帮忙写战争不能避免的原因（英文）,

帮忙写战争不能避免的原因（英文）,
帮忙写战争不能避免的原因（英文）,

帮忙写战争不能避免的原因（英文）,
Want to avoid war?Start in Iowa DES MOINES 鈥 Judging from national polls,the American people are enlisting in a growing consensus supporting military action to dislodge Saddam Hussein.But here in Iowa,where in little more than 11 months Democrats will begin selecting a 2004 presidential nominee,the mood is starkly different.In fact,the easiest way to bring Iowa Democrats to their feet with raucous applause is to denounce war with Iraq.
This anti-war militancy was on display Saturday night in Ames as 250 party activists attended the Story County Democrats' Annual Soup Supper.Four-term Sen.Tom Harkin roused the faithful by declaring:"I believe we need a need a new debate and a new resolution in the Senate.And I believe that senators ought to stand up and vote whether or not we're going to go to war with Iraq."
Harkin was the warm-up act for the Democratic presidential candidate who is best positioned to ride the groundswell of dovish sentiment into next January's Iowa caucuses.Former Vermont governor Howard Dean earned the most enthusiastic standing ovation of the evening when he said:"We ought not to resort to unilateral action unless there is an imminent threat to the United States.And the secretary of State and the president have not made a case that such an imminent threat exists."
It wasn't too long ago that Dean was the Rodney Dangerfield of the Democratic race,the long-shot candidate from a minuscule state who didn't get much respect.But all that is changing fast,largely because of Democratic doubts about war.As Iowa party Chairman Gordon Fischer,who is neutral in the presidential race,put it Monday:"I can see Dean winning the Iowa caucuses.He's as much a player here as anybody."
It is,of course,premature to speculate whether the war issue will still have political traction in next winter's caucuses.An easy military victory in Iraq,not to mention Saddam's sudden abdication,could leave the doubters on the wrong side of history.But at the moment,the underfunded Dean shares an important distinction with Massachusetts Sen.John Kerry:They are the only Democrats with strong support in both Iowa and the first primary state,New Hampshire.
Kerry,who revealed during a direct and straightforward news conference Tuesday that he is facing surgery for prostate cancer,is the only other serious Democratic contender who has been on the dovish side of the Iraqi equation.Sens.Joe Lieberman and John Edwards,along with Rep.Richard Gephardt,have all cast their lot with the president in supporting an invasion of Iraq.But Kerry,who was largely persuaded by Colin Powell's presentation last week to the United Nations Security Council,has always maintained a complicated yes-but stance on the war.He has stressed multilateral action through the U.N.,while never denying that Iraq represents an imminent threat.
Kerry's political problem has been his inability to distill the nuances of his position into easily digestible sound bites.At a campaign rally in Columbia,S.C.,earlier this month,Kerry responded to a three-word question 鈥 "What about Iraq?" 鈥 with a six-minute ramble through his foreign-policy thinking.He covered everything from his early opposition to Bush's go-it-alone foreign policy to his vote in favor of the Senate resolution on Iraq to his history as a Vietnam veteran who returned home to organize opposition to the war.
While his position on Iraq has fewer clauses than Kerry's,Dean is not unalterably opposed to military action.Responding to a question during a Sunday appearance at Grinnell College,Dean stressed,"Be careful; I have not said that I won't use unilateral force against Saddam." He explained to the crowd of more than 300 students and faculty members in a student lounge filled with red beanbag chairs that America would be justified in acting alone if Saddam acquired nuclear weapons or if he was arming terrorists.He added that he was unconvinced by Powell's claims of a link between Saddam and al-Qaeda.
During an interview on the drive between Grinnell and another well-attended appearance at a bookstore in Iowa City,Dean tried to put his anti-war skepticism in the context of his maverick campaign."What a lot of people learned from Bill Clinton is that if you can accommodate and co-opt,you can be successful," he said."And Bill Clinton was very successful.But that role is not for everybody,and it's not the right time for it anymore.It's a new time to be direct and stand up for what you believe.That's really the fault line in the Democratic Party 鈥 and the war is a piece of it."
It is easy to be puzzled by the sudden intensity of the Democratic race.But both the early dates of the primaries and the rigors of raising upward of $20 million have made this the fastest-starting presidential race in history.The candidates also know that presidential politics is certain to be put on hiatus as soon as American soldiers go into battle.
Dean,a physician-turned-politician,didn't set out to be the anti-war candidate.When he began his presidential odyssey last year his signature issue was health care.But sometimes in politics,as Dean is demonstrating,a candidate and a grass-roots movement become inextricably fused.
War and peace is humanity's eternal theme,but the war and the environment are all actively avoid the question.War is human contradiction can be resolved by the highest form of war is often at the expense of the natural environment,the destruction is inherent in the war issue.War on the environment of malicious changes to the layers of infiltrating pollution caused by cross-contamination of the world,a direct threat to human survival and development.Jurists war into a war it several stages,including :ancient wars and modern war,modern war and future wars.This paper will be discussed in accordance with the chronological order of war the impact on the environment

There are too many people on the world. While the resources of the earth are limited. People have to fight for the resources. So the wars can't be avoided.