美国有线新闻 CNN 2013-11-27
时间：2013-12-18 07:27:06
搜索关注在线英语听力室公众号：tingroom，领取免费英语资料大礼包。
（单词翻译）
In Congress, the so called nuclear option doesn't refer to weapons. It refers to a procedure rule in the US Senate. It takes a simple majority, 51 votes. For the Senate to confirm the presidential nominee1 but it takes 60 votes to hold the confirmation2 vote or it used to. Yesterday, the Senate passed the nuclear option. Now, vote to vote only takes 51. The idea of requiring 60 votes was ensure to debate in the US Senate. To make sure that minority party in the Senate right now, Republican didn't give muscled out by the majority party, right now the Democrats3. Some senators arguing that 60 votes requirement was stopping anything from getting done. The new 51 vote rule only applies to executive judicial4 nominees5, not to supreme6 court nominees and remember, the majority party won't be the majority forever. When the power shift happens, senators from that party would get to experience the other side of this nuclear option rule. Next up, a potential deal between the US and Afghanistan. American forces were first sent to that country after the 911 terrorist attack in 2001. Sine he was elected, President Obama has promised to end that US combat mission in Afghanistan by the end of 2014. The White House says that time frame is still on track but this mean deal could mean some American forces in Afghanistan after 2014.
Secretary of State John Kerry announced the deal that could leave thousands of US troops in Afghanistan for years to come.
There's no combat rule for United States forces and the
bilateral7 security agreement is in effort to try to clarify for Afghans and for United States military forces exactly what the rules are with respect to that
ongoing8 relationship.
The draft agreement is now before an Afghan council of
tribal9 leaders called the L. Untile they approve it, it's far from the done deal. To get their b., President K wants a letter of assurances from the White House, including a pledge US troops won't enter Afghan homes unless American soldiers' lives are at stake. Past raids have killed innocent Afghans and fueled anger among the population and K. says the US should acknowledge these past mistakes. But is that tantamount to an apology for U.S. actions in the 12-year war?
"I honestly don't know where the idea of an apology started, but let me be clear. President K. didn't ask for an apology. There was no discussion over an apology."
It oil boils down to semantics. US officials in the past have offered some form of apology for
civilian10 deaths, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Former
Defense11 Secretary Robert Gates and General John Allen who led US Forces in Afghanistan. Even the draft agreement expresses regret for Afghan suffering and the loss of innocent lives, language one of President Obama's top
advisors12 repeated Wednesday.
"We have, of course, throughout the war always indicated regret when there are instances of civilian casualties but I think the Afghan people understand the great sacrifices that Americans have made on behalf of their security."
分享到：
收听单词发音 
