美国反战组织“粉色代码”日前公布的研究数据显示，美国及其盟友自2001年以来在“大中东及北非”地区共投下至少32.6万枚炸弹和导弹，相当于平均每天投弹40余枚。
According to data recently published by Code Pink, an anti-war organization based in the US, the US and its allies have dropped at least 326,000 bombs and missiles on countries in the greater Middle East/North Africa region since 2001, equivalent to more than 40 every single day.
分析人士指出，美国拥有世界最高的军费支出和全球最强的军力，但长期以来并没有把力量用于维护世界和平，而是从维护自身霸权地位和利益的角度出发，不断非法动用武力干涉甚至入侵别国，威胁世界和平，成为世界一大乱源。
Analysts pointed out that despite its highest military spending and strongest military strengths in the world, Uncle Sam has not invested its power in preserving world peace, but has instead constantly interfered in or even invaded other countries through the illegal use of force in order to protect its own hegemony and interests. From this point of view, the US has become the biggest threat to world peace and a global scourge.
拜登新政府就职刚一个月出头，美军就于2月25日对叙利亚东部发动空袭，摧毁多处设施。美军方宣称，此次空袭是对美军和多国联军人员近期在伊拉克遭袭并受到持续威胁的回应。叙利亚、俄罗斯和伊朗政府均强烈谴责美方这一违反国际法、侵犯叙主权的行径。
Hardly a month had passed when the Biden administration launched an air strike in eastern Syria on February 25 that destroyed multiple facilities, which the US military explained was a response to the recent attacks against American and coalition personnel in Iraq and to ongoing threats to those personnel. Syria, Russia and Iran all strongly condemned the US-launched attacks that violated international law and Syrian sovereignty.
“粉色代码”联合创始人梅代娅·本杰明和该组织研究员尼古拉斯·戴维斯撰文指出，这次空袭只是美国及其盟友长期以来在“大中东及北非”地区无休止军事行动的最新案例之一。过去20年来，伊拉克和叙利亚是此类行动的主要受害者，据不完全统计，累计有超过15.2万枚炸弹和导弹落到这两个国家境内。而这些轰炸究竟造成多少无辜人员伤亡，外界更是无从得知。
Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J.S. Davies, co-founder and researcher of Code Pink, wrote in their article that the air strike in eastern Syria was just the latest case in point of America and its allies’ persistent and ceaseless military operations in the greater Middle East/North Africa region, to which Iraq and Syria have been the most seriously hit victims in the past two decades as 152,000 bombs and missiles have been dropped on them according to incomplete statistics. There is no telling how many innocent lives those bombings have taken.
有统计显示，美国建国240多年来，有227年在打仗。正如俄罗斯军事科学院通讯院士、政治学家谢尔盖·苏达科夫在接受今日俄罗斯电视台采访时所说：“美国只要存在，就要打仗。”
There are statistics showing that the US has fought wars in 227 out of the 240 years since its founding. “The US will fight wars as long as it exists,” said Professor Sergei Sudakov of the Russian Academy of Military Sciences in an interview with Russia Today TV.
在美军海外狂轰滥炸的背后，是美国持续高企的军费支出。
Behind America’s rampaging all over the world is its ever-rising military expenditure.
瑞典斯德哥尔摩国际和平研究所2020年4月发布报告指出，美国的军费支出在2019年增长5.3％，达到7320亿美元，占全球军费总支出的38％，几乎相当于排名其后的10个国家的军费总和。2019年全球军费支出较上年增长3.6%，增速为2010年以来最高，而美国的军费增长是重要原因之一。
A report issued by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in April 2020 revealed that the US military spending rose by 5.3% in 2019 and reached USD 732 billion, which was 38% of the world total and almost the total of the ten trailing countries. Its military increase constitutes the majority of the 3.6% increase in global military expenditure that year, the highest growth rate since 2010.
分析人士指出，军事力量是美国全球霸权的重要支柱。二战结束以来，美国一直保持大规模海外驻军，凭借庞大军事力量维护自身及盟友的利益。
According to analysts, military strength is a critical pillar of America’s global hegemony. After the end of WWII, the country has maintained massive amounts of troops overseas to protect its interests and allies.
美国国防部2018年出台的国防战略报告提出，美军应同时实现有效核威慑、发展导弹防御、应对大国竞争和热点危机、维持反恐战争等诸多要求。
In its 2018 National Defense Strategy report, the US Department of Defense said the American military should be able to perform a range of operations in parallel, including effective nuclear deterrence, developing missile defense, tackling major-power competition and hotspot crisis, and maintaining anti-terrorist warfare.
美国智库布鲁金斯学会高级研究员迈克尔·奥汉隆指出，这些要求比美国在冷战结束后很长一段时间内的计划都更具野心，因此需要更多经费支持。
These requirements are more ambitious than America’s plans in a very long time after the end of WWII, and are therefore in need of more funding, according to Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution, an American think tank,
事实上，美国的巨额军费和频繁的海外军事行动只有利于美国少数政客和军火巨头，损害的是绝大多数美国民众的利益，更对世界和平与稳定构成严重威胁。
The fact is that the huge military spending and constant overseas military operations have only benefited a handful of politicians and arms tycoons in the country, while they have harmed the interests of the majority of American people and seriously threatened world peace and stability.
美国一些专家学者和政治人物也对巨额军费支出持批评态度。他们认为，政府应将资源更多投入到应对新冠疫情和气候变化以及推动经济社会发展等方面。
Some experts and political figures in the US have voiced criticism of the colossal military bills, who believe the government should redirect more resources to handling the COVID-19 pandemic, tackling climate change, and boosting economic and social development.
哈佛大学国际关系学教授斯蒂芬·沃尔特日前指出，美国的巨额军费打造出强大军力，然而美国并没有世界上最好的基础教育、医疗制度、无线网络、电力系统、铁路、公路和桥梁，美国还缺乏经费充足的公共机构。
Stephen M.Walt, professor of International Affairs at Harvard University, recently pointed out that the US has spent a lots of money building powerful armed forces, but it doesn’t have the world’s best basic education, medical system, wireless network, power system, railway, road and bridges, and its public institutions are scarcely funded.
2020年7月，美国国会独立参议员伯尼·桑德斯和民主党籍参议员爱德华·马基曾建议将2021财年国防预算削减10%，但未获参议院支持。马基当时发表声明说，巨额军费支出没有保护美国人免受新冠疫情影响，也不能保护美国人免受环境破坏和气候变化影响。美国的政策优先项应该是消除贫困、应对全球性疫情、资助教育事业以及改善医保体系，而非发动战争和研发新式武器。
Bernie Sanders, an independent member of the congress, and Democratic Senator Edward Markey proposed in July 2020 to cut the defense budget for FY2021 by 10%, but found no support in the senate. Markey said at the time that the immense military spending has not protected the American people from coronavirus, nor will it protect them from the outcomes of environmental degradation and climate change. America’s priorities should be eliminating poverty, battling the global pandemic, sponsoring education and improving the medical insurance system, rather than waging wars and developing new weapons. Editor's note: This article is originally published on Xinhuanet.com, and is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information, ideas or opinions appearing in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.
