기초영어에서 에세이까지 최병길의 영어 놀터 www.choibg.com
나와 궁합이 잘 맞는 영어? 가급적 그런 영어를 입력해야 출력 (말하기,쓰기)이 쉽습니다!

Transcript

JUDY WOODRUFF: The fighting triggered protests throughout the Muslim world today after Friday prayers came to an end.

In Egypt, crowds in Cairo and Alexandria waved Palestinian flags and chanted anti-Israeli slogans. Thousands of people also turned out in Yemen to denounce the Israeli offensive. And in Turkey, a one-time Israeli ally, people in Istanbul called for the death of the Jewish state.

JEFFREY BROWN: And for more on the conflict, we are joined by Hisham Melhem, Washington bureau chief for Al-Arabiya, and Dan Schueftan, director of NationalSecurityStudiesCenter at the University of Haifa and a visiting professor this year at GeorgetownUniversity.

Gentlemen, one thing I think a lot of people, myself included, are wondering, how did this flare up seemingly so quickly?

Dan Schueftan?

DAN SCHUEFTAN,University of Haifa: Well, since Hamas took over, we had for a while 1,000 rockets per year, approximately.

Then came Israeli Operation Cast Lead, and it went down dramatically, to a very small number of rockets every year. Last year again, we came to about 1,000 rockets against Israel. And this intensified in recent weeks, to the point where Israel had to take action.

Israel was saying for about two weeks -- I mean, people here were dealing with the elections and other things. But it was saying it must lead to a point where either it stops or we will have to take action.

When it didn't stop, Israel took action.

JEFFREY BROWN: Hisham, what do you think happened to build it up?

HISHAM MELHEM, Al-Arabiya Television: We have never seen quiet on the border, even from 2008 until now.

And in the few days leading to the Israeli decision to take on, assassinate a major military leader of Hamas, there were skirmishes and there were casualties on both sides. So this is really not a total surprise.

But what happened, this confrontation is taking place against changing internal regional dynamics. This is the first.

JEFFREY BROWN: You mean the much larger picture.

HISHAM MELHEM: Absolutely. The much larger picture is that this is the firstconfrontation, serious confrontations, after the changes in Egypt and the changes within the Hamas leadership, the growing empowerment that Hamas feels it has in Gaza, at the expense of the marginalized Palestinian Authority in Ramallah.

You have the emir of visiting Hamas in Gaza. You have the Egyptian prime minister visiting today.

JEFFREY BROWN: The kind of thing we would never have seen, and we did never see.

HISHAM MELHEM: Absolutely. Now Hamas is getting direct financial support from Qatar. There's political support from Turkey and from Egypt.

On the Israeli side, you have upcoming election, you have the Israeli prime minister saying, essentially, our deterrence should be -- we should remind the Palestinians once again, or Hamas, of our deterrence, that we have a long hand. And that is why the decision came to escalate.

JEFFREY BROWN: Well, when you think about the calculation for both sides, in Israel, the international reproach came quickly and will come if this -- will come even more.

DAN SCHUEFTAN: No, at the moment, there is very wide support for the Israeli operation. I mean, the president of the United States went as far as saying that Hamas must stop the fire first.

There is an understanding in Europe. Now, of course, the usual suspects...

JEFFREY BROWN: I meant in the region. I'm sorry. You are right. You are right. DAN SCHUEFTAN: Oh, in the region. The region is hostile to Israel and it is becoming more hostile to Israel. And that's exactly the point that Hamas was banking on, the assumption that the new regime in Egypt, also Muslim brothers, and Hamas is also -- it's the Palestinian Muslim brothers.

So they assume that Israel will be afraid of clashing with Egypt and therefore Israel will not respond, even when a million Israelis have to sit in shelters because their cities are being bombarded by rockets before the Israeli action.

I'm not speaking after. For months and months, you have had a million Israelis under threat in Israeli cities, and there was pressure inside Israel from the population, saying hey, you know, this is impossible. More than a million Israelis can't suffer for so long.

So the government was told by the Israeli population that it must do it. And in spite of the fact that they knew it would be suspected of doing it because of the elections, and the Palestinians believed that, because of the elections, Israel will not do it, the government had to do it.

JEFFREY BROWN: When you think about the potential for escalation, though, can either side win this? I mean, what are they after?

HISHAM MELHEM: The grim reality of this conflict, particularly in Hamas and Israel, is that both sides, even when they bloody each other, even when they end up with many body bags and casualties, mostly civilian Palestinians, both of them in a crazy, surreal way will claim victory.

This is not going to change the political reality. Even if the Israelis invade Gaza, as they did in 2008, when they inflicted and killed 1,300 Palestinians, mostly civilians, there was no political solution. Today, the only thing that is still changing, as I said, there is a regional strategic dynamics that are changing and domestic dynamics, especially with the Palestinians, that are changing, the American position is still the same.

And the Americans say, we cannot talk to Hamas, and therefore we're not doing anything, except giving the Israelis tacit approval and support. At the end of the day, this administration will need Egypt, will need Turkey, will need someone to talk to Hamas.

Otherwise, the Israelis can buy themselves a few months of respite, a year or two, and then again that grim reality will face us again, and will present us with the same problem.

And that's why this crisis cries out for American leadership. If there is no American leadership, the tension will continue. We have the situation in Jordan that is teetering right now. We have a new transition that is going on in Egypt. You have conflagration within Syria.

The whole region is teetering and the whole region is brittle, politically and strategically. And into the mix now, the Israelis come with this major operation against Gaza. They cannot live in the region and claim that they are not going to be touched by the reverberations taking place in the region.

JEFFREY BROWN: Do you see a kind of political solution? And what will the U.S. role be?

DAN SCHUEFTAN: No. I disagree with a lot of things that were said now, but in one thing, I very strongly agree.

There is no political solution. And there cannot be a political solution, because what you have in Gaza is an organization dedicated it the destruction of Israel, dedicated to killing of Jews. This is what they say openly. I mean, this is not an interpretation of what they're saying. This is what they're saying.

As long as Israel exists, they will fight Israel. They are committed to an anti-Semitic perception of killing Jews. It's in their charter. It's in their official documents. This is what they are openly saying. And they will not leave Israel alone, regardless of what is happening.

So once Israel withdrew totally from the Gaza Strip, they started shelling Israeli cities. And I also agree that whatever Israel can achieve -- and it can achieve quite a lot -- it achieved in Cast Lead four years of tranquility, of relative tranquility.

But all it can achieve is relative tranquility for a while, and then it will come up again because the Hamas is committed to the destruction of the state of Israel.

JEFFREY BROWN: Just a brief last word here, but you're saying it requires American leadership, but do you do you see that happening?

HISHAM MELHEM: I don't see it happening.

JEFFREY BROWN: No.

HISHAM MELHEM: That's why. I don't see it happening.

DAN SCHUEFTAN: And it can't help anyhow.

JEFFREY BROWN It can't help?

DAN SCHUEFTAN: No.

HISHAM MELHEM: No, look, you cannot say there is no American leadership. Otherwise, you are leaving the parties to their own devices, and there will be more conflict and more tragedies between the Palestinians and the Israelis at a time when, as I said, the whole region is teetering.

And in the end, the Israelis live in that region too. And it's not in their long-term interests to allow the situation to fester like that. Yes, the Egyptians will maintain the peace treaty with Israel.

But you have -- look what is taking place in Sinai. Throughout the region, that requires new thinking. The Israelis should get out of their traditional way of thinking that, just by military means, we can deal with this issue.

JEFFREY BROWN: All right, we have to leave it there for tonight.

Hisham Melhem, Dan Schueftan, thank you both very much.

HISHAM MELHEM: Thank you.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Twitter and other social media sites lit up with eyewitness accounts from the Middle East. But who should you trust? We offer answers online.

The Sounds of Science: Intersection of Art and Technology from swissnex San Francisco on FORA.tv

이것은 프로그램의 앞부분 동영상입니다.

전체 프로그램을 다 보시려면 Play 하신 후에

우측하단의 "Watch FULL program"을 클릭하세요.

LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST:

Despite the rapid revelations of the scandal, the military writer Tom Ricks remains a defender of General Petraeus.

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

He's written much about the general over the years, and he also knows Paula Broadwell, the writer with whom Petraeus had an affair.

How long have you known General Petraeus and Paula Broadwell?

TOM RICKS: I've known General Petraeus, I'd say, about 15 years, since he was a colonel. I think I met him on a trip in Korea. We were sitting outside a meeting at the Korean Defense Ministry, and I just struck up a conversation with him and found him a smart, interesting guy.

INSKEEP: Right. And he turned out to be a rising star, I suppose.

RICKS: Yeah, and an engaging guy who was interested in the world and talking to reporters about what they were up to and politicians and so on, unusual for an Army general. Paula Broadwell, I think I probably known about four or five years ago. You know, you'd be at these conferences on counterinsurgency and run into her. And, in fact, I eventually introduced her to my book editor. Like a lot of people come through and say, hey, Tom, I'm interested in writing a book on such and such, I'd put them in with my book editor, and she was one of them.

INSKEEP: When you heard the news about the two of them, did it surprise you at all?

RICKS: It surprised me enormously about Dave Petraeus. He's a guy who had such ambition all his life, who wanted to be a great captain of the military. It made me wonder just how much stress he's been under. We've put him now through three combat tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. It made me wonder: Geez, you know, really, has this taken more out of him than we thought? It actually really bothers me. He gave so generously to the country of his time, and his family has made such sacrifices, that when it came time for us to be generous to him, we couldn't find it to forgive him and said - we're kind of instead dragging him through the mud nationally.

INSKEEP: You're saying that he should not have resigned, or his resignation should not have been accepted by the president?

RICKS: What I would like to have seen President Obama do is say, you know Dave, you really screwed up this time. You need to go home and make amends to your life, and then your punishment for all that is you're going back to work, because you're too important to just be thrown out.

It does strike me that in World War II, Dwight Eisenhower pretty openly carried on a romance with his beautiful, red-haired British driver, Kay Summersby, yet he was not pulled back and told, you know, Ike, sorry. You can't lead D-Day. We're going to have to find somebody else.

Our standards have changed, I think, in a way that's not for the better. We are very lax about enforcing professional standards and demanding professional competence. Yet somehow, we have become very insistent about judging people's private, consenting relations with other adults.

INSKEEP: This has become an occasion to reappraise the whole reputation of General David Petraeus. He's been attacked in some articles for his military performance, entirely aside from the affair. Has Petraeus actually gotten some extra breaks because he did so aggressively cultivate the media?

RICKS: I think David Petraeus understood that part of the job of a general is to talk to the media. To fault him for doing that is to fault him for actually, I think, one of the better parts of his performance as a general. There is a whole lot of revisionism going on right now. You know, I'm expecting any day to see an article appear, you know, "Tommy Franks: Misunderstood Genius," you know.

INSKEEP: The general who invaded Iraq at the beginning, but there was no plan, apparently, for what to do after the invasion.

RICKS: Yeah. And then finally, David Petraeus comes in, and David Petraeus, through taking some prudent risks, manages to extricate the United States from Iraq. Now, the Iraq War's not over, but David Petraeus got the United States out and should be credited with that. He was a successful general when others were not. And so to have his personal, private affairs somehow detract from that is like saying, well, you know, Eisenhower really didn't win World War II because, look, he was sleeping with his chauffeur. You know, there's just not connection between the two.

INSKEEP: If you were to make a serious criticism of General David Petraeus, what would it be?

RICKS: I remember a friend of his saying to me in Iraq one day: Dave Petraeus is incredibly good. He's better than the other generals you see here. The problem is he's not as good as he thinks he is. And I would think that would be a genuine and substantial criticism, you know, and there may have been some hubris here. And he certainly - he has gone for a national fall that I think he must find excruciating.

INSKEEP: Tom Ricks is a military writer and author most recently of "The Generals." Thanks very much.

RICKS: You're welcome.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

INSKEEP: It's MORNING EDITION, from NPR News.

In Wednesday's program, CNN Student News reports on a possible shift in Syria's civil war, and we see the effects of severe flooding in Venice. We also explore the origins and makeup of the U.S. presidential Cabinet. And we hear how some high school students came together to create a lasting memory for a member of their homecoming court.

Boeing CTO John Tracy: The Future of Flight from The Atlantic on FORA.tv

CNN 동영상 영어학습 YBM Sisa

AP 동영상 영어학습 YBM Sisa

오디오 듣기:

	Kim Gwang-jun, the senior prosecutor at the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office who is at the epicenter of a conflict between police and prosecutors, turns up yesterday at the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office to face questioning on charges of taking bribes. By Kim Kyung-bin

The senior prosecutor at the center of a tug-of-war over criminal investigations was named and called in for questioning yesterday.

Kim Gwang-jun, 51, a senior prosecutor at the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office, is suspected of taking hundreds of millions of won in bribes from Cho Hee-pal, a notorious pyramid scheme con artist, and Eugene Group, a construction company.

Kim was summoned by a team of special prosecutors headed by Kim Chang-soo, 50, to the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office in Mapo District, western Seoul, at 3 p.m. and questioned.

Kim’s case is pitting the police, which started the investigation into his alleged bribe-taking, against the prosecution, which is trying strenuously to take it over. The police don’t like a change in the criminal procedure code from January that gives the prosecution jurisdiction over all police investigations. It can tell the police when to start an investigation - and when to back off.

The police have refused to walk away from the investigation of Kim. Political analysts also see their targeting of a senior prosecutor for a corruption investigation as payback for the prosecution’s investigation of crooked policemen in the Gangnam area of southern Seoul since March.

Yesterday, the two competing probes started getting in the way of each other, and the prime minister tried to intervene.

Kim is suspected of taking 240 million won ($221,000) from con artist Cho and also receiving 600 million won from Eugene Group in 2008 when he was investigating corporate irregularities at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office.

On Monday, Eugene Group CEO Yu Kyung-sun and his younger brother Soon-tae, chairman of EM Media, an affiliate of Eugene, were questioned by the prosecution team.

Last week, the two were summoned by the Intelligence Crime Team of the National Police Agency to appear at its office on Friday. The brothers notified the police through their attorney that they will not obey the summons because they were already questioned by the prosecution.

But the police are refusing to stand down, even though they are required to obey the prosecutors by law.

“Whether a suspect is a police officer or a prosecutor,” Kim Ki-yong, commissioner of the National Police Agency, told reporters during a press conference, “our job is to make a suspect take legal responsibility for a crime. We will continue to investigate Kim within the scope of our authority because the police are the ones who launched the investigation.”

To try to end the stand-off, Prime Minister Kim Hwang-sik held a meeting with Minister of Justice Kwon Jae-jin, and Maeng Hyung-kyu, minister of public administration and security, who oversees the police, at the Central Government Complex in Gwanghwamun, central Seoul. He urged the two ministries to start cooperating with each other.

Although being technically under the ministries, both the prosecution and the police have independence.

“The two agencies must handle Kim’s case based on the criminal procedure code that specifies the jurisdiction over criminal investigations,” the prime minister said.

Under the revised criminal procedure code, even if an investigation is started by police, they must hand over related materials or suspects to the prosecution upon request.

The Prime Minister’s Office said it will enact a “special measure” if the tug-of-war doesn’t end soon, but it didn’t specify the measure.

“We think the police and prosecution can resolve the issue,” said Yim Jong-yong, a minister in the Prime Minister’s Office. “But we will provide every possible solution if they can’t.”

The police reacted quickly to the prime minister’s statement.

“We will focus on issues that the prosecutors are not investigating,” a spokesman of the NPA told reporters. “We will not resummon people who have already been questioned by the prosecutors.”

Sources in the police said they have acquired information about more types of corruption allegedly involving Kim.

The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office suggested the police form a joint committee to discuss the investigation system.

“We will try to narrow our differences with the police,” Kim Woo-hyun, a spokesman from the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, said.

By Lee Dong-hyun, Chung Kang-hyun[sakwon80@joongang.co.kr]

 

퍼온글임 : 기사출처

연설문전문

JFK_Address on the Buildup of Arms in Cuba (October 22, 1962).txt