Issue167 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧

ctxUID: 199330

Issue167  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：45分13秒     587 words
从2005年2月9日9时13分到2005年2月9日9时45分
------题目------
It is impossible for an effective political leader to tell the truth all the time. Complete honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician.
------正文------
Is telling the truth all the time possible for an effective political leader? Or is it true as the speaker asserts that honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician? From my point of view, it is necessary and understandable for a politician not always to tell the truth for the sake of the public or of the state, while it is not permitted that a politician lies for his or her own and private interest.

To begin with, a political leader is able, and sometimes is necessary, not to always tell the truth. At the end of last century, when the Pentagon's computer system meets certain difficulty about Y2K, namely the problem of year 2000, the message was kept as unknown to public until the problem was solved. When an epidemic occurs in certain place, the government always tells its people that all the situation is under control and there is no need for afraid and nerviness to prevent the possible chaos of the public, which might bring more obstacle to fight against the disease. By doing such things, the political leader, or the government, are for the sake of the whole public, society and the nation. And in most cases like that, not to tell the truth to public at the very beginning is extremely important. If the problem about the Pentagon's computer system had been known to all before its completely solution, the public would have experienced a large escape for the fear of possible attacks out of control by weapons out of control, or some terrorists might have taken this chance to do harm to American people.

In addition, when something about the secret of a state is concerned, a political is committed to keep the secret a secret, which requires him or her not to tell the truth, at least at that time. For example, the US leader did not tell the world that the US military force had no more atomic bonds after the only two such bonds had been used to attack the two cities in Japan, thus making Japan in deep fear of American nuclear weapons and helping to the end of the World War II. Another military action also serves as an excellent example. After the US and British army decided to land on the western shore of Europe, they successfully make the Hitler and the German generals to conclude wrong conclusion about the landing area by cheating. If the politicians had told the truth at that time, we could hardly imagine how long will the terrible war would have continued.

However, the power of a political leader to cover the truth cannot be extended to what involves his or her private interest. This is the very rule for a politician to obey; otherwise the politician would fail in public sooner or later, especially democratic countries. The scandal of Water Gate, and former president Clitons’ affair with an intern of the White House, gives us good instances. People will not give the right to political leader to cover the truth for his or her own sake, or such right is not permitted to be abused.

In sum, I strongly agree that a political leader can and sometimes should keep something secret to public for the sake of the larger society, though the right cannot be used to benefit his or her private goals. In democratic countries, all of the powers are authorized by people, and those powers can only be used for public interests, not private ones.

ponponUID: 181304

占座

ponponUID: 181304

Issue167 第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------从2005年2月9日9时13分到2005年2月9日9时45分
------题目------
It is impossible for an effective political leader to tell the truth all the time. Complete honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician.

Is telling the truth all the time possible for an effective political leader? Or is it true as the speaker asserts that honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician? From my point of view, it is necessary and understandable for a politician not always to tell the truth for the sake of the public or [of the]去掉 state, while it is not permitted that a politician lies for his or her own and private interest.
[开门见山，提出论点，但是感觉你的句式比如not always还有第一句话怪怪的]
To begin with, a political leader is able, and sometimes is necessary, not to always tell the truth.[用it is句式会不会更好些呢？] At the end of last century, when the Pentagon's computer system meets certain difficulty about Y2K, namely the problem of year 2000, the message was kept as unknown to public until the problem was solved. When an epidemic occurs in certain place, the government always tells its people that all the situation is under control and there is no need for afraid and nerviness to prevent the possible chaos of the public, which might bring more obstacle to fight against the disease. By doing such things, the political leader, or the government, are for the sake of the whole public, society and the nation. And in most cases like that, not to tell the truth to public at the very beginning is extremely important. If the problem about the Pentagon's computer system had been known to all before its completely solution, the public would have experienced a large escape for the fear of possible attacks out of control by weapons out of control, or some terrorists might have taken this chance to do harm to American people. ［好像没解决之前我就知道这件事了］

In addition, when something about the secret of a state is concerned, a political is committed to keep [the secret a]it secret, which requires him or her not to tell the truth, at least at that time. For example, the US leader did not tell the world that the US military force had no more atomic bonds after the only two such bonds had been used to attack the two cities in Japan, thus making Japan in deep fear of American nuclear weapons and helping to the end of the World War II. Another military action also serves as an excellent example. After the US and British army decided to land on the western shore of Europe, they successfully make the Hitler and the German generals to conclude wrong conclusion about the landing area by cheating. If the politicians had told the truth at that time, we could hardly imagine how long [will]would[注意虚拟语气] the terrible war would have continued.

However, the power of a political leader to cover the truth cannot be extended to what involves his or her private interest. This is the very rule for a politician to obey; otherwise the politician would fail in public sooner or later, especially democratic countries. The scandal of Water Gate, and former president Clitons’ affair with an intern of the White House, gives us good instances. People will not give the right to political leader to cover the truth for his or her own sake, or such right is not permitted to be abused.

In sum, I strongly agree that a political leader can and sometimes should keep something secret to public for the sake of the larger society, though the right cannot be used to benefit his or her private goals. In democratic countries, all of the [powers]rights are authorized by people, and those powers can only be used for public interests, not private ones.

ponponUID: 181304

Is telling the truth all the time possible for an effective political leader? Or is it true as the speaker asserts that honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician? From my point of view, it is necessary and understandable for a politician not always to tell the truth for the sake of the public or of the去掉 state, while it is not permitted that a politician lies for his or her own and private interest.
开门见山，提出论点，但是感觉你的句式比如not always还有第一句话怪怪的
To begin with, a political leader is able, and sometimes is necessary, not to always tell the truth.用it is句式会不会更好些呢？ At the end of last century, when the Pentagon's computer system meets certain difficulty about Y2K, namely the problem of year 2000, the message was kept as unknown to public until the problem was solved. When an epidemic occurs in certain place, the government always tells its people that all the situation is under control and there is no need for afraid and nerviness to prevent the possible chaos of the public, which might bring more obstacle to fight against the disease. By doing such things, the political leader, or the government, are for the sake of the whole public, society and the nation. And in most cases like that, not to tell the truth to public at the very beginning is extremely important. If the problem about the Pentagon's computer system had been known to all before its completely solution, the public would have experienced a large escape for the fear of possible attacks out of control by weapons out of control, or some terrorists might have taken this chance to do harm to American people. ［好像没解决之前我就知道这件事了］

In addition, when something about the secret of a state is concerned, a political is committed to keep the secret ait secret, which requires him or her not to tell the truth, at least at that time. For example, the US leader did not tell the world that the US military force had no more atomic bonds after the only two such bonds had been used to attack the two cities in Japan, thus making Japan in deep fear of American nuclear weapons and helping to the end of the World War II. Another military action also serves as an excellent example. After the US and British army decided to land on the western shore of Europe, they successfully make the Hitler and the German generals to conclude wrong conclusion about the landing area by cheating. If the politicians had told the truth at that time, we could hardly imagine how long willwould注意虚拟语气 the terrible war would have continued.

However, the power of a political leader to cover the truth cannot be extended to what involves his or her private interest. This is the very rule for a politician to obey; otherwise the politician would fail in public sooner or later, especially democratic countries. The scandal of Water Gate, and former president Clitons’ affair with an intern of the White House, gives us good instances. People will not give the right to political leader to cover the truth for his or her own sake, or such right is not permitted to be abused.

In sum, I strongly agree that a political leader can and sometimes should keep something secret to public for the sake of the larger society, though the right cannot be used to benefit his or her private goals. In democratic countries, all of the powersrights are authorized by people, and those powers can only be used for public interests, not private ones.