美国经典演讲 麦克阿瑟：《老兵不死》(英文原版及翻译)

老兵永远不会死亡，他们只会渐渐消逝。

”“老兵永远不死，只会悄然隐去……”，这是一首美国独立战争期间的歌，而这首歌为我所熟悉却是因为那篇题为《责任－荣誉－国家》的著名演讲。

看了《百家讲坛》二战人物传记系列中的麦克阿瑟，我感受特别深。

一位美国五星上将的二战经历震撼了我。

他凭借自己优秀的军事才能，成了美军史上最年青的陆军少将。

道格拉斯·麦克阿瑟(Douglas·MacArthur)，美国五星上将。

出身于军人世家。

1903年毕业于西点军校。

1906～1907年任总统随从副官。

第一次世界大战时任师参谋长、师长，在法国战场作战。

1919～1922年任西点军校校长。

1928年任驻菲律宾美军司令。

1930年任美国陆军参谋长。

1935年任菲律宾军事顾问。

1936年被菲律宾总统任命为菲律宾陆军元帅。

1941年7月任远东美军司令。

1942 年任西南太平洋盟军总司令。

同年秋季开始对日反攻。

1945 年9月2 日代表盟国接受日本投降。

后以盟军最高司令官名义，执行美国单独占领日本的任务。

朝鲜战争爆发后，任侵朝“联合国军”总司令，极力主张扩大侵朝战争、进攻中国。

因同H.S.杜鲁门政府的全球战略方针有分歧，1951年4月被撤职。

以前我对二战并不了解，更不用说对二战的任务，但通过老师上课给我们观看的影片，我渐渐认识了许多二战的人物，从他们身上了我看到了一位将军所应有的胆量，素质和领导才能，其中麦克阿瑟给我的印象也是最深的。

“我走了，但我还会回来”这是他的一句话，是他撤离菲律宾时说的一句话。

从这句话中我们看到了他，一位世界名将的个性，曾经罗斯福要他把那句话改成“我们将回来”，但他还是执意要用他以前的“我将会回来”，也只有他才能想出用五支钢笔和日本签字受降。

通过课堂上影片的介绍，我了解到的只是一点点，下课后我自己又看了他的相关介绍，比起麦克阿瑟在回忆录中的自我标榜，《麦克阿瑟传》相对客观和详尽的讲述了这位传奇将军的一生，他生前既有辉煌而不可一世的时候，也有狼狈逃窜如丧家之犬的时候，在马尼拉，在巴丹半岛，在“密苏里号”，在日本，在仁川……翻开书，那些半个世纪以前的峥嵘岁月，那些我们曾在历史课本中为之激动、为之愤怒、为之欣喜的诸多大事件，一一再现于我的眼前。

麦克阿瑟告别演讲“老兵永不死”演讲全文总统先生，演讲者，议会杰出的成员们：我怀着深深的谦卑和无比的自豪感站在这演讲台上----谦卑是因为面对在我面前的那些伟大美国过去的建设者们；自豪是因为想到国内立法争论所设计的代表人类最纯洁的自由。

整个人类的希望、抱负、信念都集中于此。

我站在这里不为任何党派目的辩护，因为议题的根本性超出了党派所能考虑的区域。

如果能证明我们的路线稳妥且我们的前途有保障,那些问题就应被放在最高位来解决.因此，我相信，你们会公正地把我所表达的当作一个美国同胞的观点。

我演讲既不带人生暮年的怨恨也不带伤感之情，但心中只有一个目的：为我的祖国效劳。

虽然亚洲被认为是通往欧洲的大门，但说欧洲是通往亚洲的大门也没有错。

且一方的广泛影响不得不带动另一方。

一些人声称我们的力量不足以同时保护两条线路，我们不能分散精力。

我认为没有比这更能表现出失败主义的了。

如果潜在性的敌人能将他们的力量分为两条路线，那对我们来说就要对他们的力量予以反击。

共产主义者的威胁是一个全球性的问题。

他们在每个防区的成功进展直接预示着我们每隔一个防区将遭到破坏。

我们不会为让亚洲的共产主义投降而不能同时削弱我们的力量去遏止欧洲的发展而感到安慰。

说了太多的共知之理，我会简略我关于亚洲地区的讨论。

在某人能客观地对那里存在的形势作出评估之前，他必须了解一些关于亚洲的过去和他们沿着自己的路线发展至今的改革变化。

被所谓的殖民统治长期的剥削，便很难有机会建立社会的公正尺度，维护个人尊严，或者实现一个高水平的生活，就像保卫我们在菲律宾自己崇高的政府，亚洲的人民抓住了他们的时机在战争中摆脱了殖民统治的束缚并且看到了新时机的曙光，一种从未感受过的尊严和一个国家自由后的自尊感。

集合地球一半的人数，有60%的自然资源被这些人迅速地加强成为一种新的力量，精神上的和物质上的都被用来提升生活水平也是为适应对自己的不同文化环境的最新进展的谋划。

不管谁是否拘泥于殖民的概念，这是亚洲发展进步的方向且不会被终止。

Old soldiers never die -----------Douglas MacArthurMr. President, Mr. Speaker, and Distinguished Members of the Congress:I stand on this rostrum with a sense of deep humility and great pride -- humility in the weight of those great American architects of our history who h ave stood here before me; pride in the reflection that this home of legislative debate represents human liberty in the purest form yet devised. Here are ce ntered the hopes and aspirations and faith of the entire human race. I do no t stand here as advocate for any partisan cause, for the issues are fundame ntal and reach quite beyond the realm of partisan consideration. They must b e resolved on the highest plane of national interest if our course is to prove sound and our future protected. I trust, therefore, that you will do me the just ice of receiving that which I have to say as solely expressing the considered viewpoint of a fellow American.I address you with neither rancor nor bitterness in the fading twilight of li fe, with but one purpose in mind: to serve my country. The issues are global and so interlocked that to consider the problems of one sector, oblivious to those of another, is but to court disaster for the whole. While Asia is commo nly referred to as the Gateway to Europe, it is no less true that Europe is th e Gateway to Asia, and the broad influence of the one cannot fail to have it s impact upon the other. There are those who claim our strength is inadequa te to protect on both fronts, that we cannot divide our effort. I can think of n o greater expression of defeatism. If a potential enemy can divide his strengt h on two fronts, it is for us to counter his effort. The Communist threat is a global one. Its successful advance in one sector threatens the destruction of every other sector. You can not appease or otherwise surrender to communis m in Asia without simultaneously undermining our efforts to halt its advance i n Europe.Beyond pointing out these general truisms, I shall confine my discussion to the general areas of Asia. Before one may objectively assess the situation now existing there, he must comprehend something of Asia's past and the r evolutionary changes which have marked her course up to the present. Long exploited by the so-called colonial powers, with little opportunity to achieve a ny degree of social justice, individual dignity, or a higher standard of life suc h as guided our own noble administration in the Philippines, the peoples of A sia found their opportunity in the war just past to throw off the shackles of c olonialism and now see the dawn of new opportunity, a heretofore unfelt dign ity, and the self-respect of political freedom.Mustering half of the earth's population, and 60 percent of its natural res ources these peoples are rapidly consolidating a new force, both moral and material, with which to raise the living standard and erect adaptations of the design of modern progress to their own distinct cultural environments. Whethe r one adheres to the concept of colonization or not, this is the direction of A sian progress and it may not be stopped. It is a corollary to the shift of the world economic frontiers as the whole epicenter of world affairs rotates back toward the area whence it started.In this situation, it becomes vital that our own country orient its policies i n consonance with this basic evolutionary condition rather than pursue a cour se blind to the reality that the colonial era is now past and the Asian people s covet the right to shape their own free destiny. What they seek now is frie ndly guidance, understanding, and support -- not imperious direction -- the di gnity of equality and not the shame of subjugation. Their pre-war standard of life, pitifully low, is infinitely lower now in the devastation left in war's wake. World ideologies play little part in Asian thinking and are little understood. What the peoples strive for is the opportunity for a little more food in their st omachs, a little better clothing on their backs, a little firmer roof over their he ads, and the realization of the normal nationalist urge for political freedom. T hese political-social conditions have but an indirect bearing upon our own nati onal security, but do form a backdrop to contemporary planning which must be thoughtfully considered if we are to avoid the pitfalls of unrealism.Of more direct and immediately bearing upon our national security are th e changes wrought in the strategic potential of the Pacific Ocean in the cour se of the past war. Prior thereto the western strategic frontier of the United States lay on the literal line of the Americas, with an exposed island salient extending out through Hawaii, Midway, and Guam to the Philippines. That sal ient proved not an outpost of strength but an avenue of weakness along whi ch the enemy could and did attack.The Pacific was a potential area of advance for any predatory force inte nt upon striking at the bordering land areas. All this was changed by our Pa cific victory. Our strategic frontier then shifted to embrace the entire Pacific O cean, which became a vast moat to protect us as long as we held it. Indeed, it acts as a protective shield for all of the Americas and all free lands of th e Pacific Ocean area. We control it to the shores of Asia by a chain of islan ds extending in an arc from the Aleutians to the Mariannas held by us and our free allies. From this island chain we can dominate with sea and air pow er every Asiatic port from Vladivostok to Singapore -- with sea and air powerevery port, as I said, from Vladivostok to Singapore -- and prevent any host ile movement into the Pacific.Any predatory attack from Asia must be an amphibious effort.* No amphi bious force can be successful without control of the sea lanes and the air ov er those lanes in its avenue of advance. With naval and air supremacy and modest ground elements to defend bases, any major attack from continental Asia toward us or our friends in the Pacific would be doomed to failure.Under such conditions, the Pacific no longer represents menacing avenue s of approach for a prospective invader. It assumes, instead, the friendly asp ect of a peaceful lake. Our line of defense is a natural one and can be mai ntained with a minimum of military effort and expense. It envisions no attack against anyone, nor does it provide the bastions essential for offensive operat ions, but properly maintained, would be an invincible defense against aggress ion. The holding of this literal defense line in the western Pacific is entirely d ependent upon holding all segments thereof; for any major breach of that line by an unfriendly power would render vulnerable to determined attack every other major segment.This is a military estimate as to which I have yet to find a military leade r who will take exception. For that reason, I have strongly recommended in t he past, as a matter of military urgency, that under no circumstances must F ormosa fall under Communist control. Such an eventuality would at once thre aten the freedom of the Philippines and the loss of Japan and might well for ce our western frontier back to the coast of California, Oregon and Washingt on.To understand the changes which now appear upon the Chinese mainlan d, one must understand the changes in Chinese character and culture over t he past 50 years. China, up to 50 years ago, was completely non-homogeno us, being compartmented into groups divided against each other. The war-ma king tendency was almost non-existent, as they still followed the tenets of the Confucian ideal of pacifist culture. At the turn of the century, under the regi me of Chang Tso Lin, efforts toward greater homogeneity produced the start of a nationalist urge. This was further and more successfully developed under the leadership of Chiang Kai-Shek, but has been brought to its greatest fruit ion under the present regime to the point that it has now taken on the chara cter of a united nationalism of increasingly dominant, aggressive tendencies.Through these past 50 years the Chinese people have thus become milit arized in their concepts and in their ideals. They now constitute excellent sol diers, with competent staffs and commanders. This has produced a new anddominant power in Asia, which, for its own purposes, is allied with Soviet Ru ssia but which in its own concepts and methods has become aggressively im perialistic, with a lust for expansion and increased power normal to this type of imperialism.There is little of the ideological concept either one way or another in the Chinese make-up. The standard of living is so low and the capital accumula tion has been so thoroughly dissipated by war that the masses are desperate and eager to follow any leadership which seems to promise the alleviation o f local stringencies.I have from the beginning believed that the Chinese Communists' support of the North Koreans was the dominant one. Their interests are, at present, parallel with those of the Soviet. But I believe that the aggressiveness recen tly displayed not only in Korea but also in Indo-China and Tibet and pointing potentially toward the South reflects predominantly the same lust for the exp ansion of power which has animated every would-be conqueror since the beg inning of time.The Japanese people, since the war, have undergone the greatest refor mation recorded in modern history. With a commendable will, eagerness to le arn, and marked capacity to understand, they have, from the ashes left in w ar's wake, erected in Japan an edifice dedicated to the supremacy of individu al liberty and personal dignity; and in the ensuing process there has been cr eated a truly representative government committed to the advance of political morality, freedom of economic enterprise, and social justice.Politically, economically, and socially Japan is now abreast of many free nations of the earth and will not again fail the universal trust. That it may be counted upon to wield a profoundly beneficial influence over the course of e vents in Asia is attested by the magnificent manner in which the Japanese p eople have met the recent challenge of war, unrest, and confusion surroundin g them from the outside and checked communism within their own frontiers without the slightest slackening in their forward progress. I sent all four of ou r occupation divisions to the Korean battlefront without the slightest qualms a s to the effect of the resulting power vacuum upon Japan. The results fully j ustified my faith. I know of no nation more serene, orderly, and industrious, n or in which higher hopes can be entertained for future constructive service in the advance of the human race.Of our former ward, the Philippines, we can look forward in confidence t hat the existing unrest will be corrected and a strong and healthy nation will grow in the longer aftermath of war's terrible destructiveness. We must be patient and understanding and never fail them -- as in our hour of need, they did not fail us. A Christian nation, the Philippines stand as a mighty bulwark of Christianity in the Far East, and its capacity for high moral leadership in A sia is unlimited.On Formosa, the government of the Republic of China has had the oppo rtunity to refute by action much of the malicious gossip which so undermined the strength of its leadership on the Chinese mainland. The Formosan peopl e are receiving a just and enlightened administration with majority representati on on the organs of government, and politically, economically, and socially th ey appear to be advancing along sound and constructive lines.With this brief insight into the surrounding areas, I now turn to the Korea n conflict. While I was not consulted prior to the President's decision to inter vene in support of the Republic of Korea, that decision from a military standp oint, proved a sound one, as we hurled back the invader and decimated his forces. Our victory was complete, and our objectives within reach, when Red China intervened with numerically superior ground forces.This created a new war and an entirely new situation, a situation not co ntemplated when our forces were committed against the North Korean invade rs; a situation which called for new decisions in the diplomatic sphere to per mit the realistic adjustment of military strategy.Such decisions have not been forthcoming.While no man in his right mind would advocate sending our ground force s into continental China, and such was never given a thought, the new situat ion did urgently demand a drastic revision of strategic planning if our political aim was to defeat this new enemy as we had defeated the old.Apart from the military need, as I saw It, to neutralize the sanctuary prot ection given the enemy north of the Yalu, I felt that military necessity in the conduct of the war made necessary: first the intensification of our economic blockade against China; two the imposition of a naval blockade against the C hina coast; three removal of restrictions on air reconnaissance of China's coa stal areas and of Manchuria; four removal of restrictions on the forces of the Republic of China on Formosa, with logistical support to contribute to their e ffective operations against the common enemy.For entertaining these views, all professionally designed to support our fo rces committed to Korea and bring hostilities to an end with the least possibl e delay and at a saving of countless American and allied lives, I have been severely criticized in lay circles, principally abroad, despite my understanding that from a military standpoint the above views have been fully shared in thepast by practically every military leader concerned with the Korean campaign, including our own Joint Chiefs of Staff.I called for reinforcements but was informed that reinforcements were not available. I made clear that if not permitted to destroy the enemy built-up b ases north of the Yalu, if not permitted to utilize the friendly Chinese Force o f some 600,000 men on Formosa, if not permitted to blockade the China coa st to prevent the Chinese Reds from getting succor from without, and if there were to be no hope of major reinforcements, the position of the command fr om the military standpoint forbade victory.We could hold in Korea by constant maneuver and in an approximate ar ea where our supply line advantages were in balance with the supply line dis advantages of the enemy, but we could hope at best for only an indecisive c ampaign with its terrible and constant attrition upon our forces if the enemy u tilized its full military potential. I have constantly called for the new political d ecisions essential to a solution.Efforts have been made to distort my position. It has been said, in effect, that I was a warmonger. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know wa r as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting.I have long advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on b oth friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling internation al disputes. Indeed, on the second day of September, nineteen hundred and forty-five, just following the surrender of the Japanese nation on the Battleshi p Missouri, I formally cautioned as follows:"Men since the beginning of time havesought peace. Various methods through theages have been attempted to devise aninternational process to prevent or settledisputes between nations. From the verystart workable methods were found in sofar as individual citizens were concerned,but the mechanics of an instrumentality oflarger international scope have neverbeen successful. Military alliances,balances of power, Leagues of Nations,all in turn failed, leaving the only path tobe by way of the crucible of war. Theutter destructiveness of war now blocksout this alternative. We have had our lastchance. If we will not devise somegreater and more equitable system,Armageddon will be at our door. Theproblem basically is theological andinvolves a spiritual recrudescence andimprovement of human character that willsynchronize with our almost matchlessadvances in science, art, literature, and allmaterial and cultural developments ofthe past 2000 years. It must be of the spiritif we are to save the flesh."But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to ap ply every available means to bring it to a swift end.War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.In war there is no substitute for victory.There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. Th ey are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable e mphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like blackmail, it lays the basis for ne w and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative."Why," my soldiers asked of me, "surrender military advantages to an en emy in the field?" I could not answer.Some may say: to avoid spread of the conflict into an all-out war with C hina; others, to avoid Soviet intervention. Neither explanation seems valid, for China is already engaging with the maximum power it can commit, and the Soviet will not necessarily mesh its actions with our moves. Like a cobra, an y new enemy will more likely strike whenever it feels that the relativity in mili tary or other potential is in its favor on a world-wide basis.The tragedy of Korea is further heightened by the fact that its military ac tion is confined to its territorial limits. It condemns that nation, which it is our purpose to save, to suffer the devastating impact of full naval and air bomb ardment while the enemy's sanctuaries are fully protected from such attack a nd devastation.Of the nations of the world, Korea alone, up to now, is the sole one whi ch has risked its all against communism. The magnificence of the courage a nd fortitude of the Korean people defies description.They have chosen to risk death rather than slavery. Their last words to me were: "Don't scuttle the Pacific!"I have just left your fighting sons in Korea. They have met all tests ther e, and I can report to you without reservation that they are splendid in every way.It was my constant effort to preserve them and end this savage conflict honorably and with the least loss of time and a minimum sacrifice of life. Its growing bloodshed has caused me the deepest anguish and anxiety.Those gallant men will remain often in my thoughts and in my prayers al ways.I am closing my 52 years of military service. When I joined the Army, ev en before the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all of my boyish ho pes and dreams. The world has turned over many times since I took the oat h on the plain at West Point, and the hopes and dreams have long since va nished, but I still remember the refrain of one of the most popular barrack b allads of that day which proclaimed most proudly that "old soldiers never die; they just fade away."And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career an d just fade away, an old soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him t he light to see that duty.Good Bye.中文翻译：总统先生、议长先生和尊敬的国会议员们：我怀着十分谦卑而又骄傲的心情站在这演讲台上。

美国对伊战争退伍老兵反战英文演讲稿美国对伊战争退伍老兵反战英文演讲稿演讲稿是在一定的场合，面对一定的听众，演讲人围绕着主题讲话的文稿。

在现在社会，接触并使用演讲稿的人越来越多，相信写演讲稿是一个让许多人都头痛的问题，下面是小编精心整理的美国对伊战争退伍老兵反战英文演讲稿，希望能够帮助到大家。

美国对伊战争退伍老兵反战英文演讲稿1And I tried hard to be proud of my service but all I could feel was shame.The racism could no longer mask the reality of the occupation. These were people, these were human beings. I’ve since been claimed by guilt anytime I see an elderly man like the one who couldn’t wal k and we rolled out on a stretcher and told the Iraqi police to take him away.I feel guilt anytime I see a mother with her children like the one who cried hysterically and screamed that we were worst than Saddam as we forced her from her home.I feel guilt anytime I see a young girl, like the one I grabbed by the arm, and dragged into the street. We are told we are fighting terrorists; the real terrorist was me and the real terrorism is this occupation. Racism within the military has long been an important tool to justify the destruction and occupation of another country.It’s long been used to justify the killing, subjugation and torture of another people. Racism is a vital weapon employed by this government. It’s a more important weapon than a rifle, a ta nk, a bomber or a battleship. It’s more destructive than an artillery shell or a bunker buster, or a Tomahawk missile.While those weapons are created and owned by thisgovernment, they are harmless without people willing to use them. Those who send us to war do not have to pull a trigger or lob a mortar round. They do not have to fight the war, they merely have to sell the war.They need a public who is willing to send their soldiers into harm’s way. They need soldiers who are willing to kill and be killed without question. They can spend millions on a single bomb, but that bomb only becomes a weapon when the ranks in the military are willing to follow orders to use it. They can send every last soldier anywhere on Earth, but there’ll only be a war, if soldiers are willing to fight.And the ruling class, the billionaires who profit from human suffering care only about expending their wealth, controlling the world economy. Understand that their power lies only in their ability to convince us that war, oppression and exploitation is in our interest. They understand that their wealth is dependent on their ability to convince the working class to die to control the market of another country.And, convincing us to kill and die is based on their ability to make us think that we are somehow superior. Soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, have nothing to gain from this occupation. The vast majority of people living in the U.S. have nothing to gain from this occupation.In fact, not only do we have nothing to gain, but we suffer more because of it. We lose limbs, endure trauma and give our lives. Our families have to watch flag draped coffins roll into the earth. Millions in this country without health care, jobs or access to education, just watch as this government squander over 450 million dollars a day on this occupation.Poor and working people in this country are sent to kill poorand working people in other country to make the rich richer. Without racism soldiers would realize that they have more in common with the Iraqi people than they do with the billionaires who send us to war.I threw families onto the street in Iraq only to come home and find families thrown onto the street in this country and this tragic, tragic and unnecessary foreclosure crisis. We need to wake up and realize that our real enemies are not in some distant land and not people whose names we don’t know and cultures we don’t understand. The enemy is people we know very well and people we can identify.The enemy is a system that wages war when it’s profitable. The enemy is the CEOs who lay us off our jobs when it’s profitable, is the insurance companies who deny us health care when it’s profitable, is the banks who take away our homes when it’s profitable.Our enemy is not five thousands miles away, they are right here at home. If we organize and fight with our sisters and brothers we can stop this war, we can stop this government and we can create a better world.“If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a fore ign enemy… The loss of Liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger real or imagined from abroad…”美国对伊战争退伍老兵反战英文演讲稿2转眼间，20xx年的工作已经在忙碌中过去了，在这一年的时间里，随着车间中各位的不断努力，我们xxx车间无论是在生产效率还是产品质量上面，都有了极大的提升。

道格拉斯·麦克阿瑟西点军校告别演说（双语对照）General Douglas MacArthur 道格拉斯麦克阿瑟Sylvanus Thayer Award Acceptance Address'Duty, Honor, Country' 责任、荣誉、国家这是美国五星上将道格拉斯·麦克阿瑟82岁时的西点告别演说（翻译仅供参考）General Westmoreland ([注]Gen. Westmoreland 就是后来出任驻越南美军司令的魏摩兰将军), General Grove, distinguished guests, and gentlemen of the Corps!As I was leaving the hotel this morning, a doorman asked me, 'Where are you bound for, General?' And when I replied, 'West Point,' he remarked, 'Beautiful place. Have you ever been there before?'今天早晨，当我走出旅馆时，看门人问道：“将军，您上哪去？”一听说我要去西点，他说：“那是个好地方，您从前去过吗？”No human being could fail to be deeply moved by such a tribute as this [Thayer Award]. Coming from a profession I have served so long, and a people I have loved so well, it fills me with an emotion I cannot express. But this award is not intended primarily to honor a personality, but to symbolize a great moral code -- the code of conduct and chivalry of those who guard this beloved land of culture and ancient descent. That is the animation of this medallion. For all eyes and for all time, it is anexpression of the ethics of the American soldier. That I should be integrated in this way with so noble an ideal arouses a sense of pride and yet of humility which will be with me always.这样的荣誉是没有人不深受感动的。

美国经典演讲麦克阿瑟：《老兵不死》（英文原版及翻译）President, Mr. Speaker, and Distinguished Members of the Congress: I stand on this rostrum with a sense of deep humility and great pride -- humility in theweight of those great American architects of our history who have stood here before me; pride in the reflection that this home of legislative debaterepresents human liberty in the purest form yet devised. Here are centered the hopes and aspirations and faith of the entire human race. I do not stand here as advocate for any partisan cause, for the issues are fundamental and reach quite beyond the realm of partisan consideration. They must be resolved on the highest plane of national interest if our course is to prove sound and our future protected. I trust, therefore, that you will do me the justice of receiving thatwhich I have to say as solely expressing the considered viewpoint of a fellow American. I address you with neither rancor nor bitterness in the fading twilight of life, with but one purpose in mind: to serve my country. The issuesare global and so interlocked that to consider the problems of one sector,oblivious to those of another, is but to court disaster for the whole. WhileAsia is commonly referred to as the Gateway to Europe, it is no less true that Europe is the Gateway to Asia, and the broad influence of the one cannot fail to have its impact upon the other. There are those who claim our strength is inadequate to protect on both fronts, that we cannot divide our effort. I canthink of no greater expression of defeatism. If a potential enemy can divide his strength on two fronts, it is for us to counter his effort. The Communist threatis a global one. Its successful advance in one sector threatens the destructionof every other sector. You can not appease or otherwise surrender to communismin Asia without simultaneously undermining our efforts to halt its advance in Europe. Beyond pointing out these general truisms, I shall confine my discussion to the general areas of Asia. Before one may objectively assess the situation now existing there, he must comprehend something of Asia's past andthe revolutionary changes which have marked her course up to the present. Long exploited by the so-called colonial powers, with little opportunity to achieveany degree of social justice, individual dignity, or a higher standard of lifesuch as guided our own noble administration in the Philippines, the peoples ofAsia found their opportunity in the war just past to throw off the shackles of colonialism and now see the dawn of new opportunity, a heretofore unfelt dignity, and the self-respect of political freedom. Mustering half of theearth's population, and 60 percent of its natural resources these peoples arerapidly consolidating a new force, both moral and material, with which to raisethe living standard and erect adaptations of the design of modern progress totheir own distinct cultural environments. Whether one adheres to the concept of colonization or not, this is the direction of Asian progress and it may not be stopped. It is a corollary to the shift of the world economic frontiers as thewhole epicenter of world affairs rotates back toward the area whence it started.In this situation, it becomes vital that our own country orient its policiesin consonance with this basic evolutionary condition rather than pursue a course blind to the reality that the colonial era is now past and the Asian peoplescovet the right to shape their own free destiny. What they seek now is friendly guidance, understanding, and support -- not imperious direction -- the dignityof equality and not the shame of subjugation. Their pre-war standard of life, pitifully low, is infinitely lower now in the devastation left in war's wake.World ideologies play little part in Asian thinking and are little understood.What the peoples strive for is the opportunity for a little more food in their stomachs, a little better clothing on their backs, a little firmer roof overtheir heads, and the realization of the normal nationalist urge for political freedom. These political-social conditions have but an indirect bearing upon our own national security, but do form a backdrop to contemporary planning which must be thoughtfully considered if we are to avoid the pitfalls of unrealism.Of more direct and immediately bearing upon our national security are the changes wrought in the strategic potential of the Pacific Ocean in the course ofthe past war. Prior thereto the western strategic frontier of the United Stateslay on the literal line of the Americas, with an exposed island salientextending out through Hawaii, Midway, and Guam to the Philippines. That salient proved not an outpost of strength but an avenue of weakness along which the enemy could and did attack. The Pacific was a potential area of advance for any predatory force intent upon striking at the bordering land areas. All thiswas changed by our Pacific victory. Our strategic frontier then shifted toembrace the entire Pacific Ocean, which became a vast moat to protect us as long as we held it. Indeed, it acts as a protective shield for all of the Americasand all free lands of the Pacific Ocean area. We control it to the shores ofAsia by a chain of islands extending in an arc from the Aleutians to the Mariannas held by us and our free allies. From this island chain we can dominate with sea and air power every Asiatic port from Vladivostok to Singapore -- with sea and air power every port, as I said, from Vladivostok to Singapore -- and prevent any hostile movement into the Pacific. Any predatory attack from Asia must be an amphibious effort.* No amphibious force can be successful without control of the sea lanes and the air over those lanes in its avenue of advance.With naval and air supremacy and modest ground elements to defend bases, any major attack from continental Asia toward us or our friends in the Pacific wouldbe doomed to failure. Under such conditions, the Pacific no longer represents menacing avenues of approach for a prospective invader. It assumes, instead, the friendly aspect of a peaceful lake. Our line of defense is a natural one and canbe maintained with a minimum of military effort and expense. It envisions no attack against anyone, nor does it provide the bastions essential for offensive operations, but properly maintained, would be an invincible defense against aggression. The holding of this literal defense line in the western Pacific isentirely dependent upon holding all segments thereof; for any major breach ofthat line by an unfriendly power would render vulnerable to determined attackevery other major segment. This is a military estimate as to which I have yetto find a military leader who will take exception. For that reason, I havestrongly recommended in the past, as a matter of military urgency, that under no circumstances must Formosa fall under Communist control. Such an eventuality would at once threaten the freedom of the Philippines and the loss of Japan and might well force our western frontier back to the coast of California, Oregonand Washington. To understand the changes which now appear upon the Chinese mainland, one must understand the changes in Chinese character and culture overthe past 50 years. China, up to 50 years ago, was completely non-homogenous, being compartmented into groups divided against each other. The war-making tendency was almost non-existent, as they still followed the tenets of theConfucian ideal of pacifist culture. At the turn of the century, under theregime of Chang Tso Lin, efforts toward greater homogeneity produced the startof a nationalist urge. This was further and more successfully developed underthe leadership of Chiang Kai-Shek, but has been brought to its greatest fruition under the present regime to the point that it has now taken on the character ofa united nationalism of increasingly dominant, aggressive tendencies. Through these past 50 years the Chinese people have thus become militarized in their concepts and in their ideals. They now constitute excellent soldiers, with competent staffs and commanders. This has produced a new and dominant power in Asia, which, for its own purposes, is allied with Soviet Russia but which in itsown concepts and methods has become aggressively imperialistic, with a lust for expansion and increased power normal to this type of imperialism. There is little of the ideological concept either one way or another in the Chinesemake-up. The standard of living is so low and the capital accumulation has beenso thoroughly dissipated by war that the masses are desperate and eager tofollow any leadership which seems to promise the alleviation of local stringencies. I have from the beginning believed that the Chinese Communists' support of the North Koreans was the dominant one. Their interests are, at present, parallel with those of the Soviet. But I believe that theaggressiveness recently displayed not only in Korea but also in Indo-China andTibet and pointing potentially toward the South reflects predominantly the samelust for the expansion of power which has animated every would-be conquerorsince the beginning of time. The Japanese people, since the war, have undergone the greatest reformation recorded in modern history. With a commendable will, eagerness to learn, and marked capacity to understand, they have, from the ashes left in war's wake, erected in Japan an edifice dedicatedto the supremacy of individual liberty and personal dignity; and in the ensuing process there has been created a truly representative government committed tothe advance of political morality, freedom of economic enterprise, and social justice. Politically, economically, and socially Japan is now abreast of many free nations of the earth and will not again fail the universal trust. That itmay be counted upon to wield a profoundly beneficial influence over the courseof events in Asia is attested by the magnificent manner in which the Japanesepeople have met the recent challenge of war, unrest, and confusion surroundingthem from the outside and checked communism within their own frontiers without the slightest slackening in their forward progress. I sent all four of ouroccupation divisions to the Korean battlefront without the slightest qualms asto the effect of the resulting power vacuum upon Japan. The results fullyjustified my faith. I know of no nation more serene, orderly, and industrious,nor in which higher hopes can be entertained for future constructive service inthe advance of the human race. Of our former ward, the Philippines, we can look forward in confidence that the existing unrest will be corrected and astrong and healthy nation will grow in the longer aftermath of war's terrible destructiveness. We must be patient and understanding and never fail them -- asin our hour of need, they did not fail us. A Christian nation, the Philippinesstand as a mighty bulwark of Christianity in the Far East, and its capacity forhigh moral leadership in Asia is unlimited. On Formosa, the government of the Republic of China has had the opportunity to refute by action much of the malicious gossip which so undermined the strength of its leadership on theChinese mainland. The Formosan people are receiving a just and enlightened administration with majority representation on the organs of government, and politically, economically, and socially they appear to be advancing along soundand constructive lines. With this brief insight into the surrounding areas, Inow turn to the Korean conflict. While I was not consulted prior to thePresident's decision to intervene in support of the Republic of Korea, thatdecision from a military standpoint, proved a sound one, as we hurled back the invader and decimated his forces. Our victory was complete, and our objectives within reach, when Red China intervened with numerically superior ground forces.This created a new war and an entirely new situation, a situation not contemplated when our forces were committed against the North Korean invaders; a situation which called for new decisions in the diplomatic sphere to permit the realistic adjustment of military strategy. Such decisions have not been forthcoming. While no man in his right mind would advocate sending our groundforces into continental China, and such was never given a thought, the newsituation did urgently demand a drastic revision of strategic planning if ourpolitical aim was to defeat this new enemy as we had defeated the old. Apart from the military need, as I saw It, to neutralize the sanctuary protectiongiven the enemy north of the Yalu, I felt that military necessity in the conductof the war made necessary: first the intensification of our economic blockade against China; two the imposition of a naval blockade against the China coast;three removal of restrictions on air reconnaissance of China's coastal areas andof Manchuria; four removal of restrictions on the forces of the Republic ofChina on Formosa, with logistical support to contribute to their effective operations against the common enemy. For entertaining these views, all professionally designed to support our forces committed to Korea and bring hostilities to an end with the least possible delay and at a saving of countlessAmerican and allied lives, I have been severely criticized in lay circles,principally abroad, despite my understanding that from a military standpoint the above views have been fully shared in the past by practically every militaryleader concerned with the Korean campaign, including our own Joint Chiefs of Staff. I called for reinforcements but was informed that reinforcements werenot available. I made clear that if not permitted to destroy the enemy built-upbases north of the Yalu, if not permitted to utilize the friendly Chinese Forceof some 600,000 men on Formosa, if not permitted to blockade the China coast to prevent the Chinese Reds from getting succor from without, and if there were tobe no hope of major reinforcements, the position of the command from themilitary standpoint forbade victory. We could hold in Korea by constant maneuver and in an approximate area where our supply line advantages were in balance with the supply line disadvantages of the enemy, but we could hope atbest for only an indecisive campaign with its terrible and constant attritionupon our forces if the enemy utilized its full military potential. I haveconstantly called for the new political decisions essential to a solution.Efforts have been made to distort my position. It has been said, in effect,that I was a warmonger. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know war asfew other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I havelong advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on bothfriend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling internationaldisputes. Indeed, on the second day of September, nineteen hundred andforty-five, just following the surrender of the Japanese nation on theBattleship Missouri, I formally cautioned as follows: "Men since the beginning of time have sought peace. Various methods through the ages have been attempted to devise an international process to prevent or settle disputes between nations. From the very start workable methods were found in so faras individual citizens were concerned, but the mechanics of an instrumentality of larger international scope have never been successful. Military alliances, balances of power, Leagues of Nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war. The utter destructiveness of war now blocks out this alternative. We have had our last chance. If we will not devise some greater and more equitable system,Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character thatwill synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past 2000 years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh." But once waris forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every availablemeans to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory. There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clearlesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement butbegets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, asin blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative. "Why," my soldiers asked of me, "surrender military advantages to an enemy in the field?" I couldnot answer. Some may say: to avoid spread of the conflict into an all-out war with China; others, to avoid Soviet intervention. Neither explanation seemsvalid, for China is already engaging with the maximum power it can commit, andthe Soviet will not necessarily mesh its actions with our moves. Like a cobra,any new enemy will more likely strike whenever it feels that the relativity inmilitary or other potential is in its favor on a world-wide basis. The tragedyof Korea is further heightened by the fact that its military action is confinedto its territorial limits. It condemns that nation, which it is our purpose tosave, to suffer the devastating impact of full naval and air bombardment whilethe enemy's sanctuaries are fully protected from such attack and devastation.Of the nations of the world, Korea alone, up to now, is the sole one which has risked its all against communism. The magnificence of the courage and fortitudeof the Korean people defies description. They have chosen to risk death rather than slavery. Their last words to me were: "Don't scuttle the Pacific!" I havejust left your fighting sons in Korea. They have met all tests there, and I canreport to you without reservation that they are splendid in every way. It wasmy constant effort to preserve them and end this savage conflict honorably andwith the least loss of time and a minimum sacrifice of life. Its growingbloodshed has caused me the deepest anguish and anxiety. Those gallant men will remain often in my thoughts and in my prayers always. I am closing my 52 years of military service. When I joined the Army, even before the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all of my boyish hopes and dreams. The worldhas turned over many times since I took the oath on the plain at West Point, andthe hopes and dreams have long since vanished, but I still remember the refrainof one of the most popular barrack ballads of that day which proclaimed most proudly that "old soldiers never die; they just fade away." And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just fade away, anold soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to see that duty.Good Bye.中文翻译：总统先生、议长先生和尊敬的国会议员们：我怀着十分谦卑而又骄傲的心情站在这演讲台上。

三一文库（）/演讲致辞/英语演讲稿麦克阿瑟将军国会大厦告别演讲Farewell Address to Congressmr.president,mr.speaker,anddistinguishedmember softhecongress:istandonthisrostrumwithasenseofdeephumilityand greatpride--humilityinthewakeofthosegreatameri canarchitectsofourhistorywhohavestoodherebefor eme;prideinthereflectionthatthisforumoflegisla tivedebaterepresentshumanlibertyinthepurestfor myetdevised.herearecenteredthehopesandaspirati onsandfaithoftheentirehumanrace.idonotstandher easadvocateforanypartisancause,fortheissuesare fundamentalandreachquitebeyondtherealmofpartis anconsideration.theymustberesolvedonthehighest planeofnationalinterestifourcourseistoprovesoundandourfutureprotected.itrust,therefore,thaty ouwilldomethejusticeofreceivingthatwhichihavet osayassolelyexpressingtheconsideredviewpointof afellowamerican.iaddressyouwithneitherrancornorbitternessinthe fadingtwilightoflife,withbutonepurposeinmind:t oservemycountry.theissuesareglobalandsointerlo ckedthattoconsidertheproblemsofonesector,obliv ioustothoseofanother,isbuttocourtdisasterforth ewhole.whileasiaiscommonlyreferredtoasthegatew aytoeurope,itisnolesstruethateuropeisthegatewa ytoasia,andthebroadinfluenceoftheonecannotfail tohaveitsimpactupontheother.therearethosewhocl aimourstrengthisinadequatetoprotectonbothfront s,thatwecannotdivideoureffort.icanthinkofnogre aterexpressionofdefeatism.ifapotentialenemycan dividehisstrengthontwofronts,itisforustocounte rhiseffort.thecommunistthreatisaglobalone.itss uccessfuladvanceinonesectorthreatensthedestruc tionofeveryothersector.youcannotappeaseorother wisesurrendertocommunisminasiawithoutsimultaneouslyunderminingoureffortstohaltitsadvanceineu rope.beyondpointingoutthesegeneraltruisms,ishallcon finemydiscussiontothegeneralareasofasia.before onemayobjectivelyassessthesituationnowexisting there,hemustcomprehendsomethingofasiaspastandt herevolutionarychangeswhichhavemarkedhercourse uptothepresent.longexploitedbytheso-calledcolo nialpowers,withlittleopportunitytoachieveanyde greeofsocialjustice,individualdignity,orahighe rstandardoflifesuchasguidedourownnobleadminist rationinthephilippines,thepeoplesofasiafoundth eiropportunityinthewarjustpasttothrowoffthesha cklesofcolonialismandnowseethedawnofnewopportu nity,aheretoforeunfeltdignity,andtheself-respe ctofpoliticalfreedom.musteringhalfoftheearthspopulation,and60percen tofitsnaturalresourcesthesepeoplesarerapidlyco nsolidatinganewforce,bothmoralandmaterial,withwhichtoraisethelivingstandardanderectadaptatio nsofthedesignofmodernprogresstotheirowndistinc tculturalenvironments.whetheroneadherestotheco nceptofcolonizationornot,thisisthedirectionofa sianprogressanditmaynotbestopped.itisacorollar ytotheshiftoftheworldeconomicfrontiersasthewho leepicenterofworldaffairsrotatesbacktowardthea reawhenceitstarted.inthissituation,itbecomesvitalthatourowncountr yorientitspoliciesinconsonancewiththisbasicevo lutionaryconditionratherthanpursueacourseblind totherealitythatthecolonialeraisnowpastandthea sianpeoplescovettherighttoshapetheirownfreedes tiny.whattheyseeknowisfriendlyguidance,underst anding,andsupport--notimperiousdirection--thed ignityofequalityandnottheshameofsubjugation.th eirpre-warstandardoflife,pitifullylow,isinfini telylowernowinthedevastationleftinwarswake.wor ldideologiesplaylittlepartinasianthinkingandar elittleunderstood.whatthepeoplesstriveforisthe opportunityforalittlemorefoodintheirstomachs,alittlebetterclothingontheirbacks,alittlefirmer roofovertheirheads,andtherealizationofthenorma lnationalisturgeforpoliticalfreedom.thesepolit ical-socialconditionshavebutanindirectbearingu ponourownnationalsecurity,butdoformabackdropto contemporaryplanningwhichmustbethoughtfullycon sideredifwearetoavoidthepitfallsofunrealism.ofmoredirectandimmediatebearinguponournational securityarethechangeswroughtinthestrategicpote ntialofthepacificoceaninthecourseofthepastwar. priortheretothewesternstrategicfrontieroftheun itedstateslayonthelittorallineoftheamericas,wi thanexposedislandsalientextendingoutthroughhaw aii,midway,andguamtothephilippines.thatsalient provednotanoutpostofstrengthbutanavenueofweakn essalongwhichtheenemycouldanddidattack.thepacificwasapotentialareaofadvanceforanypred atoryforceintentuponstrikingattheborderingland areas.allthiswaschangedbyourpacificvictory.ourstrategicfrontierthenshiftedtoembracetheentire pacificocean,whichbecameavastmoattoprotectusas longasweheldit.indeed,itactsasaprotectiveshiel dforalloftheamericasandallfreelandsofthepacifi coceanarea.wecontrolittotheshoresofasiabyachai nofislandsextendinginanarcfromthealeutianstoth emariannasheldbyusandourfreeallies.fromthisisl andchainwecandominatewithseaandairpowereveryas iaticportfromvladivostoktosingapore--withseaan dairpowereveryport,asisaid,fromvladivostoktosi ngapore--andpreventanyhostilemovementintothepa cific.*anypredatoryattackfromasiamustbeanamphibiouse ffort.*noamphibiousforcecanbesuccessfulwithout controlofthesealanesandtheairoverthoselanesini tsavenueofadvance.withnavalandairsupremacyandm odestgroundelementstodefendbases,anymajorattac kfromcontinentalasiatowardusorourfriendsinthep acificwouldbedoomedtofailure.undersuchconditions,thepacificnolongerrepresen tsmenacingavenuesofapproachforaprospectiveinva der.itassumes,instead,thefriendlyaspectofapeac efullake.ourlineofdefenseisanaturaloneandcanbe maintainedwithaminimumofmilitaryeffortandexpen se.itenvisionsnoattackagainstanyone,nordoesitp rovidethebastionsessentialforoffensiveoperatio ns,butproperlymaintained,wouldbeaninvinciblede fenseagainstaggression.theholdingofthislittora ldefenselineinthewesternpacificisentirelydepen dentuponholdingallsegmentsthereof;foranymajorb reachofthatlinebyanunfriendlypowerwouldrenderv ulnerabletodeterminedattackeveryothermajorsegm ent.thisisamilitaryestimateastowhichihaveyettofind amilitaryleaderwhowilltakeexception.forthatrea son,ihavestronglyrecommendedinthepast,asamatte rofmilitaryurgency,thatundernocircumstancesmus tformosafallundercommunistcontrol.suchaneventu alitywouldatoncethreatenthefreedomofthephilippinesandthelossofjapanandmightwellforceourweste rnfrontierbacktothecoastofcalifornia,oregonand washington.tounderstandthechangeswhichnowappearuponthechi nesemainland,onemustunderstandthechangesinchin esecharacterandcultureoverthepast50years.china ,upto50yearsago,wascompletelynon-homogenous,be ingcompartmentedintogroupsdividedagainsteachot her.thewar-makingtendencywasalmostnon-existent ,astheystillfollowedthetenetsoftheconfucianide alofpacifistculture.attheturnofthecentury,unde rtheregimeofchangtsolin,effortstowardgreaterho mogeneityproducedthestartofanationalisturge.th iswasfurtherandmoresuccessfullydevelopedundert heleadershipofchiangkai-shek,buthasbeenbrought toitsgreatestfruitionunderthepresentregimetoth epointthatithasnowtakenonthecharacterofaunited nationalismofincreasinglydominant,aggressivete ndencies.throughthesepast50yearsthechinesepeoplehavethu sbecomemilitarizedintheirconceptsandintheiride als.theynowconstituteexcellentsoldiers,withcom petentstaffsandcommanders.thishasproducedanewa nddominantpowerinasia,which,foritsownpurposes, isalliedwithsovietrussiabutwhichinitsownconcep tsandmethodshasbecomeaggressivelyimperialistic ,withalustforexpansionandincreasedpowernormalt othistypeofimperialism.thereislittleoftheideologicalconcepteitheronew ayoranotherinthechinesemake-up.thestandardofli vingissolowandthecapitalaccumulationhasbeensot horoughlydissipatedbywarthatthemassesaredesper ateandeagertofollowanyleadershipwhichseemstopr omisethealleviationoflocalstringencies.ihavefromthebeginningbelievedthatthechinesecom munistssupportofthenorthkoreanswasthedominanto ne.theirinterestsare,atpresent,parallelwiththoseofthesoviet.butibelievethattheaggressiveness recentlydisplayednotonlyinkoreabutalsoinindo-c hinaandtibetandpointingpotentiallytowardthesou threflectspredominantlythesamelustfortheexpans ionofpowerwhichhasanimatedeverywould-beconquer orsincethebeginningoftime.thejapanesepeople,sincethewar,haveundergonethe greatestreformationrecordedinmodernhistory.wit hacommendablewill,eagernesstolearn,andmarkedca pacitytounderstand,theyhave,fromtheashesleftin warswake,erectedinjapananedificededicatedtothe supremacyofindividuallibertyandpersonaldignity ;andintheensuingprocesstherehasbeencreatedatru lyrepresentativegovernmentcommittedtotheadvanc eofpoliticalmorality,freedomofeconomicenterpri se,andsocialjustice.politically,economically,andsociallyjapanisnow abreastofmanyfreenationsoftheearthandwillnotag ainfailtheuniversaltrust.thatitmaybecountedupontowieldaprofoundlybeneficialinfluenceoverthec ourseofeventsinasiaisattestedbythemagnificentm annerinwhichthejapanesepeoplehavemettherecentc hallengeofwar,unrest,andconfusionsurroundingth emfromtheoutsideandcheckedcommunismwithintheir ownfrontierswithouttheslightestslackeninginthe irforwardprogress.isentallfourofouroccupationd ivisionstothekoreanbattlefrontwithouttheslight estqualmsastotheeffectoftheresultingpowervacuu muponjapan.theresultsfullyjustifiedmyfaith.ikn owofnonationmoreserene,orderly,andindustrious, norinwhichhigherhopescanbeentertainedforfuture constructiveserviceintheadvanceofthehumanrace.ofourformerward,thephilippines,wecanlookforwar dinconfidencethattheexistingunrestwillbecorrec tedandastrongandhealthynationwillgrowinthelong eraftermathofwarsterribledestructiveness.wemus tbepatientandunderstandingandneverfailthem--as inourhourofneed,theydidnotfailus.achristiannat ion,thephilippinesstandasamightybulwarkofchristianityinthefareast,anditscapacityforhighmoral leadershipinasiaisunlimited.onformosa,thegovernmentoftherepublicofchinahas hadtheopportunitytorefutebyactionmuchofthemali ciousgossipwhichsounderminedthestrengthofitsle adershiponthechinesemainland.theformosanpeople arereceivingajustandenlightenedadministrationw ithmajorityrepresentationontheorgansofgovernme nt,andpolitically,economically,andsociallythey appeartobeadvancingalongsoundandconstructiveli nes.withthisbriefinsightintothesurroundingareas,in owturntothekoreanconflict.whileiwasnotconsulte dpriortothepresidentsdecisiontointerveneinsupp ortoftherepublicofkorea,thatdecisionfromamilit arystandpoint,provedasoundone,aswe--asisaid,pr ovedasoundone,aswehurledbacktheinvaderanddecim atedhisforces.ourvictorywascomplete,andourobjectiveswithinreach,whenredchinaintervenedwithnu mericallysuperiorgroundforces.thiscreatedanewwarandanentirelynewsituation,as ituationnotcontemplatedwhenourforceswerecommit tedagainstthenorthkoreaninvaders;asituationwhi chcalledfornewdecisionsinthediplomaticsphereto permittherealisticadjustmentofmilitarystrategy .suchdecisionshavenotbeenforthcoming.whilenomaninhisrightmindwouldadvocatesendingou rgroundforcesintocontinentalchina,andsuchwasne vergivenathought,thenewsituationdidurgentlydem andadrasticrevisionofstrategicplanningifourpol iticalaimwastodefeatthisnewenemyaswehaddefeate dtheold.apartfromthemilitaryneed,asisawit,toneutralize thesanctuaryprotectiongiventheenemynorthofthey alu,ifeltthatmilitarynecessityintheconductofthewarmadenecessary:firsttheintensificationofour economicblockadeagainstchina;twotheimpositiono fanavalblockadeagainstthechinacoast;threeremov alofrestrictionsonairreconnaissanceofchinascoa stalareasandofmanchuria;fourremovalofrestricti onsontheforcesoftherepublicofchinaonformosa,wi thlogisticalsupporttocontributetotheireffectiv eoperationsagainstthecommonenemy.forentertainingtheseviews,allprofessionallydes ignedtosupportourforcescommittedtokoreaandbrin ghostilitiestoanendwiththeleastpossibledelayan datasavingofcountlessamericanandalliedlives,ih avebeenseverelycriticizedinlaycircles,principa llyabroad,despitemyunderstandingthatfromamilit arystandpointtheaboveviewshavebeenfullysharedi nthepastbypracticallyeverymilitaryleaderconcer nedwiththekoreancampaign,includingourownjointc hiefsofstaff.icalledforreinforcementsbutwasinformedthatreinforcementswerenotavailable.imadeclearthatifnot permittedtodestroytheenemybuilt-upbasesnorthof theyalu,ifnotpermittedtoutilizethefriendlychin eseforceofsome600,000menonformosa,ifnotpermitt edtoblockadethechinacoasttopreventthechinesere dsfromgettingsuccorfromwithout,andifthereweret obenohopeofmajorreinforcements,thepositionofth ecommandfromthemilitarystandpointforbadevictor y.wecouldholdinkoreabyconstantmaneuverandinanapp roximateareawhereoursupplylineadvantageswerein balancewiththesupplylinedisadvantagesoftheenem y,butwecouldhopeatbestforonlyanindecisivecampa ignwithitsterribleandconstantattritionuponourf orcesiftheenemyutilizeditsfullmilitarypotentia l.ihaveconstantlycalledforthenewpoliticaldecis ionsessentialtoasolution.effortshavebeenmadetodistortmyposition.ithasbe ensaid,ineffect,thatiwasawarmonger.nothingcouldbefurtherfromthetruth.iknowwarasfewothermenno wlivingknowit,andnothingtomeismorerevolting.ih avelongadvocateditscompleteabolition,asitsvery destructivenessonbothfriendandfoehasrenderedit uselessasameansofsettlinginternationaldisputes .indeed,ontheseconddayofseptember,nineteenhund redandforty-five,justfollowingthesurrenderofth ejapanesenationonthebattleshipmissouri,iformal lycautionedasfollows:mensincethebeginningoftimehavesoughtpeace.vari ousmethodsthroughtheageshavebeenattemptedtodev iseaninternationalprocesstopreventorsettledisp utesbetweennations.fromtheverystartworkablemet hodswerefoundinsofarasindividualcitizenswereco ncerned,butthemechanicsofaninstrumentalityofla rgerinternationalscopehaveneverbeensuccessful. militaryalliances,balancesofpower,leaguesofnat ions,allinturnfailed,leavingtheonlypathtobebyw ayofthecrucibleofwar.theutterdestructivenessof warnowblocksoutthisalternative.wehavehadourlas tchance.ifwewillnotdevisesomegreaterandmoreequitablesystem,armageddonwillbeatourdoor.theprob lembasicallyistheologicalandinvolvesaspiritual recrudescenceandimprovementofhumancharactertha twillsynchronizewithouralmostmatchlessadvances inscience,art,literature,andallmaterialandcult uraldevelopmentsofthepastXXyears.itmustbeofthe spiritifwearetosavetheflesh.butoncewarisforceduponus,thereisnootheralterna tivethantoapplyeveryavailablemeanstobringittoa swiftend.warsveryobjectisvictory,notprolongedindecision .inwarthereisnosubstituteforvictory.therearesomewho,forvaryingreasons,wouldappease redchina.theyareblindtohistorysclearlesson,for historyteacheswithunmistakableemphasisthatappe asementbutbegetsnewandbloodierwar.itpointstono singleinstancewherethisendhasjustifiedthatmeans,whereappeasementhasledtomorethanashampeace.l ikeblackmail,itlaysthebasisfornewandsuccessive lygreaterdemandsuntil,asinblackmail,violencebe comestheonlyotheralternative."why,"mysoldiersaskedofme,"surrendermilitaryad vantagestoanenemyinthefield?"icouldnotanswer.somemaysay:toavoidspreadoftheconflictintoanall -outwarwithchina;others,toavoidsovietintervent ion.neitherexplanationseemsvalid,forchinaisalr eadyengagingwiththemaximumpoweritcancommit,and thesovietwillnotnecessarilymeshitsactionswitho urmoves.likeacobra,anynewenemywillmorelikelyst rikewheneveritfeelsthattherelativityinmilitary orotherpotentialisinitsfavoronaworld-widebasis .thetragedyofkoreaisfurtherheightenedbythefactt hatitsmilitaryactionisconfinedtoitsterritorial limits.itcondemnsthatnation,whichitisourpurposetosave,tosufferthedevastatingimpactoffullnava landairbombardmentwhiletheenemyssanctuariesare fullyprotectedfromsuchattackanddevastation.ofthenationsoftheworld,koreaalone,uptonow,isth esoleonewhichhasriskeditsallagainstcommunism.t hemagnificenceofthecourageandfortitudeofthekor eanpeopledefiesdescription.theyhavechosentoriskdeathratherthanslavery.the irlastwordstomewere:"dontscuttlethepacific!"ihavejustleftyourfightingsonsinkorea.theyhavem etallteststhere,andicanreporttoyouwithoutreser vationthattheyaresplendidineveryway.itwasmyconstantefforttopreservethemandendthiss avageconflicthonorablyandwiththeleastlossoftim eandaminimumsacrificeoflife.itsgrowingbloodshe dhascausedmethedeepestanguishandanxiety.thosegallantmenwillremainofteninmythoughtsandi nmyprayersalways.iamclosingmy52yearsofmilitaryservice.whenijoin edthearmy,evenbeforetheturnofthecentury,itwast hefulfillmentofallofmyboyishhopesanddreams.the worldhasturnedovermanytimessinceitooktheoathon theplainatwestpoint,andthehopesanddreamshavelo ngsincevanished,butistillremembertherefrainofo neofthemostpopularbarrackballadsofthatdaywhich proclaimedmostproudlythat"oldsoldiersneverdie; theyjustfadeaway."andliketheoldsoldierofthatballad,inowclosemymi litarycareerandjustfadeaway,anoldsoldierwhotri edtodohisdutyasgodgavehimthelighttoseethatduty .goodbye.。

麦克阿瑟告别演讲“老兵永不死”中英文第一篇：麦克阿瑟告别演讲“老兵永不死”中英文英文全文如下: Old soldiers never die, they just fade awayMr.President, Mr.Speaker, and Distinguished Members of the Congress:I stand on this rostrum with a sense of deep humility and great pride--humility in the weight of those great American architects of our history who have stood here before me;pride in the reflection that this home of legislative debate represents human liberty in the purest form yet devised.Here are centered the hopes and aspirations and faith of the entire human race.I do not stand here as advocate for any partisan cause, for the issues are fundamental and reach quite beyond the realm of partisan consideration.They must be resolved on the highest plane of national interest if our course is to prove sound and our future protected.I trust, therefore, that you will do me the justice of receiving that which I have to say as solely expressing the considered viewpoint of a fellow American.I address you with neither rancor nor bitterness in the fading twilight of life, with but one purpose in mind: to serve my country.The issues are global and so interlocked that to consider the problems of one sector, oblivious to those of another, is but to court disaster for the whole.While Asia is commonly referred to as the Gateway to Europe, it is no less true that Europe is the Gateway to Asia, and the broad influence of the one cannot fail to have its impact upon the other.There are those who claim our strength is inadequate to protect on both fronts, that we cannot divide our effort.I can think of no greater expression of defeatism.If a potential enemy can divide his strength on two fronts, it is for us to counter hiseffort.The Communist threat is a global one.Its successful advance in one sector threatens the destruction of every other sector.You can not appease or otherwise surrender to communism in Asia without simultaneously undermining our efforts to halt its advance in Europe.Beyond pointing out these general truisms, I shall confine my discussion to the general areas of Asia.Before one may objectively assess the situation now existing there, he must comprehend something of Asia's past and the revolutionary changes which have marked her course up to the present.Long exploited by the so-called colonial powers, with little opportunity to achieve any degree of social justice, individual dignity, or a higher standard of life such as guided our own noble administration in the Philippines, the peoples of Asia found their opportunity in the war just past to throw off the shackles of colonialism and now see the dawn of new opportunity, a heretofore unfelt dignity, and the self-respect of political freedom.Mustering half of the earth's population, and 60 percent of its natural resources these peoples are rapidly consolidating a new force, both moral and material, with which to raise the living standard and erect adaptations of the design of modern progress to their own distinct cultural environments.Whether one adheres to the concept of colonization or not, this is the direction of Asian progress and it may not be stopped.It is a corollary to the shift of the world economic frontiers as the whole epicenter of world affairs rotates back toward the area whence it started.In this situation, it becomes vital that our own country orient its policies in consonance with this basic evolutionary condition rather than pursue a course blind to the reality that the colonial era is now past and the Asian peoples covet the right to shape their ownfree destiny.What they seek now is friendly guidance, understanding, and support--not imperious direction--the dignity of equality and not the shame of subjugation.Their pre-war standard of life, pitifully low, is infinitely lower now in the devastation left in war's wake.World ideologies play little part in Asian thinking and are little understood.What the peoples strive for is the opportunity for a little more food in their stomachs, a little better clothing on their backs, a little firmer roof over their heads, and the realization of the normal nationalist urge for political freedom.These political-social conditions have but an indirect bearing upon our own national security, but do form a backdrop to contemporary planning which must be thoughtfully considered if we are to avoid the pitfalls of unrealism.Of more direct and immediately bearing upon our national security are the changes wrought in the strategic potential of the Pacific Ocean in the course of the past war.Prior thereto the western strategic frontier of the United States lay on the literal line of the Americas, with an exposed island salient extending out through Hawaii, Midway, and Guam to the Philippines.That salient proved not an outpost of strength but an avenue of weakness along which the enemy could and did attack.The Pacific was a potential area of advance for any predatory force intent upon striking at the bordering land areas.All this was changed by our Pacific victory.Our strategic frontier then shifted to embrace the entire Pacific Ocean, which became a vast moat to protect us as long as we held it.Indeed, it acts as a protective shield for all of the Americas and all free lands of the Pacific Ocean area.We control it to the shores of Asia by a chain of islands extending in an arc from the Aleutians to the Mariannas held by us and our free allies.From this island chain we can dominate with sea and airpower every Asiatic port from Vladivostok to Singapore--with sea and air power every port, as I said, from Vladivostok to Singapore--and prevent any hostile movement into the Pacific.Any predatory attack from Asia must be an amphibious effort.* No amphibious force can be successful without control of the sea lanes and the air over those lanes in its avenue of advance.With naval and air supremacy and modest ground elements to defend bases, any major attack from continental Asia toward us or our friends in the Pacific would be doomed to failure.Under such conditions, the Pacific no longer represents menacing avenues of approach for a prospective invader.It assumes, instead, the friendly aspect of a peaceful lake.Our line of defense is a natural one and can be maintained with a minimum of military effort and expense.It envisions no attack against anyone, nor does it provide the bastions essential for offensive operations, but properly maintained, would be an invincible defense against aggression.The holding of this literal defense line in the western Pacific is entirely dependent upon holding all segments thereof;for any major breach of that line by an unfriendly power would render vulnerable to determined attack every other major segment.This is a military estimate as to which I have yet to find a military leader who will take exception.For that reason, I have strongly recommended in the past, as a matter of military urgency, that under no circumstances must Formosa fall under Communist control.Such an eventuality would at once threaten the freedom of the Philippines and the loss of Japan and might well force our western frontier back to the coast of California, Oregon and Washington.T o understand the changes which now appear upon the Chinese mainland, one must understand the changes in Chinese character and cultureover the past 50 years.China, up to 50 years ago, was completely non-homogenous, being compartmented into groups divided against each other.The war-making tendency was almost non-existent, as they still followed the tenets of the Confucian ideal of pacifist culture.At the turn of the century, under the regime of Chang Tso Lin, efforts toward greater homogeneity produced the start of a nationalist urge.This was further and more successfully developed under the leadership of Chiang Kai-Shek, but has been brought to its greatest fruition under the present regime to the point that it has now taken on the character of a united nationalism of increasingly dominant, aggressive tendencies.Through these past 50 years the Chinese people have thus become militarized in their concepts and in their ideals.They now constitute excellent soldiers, with competent staffs and commanders.This has produced a new and dominant power in Asia, which, for its own purposes, is allied with Soviet Russia but which in its own concepts and methods has become aggressively imperialistic, with a lust for expansion and increased power normal to this type of imperialism.There is little of the ideological concept either one way or another in the Chinese make-up.The standard of living is so low and the capital accumulation has been so thoroughly dissipated by war that the masses are desperate and eager to follow any leadership which seems to promise the alleviation of local stringencies.I have from the beginning believed that the Chinese Communists' support of the North Koreans was the dominant one.Their interests are, at present, parallel with those of the Soviet.But I believe that the aggressiveness recently displayed not only in Korea but also in Indo-China and Tibet and pointing potentially toward the South reflects predominantly the same lust for the expansion of powerwhich has animated every would-be conqueror since the beginning of time.The Japanese people, since the war, have undergone the greatest reformation recorded in modern history.With a commendable will, eagerness to learn, and marked capacity to understand, they have, from the ashes left in war's wake, erected in Japan an edifice dedicated to the supremacy of individual liberty and personal dignity;and in the ensuing process there has been created a truly representative government committed to the advance of political morality, freedom of economic enterprise, and social justice.Politically, economically, and socially Japan is now abreast of many free nations of the earth and will not again fail the universal trust.That it may be counted upon to wield a profoundly beneficial influence over the course of events in Asia is attested by the magnificent manner in which the Japanese people have met the recent challenge of war, unrest, and confusion surrounding them from the outside and checked communism within their own frontiers without the slightest slackening in their forward progress.I sent all four of our occupation divisions to the Korean battlefront without the slightest qualms as to the effect of the resulting power vacuum upon Japan.The results fully justified my faith.I know of no nation more serene, orderly, and industrious, nor in which higher hopes can be entertained for future constructive service in the advance of the human race.Of our former ward, the Philippines, we can look forward in confidence that the existing unrest will be corrected and a strong and healthy nation will grow in the longer aftermath of war's terrible destructiveness.We must be patient and understanding and never fail them--as in our hour of need, they did not fail us.A Christian nation, the Philippines stand as a mighty bulwark of Christianity in the Far East, and its capacity forhigh moral leadership in Asia is unlimited.On Formosa, the government of the Republic of China has had the opportunity to refute by action much of the malicious gossip which so undermined the strength of its leadership on the Chinese mainland.The Formosan people are receiving a just and enlightened administration with majority representation on the organs of government, and politically, economically, and socially they appear to be advancing along sound and constructive lines.With this brief insight into the surrounding areas, I now turn to the Korean conflict.While I was not consulted prior to the President's decision to intervene in support of the Republic of Korea, that decision from a military standpoint, proved a sound one, as we hurled back the invader and decimated his forces.Our victory was complete, and our objectives within reach, when Red China intervened with numerically superior ground forces.This created a new war and an entirely new situation, a situation not contemplated when our forces were committed against the North Korean invaders;a situation which called for new decisions in the diplomatic sphere to permit the realistic adjustment of military strategy.Such decisions have not been forthcoming.While no man in his right mind would advocate sending our ground forces into continental China, and such was never given a thought, the new situation did urgently demand a drastic revision of strategic planning if our political aim was to defeat this new enemy as we had defeated the old.Apart from the military need, as I saw It, to neutralize the sanctuary protection given the enemy north of the Yalu, I felt that military necessity in the conduct of the war made necessary: first the intensification of our economic blockade against China;two the imposition of a naval blockade against the China coast;threeremoval of restrictions on air reconnaissance of China's coastal areas and of Manchuria;four removal of restrictions on the forces of the Republic of China on Formosa, with logistical support to contribute to their effective operations against the common enemy.For entertaining these views, all professionally designed to support our forces committed to Korea and bring hostilities to an end with the least possible delay and at a saving of countless American and allied lives, I have been severely criticized in lay circles, principally abroad, despite my understanding that from a military standpoint the above views have been fully shared in the past by practically every military leader concerned with the Korean campaign, including our own Joint Chiefs of Staff.I called for reinforcements but was informed that reinforcements were not available.I made clear that if not permitted to destroy the enemy built-up bases north of the Yalu, if not permitted to utilize the friendly Chinese Force of some 600,000 men on Formosa, if not permitted to blockade the China coast to prevent the Chinese Reds from getting succor from without, and if there were to be no hope of major reinforcements, the position of the command from the military standpoint forbade victory.We could hold in Korea by constant maneuver and in an approximate area where our supply line advantages were in balance with the supply line disadvantages of the enemy, but we could hope at best for only an indecisive campaign with its terrible and constant attrition upon our forces if the enemy utilized its full military potential.I have constantly called for the new political decisions essential to a solution.Efforts have been made to distort my position.It has been said, in effect, that I was a warmonger.Nothing could be further from the truth.I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting.I have longadvocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling international disputes.Indeed, on the second day of September, nineteen hundred and forty-five, just following the surrender of the Japanese nation on the Battleship Missouri, I formally cautioned as follows:“Men since the beginning of time have sought peace.Various methods through the ages have been attempted to devise an international process to prevent or settle disputes between nations.From the very start workable methods were found in so far as individual citizens were concerned, but the mechanics of an instrumentality of larger international scope have never been itary alliances, balances of power, Leagues of Nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war.The utter destructiveness of war now blocks out this alternative.We have had our last chance.If we will not devise some greater and more equitable system，Armageddon will be at our door.The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past 2000 years.It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh.”But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end.War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.In war there is no substitute for victory.There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China.They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war.It points to nosingle instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace.Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative.“Why,” my soldiers asked of me, “surrender military advantages to an enemy in the field?” I could not answer.Some may say: to avoid spread of the conflict into an all-out war with China;others, to avoid Soviet intervention.Neither explanation seems valid, for China is already engaging with the maximum power it can commit, and the Soviet will not necessarily mesh its actions with our moves.Like a cobra, any new enemy will more likely strike whenever it feels that the relativity in military or other potential is in its favor on a world-wide basis.The tragedy of Korea is further heightened by the fact that its military action is confined to its territorial limits.It condemns that nation, which it is our purpose to save, to suffer the devastating impact of full naval and air bombardment while the enemy's sanctuaries are fully protected from such attack and devastation.Of the nations of the world, Korea alone, up to now, is the sole one which has risked its all against communism.The magnificence of the courage and fortitude of the Korean people defies description.They have chosen to risk death rather than slavery.Their last words to me were: “Don't scuttle the Pacific!”I have just left your fighting sons in Korea.They have met all tests there, and I can report to you without reservation that they are splendid in every way.It was my constant effort to preserve them and end this savage conflict honorably and with the least loss of time and a minimum sacrifice of life.Its growing bloodshed has caused me the deepest anguish and anxiety.Those gallant men will remain often in my thoughts and in my prayersalways.I am closing my 52 years of military service.When I joined the Army, even before the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all of my boyish hopes and dreams.The world has turned over many times since I took the oath on the plain at West Point, and the hopes and dreams have long since vanished, but I still remember the refrain of one of the most popular barrack ballads of that day which proclaimed most proudly that “old soldiers never die;they just fade away.”And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just fade away, an old soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to see that duty.Good Bye.麦克阿瑟告别演讲“老兵永不死”演讲全文总统先生，演讲者，议会杰出的成员们：我怀着深深的谦卑和无比的自豪感站在这演讲台上----谦卑是因为面对在我面前的那些伟大美国过去的建设者们；自豪是因为想到国内立法争论所设计的代表人类最纯洁的自由。

听力讲义Unit 10. Douglas MacArthur’s Farewell Speech to Congress序: 01秒-------01分02秒:道格拉斯·麦克阿瑟（Douglas MacArthur，1880.01.26～1964.04.05），美国著名军事家，五星上将军衔。

第二次世界大战时期历任美国远东军司令，西南太平洋战区盟军司令；战后出任驻日盟军最高司令和“联合国军”总司令等职。

他曾经打过败仗，然而，他却把失败的捕猎当作磨练自己技能、增添对成功渴望的手段。

有人说他是一名笑对失败、超然前进的将军。

他忠于自己的国家，但反对这个国家的总统（杜鲁门）。

1937年，从军中退役。

1941年，第二次世界大战爆发时被征召回到军中，担任美国远东军总司令，指挥美国军队在西南太平洋战场进行“跳岛战术”，有选择地攻占对美军推进有重要意义的岛屿。

1944年，因为战功卓著，晋升为五星上将。

1分02秒----------5分03秒:讲解1:Douglas MacArthur’s Farewell Speech to CongressI am closing my fifty-two years of military service. When I joined the army, even before the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all my boyish hopes and dreams.Part1重点词汇：1. military adj. 军人的，军事的例The government has been trying to decrease military spending these years. 这些年政府一直在设法削减军费开支。

Military action may become necessary.也许有必要采取军事行动了。

《⽼兵不死》——麦克阿瑟的告别演讲道格拉斯·麦克阿瑟(Douglas MacArthur)，美国陆军五星上将。

出⽣于阿肯⾊州⼩⽯城的军⼈世家。

1899年中学毕业后考⼊西点军校，1903年以名列第⼀的优异成绩毕业，到⼯程兵部队任职，并赴菲律宾执勤。

麦克阿瑟有过50年的军事实践经验，被美国国民称之为“⼀代⽼兵”，⽽其⾃⾝的⼜曾是“美国最年轻的准将、西点军校最年轻的校长、美国陆军历史上最年轻的陆军参谋长”，凭借精妙的军事谋略和敢战敢胜的胆略，麦克阿瑟堪称美国战争史上的奇才。

提起这句话：“⽼兵永远不死，只会慢慢凋零”（Old soldiers never die, they just fade away），就不由得想起那个叼着⽟⽶棒⼦烟⽃的麦克阿瑟，和他在1951年4⽉19⽇被解职后在国会⼤厦发表的题为《⽼兵不死》的著名演讲。

道格拉斯·麦克阿瑟《⽼兵不死》》——麦克阿瑟的告别演讲今天早晨，当我⾛出旅馆时，看门⼈问道：“将军，您上哪去？”⼀听说我要去西点，他说：“那是个好地⽅，您从前去过吗？”这样的荣誉是没有⼈不受感动的。

长期以来，我从事这个职业，⼜如此热爱这个民族，能获得这样的荣誉简直使我⽆法表达我的感情。

然⽽，这种奖赏主要并不意味着对个⼈的尊崇，⽽是象征⼀个伟⼤的道德准则——捍卫这块可爱⼟地上的⽂化与古⽼传统的那些⼈的⾏为与品质的准则。

这就是这个⼤奖章的意义。

⽆论现在还是将来，它都是美国军⼈道德标准的⼀种体现。

我⼀定要遵循这个标准，结合崇⾼的理想，唤起⾃豪感，同时始终保持谦虚……责任-荣誉-国家。

这三个神圣的名词庄严地提醒你应该成为怎样的⼈，可能成为怎样的⼈，⼀定要成为怎样的⼈。

它们将使你精神振奋，在你似乎丧失勇⽓时⿎起勇⽓，似乎没有理由相信时重建信念，⼏乎绝望时产⽣希望。

遗憾的很，我既没有雄辩的词令、诗意的想象，也没有华丽的隐喻向你们说明它们的意义。

怀疑者⼀定要说它们只不过是⼏个名词，⼀句⼝号，⼀个空洞的短语。