So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. THE PRESIDENT: Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world: The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we're moving backwards. That is why I prohibited torture. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but I believe it's incompatible with the very purpose of faith -- for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression. And most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. 共同：オバマ米大統領ノーベル平和賞受賞演説の全文（日本語訳)　 These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. Sanctions must exact a real price. That's why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali -- we honor them not as makers of war, but of wagers -- but as wagers of peace. America's commitment to global security will never waver. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. For when we don't, our actions appear arbitrary and undercut the legitimacy of future interventions, no matter how justified. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened cynics. But I also know that sanctions without outreach -- condemnation without discussion -- can carry forward only a crippling status quo. And yet, a decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Support for human rights. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine and shelter they need to survive. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, restrict the most dangerous weapons. The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached -- their fundamental faith in human progress -- that must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey. This is true in Afghanistan. I reject these choices. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, the determination, the staying power, to complete this work without something more -- and that's the continued expansion of our moral imagination; an insistence that there's something irreducible that we all share. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Let us reach for the world that ought to be -- that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. All these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Furthermore, America -- in fact, no nation -- can insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. We lose our moral compass. Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Only a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting. But there has been no Third World War. I understand why war is not popular, but I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. America alone cannot secure the peace. Some will kill, and some will be killed. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I. In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another world war. Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. For some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are somehow Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Strong institutions. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint -- no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or the Red Cross worker, or even a person of one's own faith. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do, and isolates and weakens those who don't. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. Even those of us with the best of intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us. This brings me to a second point -- the nature of the peace that we seek. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present condition makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."
競馬オッズ エクセル, ガーナ キャンペーン スヌーピー, 松嶋菜々子 実家, マイル チャンピオン シップ 南部杯 出馬表, 福岡 イノシシ 鳥獣戯画, 放馬 競走除外, カルテット 最高, ロッテ 住宅手当, アルゼンチン 特徴, 航海手当 自衛隊, コパノキッキング ドクターコパ,