#今日阿富汗明日台灣???
#你的胡說八道只是貽笑國際
阿富汗在8月16日再次被塔利班控制,國際間對於阿富汗人權,特別是婦女與女孩人身安全可能遭受的迫害,紛紛表達關切與憂心。
但卻有一群人對於阿富汗人可能遭遇的迫害視而不見,反而掀起一波波不倫不類的對比「#今日阿富汗是明日台灣???」
這樣的言論,連美國重要政治人物、學者專家都看不下去,紛紛在自己的社群媒體上發聲。
美國國安顧問蘇利文(Jake Sullivan)更在媒體簡報會上表示,美國相信自己對盟友夥伴的承諾神聖不可侵犯(sacrosanct),且一向是如此:
「我們也相信自己對台灣、以色列的承諾,一如既往堅實。」
他也強調阿富汗和台灣兩者情況不同(請参見中央社報導:https://reurl.cc/83kpEM )。
國內某些人 #刻意類比台灣為阿富汗,居然要出動美國國安顧問來闢謠,只能說 #中共操弄台灣輿論 已經到令美國擔心的地步。
我們該思考的是,這樣的言論,究竟是要把台灣推向什麼方向?
#來看看美國人自己怎麼說
📍 Bonnie Glaser / 葛來儀(華府智庫「德國馬歇爾基金會」亞洲計畫主任)
「說的沒錯。美國/北約從阿富汗撤軍,與美國對盟友或台灣的承諾和保證完全無關。」
Exactly. US/NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan says nothing about US commitment to allies or Taiwan.
〔以上是葛來儀轉發下面這則訊息並評論〕
🧷Stephen Walt (哈佛甘迺迪學院,國際事務學教授):
「從阿富汗撤軍這件事,儘管可以做得更好,但我並不覺得那裡發生的悲劇摧毀了美國信譽。美國不為次要的利益而戰,並不代表美國不會為了核心利益而戰。」
Disengagement from Afghanistan should have been managed far better, but I don’t get the hysterical claims that the tragedy there has demolished US credibility. Not fighting for less-than-vital interests says nothing about a state’s willingness to fight for vital ones.
📍 Michael McCaul(共和黨眾議院外交委員會召集人)
「中國共產黨的文宣不斷地在秀下限,所以他們利用阿富汗的人道危機來恐嚇和主張領土的侵略,也不令人意外。
中共不該因為我們總統在此事的錯誤領導,就誤判情勢。」
No depth is too low for #CCP propagandists, so it’s no surprise that they’re trying to exploit the humanitarian disaster in #Afghanistan to further their territorial aggression and intimidation.
The CCP should not miscalculate based on @POTUS failed leadership.
📍共和黨眾議院外交委員會
「我們的敵人若懷疑美國對於台灣、或任何美國盟友的保證,那是犯了一個天大的錯誤。」
Our adversaries would be making a grave mistake to doubt our assurances to Taiwan or any other US ally or partner.”
📍 Eric Sayers(華府政策智庫American Enterprise Institute 訪問學者)
「不要再把台灣比做阿富汗。美國在阿富汗佈軍二十年後草率撤軍,與美國願意介入如台灣般的現代民主政體的軍事衝突,完全是兩碼子事。」
Enough with the Taiwan comparisons. Pulling out of a war after 20 years carelessly says nothing about our intent to intervene in an armed conflict over the future of a modern democracy like Taiwan.
同時也有1部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過75萬的網紅志祺七七 X 圖文不符,也在其Youtube影片中提到,這支影片是黃標嗎?#對這支影片是黃標 如果你覺得它不應該被黃標 歡迎留言 #ItDeservesGreenMark #這應該綠標 和我們一起協助 YouTube 建立一個更完善、更精準的AI判別系統! ✔︎ 成為七七會員(幫助我們繼續日更,並享有會員專屬福利):https://bit.ly/3e...
「conflict of interests」的推薦目錄:
conflict of interests 在 Terry&Friends程天縱與朋友們 Facebook 的精選貼文
最近發生的太魯閣號列車事故,使得台鐵的「民營化」和「公司化」議題又被搬上檯面。台鐵工會仍然採取反對立場,認為這些並非台鐵問題的解決辦法。
姑且不論台鐵問題應該如何解決,不過,台鐵工會本身就是利益關係人,參與討論本就有「利益衝突」(conflict of interests)之顧慮。
本篇文章中引用麥可·波特(Michael Porter)在《競爭優勢》(Competitive Advantage)一書中, 提出「價值鏈」(Value Chain)的概念,強調企業之所以能夠存活,主要是因為企業透過「增值流程」(value added process)為客戶創造價值。
企業透過各種「價值活動」(Value Activities)來將投入(Input)轉變成為產出(Output),並且產生利潤(Profit Margin)。波特又把「價值活動」區分為「主要活動」(Primary Activities),以及支援主要活動順利進行的「輔助活動」(Support Activities)。
我們不妨擴大一下,看看整個政府的管理。如果視中華民國政府為一家企業,那麼總統府就如同董事會一般。而最主要的行政組織,就是行政院,行政院長就是這個企業的CEO。
那麼,為什麼台鐵必須要「民營化」或是「公司化」?如果是政府機關,隸屬於交通部下屬單位,就一定會問題叢生嗎?如果是這樣的話,那麼整個行政院和下屬的部會,都一定會有問題嗎?
會不會是管理的問題呢?那麼我們先來看看政府的人事組織管理,再來對照我寫的這篇文章,增加一點趣味性。
依據維基百科的資料,將「行政院」和「人事」相關機構的職掌,引述如下:
行政院是中華民國的最高行政機關,依憲法之相關規定向立法院負起政治責任,簡稱政院。一般所稱的「行政院」,狹義上僅指行政院本部,主要功能為協助行政院院長處理各項行政事務,廣義上則涵蓋各中央行政機關(即俗稱之「部會」,均由行政院管轄),端看使用的場合而定。需要注意的是,「院本部」並非法定名稱,乃為了區別行政院內部單位與各部會而使用。
行政院人事行政總處(Directorate-General of Personnel Administration, Executive Yuan),是主管中華民國政府人力規劃、進用、訓練、考核、待遇、福利等,統籌行政院所屬人事人員管理事項工作的中央二級行政機關,以及負責公布全國各縣市氣候異常期間的上班上課情況;並以人事行政總處為中心,在全臺所有公務機關設立人事處或人事室。
考試院是中華民國國家最高考試機關 。其銜稱中的「考試」一詞,不僅指文官的考選,也包括有關文官人事行政的相關事務。除院本部外,考試院下轄4個中央級機關,分別是考選部、銓敘部、保訓會和基金監理會。
監察院為中華民國最高監察機關,1931年2月成立。簡稱監院。依照《中華民國憲法》在中華民國五院中可負責行使彈劾權、糾舉權、監察權(調查權)、監試權及審計權;1992年前與國民大會和立法院共同行使國會職權。這個機關相當於歐洲審計院、美國政府問責署、中華人民共和國國家監察委員會。
以上提到,人事行政有關的機構,人事行政總處隸屬於行政院下屬單位,而考試院和監察院則直接向總統報告,不屬於行政院管轄。
這就如同一個企業的CEO,卻管不到下屬主管的考選和任用(據維基百科:銓敘部為中華民國考試院的兩個附屬部門之一,為中華民國最高銓敘以及公務人員人事主管機關。),也無法對內部管理者,進行考核、懲處、調查、審計。
國父孫中山先生領導中國革命,倡行「五權憲法」,擷取歐美三權分立制度,與中國御史諫官制度及考試制度之優點,於行政、立法、司法三權之外,另增監察、考試兩權。難怪監察院的網站上面說,我國的監察制度,已經有2000多年的歷史了。
我也無意討論中華民國究竟是總統制、內閣制,或是混合制。只是從企業經營的觀點來看,這樣的組織架構下,最重要的人事行政管理,已經是疊床架屋,職權責分離。管理者的心態和做法是否會被扭曲?
如果是的話,那麼跛腳的不僅僅是CEO,所有的管理者也都跛腳了。台鐵的問題,只是冰山的一角。
這篇引言,幾乎獨立寫成一篇文章了。還是請各位讀者讀讀以下的本文,憂國憂民的事情,擺在一邊,先關心一下自己職涯的發展吧。
https://tuna.mba/p/210511?
conflict of interests 在 李怡 Facebook 的最讚貼文
I sincerely hope I am wrong | Lee Yee
I know very little about American issues. In the past, I even thought that no matter which party wins the presidential election, there would be no significant difference under the Constitution and the existing system. However, it is different this time. This US presidential election not only involves the interests of the Americans but also concerns the future political situation of the world, especially for China and Hong Kong.
The state of society tearing as a result of this presidential election is far beyond any from the past, almost to the point of a civil war. As far as the domestic situation in the US is concerned, it is not a dispute between supporting Trump or supporting Biden, but a fight between support for Trump and opposition to Trump. The topics of discussion are 1) epidemic prevention and control measures, 2) violence and disorder due to the Black Lives Matter protests, and 3) economy. Arguments from both standpoints are too numerous to detail and many are reasonable with solid judgment. It is very difficult to explain clearly in this short article. I will only discuss the history and current situation of Sino-US relations.
The most important timeline in the history of the modern relations between China and the US is after WWII during the Chinese Civil War between the Kuomintang (KMT)-led government of the Republic of China and the Communist Party of China (CPC). At that time, the 33rd president of the US and leader of the Democratic Party, Harry S. Truman pursued a policy of appeasement to the CPC and actively advocated negotiations between the KMT and the CPC. During the Chinese Civil War, it was apparent that he was pro-communist and made the communist military stronger. The KMT was defeated for internal reasons but the US inclination was key. After the KMT government retreated to Taiwan, in January 1950, President Truman issued a statement that the US would not intervene with the situation in China and declared that the island groups of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and some minor islands were not within the scope of the US military. The US Democratic Party allowed mainland China to fall into the hands of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Later, Chiang Kai-shek commissioned General Ho Shai-lai to Tokyo to meet with Douglas MacArthur, the American general who administered postwar Japan during the Allied occupation and oversaw the occupation, rebuilding and democratization of Japan. The visit aimed to win the support of General MacArthur and was ultimately able to save Taiwan.
Another important page in the history of the Sino-US relations was the diplomatic breakthrough of Republican US President Richard Nixon in 1971. A military conflict broke out in the previous year at the border of China and the then Soviet Union. The Soviet Union intended to deploy nuclear weapons to perform a so-called “surgical removal operation” on China’s nuclear base. However, it was halted when it probed the US for reactions. The US stated that if the Soviet Union employed nuclear weapons, it would undoubtedly challenge the US nuclear balance policy. After that, when the US collaborated with China to strategically deal with the superpower Soviet Union, the US did not abandon Taiwan. Not until 1979 when Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the US and a democrat, established diplomatic relations with the CCP that the US severed ties with Taiwan. The incident triggered a global trend to set up diplomatic relations with the CCP, which enabled the CCP to steady a firm holding in the international community.
The third important aspect in the history of the Sino-US relations was in 2000, under Bill Clinton’s administration, China was given entry into the WTO (World Trade Organization) and granted a most favored nation (MFN) status. Since then, it developed its foothold as an international manufacturer in the global market. Furthermore, its economy took off through intellectual property theft, failure to commit to the promise of its 2001 accession to the WTO and market dominance by means of authoritarian capitalism. As China’s economic development fully penetrates into the Western world, on the one hand, it takes advantage of the multinational companies invested in China to control the capital markets of the US and the West. On the other hand, it invests heavily in its grand propaganda to control overseas Chinese media and even Western mainstream media.
Every election candidate receives donations from multinational companies. Not to mention 90% of the mainstream media in the US are owned or operated by these Democratic Party’s donors. Therefore, they turn a blind eye to the elephant in the room and injudiciously embrace the CCP regime that has infiltrated the American society and continuously infringed on human rights at home. In addition to the interest considerations, the media of course also has the leftist ideology permeated in Western academia and journalism. I will elaborate on this topic at another time.
Finally, there is Trump who is not swayed by the donors of multinational corporations because he himself does not lack money nor is he afraid to offend most of the leftist media. He sometimes speaks without thinking but he never seeks the so-called “political correctness,” and basically does what he says he would. People who stand on the moral high ground with the spirit of great love would shake their heads upon his words and actions. Regardless, only a person like Trump can start to contain the power that infiltrated the US and the Western world, and support the democracy of Taiwan and Hong Kong’s campaign for autonomy.
Currently, anti-China is the general social conscience in the US. Biden’s China policy seems to align with that of Trump’s. Biden even defined the CCP’s handling of Xinjiang as an “ethnic genocide.” However, is there really no difference between the two parties? Recall that when Clinton was running for the presidency, he said that he opposed the Republican government’s annual review of the US MFN status for China. He believed it should not be granted but after he took office, he made China’s MFN status permanent and sent China to the WTO.
As the Democratic Party controls Wall Street and mainstream media, I am not optimistic about Trump in this election. Even so, I really hope from my brain to my heart that I am wrong.
conflict of interests 在 志祺七七 X 圖文不符 Youtube 的最佳貼文
這支影片是黃標嗎?#對這支影片是黃標
如果你覺得它不應該被黃標
歡迎留言 #ItDeservesGreenMark #這應該綠標
和我們一起協助 YouTube 建立一個更完善、更精準的AI判別系統!
✔︎ 成為七七會員(幫助我們繼續日更,並享有會員專屬福利):https://bit.ly/3eYdLKp
✔︎ 訂閱志祺七七頻道: http://bit.ly/shasha77_subscribe
✔︎ 追蹤志祺IG :https://www.instagram.com/shasha77.daily
✔︎ 來看志祺七七粉專 :http://bit.ly/shasha77_fb
✔︎ 如果不便加入會員,也可從這裡贊助我們:https://bit.ly/support-shasha77
(請記得在贊助頁面留下您的email,以便我們寄送發票。若遇到金流問題,麻煩請聯繫:service@simpleinfo.cc)
#川普 #波頓 #白宮
各節重點:
00:00 前導
01:36 美國「國安顧問」有多大?
02:41 當川普遇上波頓
04:49 反目成仇
06:22 出書爆料
08:20 川普的反擊
08:54 我們的觀點
09:59 提問
【 製作團隊 】
|企劃:路寬
|腳本:路寬、土龍
|編輯:土龍
|剪輯後製:Pookie
|剪輯助理:歆雅、范范
|演出:志祺
——
【 本集參考資料 】
→ From Bolton to Mattis, Trump Faces Aides Turned Adversaries:https://bloom.bg/3iBIIWN
→ 22 new books that reveal the inner workings of the Trump administration:https://bit.ly/2DJ4VmW
→ ‘Disgruntled boring fool’: Trump lashes out at former aide John Bolton over details in tell-all book:https://bit.ly/2XOJK9F
→ Trump lashes out against John Bolton in response to damning allegations in tell-all memoir, which the president says is 'made up of lies and fake stories:https://bit.ly/2CimIk3
→ John Bolton’s ‘The Room Where It Happened’ Sells Over 780,000 Copies in First Week:https://bit.ly/33O8a7e
→ John Bolton’s bombshell Trump book: eight of its most stunning claims:https://bit.ly/31KWmQq
→ John Bolton: Ten biggest claims in his Donald Trump book:https://bbc.in/33Sp054
→ Trump Once Asked If Finland Is Part Of Russia, Bolton Book Says:https://bit.ly/3fSry5g
→ White House attempt to block publication of Bolton book fails:https://on.ft.com/2DYgHd2
→ Donald Trump unable to differentiate between private affairs and nation’s interests' :https://bit.ly/3ahVyqj
→ How incompetent is Donald Trump? Interview with John Bolton | Conflict Zone:https://bit.ly/31DOgZU
→ 伊朗擊落美軍無人機》紐時:川普下令空襲報復,機艦全就位卻臨時喊卡!:https://bit.ly/31FUVD2
→ 阿富汗和談破局 揭美國務卿與國安顧問鬥法:https://bit.ly/30QpFlz
→ 川普撤換國安顧問波頓 紐時:爭論政策是導火線:https://bit.ly/3fQgsO6
→ 討好政治「強人」?波頓爆料:川普傾心習近平、普亭:https://bit.ly/33MV1eF
→ 波頓新書曝:習親自求川普放了中興、華為一馬:https://bit.ly/3fKnmEB
→ 座標圖:https://bit.ly/31MBB7b
→ 法官對DoJ申請書及出版禁制令的判決:https://bit.ly/2PMrSb8
【 延伸閱讀 】
→ 誤讀尼泊爾為nipple!川普外交內幕曝光 超愛致電給馬克宏閒聊:https://bit.ly/2DI20e4
→ 波頓新書《事發之室:白宮回憶錄》導讀:川普為何對台灣如此不在乎?:https://bit.ly/33RbjDm
→ 他是外交鷹派、也是親台派:美國國安顧問波頓下台,將如何影響美外交政策?:https://bit.ly/2DZYGuw
→ 波頓新書雖是充滿主觀恨意的報仇之作,但也撕去了川普的國王新衣:https://bit.ly/3fPQrif
\每週7天,每天7點,每次7分鐘,和我們一起了解更多有趣的生活議題吧!/
🥁七七仔們如果想寄東西關懷七七團隊與志祺,傳送門如下:
106台北市大安區羅斯福路二段111號8樓
🔶如有業務需求,請洽:hi77@simpleinfo.cc
🔴如果影片內容有誤,歡迎來信勘誤:hey77@simpleinfo.cc
conflict of interests 在 What is a conflict of interest? - YouTube 的推薦與評價
... <看更多>