20080715 奧巴馬演講—Campaign Policy Speech on Iraq at the Wilson Center

2020-03-15 11:32:1537:59 5.9萬
聲音簡(jiǎn)介

Thank you very much, everybody, and I very much appreciate your patience. I want to, first of all, thank Ambassador Gildenhorn for the outstanding work he does as board chairman here at the Woodrow Wilson Center, and to my great friend Lee Hamilton, who is, I think, an example of what's best in American public service, and has done so much to not only promote American interests all across the globe but also to educate the American people on our foreign policy. So, thank you very much.

Sixty-one years ago, George Marshal announced the plan that would come to bear his name. Much of Europe lay in ruins. The United States faced a powerful and ideological enemy intent on world domination. This menace was magnified by the recently discovered capability to destroy life on an unimaginable scale. The Soviet Union didn't yet have an atomic bomb, but before long it would.


The challenge facing the greatest generation of Americans -- the generation that had vanquished fascism on the battlefield -- was how to contain this threat while extending freedom's frontiers. Leaders like Truman and Acheson, Kennan and Marshall, knew that there was no single decisive blow that could be struck for freedom. We needed a new overarching strategy to meet the challenges of a new and dangerous world.

Such a strategy would join overwhelming military strength with sound judgment. It would shape events not just through military force, but through the force of our ideas; through economic power, intelligence and diplomacy. It would support strong allies that freely shared our ideals of liberty and democracy; open markets and the rule of law. It would foster new international institutions like the United Nations, NATO, and the World Bank, and focus on every corner of the globe. It was a strategy that saw clearly the world's dangers, while seizing its promise.

As a general, Marshall had spent years helping FDR wage war. But the Marshall Plan -- which was just one part of this strategy -- helped rebuild not just allies, but also the nation that Marshall had plotted to defeat. In the speech announcing his plan, he concluded not with tough talk or definitive declarations -- but rather with questions and a call for perspective. "The whole world of the future," Marshall said, "hangs on a proper judgment." To make that judgment, he asked the American people to examine distant events that directly affected their security and prosperity. He closed by asking: "What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?"

What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?

Today's dangers are different, though no less grave. The power to destroy life on a catastrophic scale now risks falling into the hands of terrorists. The future of our security -- and our planet -- is held hostage to our dependence on foreign oil and gas. From the cave- spotted mountains of northwest Pakistan, to the centrifuges spinning beneath Iranian soil, we know that the American people cannot be protected by oceans or the sheer might of our military alone.

The attacks of September 11 brought this new reality into a terrible and ominous focus. On that bright and beautiful day, the world of peace and prosperity that was the legacy of our Cold War victory seemed to suddenly vanish under rubble, and twisted steel, and clouds of smoke.

But the depth of this tragedy also drew out the decency and determination of our nation. At blood banks and vigils; in schools and in the United States Congress, Americans were united -- more united, even, than we were at the dawn of the Cold War. The world, too, was united against the perpetrators of this evil act, as old allies, new friends, and even long-time adversaries stood by our side. It was time -- once again -- for America's might and moral suasion to be harnessed; it was time to once again shape a new security strategy for an ever-changing world.

Imagine, for a moment, what we could have done in those days, and months, and years after 9/11.

We could have deployed the full force of American power to hunt down and destroy Osama bin Laden, Al Qaida, the Taliban, and all of the terrorists responsible for 9/11, while supporting real security in Afghanistan.

We could have secured loose nuclear materials around the world, and updated a 20th century non-proliferation framework to meet the challenges of the 21st.

We could have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in alternative sources of energy to grow our economy, save our planet, and end the tyranny of oil.

We could have strengthened old alliances, formed new partnerships, and renewed international institutions to advance peace and prosperity.

We could have called on a new generation to step into the strong currents of history, and to serve their country as troops and teachers, Peace Corps volunteers and police officers.

We could have secured our homeland -- investing in sophisticated new protection for our ports, our trains and our power plants.

We could have rebuilt our roads and bridges, laid down new rail and broadband and electricity systems, and made college affordable for every American to strengthen our ability to compete.

We could have done that.

Instead, we have lost thousands of American lives, spent nearly a trillion dollars, alienated allies and neglected emerging threats -- all in the cause of fighting a war for well over five years in a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.

Our men and women in uniform have accomplished every mission we have given them. What's missing in our debate about Iraq -- what has been missing since before the war began -- is a discussion of the strategic consequences of Iraq and its dominance of our foreign policy. This war distracts us from every threat that we face and so many opportunities we could seize. This war diminishes our security, our standing in the world, our military, our economy, and the resources that we need to confront the challenges of the 21st century. By any measure, our single-minded and open-ended focus on Iraq is not a sound strategy for keeping America safe.

I am running for President of the United States to lead this country in a new direction -- to seize this moment's promise. Instead of being distracted from the most pressing threats that we face, I want to overcome them. Instead of pushing the entire burden of our foreign policy on to the brave men and women of our military, I want to use all elements of American power to keep us safe, and prosperous, and free. Instead of alienating ourselves from the world, I want America -- once again -- to lead.

As President, I will pursue a tough, smart and principled national security strategy -- one that recognizes that we have interests not just in Baghdad, but in Kandahar and Karachi, in Tokyo and London, in Beijing and Berlin. I will focus this strategy on five goals essential to making America safer: ending the war in Iraq responsibly; finishing the fight against Al Qaida and the Taliban; securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states; achieving true energy security; and rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

My opponent in this campaign has served this country with honor, and we all respect his sacrifice. We both want to do what we think is best to defend the American people. But we've made different judgments, and would lead in very different directions. That starts with Iraq.

I opposed going to war in Iraq; Senator McCain was one of Washington's biggest supporters for war. I warned that the invasion of a country posing no imminent threat would fan the flames of extremism, and distract us from the fight against Al Qaida and the Taliban; Senator McCain claimed that we would be greeted as liberators, and that democracy would spread across the Middle East. Those were the judgments we made on the most important strategic question since the end of the Cold War.

Now, all of us recognize that we must do more than look back -- we must make a judgment about how to move forward. What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done? Senator McCain wants to talk of our tactics in Iraq; I want to focus on a new strategy for Iraq and the wider world.

It has been 18 months since President Bush announced the surge. As I have said many times, our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence. General Petraeus has used new tactics to protect the Iraqi population. We have talked directly to Sunni tribes that used to be hostile to America, and supported their fight against Al Qaida. Shiite militias have generally respected a cease- fire. Those are the facts, and all Americans welcome them.



用戶評(píng)論

表情0/300

天與天成

歡迎關(guān)注原創(chuàng)主播天與天成

聽友487064752

有中文翻譯嗎?

猜你喜歡
四奧

小學(xué)四年級(jí)奧數(shù)舉一反三,學(xué)習(xí)是一種循序漸進(jìn)的過程,所以我們要有持之以恒的學(xué)習(xí)理念,訓(xùn)練多角度思考問題的能力,從而養(yǎng)成一個(gè)良好的學(xué)習(xí)習(xí)慣,這樣方能做到融會(huì)貫通,...

by:不倒翁翁

大奧

漸欲桜散,百鬼繚亂;華服為孽,奧深似海。

by:聽友34625144

爆笑奧利給!奧利給!

我沒遇到什么困難,也不要怕,微笑著面對(duì)他,加油,奧利給?。?!這是一部關(guān)于奧利給先生的專輯,裏面有很多奧利給的東西!傻子奧利給等等等等更新時(shí)間:每天兩集有可能一...

by:茶杯鼠_小茶茶

奧運(yùn)

為啥奧運(yùn)項(xiàng)目沒有釣魚

by:淼宇熙熙

奧娘

我家妮不喜歡讀書,為了提高她的興趣,給她設(shè)了個(gè)專輯,希望大家多多吐槽

by:奧娘

奧莉薇

歡迎關(guān)注寶方媽媽微信公眾號(hào)---“寶方媽媽每日雜談”!

by:寶方媽媽講故事

奧本海默

2006年普立茲獎(jiǎng)傳記類得獎(jiǎng)作品?美國國家書評(píng)獎(jiǎng)最佳傳記。他是美國的普羅米修斯,“原子彈之父“,戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間為他的國家?guī)ь^努力從大自然攫取令人敬畏的太陽之火。之后,...

by:石器時(shí)代的Kriek

奧德賽

特洛伊之戰(zhàn)結(jié)束后,眾英雄返家的故事。

by:主播大治