評論
打印
Now, Mr Speaker, it has been argued in the debate that airstrikes achieve nothing. Not so.
議長先生，剛剛辯論中有人爭辯空襲沒有作用。并不盡然。
Look at how Daesh’s forward march has been halted in Iraq.
我們來看看Daesh在伊拉克的前進(jìn)勢頭是怎樣被阻擋的。
The House will remember that, 14 months ago, people were saying: ‘they are almost at the gates of Baghdad’.
本院應(yīng)該還記得，14個月前，人們驚呼：它們已經(jīng)逼近巴格達(dá)了！
And that is why we voted to respond to the Iraqi government’s request for help to defeat them.
于是，我們投票決定答應(yīng)伊拉克政府的請求，幫助擊敗它們。
Look at how their military capacity and their freedom of movement has been put under pressure.
想知道它們的軍事實(shí)力和移動自由受到了多大打擊嗎？
Ask the Kurds about Sinjar and Kobani.
去問問辛賈爾和科瓦尼的庫爾德人吧！
Now of course, air strikes alone will not defeat Daesh – but they make a difference.
當(dāng)然當(dāng)然，僅靠空襲當(dāng)然不能摧毀達(dá)伊沙，但空襲確實(shí)奏效！
Because they are giving them a hard time – and it is making it more difficult for them to expand their territory.
因為空襲會讓它們吃盡苦頭，會讓它們更難以擴(kuò)張地盤。
Now, I share the concerns that have been expressed this evening about potential civilian casualties.
我也同意今晚諸位對于平民傷亡所表達(dá)出的擔(dān)心。
However, unlike Daesh, none of us today act with the intent to harm civilians.
但是，與達(dá)伊沙不同，我們沒有人希望傷害平民！
Rather, we act to protect civilians from Daesh – who target innocent people.
相反，我們的行動正是在保護(hù)無辜平民免受達(dá)伊沙的傷害！
Now on the subject of ground troops to defeat Daesh, there’s been much debate about the figure of 70,000 and the government must, I think, better explain that.
關(guān)于出動地面部隊擊潰Daesh的問題，辯論焦點(diǎn)集中在7萬人的數(shù)字上，我認(rèn)為，政府需要作出更明確的解釋。
But we know that most of them are currently engaged in fighting President Assad.
我們清楚這些人中的大多數(shù)正在和阿薩德總統(tǒng)作戰(zhàn)。
But I'll tell you what else we know, is whatever the number – 70,000,40,000,80,000 – the current size of the opposition forces mean the longer we leave taking action, the longer Daesh will have to decrease that number.
然而，我想提醒諸位的是，無論這個數(shù)字是7萬，4萬還是8萬，現(xiàn)在的反對派武裝人數(shù)意味著，我們越晚采取行動，達(dá)伊沙就會把這個人數(shù)減到越低。
And so to suggest, Mr Speaker, that airstrikes should not take place until the Syrian civil war has come to an end is, I think, to miss the urgency of the terrorist threat that Daesh poses to us and others, and I think misunderstands the nature and objectives of the extension to airstrikes that is being proposed.
所以，議長先生，那些表示在敘利亞內(nèi)戰(zhàn)結(jié)束之前不應(yīng)進(jìn)行空襲的意見，在我看來，罔顧了達(dá)伊沙帶來的恐怖主義威脅的緊迫性，并且誤解了計劃中空襲的實(shí)質(zhì)和目的。
And of course we should take action.
我們當(dāng)然應(yīng)該采取行動。
It is not a contradiction between the two to cut off Daesh’s support in the form of money and fighters and weapons, and of course we should give humanitarian aid, and of course we should offer shelter to more refugees including in this country and yes we should commit to play our full part in helping to rebuild Syria when the war is over.
斬斷達(dá)伊沙獲得金錢、戰(zhàn)士以及武器的渠道并不矛盾，我們當(dāng)然應(yīng)該給予人道主義援助，我們當(dāng)然應(yīng)該為包括在英國的敘利亞難民在內(nèi)的所有難民提供庇護(hù)，而且，沒錯，我們當(dāng)然應(yīng)該承諾在戰(zhàn)后對敘利亞的重建給予全面幫助。
Now I accept that there are legitimate arguments, and we have heard them in the debate, for not taking this form of action now.
我承認(rèn)有人提出了合法性上的擔(dān)憂，正如我們在辯論中聽到的，認(rèn)為不應(yīng)該采取軍事行動。
And it is also clear that many members have wrestled, and who knows, in the time that is left, may still be wrestling, with what the right thing to do is.
很明顯，很多議員爭論的是究竟怎么做才是正確的，而且在剩余的時間里，可能還會繼續(xù)為此爭論。
