英国还能负担得起自我防卫的费用吗？

 
The British Army has been in decline for the past two decades. A growing need to deter any Russian threat, and potentially without US support, has highlighted the urgency NATO members like the UK face in boosting defense spending. But in Britain, that necessity comes against a backdrop of weak economic growth, rising borrowing costs and public ambivalence, possibly requiring major tradeoffs by Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
 
过去二十年来，英国陆军一直在走下坡路。如今，面对俄罗斯带来的威胁以及可能失去美国支持的局面，北约成员国如英国提升国防开支的紧迫性愈发明显。然而，在英国，这一必要性却与经济增长疲软、借贷成本上升和公众态度冷漠的背景交织，首相基尔·斯塔默或许不得不在多方面做出艰难的取舍。
 

 
@EyeTech21
Britain: We once ruled half the world with red coats and muskets. Now we’re debating if we can afford bullets. History moves fast… but decline moves faster.
 
英国：我们曾经靠红衣军和火枪统治过半个世界，现在却在争论买不买得起子弹。历史发展得快，但衰退更快。
 
@Narweeboy
Britain global power was not muskets. It was their navy. Unfortunately, Britain has neither today.
 
英国的全球影响力靠的不是火枪而是海军，可惜如今两样都没了。
 
@ac1455
Tbf, it’s not as if Britain was doing financially well during its wars in the past either. Some wars bankrupt Britain so much it took decades to get back to just a healthy amount of debt.
 
说实话，英国在以往打仗的时候财政状况也从未算好。有些战争让英国几乎破产，花了几十年才把债务恢复到健康的水平。
 
@Music5362
For the UK, the most important area of defence isn't the army, it's air defence and marine defence, mainly navy and air force. Sure, the army will man the land base air defence systems. I think most Brits don't care if we don't have an army to go fight another Iraq or Afan war. Security for us is what we want.
 
对英国来说，最重要的防御不是陆军，而是空防和海防，主要靠空军和海军。陆军当然会负责陆基防空系统。我想大多数英国人并不在乎我们有没有陆军再去打一场伊拉克或阿富汗那样的战争。我们要的只是自身的安全。
 
@mikechannel888
the future is uk and eu send soldier to defense poland ,so we need a big army
 
未来英国和欧盟将要向波兰派兵防御，所以我们需要一支庞大的军队。
 
@Music5362
All for helping other countries but only after our own security needs are satisfied.
 
我支持帮助其他国家，但前提是先确保我们自己的安全。
 
@mikechannel888
for homeland security,we need the navy Patrol Craft Squadron to stop the boat
 
为了本土安全，我们需要海军巡逻艇中队来拦截非法船只。
 
@Burty117
I haven't even started watching the video, I already know the answer, no, it cannot afford to defend itself, it can't even afford to pickup rubbish from citizens bins anymore, let alone militarily defend itself.
 
我甚至还没看视频，就已经知道答案了：不，英国根本负担不起自我防卫的开销。我们连从居民垃圾桶里收垃圾的钱都拿不出来了，更别提军事防御了。
 
@RedsGoAway
City of London can afford it if politicians would make them
 
如果政客愿意让伦敦金融城出钱，那他们是负担得起的。
 
@gleitsonSalles
Just a reminder that the U.S defence speding is also falling since 2010 as a share gpd. So dont ask the Europeans for what you guys cant do either
 
提醒一下，美国的国防开支占GDP的比例从2010年起也在下降，所以你们自己做不到的事情，也别来要求欧洲人。
 
@MaxeMooseyBoo
Dude we literally just approved the biggest budget ever for spending as the US
 
兄弟，美国刚刚批准了史上最大一笔的国防预算。
 
@gleitsonSalles
Still falling as a share of gdp
 
但作为GDP的占比还是在下降。
 
@arwinsp3358
Maxeboobooboy does not understand percentages and what relative to GDP means, I'm afraid
 
我看Maxeboobooboy根本不懂百分比，更不懂“相对于GDP”是什么意思。
 
@gleitsonSalles
Yep, it fell from 4.9% in 2009 to 3.4% in 2024. I think the U.S is not paying its bills
 
是的，从2009年的4.9%降到了2024年的3.4%。我觉得美国根本没有好好掏钱。
 
@CosyCelsior
What's the point? The Americans can't build ships anymore, cracks in multiple hulls..
 
有什么好争的？美国现在连造船都不会了，好几艘船体都有裂缝。
 
@MaxeMooseyBoo
btw, I do understand that the GDP stuff. But I was trying to point out that Trump wants to add a 100+ billion dollars to the budget. That's still increasing the military spending as a percent of GDP. Secondly, GDP is fairly bad when looking at US military spending due to our economy's size (and when recessions are also included in the graph, as this skews it massively). Even when accounting for inflation, we are still increasing the military budget.
AND, what I like most to compare defense spending to the past is using a per capita model, which shows that it has been slightly increasing over the past 10 or 40 ish years (depends on if you include the recession again). Meaning that more of my personal tax-paying dollars is going to the military than before.
 
顺便说一下，我当然懂GDP的事，但我想指出的是特朗普打算给预算再加一千多亿美元。那依然是把国防支出提高到了GDP的更高比例。其次，用GDP衡量美国的军费本来就不太准，因为我们的经济体量太大了，而且图表里还包括了经济衰退期，误差很大。即使考虑通胀，我们的军费还是在涨。
而我最喜欢用来比较历史国防支出的是人均支出模型，这个数据显示在过去的十年或四十年里（取决于你是否纳入经济衰退期），军费的人均支出是略有上升的。也就是说我作为纳税人的钱比过去更多地流进了军队。
 
@FiremansGaming
They can't even defend themselves against dude with kitchen knives haha
 
他们连拿菜刀的哥们都防不住，还谈什么国防，笑死人了。
 
@devanshsanghavi9999
First they need to decrease the cost of living by producing more electricity so that extra money that goes towards this can be used for other things which can increase GDP.
 
他们首先得通过增产电力来降低生活成本，这样原本用于能源的那部分钱才能被用在其他能促进GDP增长的事情上。
 
@simonsaysno
I wouldn’t be surprised if more British men are willing to fight the state than to fight for it.
 
如果有更多英国人宁愿反抗国家，也不愿为它而战，我一点都不会感到惊讶。
 
@Nomad-XA
Nato is way too dependent on the US. The US is the only country in nato that matters, the others are too small to matter
 
北约太依赖美国了。美国是唯一一个真正重要的国家，其余的国家规模都太小，根本没有分量。
 
@Fab666.
That’s why the EU exists and needs to evolve into a military force alongside what it is now. It has potential to be what the US would prefer that it doesn’t.. and the US has repeatedly gotten in the way over the last decades to stop that happening
 
这正是欧盟存在的意义，也说明它需要在现有的基础上发展出军事力量。欧盟有潜力成为美国不希望看到的样子……而过去几十年里，美国一直在阻止这件事发生。
 
@Melior_Traiano
UK, France and Germany certainly aren't too small to matter. Both the UK and France are nuclear powers and collectively these three countries constitute a large part of global GDP. The only reason that their militaries are comparatively small is because they could rely on the US and spend the money that would've been used for defense on social services.
 
英国、法国和德国绝对不算无足轻重。英国和法国都是有核国家，这三国加起来也占据了全球GDP的大部分。他们军力相对较小的唯一原因是因为他们可以依赖美国，把原本该花在国防上的钱用于社会服务。
 
@kyrusinek
I think its funny US citizens think any other army would of been allowed to get as big as the US, even allies like the UK.
Its not just EU being lazy.
 
我觉得很好笑，美国人以为其他国家的军队能被允许像美国一样扩张，但就算是盟友英国也不行。
这可不是欧盟懒的问题。
 
@santostv.
Because thats was the deal, only france rejected it, it was by design, still usa citizens undermine eu/uk power while you they benefited from a weaker europe for decades.
 
因为那本来就是协定，只有法国拒绝了，这一切早就被设计好了。尽管美国人几十年来一直从欧洲的虚弱中受益，但他们现在却还要贬低欧盟和英国的实力。
 
@Janoip
Thats just not true as you even see now with US transferring its Air refueling flet to Germany its a mayor Transport Hub and Nato Europe Logistic Hub, has the biggest US hospital, drone transmission without that no middle east wars, produces more 155mm shells and other types than the us, the barrels, tracks (all ordered again this moth for modernization of us army)
 
这根本不是事实。你看现在美国都把空中加油机队转移到德国去了。德国是主要的运输枢纽，也是北约在欧洲的后勤中心，还是美国最大的海外医院的所在地。无人机信号传输也依赖这里，没有它中东战争都打不了。德国现在生产的155毫米炮弹和其他弹药比美国还多，炮管和履带也都在生产——这个月又下了订单，用于美军的现代化升级。
 
@panmichael5271
Duplication in defence R and D and overlapping roles reduces the multiplier effect. Answer: work with allies in Europe to streamline defense procurement and investment in R and D. The money is there. The format is skewed towards inefficiencies.
 
国防研发中的重复投入和职责重叠降低了乘数效应。解决方案：与欧洲盟友合作，简化国防采购流程和研发投资结构。资金其实是有的，只是体系太低效了。
 
@yoshua9676
We'd defend the country like in WW2. We don't want to get involved in foreign wars.
Focus defence on that and protecting trade; that's all.
 
我们会像二战那样保卫国家，我们不想卷入海外战争。
国防只要专注于这一点，还有保护贸易就行了。
 
@CarltonTweedle
Back in the day the leaders would charge into battle, I think if there is war every MP should be on the front line a long side the PM and the ministers. Instead of being cowards and sending the young men and women off to war. This is truth.
 
以前的领袖都是冲在最前线的。我认为如果真的打仗，每个议员都应该和首相、大臣们一起上前线。别再做懦夫，把年轻的男女送上战场。这才是公道。
 
@iggy5347
British need to take india ,pakistan and singapore and hongkong back to make british empire great again
 
英国得把印度、巴基斯坦、新加坡和香港（特区）都收回来，这样才能让大英帝国再度伟大。
 
@feranicignis1112
100k troops has a nice ring to it. People are not the main expense though, millitary equipment even just munitions is incredibly expensive for some reason.
 
十万人的部队听起来挺响亮的，但人并不是主要的开销，真正贵的是装备，光是弹药就贵得离谱，不知为何。
 
@OXO302
Do you know where we spend our money? I'll tell you: We spent 300 BILLION last year on benefits for elderly and disabled people and even people who are capable of work. We also spent 220 billion on the NHS - we spend half a trillion every year on welfare.
 
你知道我们的钱都花哪儿了吗？我告诉你：去年我们花了三千亿在老年人、残障人士，甚至是有工作能力的人身上，我们还给NHS花了2200亿——我们每年有半万亿都砸在福利上。
 
@techtactics788
Not entirely true. It's £179 billion. The rest also covers such as pensions which technically is already paid for by pensioners.
 
这说得不完全对。其实是1790亿英镑，其余的包括养老金——严格来说那是养老金领取者自己缴纳的。
 
@feranicignis1112
And even with all that spending its not enough, everything is incredibly expensive these days.
 
可就算花了这么多钱，还是不够。现在什么都贵得离谱。
 
@thomaslanders2073
So you're telling me that after importing millions of South Asians the UK today is now weaker than decades ago when it was a homogeneous society? Who could have seen that coming?
 
所以你是说在引入了几百万南亚人之后，英国现在比几十年前那个同质化社会还弱？真是“谁能想到”啊？
 
@Narweeboy
Yeah! We Indians had the same feeling when your lot came over to India 300 years ago
 
没错！你们三百年前来印度的时候，我们印度人也有同样的感觉。
 
@Mike-j3b1k
It's nitpicking, but the 72,000 figure, does not include the Gurkhas or Royal Marines, which adds another 10,000 or so troops.
 
虽然有些吹毛求疵，但那7.2万的数字并不包括廓尔喀和皇家海军陆战队，加上他们的话大约还有一万兵力。
 
@pranavjagdish
I literally read this as “Can the UK defend Israel” and you know what - thats way more important for British elites than defending their own country :)
 
我一开始还真看成了“英国能否保卫以色列”，说实话——对英国的精英们来说，这可能确实比保卫自己国家还重要吧 :)
 
@PhilGregory101
It is not about money, it is about whether or not it is moral and ethical to support such a regime, and the majority of British people say no-fking-way, but hey-ho, we live in a democracy where our politicians know best and are able to ignore the publics wishes! So much for western democracy.
 
这根本不是钱的问题，而是你是否有道德和伦理地去支持那样一个政权。大多数英国人都表示“绝不可能”，但哈，我们生活在一个“民主国家”，政客们最懂事，他们可以无视人民的意愿！这就是所谓的西方民主了。
 
@RestlessMonarch
We can afford it. It would just require either realocated spending, taxe rises, or more borrowing. But the government keeps making it harder for themselves with their silly self imposed fiscal rules.
 
我们是负担得起的，只是需要重新调整开支、提高税收或者加大借贷力度。但政府老是自己给自己设限制，搞什么愚蠢的财政规则，把事儿弄得越来越难。
 
@SirFlukealot
If we can afford to bail out banks and make them face 0 consequences, then we can spend on defence surely
 
如果我们有钱救银行、还让他们不用承担任何后果，那肯定也能负担得起国防支出。
 
@Danji_Coppersmoke
Britain mentally needs to drop the "Great" in Great Britain. It is too expensive to afford the "Great".
 
英国应该从精神上摘掉“Great Britain”中的“Great”，因为“伟大”太贵了，我们负担不起。
 
@Heshhion
Australia has less than 50k troops. Most of them part time. The common wealth is a shjt show..
 
澳大利亚军队还不到五万人，大多数还是兼职的。整个英联邦就是个烂摊子……
 
@danw4237
Most are actually full-time. Of the 45,000 that make up the Army, approximately 28,000 are full-time, while 15,000 are part-time.
 
其实大多数是全职的。在这4.5万的军队里，大概有2.8万是全职军人，1.5万是兼职军人。
 
@samyueldanyo8679
Why would you need a big standing army? Do you understand how expensive that is and the opportunity cost in terms of GDP? UK and Australia are and should be naval powers.
 
你们为什么非要一支庞大的常备军？你们知道那有多贵吗？那对GDP来说是多大的机会成本？英国和澳大利亚现在是、将来也应该是海权国家。
 
@J.Goldberg73
UK empire still thinks it's living in the 1900s, the empire is dead. The whole army can fit in Wembley Stadium, with plenty of vacant seats.
 
英国还活在1900年代的大英帝国的梦里，但帝国早死了。现在整个军队都能塞进温布利球场，还能空出不少座位。
 
@Melior_Traiano
The British Army has always been small in peace time.
 
和平时期，英军一向都很小。
 
@crocsbob
did abit of research , british army is a little over 100,000. truly astonishing figure. a countrys whole army personnel could fit in a single stadium
 
我查了点资料，英国军队的总人数刚刚超过十万。真是个惊人的数字——一个国家的全部军人竟然能挤进一个球场。
 
@1132539
It's a shame to see the once mighty British Navy and Army fall to such a sorry state.
 
看到曾经强大的英国海陆军落到这副模样，真是令人唏嘘。
 
@janseyfarth9489
My best friend is a lieutenant in the army. One factor not mentioned in this U.K army's crazy focus on DEI. For years, they have been actively rejecting white working class Brits over a push for minorities. My comment is absolutely not related to race in any way, but common sense. How likely is someone whose background and faith is rooted in another country going to be willing to fight for queen and country, and how likely is a working class lad from a council estate with a lack of other options and in great need of an opportunity going to be willing to do so? Its common sense.
 
我最好的朋友是英军的一名中尉。有一点没人提到——英国军队如今疯狂地强调多元、公平和包容（DEI）。这些年他们一直在排斥白人工人阶级，而更倾向于招募少数族裔。我说这些完全和种族无关，只是基于常识。一个出生背景和信仰根植于其他国家的人，有多大可能心甘情愿地为这个国家战斗？而一个来自贫困社区、别无出路、迫切需要机会的工人阶级小伙子，有多大可能愿意为国家奋斗？这只是常识问题。
 
@griffalo8386
I regret to say that you have been misinformed. While it is true that the Army has, at times, increased its recruitment from Commonwealth nations, this is not related to DEI initiatives. Instead, it reflects the evolving nature of our society and the shifting aspirations of young people. This is a challenge faced by every Western nation, not just the UK, and it is certainly not about prioritising one group over another.
Having served in the Army for over 20 years and still being actively involved, including a recent assignment at a training establishment, I can personally attest to this reality. While your best friend is undoubtedly entitled to their opinion, and their perspective is likely shaped by their own experiences, their relatively short time in the Service limits their ability to make a comprehensive assessment based on fact. As a recently commissioned Lieutenant, they would not yet have had exposure to the Army recruitment processes beyond that of an officer, Army recruitment policy, or conducted an assignment at initial training establishments such as Pirbright, Harrogate, or Catterick. Worth checking out a recently passing out parade at the Army Foundation College.
Finally, it’s worth noting that there are countless examples throughout history of individuals from diverse backgrounds and faiths—Indians, Sikhs, Fijians, Nepalis, and many others—who have willingly and bravely fought for our little King and Country. This is a testament to the enduring spirit of service that transcends nationality and creed. If you are still not convinced I suggest checking out Johnson Beharry from Grenada or Dipprasad Pun from Nepaul, both of whom have been awarded some of our nation's highest honours - Yet, look a little deeper, and you’ll discover a rich and beautiful tapestry of peoples who have defended these islands for centuries.
 
很遗憾地说，你被误导了。虽然确实有些时候英军在英联邦国家中加大了招募比例，但这和多元、公平、包容政策无关。那反映的是我们社会结构的演变，以及年轻一代的志向变化。这是所有西方国家面临的挑战，不只是英国，也绝不是在偏袒哪个群体。
我本人在军中服役超过二十年，现在仍参与其中，最近还在训练基地任职。我可以亲身证明这些说法并不属实。你的朋友当然有权表达自己的观点，他们的看法很可能是出于自身经历，但作为刚刚获得军官任命的年轻中尉，他们还没有机会接触军队完整的招募机制、政策，或者到像Pirbright、Harrogate、Catterick这样的基础训练中心轮岗。如果能看看最近陆军基础学院的结业阅兵，你就能理解更多。
最后，我想指出历史上有无数来自不同背景和信仰的人——印度人、锡克人、斐济人、尼泊尔人等等——都自愿并英勇地为我们的国家作战，这种服务精神早已超越国籍和信仰。如果你仍然不信，那就去了解一下来自格林纳达的Johnson Beharry或来自尼泊尔的Dipprasad Pun，他们都获得了国家最高荣誉之一。再往下看，你会发现有着悠久历史的多元群体，世世代代在保卫这片岛屿。