸机飞越这些国家并非不可能。

chuanpetro23
That kind of invasion wouldn't be benefitial to the US, considering that China has a large Air Force. If they did this, China could use it as a pretext to bomb US islands in the Pacific and even the East Coast, which would kill many people; an escallation of violence like that wouldn't be benefitial, especially for a country that is recovering from a pandemic.
Wars like WW2 are very unlikely to happen again, both countries have nuclear weapons and don't want things to get bad to the point one of them uses neclear weapons. The US would only invade Chinese mainland if China had a weak army and no nuclear weapons.

考虑到中国拥有庞大的空军力量，这种入侵对美国来说不会有什么好处。如果他们这样做，中国可能会以此为借口轰炸美国在太平洋的岛屿，甚至东海岸，这将导致许多人死亡; 这样的暴力不会有什么好处，特别是对于一个正在从疫情中恢复的国家。
像二战这样的战争不太可能再次发生，两国都拥有核武器，都不希望事态恶化到其中一方使用核武器的地步。美国只有在中国军队薄弱并且没有核武器的情况下，才敢入侵中国大陆。

Celtrav
This. If humanity managed to avoid WW3 during the First Cold War, it's not gonna happen today, specially considering all the economic ties between the USA and China, which means a conflict would entail economic MAD, and the fact that China is much stronger than the USSR. The USSR's GDP was around half of the USA's, while the Chinese economy is almost as big as the American one, will surpass it in a few years and might double by 2035.
Fortunately, it seems like the age of wars between global powers ended after WW2.

这一点。如果人类在第一次冷战期间成功避免了第三次世界大战，那么当今就不会发生了，特别是考虑到美国和中国之间的经济联系，这意味着一场冲突会导致经济疯狂，以及事实上中国比苏联强大得多。苏联的国内生产总值大约是美国的一半，而中国的经济规模几乎和美国一样大，将在几年内超过美国，并可能在2035年翻一番。
幸运的是，似乎二战之后，全球大国之间的战争时代结束了。

TserriednichHuiGuo
Chinese GDP is already much bigger than the US, check GDP PPP.

中国的国内生产总值已经比美国大得多了，看看GDP购买力平价。

VerySlickRhymes
Since when has the US cared about the death of its soldiers?

美国从什么时候开始关心士兵的死活了？

chuanpetro23
Since Vietnam absolutely destroyed them. US politicians don't want to upset the population again like they did during during the Vietnam War, it wouldn't be good for the elections.

因为越南完全摧毁了他们。美国政客们不想再次像在越南战争期间那样惹怒民众，这对选举不利。

SuperSultan
Idk if you’ve been to the US but I see homeless veterans at least every week during commutes

如果你去过美国，我不知道，但是我至少每周都会在上下班途中看到无家可归的退伍军人。

chuanpetro23
I've never been to the US, but I heard about that. I was talking about soldiers getting killed while in service. Politicians don't want a lot of soldiers dying while they are still in the army; however, after they leave the army, that's a whole different story.

我从没去过美国，但我听说过。我说的是士兵在服役期间被杀。政客们不希望很多士兵还在服役的时候就死了，然而，当他们离开军队后，情况就完全不同了。

SuperSultan
Oh true. I misread your argument. I didn’t take that into account, but it’s true people get emotional over one death compared to thousands. One is a tragedy, a million is a statistic. Americans aren’t willing to die for wars, they prefer to just bomb. Bombing only helps so much, you’ll need troops on the ground at the end of the day.

哦，是的。我误解了你的论点。我没有考虑到这一点，但是相对于成千上万的人来说，人们确实对一个人的死亡感到情绪化。死一个是悲剧，死一百万个只是统计数字。美国人不愿意为战争而死，他们更喜欢轰炸。轰炸只能起到这么点作用，最终，你需要派遣地面部队。

chuanpetro23
No problem :) I agree with what you said about Americans prefering to just bomb, that's why I don't think that a conflict between China and US would result in a serious war.

没毛病 :) 我同意你说的美国人更喜欢轰炸，这就是为什么我不认为中国和美国之间的冲突会导致一场严重的战争。

Palladium1987
Which is incredibly ironic, considering the budget of the Veterans Affairs alone is larger than the entire Chinese military budget, and its not like the latter is skimping on benefits for discharged personnel either.

考虑到仅仅退伍军人事务部的预算就超过了整个中国的军事预算，而且它不像后者(美国)那样在退役人员的福利方面吝啬，这真是令人难以置信的讽刺。

AllieOopClifton
US "healthcare" is about putting money in the pockets of the insurance companies, not results. It's corruption.

美国的“医疗保健”是把钱放进保险公司的口袋，没有结果。这是腐败。

AllieOopClifton
The lesson the US took was "don't let the media report independently or even in a neutral manner on its wars."

美国得到的教训是“不要让媒体独立报道，甚至不要让媒体以中立的方式报道美国的战争。”

SuperSultan
Impossible to cross? Well, if Pakistan and India can fight in Kargil and Siachen glacier

无法穿越？好吧，如果巴基斯坦和印度能在卡吉尔和锡亚琴冰川作战的话。

chuanpetro23
But that's different, they don't have to cross the entire Himalayas do fight each other. If the US wanted to invade China they would have to do so. Also, the US would have a lot of trouble sending supplies to the soldiers in the front if they tried to cross the Himalayas.

但这是不同的，他们不需要跨越整个喜马拉雅山，就可以互相战斗。如果美国想入侵中国，他们就必须这么做。此外，如果前线士兵试图穿越喜马拉雅山脉，美国将很难向他们运送补给。

D3athwithLaught3r
India is not low probability. The Afghan/Xinjiang corridor is also likely

印度的可能性并不低，阿富汗/新疆走廊也有可能

VerySlickRhymes
Afghanistan, too.

还有阿富汗。

FugueGame
And all without increasing the percentage of GDP spent on military and sacrificing quality of life. Unlike America, where the hegemony is being funded by a collapsing republic and dying people.

所有这些都不会增加军事开支占GDP的比例，也不会牺牲生活质量。与美国不同，美国的霸权是由一个崩溃的共和国和垂死的人民资助的。

TheEasternSky
This map also shows why Western politician and media is so concerned about Uighurs and believe every word prophet Adrian the Zenze utters.

这张地图也说明了为什么西方政治家和媒体如此关注维族人，并且相信“先知”阿德里安·曾兹说的每一个字。

Aytrone
Excellent :) Time is on our side

好极了 :) 时间在我们这边

hiddenagenda714
These stupid US Satellite / Proxies countries are dumb for harboring US bases, US Troops, US missiles launchers. Don't they know that THEY will be the first to be wiped off the map if the US does something stupid?
Instead of harboring a war mongering / extremist regime like the US military, they should instead play nice and be friends with China. Trade with China. And remove the US out of the region. They are instigator and rapist. Every day, a US troop rapes a girl in Japan / S. Korea. And Japan / S. Korea has to look away and obey the USA.

这些愚蠢的美国卫星/代理国家都蠢透了，窝藏美国基地、美国军队、美国导弹发射器。难道他们不知道，如果美国做了什么蠢事，他们将第一个从地图上消失吗？
与其庇护像美国军队那样的战争贩子/极端主义政权，他们应该与中国友好相处，成为朋友。与中国贸易。把美国赶出这个地区。他们是煽动者和强奸犯。在日本/韩国，平均每天都有一名美军士兵强奸女孩。而日本/韩国不得不转移视线，服从美国。

danklasson
Imperialism is a paper tiger. Especially now with advanced missiles. Good luck Americans in trying to assert your dominance anywhere close to the coast of China or anywhere in the South China Sea. Get ready to be wiped out as the cockroaches that you are.

帝国主义是纸老虎。特别是(中国)现在有了先进的导弹。祝美国人在靠近中国海岸或者南中国海的任何地方维护你们的统治地位好运吧。准备好像蟑螂一样被消灭吧。

fatimang
Taiwan and Hong Kong should learn who has the strategic advantage.

台湾和香港应该了解谁具有战略优势。

ZeEa5KPul
More interesting (and difficult to obtain) than that would be coverage maps for various ISR assets like OTH radars, drones, satellites, etc. Given a certain region of the SCS/WestPac, what kind of sensor density does China have on that region at any given time.
Nobody serious questions the fact that China can put missiles on a target with exceeding accuracy. What's questioned is how capable it is of tracking and targeting.

比这更有趣(也更难得)的是各种各样的ISR资产（情报、侦查和监视）的覆盖地图，比如超视距雷达、无人机、卫星等等。给定南太平洋/西太平洋的某一区域，中国在任何时候在该区域都是什么样的传感器密度。
没有人认真地质疑这样一个事实——即中国能够以极高的准确度将导弹对准目标。而是质疑它跟踪和瞄准目标的能力如何。

poshprincessx
And DF-41s better be pointed straight at Washington

Df-41最好直接对准华盛顿。

zhumao
Pretty sure US "forces" is aware of the Chinese artificial islands, 7 of them and over 2,000 acres as of 2015(!). That's at least 7 additional aircraft carriers (most with landing strip, and unsinkable) armed to the teeth and not just war planes, sitting there without the need of refueling, nor arduous travel.
Wonder how long can US navy keep up their FON sillies, also nice of them to provide PLA a closer look at their targets.

相当肯定的是，美国“军队”知道中国的人工岛，2015年就有7座人工岛，面积超过2000英亩！这意味着至少增加了7艘航空母舰(大多数都有起降跑道，永不沉没的航空母舰)武装到牙齿，而不仅仅是战机，坐在那里不需要加油，也不需要艰苦的航行。
不知道美国海军能够保持多久愚蠢的“航行自由”，他们还提供让了让解放军近距离观察他们目标的好机会。

Allington
Overwhelmingly it’s the US who is the biggest threat to peace in this world and surveys from around the world show most foreigners agree with me.
China doesn’t want war, China just wants to sell the products it manufactures in every country and nothing more. China is smarter than our war mongers in Washington, China realizes war costs both sides far to much.

绝大多数情况下，美国是世界和平的最大威胁，来自世界各地的调查显示，大多数外国人同意我的观点。
中国不想要战争，中国只想把它制造的产品销往每个国家，仅此而已。中国比华盛顿的战争贩子更聪明，中国意识到战争给双方造成的损失远远不止这些。

Richard Herron
When should America just start getting along with other countries might be a good question.
Who’s dick is biggest?
try thinking in more humanistic friendly ways and you’ll start to see that most people are just the same.

美国应该什么时候开始与其他国家和睦相处可能是一个好问题。
谁的老二最大？
试着用更人性化友好的方式思考，你会发现大多数人都是一样的。

Harry Wang
If China did not expand the navy in the past few years, I am afraid that the United States has already launched a war against China. After all, Pompeo hates China so much. I don’t know why he hates China so much.

如果中国在过去几年没有扩张海军，恐怕美国已经对中国发动了战争。毕竟，蓬佩奥非常讨厌中国。我不知道他为什么这么讨厌中国。

Paul
This is why China is “expanding its navy and air force at an alarming pace”. Because Americans want to destroy China for having an army and navy.

这就是为什么中国“正以惊人的速度扩张其海军和空军”。因为美国人想摧毁拥有陆军和海军的中国。

ScienceSleep99
Damn this seems like it’s escalating fast.

卧槽，这看起来升级很快啊。

yarkost
I breathed a sigh of relief when I saw this :)

当我看到这图片时，我松了一口气 :)

Raginbakin
HELL YEAH!

卧槽，太棒了！

Patrick Quinn
I expect so. Any substantial weapon of any kind deployed against a US warship is conceivably some kind of threat to the platform. The trick is landing the shot. (Not the weapon, but the warrior who wields it.) I’ve been dodging the missile questions for awhile, and in the past I’ve pooh-poohed the notion that Iran’s two naval combat arms pose any kind of serious threat to US carrier strike groups, but I’ve no doubt that the People’s Republic isn’t building junk. I don’t think Chinese weapons are second-class, and I don’t think the People’s Liberation Army Navy is a bunch of punks.

我希望如此。任何针对美国军舰的实质性武器都可能对航母构成某种威胁。关键在于投篮落地。(不是武器，而是使用武器的战士。)我一直在回避导弹问题，在过去，我曾对伊朗两艘海军作战舰艇对美国航母战斗群构成任何严重威胁的说法嗤之以鼻，但我毫不怀疑，中国不是在制造垃圾。我不认为中国的武器是二流的，我也不认为解放军海军是不堪一击的。

Charles Lee
Currently, within the first island chain, the Chinese navy together with it missile and Air Force, working together in tandem and in a coordinated manner and having home field advantage will likely win the fight with the United States. Within that zone, its navy will be protected by its missile forces, Air Force and drones and it is unlikely that the USN can even come close to the Chinese mainland. Its growing fleet of ultra-quiet AIP submarine armed with technologically advance torpedoes will also likely make a significant difference. The USN pivot to the pacific region is a recognition of that fact.
Outside of the first island chain, as things currently stand but which is rapidly changing, the US will prevail.

目前，在第一岛链内，中国海军、导弹、空军协同作战，具有主场优势，很可能会赢得与美国的战斗。在该区域内，美国海军将受到导弹部队、空军和无人机的保护，美国海军甚至不太可能接近中国大陆。日益增长的超静音AIP潜艇舰队配备技术先进的鱼雷，也可能会产生重大影响。美国海军把重心转向太平洋地区就是对这一事实的承认。
而在第一岛链以外的区域，按照目前的情况来看，美国将占上风，但情况变化很快。

In the years to come, as the Chinese military continue its rapid modernization not only in hardware but also doctrine and training, it will be unlikely (short of nuclear war) that it can be defeated. China will also likely to be able to access BRI military bases that is serviced by a road and rail BRI network. The industrial base of the United States is too small relatively for it to succeed in an extended war - this is not to say that the USN may not win battles against the Chinese Navy BUT in the future, it is unlikely to win a war.
Most western military analysts are not able to fully comprehend where the Chinese military is as far as capabilities or purpose because it has been growing at an exponentially rate and because Chinese military thoughts are based on Chinese military writing, which because of language barrier, western analysts does not understand or comprehend. This is true of their hardware, their training and the military doctrine which guide the use of their military. The analyst are at least five years behind what the Chinese military capabilities is at this time.

在未来的几年里，随着中国军队不仅在硬件方面，而且在理论和训练方面继续快速现代化，它不太可能被打败(除了核战争)。中国还可能能够进入由公路和铁路网络提供服务的一带一路军事基地。美国的工业基础相对来说较小，它不可能在一场持续的战争中取得胜利——这并不是说美国海军不可能赢得与中国海军的战斗，但是在未来，它不太可能赢得一场战争。
大多数西方军事分析人士无法完全理解中国军队的能力和目的在哪里，因为中国军队一直在以指数级增长，而且中国的军事思想是基于中国的军事文字。由于语言障碍，西方分析人士无法理解中国的军事文字。他们的硬件、训练以及指导他们军队使用的军事准则都无法理解。这些分析人士认为，中国目前的军事实力至少落后五年。

Peter Gould
Americans need to remember that China has been prep’g for a possible US Naval attack since the 90’s. And they have done there best to turn the China Sea into a killing zone. In the end its a American Bluewater fleet with Air Force support verses China’s more shallow water Fleet supported by Shore defences (alot) & Air Force. America could ware them down but I really doubt America got the stomic for the personal cost in american lives and ship loss. I wonder about the level of american resolve once they loose 2 to 3 aircraft carriers plus what ever else.
Now on the flip side if they decide to stand off and avoid the kill zone and just blockaide all china related shipping? America could shut down all traffic at a small butcherbill. It would criple China but might cripple the world in the process.

美国人需要记住，自90年代以来，中国一直在为可能的美国海军攻击做准备。他们竭尽全力把中国海变成一个杀伤区。最终，拥有空军支援的美国蓝水舰队 vs 拥有空军支援和海岸防御(很多)的中国更多浅水舰队。美国可以警惕他们，但我真的怀疑美国是否有勇气为美国人的生命和舰船的损失付出代价。我想知道一旦美国失去了2到3艘航空母舰，再加上别的什么，他们的决心有多大。
另一方面，如果他们决定保持距离，避开杀伤区，只是封锁所有与中国有关的航运？美国可以通过一张小小的屠夫账单来关闭所有的交通。这会削弱中国，但也可能削弱世界。

Chris Schene
I would think the US would just blockade their ocean traffic

我认为美国只会封锁他们的海上交通。

Jack Menendez
As long as the conflict remains in the region of China protected by land-based mobile anti-ship missiles, China will do well. A conflict outside of that geography, not so much.
The US objective of a wider conflict, a world war, would be to destroy China’s SLBM. China’s fleet would have to protect them. That appears to be China’s current naval paradigm, to create a safe place in the Oceans around China for its SLBMs to lurk protected by land-based mobile anti-ship missiles, non-nuclear attack submarines, and a surface fleet. They must protect their SLBM subs long enough to launch the missiles.
China does appear to be moving beyond this paradigm to be able to project power as the US does but they have a way to go.

只要冲突仍然发生在受陆基反舰导弹保护的中国地区，中国就会做得很好。这之外的冲突，就没那么多了。
一场更大范围的冲突，一场世界大战，美国的目标将是摧毁中国的潜射弹道导弹。中国的舰队将不得不保护他们。这似乎是中国当前的海军模式，在中国周边海域创造一个安全的地方，让潜射弹道导弹潜伏在陆基反舰导弹、非核攻击潜艇和水面舰队的保护下。他们必须保护他们的潜射导弹潜艇足够长的时间来发射导弹。
中国似乎确实正在超越这一模式，能够像美国那样的投射实力，但它们还有一段路要走。

Al Morrow
China is not so careless to have their Navy take on the US Navy. First and foremost China’s objective would be to take Taiwan and they would have all the land base military firepower to take on the US Navy that would not have any land base resources but Taiwan. The US Navy would be vulnerable being at sea vs China mainland being able to easily support Air & Sea forces against the US Navy. Taiwan would be taken by China in two days and the US would have to withdraw.

中国海军对抗美国海军并没有粗心大意。中国的首要目标是占领台湾，他们将把所有的陆基军事火力来对抗除了台湾以外没有任何陆基资源的美国海军。与中国大陆相比，美国海军在海上很容易受到攻击，中国大陆可以很容易地支援空军和海军对抗美国海军。台湾将在两天内被中国占领，美国将不得不撤退。

Victor H Hurtado
Perhaps in a similar manner where the much vaunted and larger Italian Navy in the Mediterranean was dealt a major blow by elements of the British Royal Navy during WWII. China may suffer that same route. Ultimately though, you never underestimate the abilities of your opponent. And it’s likely China, father of Sun Tzuo, hold a similar sentiment as well. Btw, it wouldn’t be just the U.S. navy that China may confront. Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Australia, and New Zealand navies would also join the fray.

在二战期间，地中海地区备受吹捧、规模更大的意大利海军也遭到了英国皇家海军的沉重打击。中国可能也会走上同样的道路。不过最后，你永远不要轻敌。“孙子之父”中国也可能持有类似的观点。顺便说一句，中国可能面对的不仅仅是美国海军。日本、韩国、台湾、菲律宾、澳大利亚和新西兰的海军也将加入战斗。

Jack Ye
The best chance China has is to bring the battle field close to the shore of China.
So that air force, submarines, and missile force can provide a huge amount of support.
I do not think Chinese Navy has any chance against US Navy in the ocean. China simply doesn’t have enough planes nor enough nuclear submarines. That is a massive disadvantage.

中国最好的机会就是把战场拉近到中国的海岸。
因此，空军、潜艇和导弹部队都可以提供大量的支持。
我不认为中国海军有任何机会在海上对抗美国海军。中国根本没有足够的飞机和核潜艇。这是一个巨大的劣势。

Harry Teo
It’s in China territory & seas , easy for China to throw all they got at the US navy . All their latest military hardware are design for that anticipation. They will be sorry for the provocation & need for to be taught a lesson. Their navies will used for target practice to test China new designs weapons & getting respect for Chinese bravery. I think he has lost its balls & wouldn’t dare to Attack chinese assets.

这是在中国的领土和海域，中国很容易把所拥有的东西倾泻到美国海军。他们所有最新的军事装备都是为这种预期而设计的。他们会为这种挑衅感到抱歉，需要给他们一个教训。他们的海军将被用来练习射击，以测试中国新设计的武器，并产生对中国勇气的尊重。美国根本不尊重他们。我认为美国已经没胆量了，不敢攻击中国的资产。

Mert Toker
China is not challenging US militarily at a worldwide scale. It is limited to Chinese sea and India. The economical models of China and US are very different when it comes to arms expenditures.
American defense industry manufactures huge amount of weapons each year. Each year there shall be a ‘’threat’’ to close the business deals. It is mostly about business and defense contractor lobbies in US. Not much to do with bases in Germany or Japan anymore. Most of the bases in Europe is unnecessary militarily. Maybe just to be sure that some politicians in Europe behave in line.
Therefore it is really difficult not to be close to American bases on the planet we live in.

中国并没有在全球范围内挑战美国的军事力量。它仅限于中国海域和印度。在军备支出方面，中美两国的经济模式有很大不同。
美国国防工业每年生产大量武器。每年都会有一种“威胁”来结束商业交易。在美国，这主要是关于商业和国防承包商的游说团体。与德国或日本的基地没有太大关系。欧洲的大多数基地在军事上是不必要的。也许只是为了确保欧洲某些政治家的行为符合规范。
因此，在我们生活的星球上，很难不靠近美国的基地。

Despite recently closing hundreds of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad—from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined.
There is a big gap between China’s arm sales and US’s in this aspect. In US maintaining a giant military is a major business. In China, they prefer to spend their resources on exports of daily goods.
Therefore Chinese bases located around South China and mostly about the defense of mainland. If they have any military ambition it is mostly about Taiwan and checking India on long run.

尽管最近关闭了在伊拉克和阿富汗的数百个军事基地，美国仍然在70多个国家和领土上维持着近800个军事基地，从巨大的“小美洲”基地到小型雷达设施。相比之下，英国、法国和俄罗斯加起来大约有30个海外基地。
在这方面，中国的军售与美国有很大的差距。在美国，维持一支庞大的军队是一项重要的业务。在中国，他们更喜欢把资源用于日常商品的出口。
因此中国的军事基地位于华南地区，主要是保卫大陆。如果说他们有什么军事野心的话，那也主要是关于台湾和长期制衡印度。