Comments by "Dave Sisson" (@Dave_Sisson) on "The Washington Naval Treaty - The parties, the motives, the negotiations, the loophole abuse..." video.

Without reading your link, it strikes me that in the 1920s the UK had far more allies in the Pacific Ocean capable of operating and maintaining capital ships than the USA did. Australia had their own before the first world war, Chile sort of did too, then there's Canada, Netherlands, even little New Zealand could probably manage to run a battleship. But which reliable and trustworthy allies did the U.S. have? So if the Yanks had given away cruisers and battleship to their somewhat shaky allies (perhaps Ecuador?), the Brits could give away far more ships to a lot of countries that they knew would help them in a war.
1
@WalterReimer Except that before the war the Philippines was an American colony with only very limited self government. I can't think of a single country bordering the Pacific that had closer relations with the U.S. than they did with the U.K. except for a few unstable tropical Latin American countries.
1