In the last week in July the men and women of the populous9 civilized countries of Europe were leading their usual ordered lives, busy and yet soft, lives carried on with comfort and luxury, with appliances for ease and pleasure such as never before were known, lives led in a routine which to most people seemed part of the natural order of things, something which could not be disturbed by shocks such as the world knew of2 old. A fortnight later hell yawned under the feet of these hard-working or pleasure-seeking men and women, and woe11 smote12 them as it smote the peoples we read of in the Old Testament13 or in the histories of the Middle Ages. Through the rents in our smiling surface of civilization the volcanic14 fires beneath gleamed red in the gloom.
What occurred in Europe is on a giant scale like the disaster to the Titanic15. One moment the great ship was speeding across the ocean, equipped with every device for comfort, safety, and luxury. The men in her stoke-hold and steerage were more comfortable than the most luxurious16 travellers of a century ago. The people in her first-class cabins enjoyed every luxury that a luxurious city life could demand and were screened not only from danger but from the least discomfort17 or annoyance18. Suddenly, in one awful and shattering moment, death smote the floating host, so busy with work and play. They were in that moment shot back through immeasurable ages. At one stroke they were hurled19 from a life of effortless ease back into elemental disaster; to disaster in which baseness showed naked, and heroism20 burned like a flame of light.
In the face of a calamity21 so world-wide as the present war, it behooves22 us all to keep our heads clear and to read aright the lessons taught us; for we ourselves may suffer dreadful penalties if3 we read these lessons wrong. The temptation always is only to half-learn such a lesson, for a half-truth is always simple, whereas the whole truth is very, very difficult. Unfortunately, a half-truth, if applied23, may turn out to be the most dangerous type of falsehood.
Now, our business here in America in the face of this cataclysm is twofold. In the first place it is imperative24 that we shall take the steps necessary in order, by our own strength and wisdom, to safeguard ourselves against such disaster as has occurred in Europe. Events have shown that peace treaties, arbitration25 treaties, neutrality treaties, Hague treaties, and the like as at present existing, offer not even the smallest protection against such disasters. The prime duty of the moment is therefore to keep Uncle Sam in such a position that by his own stout26 heart and ready hand he can defend the vital honor and vital interest of the American people.
But this is not our only duty, even although it is the only duty we can immediately perform. The horror of what has occurred in Europe, which has drawn28 into the maelstrom29 of war large parts of Asia, Africa, Australasia, and even America, is altogether too great to permit us to rest supine without endeavoring to prevent its repetition. We are not to be excused if we do not make a resolute30 and intelligent effort to devise some4 scheme which will minimize the chance for a recurrence31 of such horror in the future and which will at least limit and alleviate32 it if it should occur. In other words, it is our duty to try to devise some efficient plan for securing the peace of righteousness throughout the world.
That any plan will surely and automatically bring peace we cannot promise. Nevertheless, I think a plan can be devised which will render it far more difficult than at present to plunge33 us into a world war and far more easy than at present to find workable and practical substitutes even for ordinary war. In order to do this, however, it is necessary that we shall fearlessly look facts in the face. We cannot devise methods for securing peace which will actually work unless we are in good faith willing to face the fact that the present all-inclusive arbitration treaties, peace conferences, and the like, upon which our well-meaning pacificists have pinned so much hope, have proved utterly34 worthless under serious strain. We must face this fact and clearly understand the reason for it before we can advance an adequate remedy.
It is even more important not to pay heed35 to the pathetic infatuation of the well-meaning persons who declare that this is “the last great war.” During the last century such assertions have been made again and again after the close of5 every great war. They represent nothing but an amiable36 fatuity37. The strong men of the United States must protect the feeble; but they must not trust for guidance to the feeble.
In these chapters I desire to ask my fellow countrymen and countrywomen to consider the various lessons which are being writ38 in letters of blood and steel before our eyes. I wish to ask their consideration, first, of the immediate27 need that we shall realize the utter hopelessness under actually existing conditions of our trusting for our safety merely to the good-will of other powers or to treaties or other “bits of paper” or to anything except our own steadfast40 courage and preparedness. Second, I wish to point out what a complicated and difficult thing it is to work for peace and how difficult it may be to combine doing one’s duty in the endeavor to bring peace for others without failing in one’s duty to secure peace for one’s self; and therefore I wish to point out how unwise it is to make foolish promises which under great strain it would be impossible to keep.
Third, I wish to try to give practical expression to what I know is the hope of the great body of our people. We should endeavor to devise some method of action, in common with other nations, whereby there shall be at least a reasonable chance of securing world peace and, in any event,6 of narrowing the sphere of possible war and its horrors. To do this it is equally necessary unflinchingly to antagonize the position of the men who believe in nothing but brute41 force exercised without regard to the rights of other nations, and unhesitatingly to condemn42 the well-meaning but unwise persons who seek to mislead our people into the belief that treaties, mere39 bits of paper, when unbacked by force and when there is no one responsible for their enforcement, can be of the slightest use in a serious crisis. Force unbacked by righteousness is abhorrent43. The effort to substitute for it vague declamation44 for righteousness unbacked by force is silly. The policeman must be put back of the judge in international law just as he is back of the judge in municipal law. The effective power of civilization must be put back of civilization’s collective purpose to secure reasonable justice between nation and nation.
First, consider the lessons taught by this war as to the absolute need under existing conditions of our being willing, ready, and able to defend ourselves from unjust attack. What has befallen Belgium and Luxembourg—not to speak of China—during the past five months shows the utter hopelessness of trusting to any treaties, no matter how well meant, unless back of them lies power sufficient to secure their enforcement.
7 At the outset let me explain with all possible emphasis that in what I am about to say at this time I am not criticising nor taking sides with any one of the chief combatants in either group of warring powers, so far as the relations between and among these chief powers themselves are concerned. The causes for the present contest stretch into the immemorial past. As far as the present generations of Germans, Frenchmen, Russians, Austrians, and Servians are concerned, their actions have been determined45 by deeds done and left undone47 by many generations in the past. Not only the sovereigns but the peoples engaged on each side believe sincerely in the justice of their several causes. This is convincingly shown by the action of the Socialists49 in Germany, France, and Belgium. Of all latter-day political parties the Socialist48 is the one in which international brotherhood50 is most dwelt upon, while international obligations are placed on a par10 with national obligations. Yet the Socialists in Germany and the Socialists in France and Belgium have all alike thrown themselves into this contest with the same enthusiasm and, indeed, the same bitterness as the rest of their countrymen. I am not at this moment primarily concerned with passing judgment51 upon any of the powers. I am merely instancing certain things that have occurred, because of the vital importance that we as a people8 should take to heart the lessons taught by these occurrences.
At the end of July Belgium and Luxembourg were independent nations. By treaties executed in 1832 and 1867 their neutrality had been guaranteed by the great nations round about them—Germany, France, and England. Their neutrality was thus guaranteed with the express purpose of keeping them at peace and preventing any invasion of their territory during war. Luxembourg built no fortifications and raised no army, trusting entirely52 to the pledged faith of her neighbors. Belgium, an extremely thrifty53, progressive, and prosperous industrial country, whose people are exceptionally hard-working and law-abiding, raised an army and built forts for purely54 defensive55 purposes. Neither nation committed the smallest act of hostility56 or aggression57 against any one of its neighbors. Each behaved with absolute propriety58. Each was absolutely innocent of the slightest wrong-doing. Neither has the very smallest responsibility for the disaster that has overwhelmed her. Nevertheless as soon as the war broke out the territories of both were overrun.
Luxembourg made no resistance. It is now practically incorporated in Germany. Other nations have almost forgotten its existence and not the slightest attention has been paid to its9 fate simply because it did not fight, simply because it trusted solely59 to peaceful measures and to the treaties which were supposed to guarantee it against harm. The eyes of the world, however, are on Belgium because the Belgians have fought hard and gallantly60 for all that makes life best worth having to honorable men and women. In consequence, Belgium has been trampled61 under foot. At this moment not only her men but her women and children are enduring misery62 so dreadful that it is hard for us who live at peace to visualize63 it to ourselves.
The fate of Luxembourg and of Belgium offers an instructive commentary on the folly64 of the well-meaning people who a few years ago insisted that the Panama Canal should not be fortified65 and that we should trust to international treaties to protect it. After what has occurred in Europe no sane66 man has any excuse for believing that such treaties would avail us in our hour of need any more than they have availed Belgium and Luxembourg—and, for that matter, Korea and China—in their hours of need.
If a great world war should arise or if a great world-power were at war with us under conditions that made it desirable for other nations not to be drawn into the quarrel, any step that the hostile nation’s real or fancied need demanded would unquestionably be taken, and any treaty that10 stood in the way would be treated as so much waste paper except so far as we could back it by force. If under such circumstances Panama is retained and controlled by us, it will be because our forts and garrison67 and our fleets on the ocean make it unsafe to meddle68 with the canal and the canal zone. Were it only protected by a treaty—that is, unless behind the treaty lay both force and the readiness to use force—the canal would not be safe for twenty-four hours. Moreover, in such case, the real blame would lie at our own doors. We would not be helped at all, we would merely make ourselves objects of derision, if under these circumstances we screamed and clamored about the iniquity69 of those who violated the treaty and took possession of Panama. The blame would rightly be placed by the world upon our own supine folly, upon our own timidity and weakness, and we would be adjudged unfit to hold what we had shown ourselves too soft and too short-sighted to retain.
The most obvious lesson taught by what has occurred is the utter worthlessness of treaties unless backed by force. It is evident that as things are now, all-inclusive arbitration treaties, neutrality treaties, treaties of alliance, and the like do not serve one particle of good in protecting a peaceful nation when some great military power deems its vital needs at stake, unless the11 rights of this peaceful nation are backed by force. The devastation70 of Belgium, the burning of Louvain, the holding of Brussels to heavy ransom71, the killing72 of women and children, the wrecking73 of houses in Antwerp by bombs from air-ships have excited genuine sympathy among neutral nations. But no neutral nation has protested; and while unquestionably a neutral nation like the United States ought to have protested, yet the only certain way to make such a protest effective would be to put force back of it. Let our people remember that what has been done to Belgium would unquestionably be done to us by any great military power with which we were drawn into war, no matter how just our cause. Moreover, it would be done without any more protest on the part of neutral nations than we have ourselves made in the case of Belgium.
If, as an aftermath of this war, some great Old-World power or combination of powers made war on us because we objected to their taking and fortifying75 Magdalena Bay or St. Thomas, our chance of securing justice would rest exclusively on the efficiency of our fleet and army, especially the fleet. No arbitration treaties, or peace treaties, of the kind recently negotiated at Washington by the bushelful, and no tepid76 good-will of neutral powers, would help us in even the smallest degree. If our fleet were conquered, New12 York and San Francisco would be seized and probably each would be destroyed as Louvain was destroyed unless it were put to ransom as Brussels has been put to ransom. Under such circumstances outside powers would undoubtedly77 remain neutral exactly as we have remained neutral as regards Belgium.
Under such conditions my own view is very strongly that the national interest would be best served by refusing the payment of all ransom and accepting the destruction of the cities and then continuing the war until by our own strength and indomitable will we had exacted ample atonement from our foes79. This would be a terrible price to pay for unpreparedness; and those responsible for the unpreparedness would thereby80 be proved guilty of a crime against the nation. Upon them would rest the guilt81 of all the blood and misery. The innocent would have to atone78 for their folly and strong men would have to undo46 and offset82 it by submitting to the destruction of our cities rather than consent to save them by paying money which would be used to prosecute83 the war against the rest of the country. If our people are wise and far-sighted and if they still have in their blood the iron of the men who fought under Grant and Lee, they will, in the event of such a war, insist upon this price being paid, upon this course being followed.13 They will then in the end exact, from the nation which assails84 us, atonement for the misery and redress85 for the wrong done. They will not rely upon the ineffective good-will of neutral outsiders. They will show a temper that will make our foes think twice before meddling86 with us again.
The great danger to peace so far as this country is concerned arises from such pacificists as those who have made and applauded our recent all-inclusive arbitration treaties, who advocate the abandonment of our policy of building battle-ships and the refusal to fortify74 the Panama Canal. It is always possible that these persons may succeed in impressing foreign nations with the belief that they represent our people. If they ever do succeed in creating this conviction in the minds of other nations, the fate of the United States will speedily be that of China and Luxembourg, or else it will be saved therefrom only by long-drawn war, accompanied by incredible bloodshed and disaster.
It is those among us who would go to the front in such event—as I and my four sons would go—who are the really far-sighted and earnest friends of peace. We desire measures taken in the real interest of peace because we, who at need would fight, but who earnestly hope never to be forced to fight, have most at stake in keeping peace. We object to the actions of those who do most14 talking about the necessity of peace because we think they are really a menace to the just and honorable peace which alone this country will in the long run support. We object to their actions because we believe they represent a course of conduct which may at any time produce a war in which we and not they would labor87 and suffer.
In such a war the prime fact to be remembered is that the men really responsible for it would not be those who would pay the penalty. The ultrapacificists are rarely men who go to battle. Their fault or their folly would be expiated88 by the blood of countless89 thousands of plain and decent American citizens of the stamp of those, North and South alike, who in the Civil War laid down all they had, including life itself, in battling for the right as it was given to them to see the right.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
stunned
|
|
| adj. 震惊的，惊讶的 动词stun的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
cataclysm
|
|
| n.洪水，剧变，大灾难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
engulfed
|
|
| v.吞没，包住( engulf的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
hideous
|
|
| adj.丑陋的，可憎的，可怕的，恐怖的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
enthusiasts
|
|
| n.热心人，热衷者( enthusiast的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
primal
|
|
| adj.原始的；最重要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
dread
|
|
| vt.担忧，忧虑；惧怕，不敢；n.担忧，畏惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
populous
|
|
| adj.人口稠密的，人口众多的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
par
|
|
| n.标准，票面价值，平均数量；adj.票面的，平常的，标准的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
woe
|
|
| n.悲哀，苦痛，不幸，困难；int.用来表达悲伤或惊慌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
smote
|
|
| v.猛打，重击，打击( smite的过去式 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
volcanic
|
|
| adj.火山的；象火山的；由火山引起的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
titanic
|
|
| adj.巨人的，庞大的，强大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
luxurious
|
|
| adj.精美而昂贵的；豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
discomfort
|
|
| n.不舒服，不安，难过，困难，不方便 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
annoyance
|
|
| n.恼怒，生气，烦恼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
hurled
|
|
| v.猛投，用力掷( hurl的过去式和过去分词 )；大声叫骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
heroism
|
|
| n.大无畏精神，英勇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
calamity
|
|
| n.灾害，祸患，不幸事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
behooves
|
|
| n.利益，好处( behoof的名词复数 )v.适宜( behoove的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
imperative
|
|
| n.命令，需要；规则；祈使语气；adj.强制的；紧急的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
arbitration
|
|
| n.调停，仲裁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
maelstrom
|
|
| n.大乱动；大漩涡 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
resolute
|
|
| adj.坚决的，果敢的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
recurrence
|
|
| n.复发，反复，重现 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
alleviate
|
|
| v.减轻，缓和，缓解(痛苦等) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
plunge
|
|
| v.跳入，(使)投入，(使)陷入；猛冲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
heed
|
|
| v.注意，留意；n.注意，留心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
amiable
|
|
| adj.和蔼可亲的，友善的，亲切的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
fatuity
|
|
| n.愚蠢，愚昧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
writ
|
|
| n.命令状，书面命令 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
steadfast
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，不动摇的；忠实的；坚贞不移的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
brute
|
|
| n.野兽，兽性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
condemn
|
|
| vt.谴责，指责；宣判(罪犯)，判刑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
abhorrent
|
|
| adj.可恶的，可恨的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
declamation
|
|
| n. 雄辩，高调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
undo
|
|
| vt.解开，松开；取消，撤销 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
undone
|
|
| a.未做完的，未完成的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
socialist
|
|
| n.社会主义者；adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
socialists
|
|
| 社会主义者( socialist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
thrifty
|
|
| adj.节俭的；兴旺的；健壮的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
defensive
|
|
| adj.防御的；防卫的；防守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
hostility
|
|
| n.敌对，敌意；抵制［pl.］交战，战争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
aggression
|
|
| n.进攻，侵略，侵犯，侵害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
propriety
|
|
| n.正当行为；正当；适当 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
gallantly
|
|
| adv. 漂亮地，勇敢地，献殷勤地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
trampled
|
|
| 踩( trample的过去式和过去分词 )； 践踏； 无视； 侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
visualize
|
|
| vt.使看得见，使具体化，想象，设想 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
fortified
|
|
| adj. 加强的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
sane
|
|
| adj.心智健全的，神志清醒的，明智的，稳健的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
garrison
|
|
| n.卫戍部队；驻地，卫戍区；vt.派(兵)驻防 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
meddle
|
|
| v.干预，干涉，插手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
iniquity
|
|
| n.邪恶；不公正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
devastation
|
|
| n.毁坏；荒废；极度震惊或悲伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
ransom
|
|
| n.赎金，赎身；v.赎回，解救 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
killing
|
|
| n.巨额利润；突然赚大钱，发大财 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
wrecking
|
|
| 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
fortify
|
|
| v.强化防御，为…设防；加强，强化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
fortifying
|
|
| 筑防御工事于( fortify的现在分词 )； 筑堡于； 增强； 强化（食品） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
tepid
|
|
| adj.微温的，温热的，不太热心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
atone
|
|
| v.赎罪，补偿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
foes
|
|
| 敌人，仇敌( foe的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
offset
|
|
| n.分支，补偿；v.抵消，补偿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
prosecute
|
|
| vt.告发；进行；vi.告发，起诉，作检察官 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
assails
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的第三人称单数 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
redress
|
|
| n.赔偿，救济，矫正；v.纠正，匡正，革除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
meddling
|
|
| v.干涉，干预（他人事务）( meddle的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
labor
|
|
| n.劳动，努力，工作，劳工；分娩；vi.劳动，努力，苦干；vt.详细分析；麻烦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
expiated
|
|
| v.为（所犯罪过）接受惩罚，赎（罪）( expiate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
countless
|
|
| adj.无数的，多得不计其数的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |