北京外国语大学英语翻译硕士考研参考书目，考研真题，考研经验，考研资料—汉译英练习.pdfVIP

- wing.j.lam@ Translation1 Is Strategy For Victory in Iraq an Empty Package? American people will have to support it with their children and wallets Joan Johnson-Freese The March 2003, U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a big bet to change the fabric of the Middle East to one more amenable to U.S. and global security in the long term. Overthrowing Saddam Hussein was achieved with lightning speed. Nearly three years and 2,100 American casualties later the White House has released a strategy for securing and rebuilding Iraq as a viable democracy. The question now is, can this new strategy work? Though many people felt it was initially a war of choice, and an unnecessary choice at that, many now believe it has become a war of necessity. For the U.S. to leave Iraq in the near term would almost certainly result in chaos, including some combination of civil war, fragmentation, despotic rule, external influence and minority oppression. The U.S. would lose considerable international credibility regarding its support for democracy and human rights; credibility already in short supply. Iraq could also become a haven for terrorists. Accomplishing the new strategy goals will be hard. Iraq is a virtual Rubik’s Cube of cultural, economic, military and political dilemmas, with roots dating back to before the United States even existed. The new strategy seems to provide a way to start moving Rubik’s Cube pieces in a way that could, over a very long time, be successful. But, as Andrew Krepinevich reminds us in a recent Foreign Affairs article entitled “How to Win in Iraq,” there are three essential elements to a successful Iraq strategy: the Iraqi people, the Ame