-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
Yesterday, I interviewed the Republican presidential candidate John McCain, and he said this: "Failure is catastrophe1. Failure is genocide. Failure means we come back. Failure means they follow us home." What if he's right? What if he's right and what you're proposing, and a lot of Democrats2 are proposing, results in genocide in Iraq?
Well, look, what you have right now is chaos3 in Iraq. After having spent hundreds of billions of dollars, after seeing close to 3,200 lives lost, what you now see is chaos. And there's no end in sight. Now, John McCain may believe that it's an option for us to maintain an indefinite occupation of Iraq, regardless of what happens in terms of the politics within Iraq, so that we're every year sending 100 billion dollars over to Iraq, so that every year we're seeing hundreds or thousands of young Americans dying, so that we continue to see a deterioration4 of America's standing5 in the world. I don't think that serves the best interests of the United States, and I don't think it will ultimately result in the kind of, the stabilization6 in Iraq that's necessary. Now, these are judgment7 calls. I don't question John McCain's sincerity8 in believing that the approach that he wants to take, which is essentially9 a continuation of the Bush policies over the last six years, are the right ones to take.
If you're president of the United States in January 2009, and the situation is basically the same in Iraq as it is right now, what would be your immediate10 first step?
Well, the bill that I put in, I think...
But assuming that bill doesn't go.
No, no, but I think... Assuming that things are the same, I think the same dynamic will be at work, which is to say, we are gonna pull out our combat troops out of Iraq in a phased, systematic11 way, that we continue to provide the Iraqi government with logistical and training support, that we have those forces over the horizon to respond to crisis that spill over into the remainder of the region. And most importantly, we have an aggressive diplomatic initiative with those countries in the region to make sure that we are part of a broader conversation about how can we stabilize12 Iraq and stabilize the region.
You're president of the United State. 15 American sailors and marines are captured by Iranians, the Revolutionary Guard in the northern Persian Gulf13, and they're held. What do you do?
Well, I think that the British obviously are taking the prudent14 steps that are required, sending a strong, unequivocal message to the Iranians that they have to release these British soldiers. I think that they are handling it in the appropriate way. My sense is that the Iranians are going to stand down fairly soon. But, look, one of the obligations of the Commander-in-Chief is to make sure that our troops are protected, wherever they're projected around the world.
So, they, if they were to hold them, let's say, for 444 days—Iranians have held Americans hostage for a long period of time—what, do you just let them be held there?
No, you don't. I think you take a firm action to make sure that those troops are returned.
You want to be specific?
You know, I think that it's important to say that all options, including military, would be on the table in such a circumstance.
Well, look, what you have right now is chaos3 in Iraq. After having spent hundreds of billions of dollars, after seeing close to 3,200 lives lost, what you now see is chaos. And there's no end in sight. Now, John McCain may believe that it's an option for us to maintain an indefinite occupation of Iraq, regardless of what happens in terms of the politics within Iraq, so that we're every year sending 100 billion dollars over to Iraq, so that every year we're seeing hundreds or thousands of young Americans dying, so that we continue to see a deterioration4 of America's standing5 in the world. I don't think that serves the best interests of the United States, and I don't think it will ultimately result in the kind of, the stabilization6 in Iraq that's necessary. Now, these are judgment7 calls. I don't question John McCain's sincerity8 in believing that the approach that he wants to take, which is essentially9 a continuation of the Bush policies over the last six years, are the right ones to take.
If you're president of the United States in January 2009, and the situation is basically the same in Iraq as it is right now, what would be your immediate10 first step?
Well, the bill that I put in, I think...
But assuming that bill doesn't go.
No, no, but I think... Assuming that things are the same, I think the same dynamic will be at work, which is to say, we are gonna pull out our combat troops out of Iraq in a phased, systematic11 way, that we continue to provide the Iraqi government with logistical and training support, that we have those forces over the horizon to respond to crisis that spill over into the remainder of the region. And most importantly, we have an aggressive diplomatic initiative with those countries in the region to make sure that we are part of a broader conversation about how can we stabilize12 Iraq and stabilize the region.
You're president of the United State. 15 American sailors and marines are captured by Iranians, the Revolutionary Guard in the northern Persian Gulf13, and they're held. What do you do?
Well, I think that the British obviously are taking the prudent14 steps that are required, sending a strong, unequivocal message to the Iranians that they have to release these British soldiers. I think that they are handling it in the appropriate way. My sense is that the Iranians are going to stand down fairly soon. But, look, one of the obligations of the Commander-in-Chief is to make sure that our troops are protected, wherever they're projected around the world.
So, they, if they were to hold them, let's say, for 444 days—Iranians have held Americans hostage for a long period of time—what, do you just let them be held there?
No, you don't. I think you take a firm action to make sure that those troops are returned.
You want to be specific?
You know, I think that it's important to say that all options, including military, would be on the table in such a circumstance.
点击收听单词发音
1 catastrophe | |
n.大灾难,大祸 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 democrats | |
n.民主主义者,民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 chaos | |
n.混乱,无秩序 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 deterioration | |
n.退化;恶化;变坏 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 standing | |
n.持续,地位;adj.永久的,不动的,直立的,不流动的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 Stabilization | |
稳定化 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 judgment | |
n.审判;判断力,识别力,看法,意见 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 sincerity | |
n.真诚,诚意;真实 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 essentially | |
adv.本质上,实质上,基本上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 immediate | |
adj.立即的;直接的,最接近的;紧靠的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 systematic | |
adj.有系统的,有计划的,有方法的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 stabilize | |
vt.(使)稳定,使稳固,使稳定平衡;vi.稳定 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 gulf | |
n.海湾;深渊,鸿沟;分歧,隔阂 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 prudent | |
adj.谨慎的,有远见的,精打细算的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|