2008 美國總統競選第一場辯論中英文對照

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:30:51

But we can't do it if we are not willing to give Iraq back its country. Now, what I've said is we should end this war responsibly. We should do it in phases. But in 16 months we should be able to reduce our combat troops, put -- provide some relief to military families and our troops and bolster our efforts in Afghanistan so that we can capture and kill bin Laden and crush al Qaeda.

奧巴馬：但我們還不能做那個（結束阿富汗戰爭），如果我們不願把伊拉克還給他們自己的國家的話。現在，我剛才所說的就是我們應該負責任地結束這場戰爭了。我們應該有階段性計劃。在16個月的時間裡我們應該能減少我們的作戰部隊，給軍人家庭和我們的部隊一些調劑。支援我們在阿富汗的努力，這樣我們能抓住本拉登並斃掉他，並摧毀基地組織。

And right now, the commanders in Afghanistan, as well as Admiral Mullen, have acknowledged that we don't have enough troops to deal with Afghanistan because we still have more troops in Iraq than we did before the surge.

而現在，阿富汗駐軍司令，還有海軍上將麥克.馬倫，都說我們沒有足夠的隊伍來處理阿富汗（的任務），因為我們現在在伊拉克的部隊仍然比（2007年）增兵時多。

MCCAIN: Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama's plan is dangerous for America.

麥凱恩：馬倫上將認為奧巴馬議員的計劃對美國很危險。

OBAMA: That's not the case.

奧巴馬：那是另一個話題。

MCCAIN: That's what ...

麥凱恩：那就是……

OBAMA: What he said was a precipitous...

奧巴馬：他所說的是一個倉促的……

MCCAIN: That's what Admiral Mullen said.

麥凱恩：那就是馬倫上將所說的。

OBAMA: ... withdrawal would be dangerous. He did not say that. That's not true.

奧巴馬：……撤退是危險的（決策）。他沒有說過那個。那不是真的。

MCCAIN: And also General Petraeus said the same thing. Osama bin Laden and General Petraeus have one thing in common that I know of, they both said that Iraq is the central battleground.

麥凱恩：還有彼得雷烏斯將軍也說了同樣的話。我知道奧薩瑪.本.拉登和彼得雷烏斯將軍有一個共同點，他們都說伊拉克是戰鬥中心。

Now General Petraeus has praised the successes, but he said those successes are fragile and if we set a specific date for withdrawal -- and by the way, Senator Obama's original plan, they would have been out last spring before the surge ever had a chance to succeed.

現在彼得雷烏斯將軍高度評價了（在伊拉克的）成就。但他也說這些成就非常脆肉，而如果我們為撤退設定了一個確定的日期——順便說一句，這就是奧巴馬議員最初的計劃，那麼去年春天，駐伊部隊就已經得退場了，而（2007年的）增兵將沒有機會實施並成功。

And I'm -- I'm -- understand why Senator Obama was surprised and said that the surge succeeded beyond his wildest expectations.

而我……我……理解為什麼奧巴馬議員會感到驚訝，還有他說增兵的成功超出了他最瘋狂的期望。

MCCAIN: It didn't exceed beyond mine, because I know that that's a strategy that has worked and can succeed. But if we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and adopt Senator Obama's plan, then we will have a wider war and it will make things more complicated throughout the region, including in Afghanistan.

麥凱恩：而那並不讓我意外，因為我知道那起過作用的戰略能夠成功。但如果我們採用了奧巴馬議員的建議，在到達勝利的大門口被擊敗，那我們將面臨更廣闊範圍的戰爭，那會讓那個（中東）地區的局勢更加複雜化，包括在阿富汗（的局勢）。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:31:13

LEHRER: Afghanistan, lead -- a new -- a new lead question. Now, having resolved Iraq, we'll move to Afghanistan.

主持人：阿富汗，引導……新的……新的引導問題。現在，在解決了伊拉克（的問題）後，我們將前往阿富汗。

(LAUGHTER)
（笑聲）

And it goes to you, Senator Obama, and it's a -- it picks up on a point that's already been made. Do you think more troops -- more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan, how many, and when?

而這個問題輪到你了，奧巴馬議員。它是一個……它深入討論我們剛才談到的一點。你認為更多的部隊——更多的美國部隊應該被派往阿富汗嗎？多少？什麼時候？

OBAMA: Yes, I think we need more troops. I've been saying that for over a year now.

奧巴馬：是的，我認為我們需要更多部隊。我談這個已經一整年了。

And I think that we have to do it as quickly as possible, because it's been acknowledged by the commanders on the ground the situation is getting worse, not better.

我認為我們還得盡快做這件事情，因為戰場上的指揮官們承認局勢正在惡化，而不是變好。

We had the highest fatalities among U.S. troops this past year than at any time since 2002. And we are seeing a major offensive taking place -- Al Qaida and Taliban crossing the border and attacking our troops in a brazen fashion. They are feeling emboldened.

過去這一年比從2002年來的任何時候美軍的傷亡都要高。我們看到主要的進攻正在發生——基地組織還有塔利班橫越國界，以無恥的招數攻擊我們的部隊。他們的膽子大起來了。

And we cannot separate Afghanistan from Iraq, because what our commanders have said is we don't have the troops right now to deal with Afghanistan.

而我們不能將阿富汗（的問題）和伊拉克（的問題）分離開來，因為我們的指揮官說過了我們現在在阿富汗沒有足夠的部隊。

So I would send two to three additional brigades to Afghanistan. Now, keep in mind that we have four times the number of troops in Iraq, where nobody had anything to do with 9/11 before we went in, where, in fact, there was no Al Qaida before we went in, but we have four times more troops there than we do in Afghanistan.

所以如果是我，我會派遣額外三個旅去阿富汗。現在，（我想讓你們）記住我們現在在伊拉克有著四倍（於阿富汗）的部隊，而在我們去那裡（伊拉克）之前，那裡沒有人和911有關。實際上，那裡在我們去之前是沒有基地組織的，而我們卻在那裡佈置了四倍於阿富汗的部隊。

（註：美國人將部隊大批派往伊拉克是有原因的。除了控制中東石油外，美國人還寄希望在那裡開闢戰場，吸引全球所有的恐怖分子，從而在那裡將中東的反美武裝一網打盡。這一招其實就是圍魏救趙。這樣可以避免在美國本土作戰。這也是為何麥凱恩說，奧巴馬還沒有理解這個戰略，而如果從伊拉克撤兵，戰場必然會擴大化。當然，奧巴馬其實是理解這個戰略的，但是他戰略是各個擊破，先消滅阿富汗的反美武裝，然後再考慮其他地區。）

And that is a strategic mistake, because every intelligence agency will acknowledge that Al Qaida is the greatest threat against the United States and that Secretary of Defense Gates acknowledged the central front -- that the place where we have to deal with these folks is going to be in Afghanistan and in Pakistan.

而那是一個戰略性的錯誤，因為每個情報機構都承認基地組織是對美國最大的威脅，國防部長蓋茨也承認前線的中心——我們必須得在那裡解決基地組織——是阿富汗和巴基斯坦。

So here's what we have to do comprehensively, though. It's not just more troops. We have to press the Afghan government to make certain that they are actually working for their people. And I've said this to President Karzai.

所以這是我們必須得徹底做的事情，不僅僅是要更多的部隊。我們得對阿富汗政府施壓，確保他們正在為他們的人民而工作。這個我已經對卡爾扎伊總統說過了。

Number two, we've got to deal with a growing poppy trade that has exploded over the last several years.

第二，我們必須得處理（阿富汗）在過去數年間暴漲的鴉片交易。

（註：阿富汗70%的經濟來源都靠種植鴉片，而鴉片對於我們中國人來說，更有不同尋常的歷史。在糜爛的清朝，多少人自甘墮落，抽吸大煙。看看歷史上的照片，那個時期的中國人，一個個皮包骨頭，面黃肌瘦。難怪那時我們被人稱為東亞病夫。）

Number three, we've got to deal with Pakistan, because Al Qaida and the Taliban have safe havens in Pakistan, across the border in the northwest regions, and although, you know, under George Bush, with the support of Senator McCain, we've been giving them $10 billion over the last seven years, they have not done what needs to be done to get rid of those safe havens.

第三、我們必須處理巴基斯坦了，因為基地組織和塔利班在巴基斯坦有著安全的避難所，就在越過（阿富汗）邊境在巴基斯坦的西北區域。儘管，你也知道，在喬治.布什以及支持他的麥凱恩議員的政策下，在過去七年我們總共給了他們100億美元。他們沒有做那些我們需要他們做的事情，即端掉那些避難所。

And until we do, Americans here at home are not going to be safe.

而除非我們這樣做，否則美國，就在我們的家這裡，將不會安全。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:31:32

LEHRER: Afghanistan, Senator McCain?

主持人：（關於）阿富汗，麥凱恩議員。

MCCAIN: First of all, I won't repeat the mistake that I regret enormously, and that is, after we were able to help the Afghan freedom fighters and drive the Russians out of Afghanistan, we basically washed our hands of the region.

麥凱恩：首先，我不會重複那個我非常後悔的錯誤，即：在我們有能力幫助阿富汗為自由而戰的戰士們和把俄羅斯人驅逐出阿富汗後，我們卻在那個地區洗手不幹了。

And the result over time was the Taliban, Al Qaida, and a lot of the difficulties we are facing today. So we can't ignore those lessons of history.

而隨著時間的推移，這後果就是我們今天面臨的塔利班、基地組織還有許許多多的問題。所以我們不能忽略這些歷史上的教訓。

Now, on this issue of aiding Pakistan, if you're going to aim a gun at somebody, George Shultz, our great secretary of state, told me once, you'd better be prepared to pull the trigger.

現在，在援助巴基斯坦的問題上。我們的傑出的國務卿喬治.舒爾茨（任期1982年7月到1989年1月）一次曾經告訴過我，如果你要拿著槍對準某人，那你最好準備好按下扳機。

I'm not prepared at this time to cut off aid to Pakistan. So I'm not prepared to threaten it, as Senator Obama apparently wants to do, as he has said that he would announce military strikes into Pakistan.

我現在這個時候還沒有準備好砍掉對巴基斯坦的援助。因此我還沒有準備好去威脅他，而奧巴馬議員顯然想這麼做，正如他說過他會對巴基斯坦進行軍事打擊。

We've got to get the support of the people of -- of Pakistan. He said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan.

我們還需要巴基斯坦人民的支持。而他卻說他要對巴基斯坦進行軍事打擊。

Now, you don't do that. You don't say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government.

你沒有必要這麼做，你不需要大聲的把它說出來。如果你真得做點什麼，你就做點什麼，並和巴基斯坦政府合作。

Now, the new president of Pakistan, Kardari (sic), has got his hands full. And this area on the border has not been governed since the days of Alexander the Great.

現在，巴基斯坦的新任總統，卡爾達裡，已經忙得不可開交了。而在巴基斯坦邊境的這個地區自從亞歷山大大帝（公元前336年）開始起就無人管理。

I've been to Waziristan. I can see how tough that terrain is. It's ruled by a handful of tribes.

我去過一回瓦齊裡斯坦。那裡的地形非常苛刻。它被一些部落佔據著。

（註：瓦齊裡斯坦，巴基斯坦西北部山區，靠阿富汗邊界，被分成北瓦齊裡斯坦和南瓦齊裡斯坦。此地區於1947年成為巴基斯坦一部分。）

And, yes, Senator Obama calls for more troops, but what he doesn't understand, it's got to be a new strategy, the same strategy that he condemned in Iraq. It's going to have to be employed in Afghanistan.

是的，奧巴馬議員呼籲更多的部隊，但他所不理解的，是（在阿富汗）應該是一個新的戰略，即飽受他責難的我們在伊拉克的戰略。那應該用於阿富汗。

And we're going to have to help the Pakistanis go into these areas and obtain the allegiance of the people. And it's going to be tough. They've intermarried with Al Qaida and the Taliban. And it's going to be tough. But we have to get the cooperation of the people in those areas.

而我們得幫助巴基斯坦人進入這些地區（邊境區域）並得到那些人的效忠。而那將是一項艱巨的任務。（邊境）那些人已經和基地組織還有塔利班通婚。那將非常艱巨，但我們必須得到那些區域的人民的合作。

And the Pakistanis are going to have to understand that that bombing in the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad was a signal from the terrorists that they don't want that government to cooperate with us in combating the Taliban and jihadist elements.

而巴基斯坦人將明白，在伊斯蘭堡的萬豪大酒店的爆炸是一個信號，它意味著恐怖分子不想讓政府和我們合作對抗塔利班和討伐（恐怖分子）。

So we've got a lot of work to do in Afghanistan. But I'm confident, now that General Petraeus is in the new position of command, that we will employ a strategy which not only means additional troops -- and, by the way, there have been 20,000 additional troops, from 32,000 to 53,000, and there needs to be more.

所以在阿富汗我們有很多事情要做。但我相信，現在彼得雷烏斯將軍就任了司令部的新的職位，我們將執行一項不僅僅意味著增加額外部隊的戰略——順便說一句，那裡已經增派了2萬多部隊，從3萬2千到5萬3千，而那裡需要更多部隊。

So it's not just the addition of troops that matters. It's a strategy that will succeed. And Pakistan is a very important element in this. And I know how to work with him. And I guarantee you I would not publicly state that I'm going to attack them.

所以那不僅僅是增派額外部隊的事情。那是一項必將成功的戰略。在這個戰略中，巴基斯坦將是一個重要的因素。我知道怎麼和他們一起合作。我向你們保證，我不會（像奧巴馬議員那樣）公開聲明我要進攻他們。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:31:46

OBAMA: Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan. Here's what I said. And if John wants to disagree with this, he can let me know.

奧巴馬：沒人說要進攻巴基斯坦。我是這樣說的，如果約翰（麥凱恩）不同意，他可以說出來。

that, if the United States has Al Qaida, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out.

那就是，如果美國在視野內發現了基地組織、本拉登或者基地組織的頭子，而巴基斯坦不能或者不願行動，那我們就要把他們（基地組織）端掉。

（註：奧巴馬要發飆了，他不管巴基斯坦願意不願意，就要衝到巴基斯坦的國境內殺人。這就是他的戰略。）

Now, I think that's the right strategy; I think that's the right policy.

我認為那是正確的戰略；我認為那是正確的政策。

And, John, I -- you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say. But, you know, coming from you, who, you know, in the past has threatened extinction for North Korea and, you know, sung songs about bombing Iran, I don't know, you know, how credible that is.
而，約翰，我……關於總統要謹慎發言這一點上你完全正確。但是，你知道，你的發言，你知道的，過去你威脅說要滅絕朝鮮，還有，你知道，叫囂著要轟炸伊朗，你知道那是多麼的難以置信。

I think this is the right strategy. Now, Senator McCain is also right that it's difficult. This is not an easy situation. You've got cross-border attacks against U.S. troops.

我認為這是正確的戰略。這很難辦到，麥凱恩議員現在在這點上也是正確的。這不是一個簡單的情況，（因為）你需要穿越國界去攻擊反美武裝。

And we've got a choice. We could allow our troops to just be on the defensive and absorb those blows again and again and again, if Pakistan is unwilling to cooperate, or we have to start making some decisions.

而我們面臨一個選擇：一是如果巴基斯坦不願意合作，我們就讓我們的部隊僅僅防守，不斷不斷不斷地承受那些突然襲擊；二是我們開始下一些決定。

And the problem, John, with the strategy that's been pursued was that, for 10 years, we coddled Musharraf, we alienated the Pakistani population, because we were anti-democratic. We had a 20th-century mindset that basically said, "Well, you know, he may be a dictator, but he's our dictator."

而問題是，10年來，約翰所執行的戰略則是慣壞了穆沙拉夫。由於我們的反民主，我們疏遠了巴基斯坦人民。我們用的是一個20世紀的觀點：「嗯，你知道他也許是一個獨裁者，但他是我們的獨裁者。」

And as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren't going after Al Qaida, and they are more powerful now than at any time since we began the war in Afghanistan.

這樣做的後果是，我們在巴基斯坦失去了合法性。我們花掉了100億美元。而同時，他們卻沒有抓捕基地組織成員，現在他們（基地組織）比阿富汗戰爭開始以來的時候時候都要強悍。

That's going to change when I'm president of the United States.

如果我是美國總統，我會改變那樣的戰略。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:32:01

MCCAIN: I -- I don't think that Senator Obama understands that there was a failed state in Pakistan when Musharraf came to power. Everybody who was around then, and had been there, and knew about it knew that it was a failed state.

麥凱恩：我……我不認為奧巴馬議員知道當穆沙拉夫上台時，就有一個（巴基斯坦的）省控制不了。所有當時在的人，去過那裡的人，都知道那（邊境地區）是一個不受控制的省。

But let me tell you, you know, this business about bombing Iran and all that, let me tell you my record.

但讓我來告訴你，你知道的，關於說要轟炸伊朗還有（你談到的）所有的那些，讓我告訴你我的履歷。

Back in 1983, when I was a brand-new United States congressman, the one -- the person I admired the most and still admire the most, Ronald Reagan, wanted to send Marines into Lebanon.

遠在1983年，當時我是美國國會的新人，那位……那個我現在仍然最敬佩的人，羅納德.裡根（註：羅納德·威爾遜·裡根，美國第40任總統，1981年-1989年），想要派遣海軍陸戰隊去黎巴嫩。

（註：1983年的黎巴嫩局勢

1982年6月9日，敘利亞和以色列各出動一百餘架飛機。以色列一舉擊落八十三架敘利亞飛機，摧毀了敘利亞部署在貝卡谷地和敘黎邊界的導彈設施，使敘軍遭到重大損失。
1982年12月，蘇聯加強了它在中東的活動，大力援助敘利亞，向它提供從未在它本土或華約國之外部署的薩姆——五防空導彈和 SC——2l導彈，並派去了七千多名軍事和技術人員，使敘利亞軍事力量迅速得到恢復和加強。
1983年10月23日和11月4日，美國和法國駐貝魯特軍隊總部和以色列駐蘇爾軍隊總部先後被炸，二百三十九名美國軍人和數十名以色列士兵被炸死。
1983年11月，美國和以色列高層在一次美以首腦會談中，決定對駐黎巴嫩的敘利亞軍採取軍事行動。
1983年12月2日，以色列出動飛機轟炸了敘利亞軍隊、巴勒斯坦游擊隊和德魯茲民兵在黎巴嫩中部山區的陣地。
1983年12月4日，美國從它在黎沿海游弋的兩艘航空母艦上出動二十八架飛機，轟炸了敘利亞軍隊在舒夫山區和貝魯特——大馬士革國際公路附近的陣地，使敘軍遭到一些損失，美國三架飛機被擊落。
1983年12月5日，美國軍艦炮擊了德魯茲民兵的陣地。）

And I saw that, and I saw the situation, and I stood up, and I voted against that, because I was afraid that they couldn't make peace in a place where 300 or 400 or several hundred Marines would make a difference. Tragically, I was right: Nearly 300 Marines lost their lives in the bombing of the barracks.

而我看清了，我看清了當時的局勢，於是我站起來投票反對了它（派兵去黎巴嫩的提議），因為我擔心在那個地方，他們不能講和，而300或者400或幾百名士兵不能改變局勢。悲劇性的是，我猜對了：幾乎300名士兵在一次兵營的爆炸中失去了他們的生命。

And then we had Somalia -- then we had the first Gulf War. I supported -- I supported that.

然後就是索馬裡——之後是第一次海灣戰爭。我支持了——我支持了它。

I supported us going into Bosnia, when a number of my own party and colleagues was against that operation in Bosnia. That was the right thing to do, to stop genocide and to preserve what was necessary inside of Europe.

我支持派兵去波斯尼亞。當時許多共和黨人和我的同僚們都反對在波斯尼亞的行動。但那是正確的行動，去阻止大屠殺，並保留歐洲內重要的（一個民族）。

（註：波斯尼亞，南斯拉夫中西部的一地區。7世紀塞族人定居於此，12世紀成為一個獨立國家。1483年以後波斯尼亞被土耳其控制，後來被奧匈帝國吞併。）

I supported what we did in Kosovo. I supported it because ethnic cleansing and genocide was taking place there.

我支持我們後來在科索沃的行動。我支持是因為當時那裡正在發生種族清洗和大屠殺。

And I have a record -- and Somalia, I opposed that we should turn -- turn the force in Somalia from a peacekeeping force into a peacemaking force, which they were not capable of.

而我的履歷——在索馬裡，我反對把……把在索馬裡的維和部隊變為調和部隊。我們沒有能力調和。

So I have a record. I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm's way.

所以我有（相當的）履歷，涉入了這些民族安全問題的履歷。這些問題包括了任何一個總統的最高的責任和能做出的最艱難的決定——即，將我們的青年男女送入火海。

And I'll tell you, I had a town hall meeting in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire, and a woman stood up and she said, "Senator McCain, I want you to do me the honor of wearing a bracelet with my son's name on it."

我要告訴你們，我參加了新罕布什爾州漢普郡的沃爾夫保羅一次市民大會，當時一位婦女站起來說：「麥凱恩議員，我希望你能賞臉將這個手鐲戴上，那上面有我兒子的名字」。

（註：新罕布什爾州：美國東北部一個州，位於佛蒙特和緬因之間。被認為是1788年最初十三個殖民地之一。於1603年首先被發現，17世紀20年代至 30年代來自馬薩諸塞的殖民者在此定居，1741年成為一個獨立的殖民地。新罕布什爾州是最先宣佈脫離英國而獨立並建立自己的政府(1776年1月）的一個殖民地。康科德是其首府，曼徹斯特是最大城市。人口1,113,915）

He was 22 years old and he was killed in combat outside of Baghdad, Matthew Stanley, before Christmas last year. This was last August, a year ago. And I said, "I will -- I will wear his bracelet with honor."

她的兒子叫馬太.斯坦尼，22歲，在去年聖誕節前，死在了巴格達郊外的一次戰鬥中。具體時間是去年八月份。我說：「當然——我為戴著你的兒子的手鐲而感到驕傲。」

And this was August, a year ago. And then she said, "But, Senator McCain, I want you to do everything -- promise me one thing, that you'll do everything in your power to make sure that my son's death was not in vain."

這就是去年八月發生的。然後她又說：「但是麥凱恩議員，答應我一件事——我希望你盡一切努力，盡你能力範圍內的一切努力讓我的兒子沒有白白死去。」

That means that that mission succeeds, just like those young people who re-enlisted in Baghdad, just like the mother I met at the airport the other day whose son was killed. And they all say to me that we don't want defeat.

那意味著那個任務（伊拉克戰爭）的勝利，就像那些在巴格達延長服役期限的年輕人，就像另一天我在機場遇到的另一位失去兒子的母親，他們都告訴我我們不能輸。

MCCAIN: A war that I was in, where we had an Army, that it wasn't through any fault of their own, but they were defeated. And I know how hard it is for that -- for an Army and a military to recover from that. And it did and we will win this one and we won't come home in defeat and dishonor and probably have to go back if we fail.

在我參加過的一場戰爭中，當時我們的部隊沒有犯下任何錯誤，但卻（由於錯誤的戰略指揮而）遭到了失敗。我知道那是多麼的困難，對於部隊還有軍方，多麼難以走出那陰影。而我們得贏這場戰爭（伊拉克戰爭），我們不能帶著失敗回家，我們不能蒙羞，而如果我們失敗了，我們可能還不得不再回去。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:32:15

OBAMA: Jim, let me just make a point. I've got a bracelet, too, from Sergeant - from the mother of Sergeant Ryan David Jopeck (ph), given to me in grain bin green bay. She asked me, can you please make sure another mother is not going through what I'm going through.

奧巴馬：吉姆，讓我指出一點來。我也得到了一條手鐲，是中士——中士賴安.大衛.傑佩克的母親在綠灣糧倉給我的。她對我說，你能讓別的母親不會遭受我所遭受的（悲劇）嗎？

（註：
綠灣（Green Bay）是位於美國威斯康星州布朗縣的一座城市，也是該縣的縣治所在。根據美國人口調查局2000年統計，共有人口41,591，其中白人占85.86%、亞裔美國人占3.76%、印第安人占3.28%、非裔美國人占1.38%。
威斯康星州，威斯康星州美國中北部一州。1848年作為第三十個州加入。首先由法國殖民者建立，1763年割讓給大不列顛，1787年成為西北地區的一部分。麥迪遜市是該州首府，密爾沃基市是最大城市。人口4,906,745）

No U.S. soldier ever dies in vain because they're carrying out the missions of their commander in chief. And we honor all the service that they've provided. Our troops have performed brilliantly. The question is for the next president, are we making good judgments about how to keep America safe precisely because sending our military into battle is such an enormous step.

沒有一個美國士兵是白白犧牲的，因為他們在執行他們的總司令的任務。我為他們所作出的一切貢獻而感到光榮。我們的隊伍一直以來表現優秀。對下一屆總統來說，問題是我們是否作出了正確的判斷以精確地確保美國的安全，因為把部隊派上戰場是如此重大的一步。

And the point that I originally made is that we took our eye off Afghanistan, we took our eye off the folks who perpetrated 9/11, they are still sending out videotapes and Senator McCain, nobody is talking about defeat in Iraq, but I have to say we are having enormous problems in Afghanistan because of that decision.

而我最初指出的一點是我們把注意力從阿富汗轉移了，我們把注意力從那些犯下911罪行的人們身上轉移了，他們現在還在送出（基地組織的）錄像帶。而麥凱恩議員，沒有人說（我們）在伊拉克是失敗，但我得說的是由於那個決定，我們現在在阿富汗正面臨嚴峻的問題。

And it is not true you have consistently been concerned about what happened in Afghanistan. At one point, while you were focused on Iraq, you said well, we can "muddle through" Afghanistan. You don't muddle through the central front on terror and you don't muddle through going after bin Laden. You don't muddle through stamping out the Taliban.

還有，關於你一直在關注阿富汗所發生的也不是真的。當你正聚焦伊拉克的時候，你說：嗯，我們可以「應付過去」阿富汗。你不能應付過去反恐的前沿陣地中心，不能應付過去追捕本拉登，不能應付過去剿滅塔利班。

I think that is something we have to take seriously. And when I'm president, I will.

我認為那是我們必須得認真對待的事情。而當我是總統時，我會的。

LEHRER: New ...

主持人：新的……

MCCAIN: You might think that with that kind of concern that Senator Obama would have gone to Afghanistan, particularly given his responsibilities as a subcommittee chairman. By the way, when I'm subcommittee chairman, we take up the issues under my subcommittee. But the important thing is -- the important thing is I visited Afghanistan and I traveled to Waziristan and I traveled to these places and I know what our security requirements are. I know what our needs are. So the point is that we will prevail in Afghanistan, but we need the new strategy and we need it to succeed. But the important thing is, if we suffer defeat in Iraq, which General Petraeus predicts we will, if we adopted Senator Obama's set date for withdrawal, then that will have a calamitous effect in Afghanistan and American national security interests in the region. Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand there is a connected between the two.

（註：這一段在上面那位兄台的博客中不知為何沒有。）
麥凱恩：你們也許會認為在那樣的關心下，麥凱恩議員會去阿富汗，特別是履行他作為他那個（分管阿富汗事務的）小組委員會主席的職責，而他沒有。順便說一下，當我是我那個小組委員會的主席時，我們承擔了我那的小組委員會的事務。重要的是——重要的是我去過阿富汗，我去過瓦齊裡斯坦，我去過那些地方。我知道我們的安全需要是什麼。我知道我們需要什麼。所以我要說，我們將會在阿富汗成功，但我們需要新的戰略來達到成功。但重要的是，如果我們採用了奧巴馬議員的建議，即為撤退設定一個日期，我們將如彼得雷烏斯將軍所預料的那樣，在伊拉克失敗。那將對阿富汗還有美國民族在那個地區的安全利益造成災難性的影響。奧巴馬議員似乎並沒有理解這兩個（伊拉克和阿富汗）之間的聯繫。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:32:32

LEHRER: I have some good news and bad news for the two of you. You all are even on time, which is remarkable, considering we've been going at it ...

主持人：我有一些好消息和一些壞消息給你們兩位。你們兩位用掉的時間都差不多，這很不錯，考慮到我們一直是在全力以赴……

OBAMA: A testimony to you, Jim.

奧巴馬：對你來說那是顯而易見的事實，吉姆。

（

註：這句話省略掉了That is。要完整地理解這句話，應該這麼理解：
That is a testimony to you, Jim.
用另一種囉嗦的方式來描述：吉姆，我們兩人所用掉的時間差不多這個事實，顯而易見，你是很清楚的，因為你有記錄。

testimony指在法庭上的證據。

奧巴馬此話，似乎把主持人吉姆捧成了法官，這句話被人指出有馬屁的嫌疑。因為法官並不是這位主持人，法官是每一個美國人。還有，我感覺上奧巴馬無論是在主持人說這句話之前還是之後都經常插話，他用掉的時間應該比麥凱恩多。

我看到這裡時，漸漸地開始不大信任奧巴馬了。

）

LEHRER: I don't know about that. But the bad news is all my little five minute things have run over, so, anyhow, we'll adjust as we get there. But the amount of time is even.

主持人：我不知道。但壞消息是我們的每個5分鐘（自由討論階段）都超時了，嗯，不管怎樣，我們得在後面做一點調整了。但給你們雙方的時間都是均等的。

New lead question. And it goes two minutes to you, Senator McCain, what is your reading on the threat to Iran right now to the security of the United States?

新的引導問題。這兩分鐘是你的，麥凱恩議員，你如何解讀當前伊朗對美國安全的威脅？

MCCAIN: My reading of the threat from Iran is that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region because the other countries in the region will feel compelling requirement to acquire nuclear weapons as well.

麥凱恩：我對來自伊朗的威脅的解讀是如果伊朗獲得了核武器，它將是對以色列和周邊地區的實際威脅，因為在那個地區的其他國家將感到迫切的需要去同樣獲得核武器。

Now we cannot a second Holocaust. Let's just make that very clear. What I have proposed for a long time, and I've had conversation with foreign leaders about forming a league of democracies, let's be clear and let's have some straight talk. The Russians are preventing significant action in the United Nations Security Council.

而我們不能允許第二次（對猶太人的）大屠殺。讓我們明確那一點。很長時間來我一直有個建議，而且我已經和國外的領導人有過對話，即關於構建一個民主國家的聯盟，讓我們（民主國家們）乾淨利落點，並多一些直接對話。俄羅斯人一直在阻礙聯合國安理會有意義的行動。

I have proposed a league of democracies, a group of people - a group of countries that share common interests, common values, common ideals, they also control a lot of the world's economic power. We could impose significant meaningful, painful sanctions on the Iranians that I think could have a beneficial effect.

我建議成立這個民主國家聯盟，它由一群人 —— 多個國家構成，這些國家擁有共同的利益，共同的價值觀，共同的理想，它們也控制了這個世界上大部分的經濟實力。我們就可以對伊朗實施有相當意義和令其痛苦的制裁，而那將會產生有益的效果。

The Iranians have a lousy government, so therefore their economy is lousy, even though they have significant oil revenues. So I am convinced that together, we can, with the French, with the British, with the Germans and other countries, democracies around the world, we can affect Iranian behavior.

伊朗人有著一個齷齪的政府，也因而有著齷齪的經濟，哪怕他們擁有巨大的石油暴利。所以我相信我們一起，和法國、英國、德國還有其他國家，和全世界的民主國家，我夢能改變伊朗的行為。

But have no doubt, but have no doubt that the Iranians continue on the path to the acquisition of a nuclear weapon as we speak tonight. And it is a threat not only in this region but around the world.

但毫不懷疑地，毫不懷疑地就在我們談話的今晚，伊朗人還在向獲取核武器的道路上前進。它不僅僅是那個地區的威脅，還是對世界的威脅。

What I'd also like to point out the Iranians are putting the most lethal IEDs into Iraq which are killing young Americans, there are special groups in Iran coming into Iraq and are being trained in Iran. There is the Republican Guard in Iran, which Senator Kyl had an amendment in order to declare them a sponsor of terror. Senator Obama said that would be provocative.

我還想指出伊朗人正在把最具殺傷力的爆炸裝置運往伊拉克，而那將奪走美國年輕人的命。有一個特別小組正在從伊朗前往伊拉克，這些人都是在伊朗接受訓練。凱爾議員作了點修正，以便聲明伊朗的共和國衛隊軍是恐怖組織的一個發起組織。而奧巴馬議員說那是在挑釁伊朗。

（註：簡易爆炸裝置或即造爆炸裝置或土製炸彈（Improvised Explosive Device，IED）泛指任何利用現有或臨時製造的材料所製成之炸彈。傳統引爆方式是採用計時裝置來引爆，隨後出現以遙控方式進行引爆（特別是利用無線電或行動電話等器材作為引爆裝置）。在伊拉克和阿富汗戰場上，美軍查獲的IED已採用是感應式引信和防拆裝置，顯見IED的設計與製造已逐漸趨向複雜化和精密化，已非能以「簡易爆炸裝置」來敘述。

Senator Kyl，瓊·凱爾（Jon Kyl，1942年4月25日—）是共和黨的美國參議員，來自亞利桑那州。在參議院於2007年1月3日展開新會期後，凱爾也多了一項職務—擔任參議院裡共和黨協商會（Republican Conference）的主席，使他成為參議院裡名列第三的共和黨重要人物。）

So this is a serious threat. This is a serious threat to security in the world, and I believe we can act and we can act with our friends and allies and reduce that threat as quickly as possible, but have no doubt about the ultimate result of them acquiring nuclear weapons.

所以這是一個嚴重的威脅。這是對世界和平的一個嚴重的威脅。我相信我們能行動……我們能和我們的朋友和盟友並盡快消減那個威脅。我毫不懷疑他們試圖獲取核武器的最終後果。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:32:43

我個人還是希望OBAMA獲得勝利。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:32:44

LEHRER: Two minutes on Iran, Senator Obama.

主持人：關於伊朗，兩分鐘，奧巴馬議員。

OBAMA: Well, let me just correct something very quickly. I believe the Republican Guard of Iran is a terrorist organization. I've consistently said so. What Senator McCain refers to is a measure in the Senate that would try to broaden the mandate inside of Iraq.

奧巴馬：嗯，請讓我快速指正一些東西。我認為伊朗共和國衛隊是一個恐怖組織。我一向這麼說。而麥凱恩議員所提到的是議會裡的一個權衡，即是否擴大伊拉克的委任。

To deal with Iran, and ironically, the single thing that has strengthened Iran over the last several years has been the war in Iraq. Iraq was Iran's mortal enemy. That was cleared away. And what we've seen over the last several years is Iran's influence grow. They have funded Hezbollah, they have funded Hamas, they have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weapon.

回到伊朗，諷刺的是，唯一讓伊朗在過去數年間強大的就是伊拉克戰爭。伊拉克曾是伊朗的死敵。現在它已經不再是了。而我們過去數年來看到的是伊朗影響力的增加。他們支助了黎巴嫩真主黨，支助了哈馬斯（註：一個巴勒斯坦激進組織），他們從無到有現在已經有了4000台離心機用於開發核武器。

So obviously, our policy over the last eight years has not worked. Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran. It would be a game changer. Not only would it threaten Israel, a country that is our stalwart ally, but it would also create an environment in which you could set off an arms race in this Middle East.

所以，很明顯，我們過去八年的政策不起作用。麥凱恩議員完全正確，那就是我們不能忍受一個擁有核武器的伊朗。他會改變遊戲規則，不僅僅會威脅我們堅定的盟友以色列，還會改變中東局勢並引發軍備競賽。

Now here's what we need to do. We do need tougher sanctions. I do not agree with Senator McCain that we're going to be able to execute the kind of sanctions we need without some cooperation with some countries like Russia and China that are, I think Senator McCain would agree, not democracies, but have extensive trade with Iran but potentially have an interest in making sure Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon.

這是我們所要做的：我們需要更加強硬的制裁。我不同意麥凱恩議員的觀點，我認為要執行我們需要的制裁，我們不能沒有來自一些國家如俄羅斯還有中國的合作。我想麥凱恩議員也許也會同意，他們（雖然）沒有民主政治，但卻和伊朗有著廣泛的貿易合作，而且他們也希望看到一個沒有核武器的伊朗。

But we are also going to have to, I believe, engage in tough direct diplomacy with Iran and this is a major difference I have with Senator McCain, this notion by not talking to people we are punishing them has not worked. It has not worked in Iran, it has not worked in North Korea. In each instance, our efforts of isolation have actually accelerated their efforts to get nuclear weapons. That will change when I'm president of the United States.

但我認為，我們也將得開展同伊朗的艱難地直接外交對話。這是我和麥凱恩議員的一個主要的區別。不和我們所懲罰的人們對話，這個觀點在伊朗沒有成功，在朝鮮（也）沒有成功。在兩個場合（伊朗和朝鮮），我們試圖孤立他們的努力實際上加速了他們去獲取核武器的努力。而當我是美國總統時，那會發生改變的。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:33:13

LEHRER: Senator, what about talking?

主持人：（麥凱恩）議員，你怎麼說？

MCCAIN: Senator Obama twice said in debates he would sit down with Ahmadinejad, Chavez and Raul Castro without precondition. Without precondition. Here is Ahmadinenene (ph), Ahmadinejad, who is, Ahmadinejad, who is now in New York, talking about the extermination of the State of Israel, of wiping Israel off the map, and we're going to sit down, without precondition, across the table, to legitimize and give a propaganda platform to a person that is espousing the extermination of the state of Israel, and therefore then giving them more credence in the world arena and therefore saying, they've probably been doing the right thing, because you will sit down across the table from them and that will legitimize their illegal behavior.

麥凱恩：奧巴馬議員兩次在辯論中說到他將會和內賈德（註：伊朗總統），查韋斯（註：委內瑞拉總統 Hugo Chavez）還有勞爾.卡斯特羅（註：古巴領導人）沒有任何前提就一起坐下來談，沒有任何前提。這位內賈尼……呃，內賈德，現在在紐約，談論著要滅絕以色列，要把以色列從地圖上清除掉，而（你卻想讓）我們要坐下來，沒有任何前提，在桌面上，合法化他的行為，並給那個贊成要滅絕以色列的人一個宣傳的平台。這將因此給他們在世界舞台上增加信用度，這也因此等於是（我們）在說，他們也許一直在做的是正確的事情，因為你坐下來和他們在桌面上（談），而那還會將他們的不合法行為合法化。

（註：我覺得麥凱恩這一段對美國利益來說，言之有理。）

The point is that throughout history, whether it be Ronald Reagan, who wouldn't sit down with Brezhnev, Andropov or Chernenko until Gorbachev was ready with glasnost and perestroika.

重點是在歷史上，不管是羅納德.裡根，他沒有坐下來和勃列日涅夫，安德羅波夫坐下來談，直到戈爾巴喬夫準備好了公開化和改革為止；

（

註：「偉大領袖」列昂尼德·伊裡奇·勃列日涅夫（1906—1982）是蘇聯第四代領導人。從1964年10月起到1982年11月去世為止，共執掌這個世界第二強國的最高領導權達十八年，在蘇聯六十九年歷史中，執政時間僅次於斯大林。勃列日涅夫畢業於烏克蘭的第涅伯彼得羅夫斯克礦業冶金學院，從事黨的工作；1941年衛國戰爭爆發，勃列日涅夫以中校軍銜參加紅軍，1942年任第18集團軍政治部主任；戰爭結束時任烏克蘭第四方面軍政治部主任，少將軍銜。確切地說，勃列日涅夫並未真正上過前線，只是在後方隱蔽所裡鼓舞士氣。

註：尤里·安德羅波夫(Yuri Andropov，1914年-1984年)，蘇聯特務組織克格勃首腦、政治家。1939 年他加入蘇聯共產黨，1953年任匈牙利大使，1956年鎮壓了匈牙利事件。1967年開始任克格勃首腦，實行政治高壓政策，對持異議的知識分子進行鎮壓，將他們送進克格勃管制下的精神病院進行非人道的折磨。1982年11月他接替勃列日涅夫成為蘇聯共產黨總書記，在任期間，繼承了勃列日涅夫的政策， 1984年逝世，由契爾年科接任總書記職務。

註：「卓越領袖」康斯坦丁·烏斯季諾維奇·契爾年科(Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko)，(1984年2月13日-1985年3月10日)。蘇聯黨務和國務活動家，曾任蘇聯共產黨中央總書記、蘇共中央政治局委員、中央書記。

註：glasnost，蘇聯政府關於在對社會問題和弊端的討論中強調公平的一個官方政策。

註：perestroika，指開始於20世紀80年代中期對蘇聯經濟和官僚政治的重新組織

）

Or whether it be Nixon's trip to China, which was preceded by Henry Kissinger, many times before he went. Look, I'll sit down with anybody, but there's got to be pre-conditions. Those pre-conditions would apply that we wouldn't legitimize with a face to face meeting, a person like Ahmadinejad. Now, Senator Obama said, without preconditions.

還是尼克松的訪華，而在他之前，亨利.基辛格已經來華了多次。你看，我會和任何人坐下來談，但必須得有前提條件。而那些前提條件涉及我們不會以面對面的會議去合法化，類似於內賈德那樣的人。而現在，奧巴馬議員說不需要前提條件。

（

註：理查德·米爾豪斯·尼克松（Richard Milhous Nixon，1913年1月9日－1994年4月22日），第36任美國副總統（1953年—1961年）與第37任美國總統（1969年—1974 年）。尼克松是美國史上唯一一位當過兩屆副總統與兩屆總統的人，但也是唯一一位於在位期間，以辭職的方式離開總統職位的美國總統。他在1974年8月因「水門事件」事件曝光之後（授權非法闖入民主黨在水門飯店的總部，並下令掩蓋事件真相，事後福特總統給予尼克松特赦，以便緩解全美上下在尼克松總統因水門事件辭職後出現的分歧。）被迫辭去總統職務，成為唯一一位由於辭職而離任的美國總統。

註：亨利·艾爾弗雷德·基辛格 (Henry Alfred Kissinger) 1923年5月27日生於德國費爾特市。猶太人後裔。1938年移居美國。1943年加入美國籍。1950年畢業於哈佛大學，1952年獲文學碩士、 1954年獲哲學博士學位。1971年7月，基辛格作為尼克松總統特使訪華，為中美關係大門的開啟作出了歷史性貢獻。

		自動登錄	找回密碼
密碼			免费注册

2008 美國總統競選第一場辯論中英文對照

個人OBAMA