My fellow Americans, tonight I want to talk to you about Syria -- why it matters, and where we go from here. 今晚，美国同胞们，我想和大家谈谈叙利亚：为什么它重要，以及我们将何去何从。
Over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war. Over 100,000 people have been killed. Millions have fled the country. In that time, America has worked with allies to provide humanitarian support, to help the moderate opposition, and to shape a political settlement. But I have resisted calls for military action, because we cannot resolve someone else’s civil war through force, particularly after a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. 过去两年，针对巴沙尔·阿萨德镇压政权的一系列和平抗议，已演变成残酷内战。超过十万人丧生，数百万人逃离家园。在此期间，美国与盟友合作提供人道援助、帮助温和派反对派并推动政治解决。但我一直抵制军事行动的呼吁，因为我们无法用武力解决别人的内战，尤其是在伊拉克和阿富汗经历十年战争之后。
The situation profoundly changed, though, on August 21st, when Assad’s government gassed to death over a thousand people, including hundreds of children. The images from this massacre are sickening: Men, women, children lying in rows, killed by poison gas. Others foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath. A father clutching his dead children, imploring them to get up and walk. 然而，8月21日局势发生根本变化：阿萨德政府用毒气杀死一千多人，其中包括数百名儿童。屠杀画面令人作呕：男人、女人和孩子被毒气杀死后成排躺着；有人口吐白沫、喘息挣扎；一位父亲抱着死去的孩子，哀求他们起身行走。
On that terrible night, the world saw in gruesome detail the terrible nature of chemical weapons, and why the overwhelming majority of humanity has declared them off-limits -- a crime against humanity, and a violation of the laws of war. 那一夜，世界清楚看到了化学武器的可怕本质，也看到为什么绝大多数人类已宣布其为禁用武器——这是反人类罪，也是违反战争法的行为。
This was not always the case. In World War I, American GIs were among the many thousands killed by deadly gas in the trenches of Europe. In World War II, the Nazis used gas to inflict the horror of the Holocaust. Because these weapons can kill on a mass scale, with no distinction between soldier and infant, the civilized world has spent a century working to ban them. And in 1997, the United States Senate overwhelmingly approved an international agreement prohibiting the use of chemical weapons, now joined by 189 governments that represent 98 percent of humanity. 情况并非一直如此。第一次世界大战中，美国士兵和成千上万的人在欧洲战壕中被致命毒气杀死；第二次世界大战中，纳粹用毒气制造了大屠杀的恐怖。由于这些武器能大规模杀戮、不分士兵与婴儿，文明世界一个世纪以来一直努力禁止它们。1997年，美国参议院以压倒性多数批准禁止使用化学武器的国际协定，如今已有代表98%人类的189个政府加入。
On August 21st, these basic rules were violated, along with our sense of common humanity. No one disputes that chemical weapons were used in Syria. The world saw thousands of videos, cell phone pictures, and social media accounts from the attack, and humanitarian organizations told stories of hospitals packed with people who had symptoms of poison gas. 8月21日，这些基本规则和我们共同的人性一起遭到践踏。没人质疑叙利亚使用了化学武器。世界看到了数千段视频、手机照片和社交媒体记录，人道组织讲述了医院挤满出现毒气症状患者的情况。
Moreover, we know the Assad regime was responsible. In the days leading up to August 21st, we know that Assad’s chemical weapons personnel prepared for an attack near an area where they mix sarin gas. They distributed gasmasks to their troops. Then they fired rockets from a regime-controlled area into 11 neighborhoods that the regime has been trying to wipe clear of opposition forces. 此外，我们知道责任在阿萨德政权。8月21日前几天，阿萨德的化学武器人员在混合沙林毒气的区域附近准备袭击，向部队发放防毒面具，随后从政权控制区向11个试图清除反对力量的社区发射火箭。
Shortly after those rockets landed, the gas spread, and hospitals filled with the dying and the wounded. We know senior figures in Assad’s military machine reviewed the results of the attack, and the regime increased their shelling of the same neighborhoods in the days that followed. We’ve also studied samples of blood and hair from people at the site that tested positive for sarin. 火箭落地后毒气扩散，医院挤满垂死者和伤员。我们知道阿萨德军事机器的高级人物审查了袭击结果，政权随后几天加大了对这些社区的炮击。我们还研究了现场人员的血液和头发样本，检测出沙林。
When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory. But these things happened. The facts cannot be denied. The question now is what the United States of America, and the international community, is prepared to do about it. Because what happened to those people -- to those children -- is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security. 独裁者实施暴行时，指望世界袖手旁观，直到恐怖画面淡出记忆。但这些事情确实发生了，事实无法否认。现在的问题是，美国和国际社会准备如何应对。因为那些人、那些孩子所遭遇的，不仅违反国际法，也危及我们的安全。
Let me explain why. If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. As the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas, and using them. Over time, our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield. And it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons, and to use them to attack civilians. 让我解释原因。如果我们不行动，阿萨德政权就没有理由停止使用化学武器。禁令一旦削弱，其他暴君也不会再顾忌获得并使用毒气。随着时间推移，我们的军队将再次面临战场化学战，恐怖组织也可能更容易获得这些武器并用来攻击平民。
If fighting spills beyond Syria’s borders, these weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan, and Israel. And a failure to stand against the use of chemical weapons would weaken prohibitions against other weapons of mass destruction, and embolden Assad’s ally, Iran -- which must decide whether to ignore international law by building a nuclear weapon, or to take a more peaceful path. 如果战火越过叙利亚边界，这些武器会威胁土耳其、约旦和以色列等盟友。不能反对使用化学武器，也会削弱对其他大规模杀伤性武器的禁令，并助长阿萨德的盟友伊朗，使其在无视国际法制造核武器与选择和平道路之间作出错误选择。
This is not a world we should accept. This is what’s at stake. And that is why, after careful deliberation, I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to respond to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike. The purpose of this strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime’s ability to use them, and to make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use. 我们不能接受这样的世界。因此，经过慎重考虑，我认定美国国家安全利益要求通过有针对性的军事打击回应阿萨德政权使用化学武器。打击目的，是威慑阿萨德、削弱其使用化学武器的能力，并向世界表明我们不会容忍这种行为。
That's my judgment as Commander-in-Chief. But I’m also the President of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. So even though I possess the authority to order military strikes, I believed it was right, in the absence of a direct or imminent threat to our security, to take this debate to Congress. I believe our democracy is stronger when the President acts with the support of Congress. And I believe that America acts more effectively abroad when we stand together. 这是我作为三军统帅的判断。但我也是世界最古老宪政民主国家的总统。尽管我有权下令军事打击，在不存在直接或迫在眉睫的安全威胁时，我认为把这场辩论提交国会是正确的。总统获得国会支持时，我们的民主更强大；美国团结一致时，在海外行动更有效。
This is especially true after a decade that put more and more war-making power in the hands of the President, and more and more burdens on the shoulders of our troops, while sidelining the people’s representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force. 尤其是在过去十年，越来越多的战争权力集中于总统，越来越多负担压在军人肩上，人民代表却被排除在何时动用武力的关键决策之外。
Now, I know that after the terrible toll of Iraq and Afghanistan, the idea of any military action, no matter how limited, is not going to be popular. After all, I've spent four and a half years working to end wars, not to start them. Our troops are out of Iraq. Our troops are coming home from Afghanistan. And I know Americans want all of us in Washington -- especially me -- to concentrate on the task of building our nation here at home: putting people back to work, educating our kids, growing our middle class. 我知道，伊拉克和阿富汗付出惨重代价后，任何军事行动无论多有限，都会不受欢迎。毕竟，我花了四年半努力结束战争，而不是发动战争。我们的部队已撤出伊拉克，正从阿富汗回国。我知道美国人希望华盛顿所有人——尤其是我——专注于建设国内：让人们重返工作岗位、教育孩子、壮大中产阶级。
It’s no wonder, then, that you're asking hard questions. So let me answer some of the most important questions that I've heard from members of Congress, and that I've read in letters that you've sent to me. 所以，你们提出尖锐问题并不奇怪。让我回答国会议员和你们来信中提出的一些最重要问题。
First, many of you have asked, won’t this put us on a slippery slope to another war? One man wrote to me that we are “still recovering from our involvement in Iraq.” A veteran put it more bluntly: “This nation is sick and tired of war.” 首先，许多人问，这会不会让我们滑向另一场战争？有人写信说我们仍在从伊拉克经历中恢复。一名退伍军人更直白地说：这个国家厌倦战争。
My answer is simple: I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan. I will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like Libya or Kosovo. This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective: deterring the use of chemical weapons, and degrading Assad’s capabilities. 我的回答很简单：我不会把美国士兵派到叙利亚地面。我不会像在伊拉克或阿富汗那样，采取没有尽头的行动。我也不会像在利比亚或科索沃那样，发动旷日持久的空袭。这将是一次有明确目标的打击：威慑化学武器使用并削弱阿萨德能力。
Others have asked whether it's worth acting if we don’t take out Assad. As some members of Congress have said, there’s no point in simply doing a “pinprick” strike in Syria. 有人问，如果不推翻阿萨德，行动是否值得。正如一些国会议员所说，在叙利亚进行象征性打击毫无意义。
Let me make something clear: The United States military doesn’t do pinpricks. Even a limited strike will send a message to Assad that no other nation can deliver. I don't think we should remove another dictator with force -- we learned from Iraq that doing so makes us responsible for all that comes next. But a targeted strike can make Assad, or any other dictator, think twice before using chemical weapons. 我要说清楚：美国军队不会进行象征性打击。即使有限打击也会向阿萨德传递其他国家无法传达的信息。我不认为应以武力推翻另一名独裁者；我们从伊拉克了解到，这会让我们承担之后发生的一切。但有针对性的打击能让阿萨德或任何独裁者在使用化学武器前三思。
Other questions involve the dangers of retaliation. We don’t dismiss any threats, but the Assad regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military. Any other retaliation they might seek is in line with threats that we face every day. Neither Assad nor his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his demise. And our ally, Israel, can defend itself with overwhelming force, as well as the unshakeable support of the United States of America. 其他问题涉及报复风险。我们不会轻视任何威胁，但阿萨德政权没有能力严重威胁我们的军队。他们可能寻求的其他报复，与我们每天面对的威胁相当。阿萨德及其盟友都无意升级到导致其覆亡的程度。我们的盟友以色列拥有压倒性力量自卫，也有美国坚定不移的支持。
Many of you have asked a broader question: Why should we get involved at all in a place that's so complicated, and where -- as one person wrote to me -- “those who come after Assad may be enemies of human rights?” 许多人提出更宽泛的问题：为什么要介入这样复杂的地方？有人写信说，阿萨德之后上台的人可能是人权的敌人。
It’s true that some of Assad’s opponents are extremists. But al Qaeda will only draw strength in a more chaotic Syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians from being gassed to death. The majority of the Syrian people -- and the Syrian opposition we work with -- just want to live in peace, with dignity and freedom. And the day after any military action, we would redouble our efforts to achieve a political solution that strengthens those who reject the forces of tyranny and extremism. 确实，阿萨德的一些反对者是极端分子。但如果世界对平民被毒气杀死无动于衷，基地组织只会在更混乱的叙利亚壮大。多数叙利亚人民及我们合作的反对派，只想有尊严、自由地和平生活。任何军事行动后的第二天，我们都会加倍努力推动政治解决，增强拒绝暴政和极端主义的力量。
Finally, many of you have asked: Why not leave this to other countries, or seek solutions short of force? As several people wrote to me, “We should not be the world’s policeman.” 最后，许多人问，为什么不把事情留给其他国家，或寻求武力之外的方案？有人写信说，我们不应充当世界警察。
I agree, and I have a deeply held preference for peaceful solutions. Over the last two years, my administration has tried diplomacy and sanctions, warning and negotiations -- but chemical weapons were still used by the Assad regime. 我同意，并深切偏好和平解决。过去两年，我的政府尝试了外交与制裁、警告与谈判，但阿萨德政权仍使用了化学武器。
However, over the last few days, we’ve seen some encouraging signs. In part because of the credible threat of U.S. military action, as well as constructive talks that I had with President Putin, the Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons. The Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons, and even said they’d join the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits their use. 然而，过去几天出现了一些鼓舞人心的迹象。由于美国军事行动的可信威胁以及我与普京总统的建设性会谈，俄罗斯政府表示愿与国际社会合作，推动阿萨德放弃化学武器。阿萨德政权已承认拥有这些武器，甚至表示要加入禁止使用化学武器的《化学武器公约》。
It’s too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad’s strongest allies. 现在判断这一提议能否成功还为时过早，任何协议都必须核实阿萨德政权履行承诺。但这项倡议有望在不动用武力的情况下消除化学武器威胁，尤其因为俄罗斯是阿萨德最强的盟友之一。
I have, therefore, asked the leaders of Congress to postpone a vote to authorize the use of force while we pursue this diplomatic path. I’m sending Secretary of State John Kerry to meet his Russian counterpart on Thursday, and I will continue my own discussions with President Putin. 因此，我已要求国会领导人推迟授权使用武力的表决，同时推进外交道路。我将派国务卿约翰·克里周四会见俄罗斯外长，并继续与普京总统讨论。
I’ve spoken to the leaders of two of our closest allies, France and the United Kingdom, and we will work together in consultation with Russia and China to put forward a resolution at the U.N. Security Council requiring Assad to give up his chemical weapons, and to ultimately destroy them under international control. We’ll also give U.N. inspectors the opportunity to report their findings about what happened on August 21st. And we will continue to rally support from allies from Europe to the Americas -- from Asia to the Middle East -- who agree on the need for action. 我已同法国和英国两位最亲密盟友的领导人交谈，我们将与俄罗斯、中国协商，向联合国安理会提出决议，要求阿萨德交出化学武器，最终在国际监督下销毁。我们也将让联合国调查人员报告8月21日发生的事情，并继续争取从欧洲到美洲、从亚洲到中东所有赞成采取行动的盟友支持。
Meanwhile, I’ve ordered our military to maintain their current posture to keep the pressure on Assad, and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails. And tonight, I give thanks again to our military and their families for their incredible strength and sacrifices. 与此同时，我已命令军队保持当前态势，继续向阿萨德施压，并在外交失败时做好回应准备。今晚，我再次感谢军队及其家人为他们展现的非凡坚韧和牺牲。
My fellow Americans, for nearly seven decades, the United States has been the anchor of global security. This has meant doing more than forging international agreements -- it has meant enforcing them. The burdens of leadership are often heavy, but the world is a better place because we have borne them. 美国同胞们，近七十年来，美国一直是全球安全的锚。这意味着不仅要缔结国际协定，也要执行协定。领导的负担常常沉重，但世界因我们承担这些负担而更加美好。
And so, to my friends on the right, I ask you to reconcile your commitment to America’s military might with a failure to act when a cause is so plainly just. To my friends on the left, I ask you to reconcile your belief in freedom and dignity for all people with those images of children writhing in pain, and going still on a cold hospital floor. For sometimes resolutions and statements of condemnation are simply not enough. 所以，我请右翼朋友把你们对美国军力的承诺，与在正义如此明显时拒绝行动协调起来。我也请左翼朋友把你们对所有人自由与尊严的信念，与那些孩子痛苦挣扎、最终在冰冷医院地板上停止呼吸的画面协调起来。有时，决议和谴责声明远远不够。
Indeed, I’d ask every member of Congress, and those of you watching at home tonight, to view those videos of the attack, and then ask: What kind of world will we live in if the United States of America sees a dictator brazenly violate international law with poison gas, and we choose to look the other way? 事实上，我要请每位国会议员和今晚在家观看的你们看看袭击视频，然后问自己：如果美国看到独裁者公然用毒气违反国际法，却选择袖手旁观，我们将生活在怎样的世界？
Franklin Roosevelt once said, “Our national determination to keep free of foreign wars and foreign entanglements cannot prevent us from feeling deep concern when ideals and principles that we have cherished are challenged.” Our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria, along with our leadership of a world where we seek to ensure that the worst weapons will never be used. 富兰克林·罗斯福曾说，我们维护远离外国战争和纠葛的国家决心，不能阻止我们在珍视的理想与原则受到挑战时深切关切。我们的理想、原则和国家安全，以及我们希望确保最恶劣武器永不被使用的世界领导力，都在叙利亚面临考验。
America is not the world’s policeman. Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong. But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act. That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional. With humility, but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth. 美国不是世界警察。全球各地都会发生可怕的事情，我们无力纠正每一项错误。但当我们只需付出适度努力和风险，就能阻止儿童被毒气杀死，从长远看也让自己的孩子更安全时，我相信我们应该行动。这正是美国与众不同之处，也是美国的非凡之处。让我们怀着谦逊而坚定的决心，永远不要忘记这一基本真理。
Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America. 谢谢。愿上帝保佑你们，愿上帝保佑美利坚合众国。