A very misleading series of graphics. The claimed numbers of assets under the US Indo-Pacific Command is incorrect. The US Indo-Pacific Command has the US Pacific Fleet under its command. The US Pacific Fleet in turn has the 3rd and 7th Fleet under its command. The 3rd Fleet is headquartered in San Diego and is responsible for the Northern and Eastern Pacific with four carrier strike groups. The 7th Fleet is headquartered in Yokosuka and forward deployed in the Western Pacific was only one carrier strike group. A more accurate assessment is that this is a comparison of the PLAN with only the peace-time forward deployed 7th Fleet. The idea that the USN would not move assets from the 3rd Fleet to reinforce the 7th Fleet is pure fantasy.
Time for a WW2 history lesson
The IJN attack on Pearl Harbor primarily hit the US Pacific Fleet. However, initial attacks did not cripple the US Asiatic Fleet. The US Asiatic Fleet (2 cruisers, 13 destroyers, 4 seaplane tenders and 29 submarines) was forward deployed at the time of Pearl Harbor, but following Pearl Harbor was outnumbered and outgunned by the IJN with no prospect for reinforcements. By May 5 1942, half of the 40 surface ships in the US Asiatic Fleet were sunk. The remains of the US Asiatic Fleet retreated to Australia and was reformed as part of the South West Pacific Area Command which also established the 7th Fleet. The original pre-war plan was for the US Asiatic Fleet to fight a delaying action against the IJN while the US Pacific Fleet would relieve them in force later. Pearl Harbor completely derailed that plan since the US Pacific Fleet was hit first instead of the US Asiatic Fleet.
A more apt comparison is that the forward deployed 7th Fleet is playing a role similar to the WW2 US Asiatic Fleet. But the meat of the US navy in the Pacific is under the 3rd Fleet and not the 7th fleet. Furthermore, this graphic doesn't even add the JMSDF. The author is deliberately misleading readers with this graphic.