丘吉尔演讲铁幕演说(丘吉尔演讲铁幕演说原文)

因为丘吉尔的铁幕演说，将苏联描绘成即将高压统一中欧，东欧的超级大国，引起了美国政府的警惕，随后便发生了持续四十五年之久的美苏冷战。 二战胜利后，英国前任首相丘吉尔应美国总统杜鲁门之邀，前去美国做客。在总统的陪同下，到达丘吉尔位于密苏里州富尔顿的母校发表演讲。这个演讲名为“和平砥柱”，演讲中，丘吉尔公开攻击苏联，宣称一幅横贯欧洲大陆的铁幕已经开始降落。苏联开始对东欧，中欧部分国家开始了高压统治。为了世界的和平未来，美英国家应该联合起来，遏制苏联的扩张行为。 仅仅十天后，得到消息的斯大林，公开抨击丘吉尔的演说。但是种子已经种下了，随后美国杜鲁门主义出台，标志着美苏冷战正式开启。 那么当时丘吉尔为什么要发表这样的演讲呢？这就要从当时英国所处的局势解释起。二战之后，昔日的日不落帝国日暮西山，惨烈的世界大战几乎打光了国家的所有储备。二战后，苏联开始崛起，几乎可以称得上是独霸欧洲。但是这样的扩张脚步，严重威胁到了英国在欧洲的战略利益。自英国立国起，就谋求欧洲大陆上的均势局面，这样更符合英国的利益。而苏联的出现打破了欧洲大陆的均势局面，出现了一个霸权大国。 由于二战期间的损耗，英国无力面对如此强横的苏联。如此英国政府便为苏联寻找一个旗鼓相当的对手，这个对手就是当时的美国。并且如果由美国制定国际秩序的话，这样更加有利于英国的相关利益。更重要的一点，两个超级大国发生矛盾冲突，就可以消耗两个国家的实力，而英国更可以在此之中，坐收渔利发展自身。 英国的这般做法其实美苏都看在眼里，但是无法阻拦。因为战后两极之间必定会产生矛盾，这是不可避免的。丘吉尔正是看出美苏冷战不可避免，才跳出来，将事情挑明，逼迫两国正式开启冷战。 如此可见，铁幕演讲将两国矛盾放在明面上，加速了冷战的发起，成为冷战导火索。
因为丘吉尔的铁幕演说过高的吹捧了苏联，让美国对苏联产生了忌惮。
因为这也说明了他们对美国的态度，所以才会有这样的说法。
丘吉尔的演说把各国之间的矛盾摆在了明面上。
因为丘吉尔的铁幕演说，里面说了很多直接的话，直接引发了美苏的冷战。

英国首相丘吉尔在美国总统杜鲁门的母校威斯敏斯特学院发表了铁幕演讲。这次演讲的主要内容是呼吁美国政府抵制苏联的扩张，与英国一起遏制苏联的发展。铁幕演讲是由美国总统杜鲁门精心安排的。可以说，丘吉尔的主张也是美国总统杜鲁门的主张。让我们来谈谈铁幕演讲的精髓。铁幕演讲是在第二次世界大战后发表的，当时美国的经济实力位居世界第一，而英国的经济实力则下降为二等强国。这是英国向美国表示善意，并争取美国与自己站在同一阵营的演讲。这次讲话的最终目的是与美国结成联盟，共同抵制苏联社会主义国家的扩张。这就是铁幕演讲的精髓。 铁幕演讲的目的1：铁幕演讲的主要目的是使英国和美国成为联盟。二战后，英国综合国力下降，国内经济形势不容乐观，政治形势不容乐观。随着战后共产主义力量的崛起，英国需要及时提振经济，重建在战争中受损的各种基础设施。然而，英国在战争中筋疲力尽。在完成重建任务和经济走出低迷的同时，美国经济表现良好，迎来了建国以来最快的发展速度。因此，英国希望得到美国的帮助。与美国结盟对英国既有利又无害。因此，在这种背景下，丘吉尔发表了铁幕演讲，其主要目的是争取美国作为自己的盟友，并获得美国的帮助。 铁幕演讲的第二个目的是：此外，二战后，资本主义和社会主义两大阵营之间出现了对抗。双方都充满敌意，都希望消灭对方，但实际上，双方不可能在短时间内完成消灭对方的任务。此时，苏联的力量正在积极增长和扩张。英国和美国等国家需要遏制苏联的扩张。因此，丘吉尔铁幕演讲的第二个目的是遏制苏联的扩张和增长。
是当时的总统杜鲁门精心安排的，通过这样的方式可以表达对英国的意愿，然后也可以将美国想说，但是不愿意公开的主张表达出来，之后可以散布苏联想要扩张以及威胁的谣言；目的是为了推动西方民主国家完成团结一致，主张英国和美国联合起来，形成合作的关系。
演说的实质目的是为了奠定二战之后，美国在于国际上的地位，并且对于苏联扩张的事情进行了全面的批评，最主要的目的是为了让美国的经济快速的发展，与其他国家之间形成良好的联盟状态，对苏联发起进攻。
丘吉尔铁幕演说的实质和目的是让英美联合起来，建立“特殊关系”，推动西方民主国家“团结一致”。

英文原文： The United States stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power. It is a solemn moment for the American democracy. For with this primacy in power is also joined an awe-inspiring accountability to the future. As you look around you, you must feel not only the sense of duty done, but also you must feel anxiety lest you fall below the level of achievement. Opportunity is here now, clear and shining, for both our countries. To reject it or ignore it or fritter it away will bring upon us all the long reproaches of the aftertime. It is necessary that constancy of mind, persistency of purpose, and the grand simplicity of decision shall rule and guide the conduct of the English-speaking peoples in peace as they did in war. We must, and I believe we shall, prove ourselves equal to this severe requirement. I have a strong admiration and regard for the valiant Russian people and for my wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin. There is deep sympathy and goodwill in Britain -- and I doubt not here also -- toward the peoples of all the Russians and a resolve to persevere through many differences and rebuffs in establishing lasting friendships. It is my duty, however, to place before you certain facts about the present position in Europe. From Stetting in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia; all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject, in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and in some cases increasing measure of control from Moscow. The safety of the world, ladies and gentlemen, requires a unity in Europe, from which no nation should be permanently outcast. It is from the quarrels of the strong parent races in Europe that the world wars we have witnessed, or which occurred in former times, have sprung. Twice the United States has had to send several millions of its young men across the Atlantic to fight the wars，But now we all can find any nation, wherever it may dwell, between dusk and dawn. Surely we should work with conscious purpose for a grand pacification of Europe within the structure of the United Nations and in accordance with our Charter. In a great number of countries, far from the Russian frontiers and throughout the world, Communist fifth columns are established and work in complete unity and absolute obedience to the directions they receive from the Communist center. Except in the British Commonwealth and in the United States where Communism is in its infancy, the Communist parties or fifth columns constitute a growing challenge and peril to Christian civilization. The outlook is also anxious in the Far East and especially in Manchuria. The agreement which was made at Yalta, to which I was a party, was extremely favorable to Soviet Russia, but it was made at a time when no one could say that the German war might not extend all through the summer and autumn of 1945 and when the Japanese war was expected by the best judges to last for a further eighteen months from the end of the German war. I repulse the idea that a new war is inevitable -- still more that it is imminent. It is because I am sure that our fortunes are still in our own hands and that we hold the power to save the future, that I feel the duty to speak out now that I have the occasion and the opportunity to do so. I do not believe that Soviet Russia desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here today while time remains, is the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries. Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens; nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement. What is needed is a settlement, and the longer this is delayed, the more difficult it will be and the greater our dangers will become. From what I have seen of our Russian friends and allies during the war, I am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less respect than for weakness, especially military weakness. For that reason the old doctrine of a balance of power is unsound. We cannot afford, if we can help it, to work on narrow margins, offering temptations to a trial of strength. Last time I saw it all coming and I cried aloud to my own fellow countrymen and to the world, but no one paid any attention. Up till the year 1933 or even 1935, Germany might have been saved from the awful fate which has overtaken her and we might all have been spared the miseries Hitler let loose upon mankind. There never was a war in history easier to prevent by timely action than the one which has just desolated such great areas of the globe. It could have been prevented, in my belief, without the firing of a single shot, and Germany might be powerful, prosperous and honored today; but no one would listen and one by one we were all sucked into the awful whirlpool. We must not let it happen again. This can only be achieved by reaching now, in 1946, a good understanding on all points with Russia under the general authority of the United Nations Organization and by the maintenance of that good understanding through many peaceful years, by the whole strength of the English-speaking world and all its connections. If the population of the English-speaking Commonwealth be added to that of the United States, with all that such cooperation implies in the air, on the sea, all over the globe, and in science and in industry, and in moral force, there will be no quivering, precarious balance of power to offer its temptation to ambition or adventure. On the contrary there will be an overwhelming assurance of security. If we adhere faithfully to the Charter of the United Nations and walk forward in sedate and sober strength, seeking no one's land or treasure, seeking to lay no arbitrary control upon the thoughts of men, if all British moral and material forces and convictions are joined with your own in fraternal association, the high roads of the future will be clear, not only for us but for all, not only for our time but for a century to come. 拓展： 丘吉尔铁幕演说的影响 当时美苏两国是世界上最强大的两个国家，俗话说“一山不容二虎”，随着战争的结束，共同敌人的消失，美苏之间的利益摩擦也就日趋剧烈，不只是单独的美苏之间的利益争夺，也是资本主义和共产主义两种截然不用的意识形态之间的斗争，可以说在当时双方之间已经有了很多的摩擦，只是还碍于各种各样的原因没有摆到明面上来，而丘吉尔的这一场铁幕演说就是直接的撕开了双方的遮羞布，将整件事情挑明了。因此丘吉尔的铁幕演说都被认为是之后美苏之间长达四十多年的冷战的开端，标志着东西方两大阵营的正式对立。 丘吉尔的'铁幕演说是历史上有名的演说，在这场演说中，丘吉尔看着欧洲各国逐渐成为社会主义国家，察觉到整个欧洲呈现出对于英国不利的局面，于是坚定的寻求美国的支持，发表了这场演说。在铁幕演说之后，整个世界形势也随之发生了改变，长达四十多年的冷战正式拉开了序幕。 丘吉尔铁幕演说简介 这件事情要从当时的背景说起，二战结束之后，美国和苏联的实力大增，成为来世界上最强大的两个国家，苏联实力的增长使得很多的东欧国家走上了社会主义的道路。而丘吉尔本人，除了二战时期，他一生对于共产党的态度都是非常差的，而且英国作为一个典型的资本主义的国家，随着共产主义阵营的崛起自然是感受到了危机，曾经一起反对法西斯的战友因为利益上的冲突就这样站在了对立面上。 丘吉尔在演说中认为现在苏联的扩张已经严重影响到了国际形势的安定，因为共产主义的极速扩张，东欧的很多古老国家都处于被苏联掌控的环境中，根本没有自主的权利，所以美国作为世界上最强大的国家应该联合英国一起反对以苏联为首的共产主义国家。 铁幕演说标志着冷战的开始 1946年3月5日，英国首相丘吉尔在美国富尔顿发表著名的“铁幕演说”。 1946年3月，英国前首相温斯顿·丘吉尔在美国富尔顿发表的反苏演说。又称铁幕演说。1946年1月，丘吉尔应邀访美。3月5日，他在美国总统杜鲁门陪同下抵达密苏里州富尔顿，在杜鲁门的母校威斯敏斯特学院发表了题为“和平砥柱”的演说。丘吉尔在演说中公开攻击苏联“扩张”，宣称“从波罗的海的什切青到亚得里亚海边的里雅斯特，一幅横贯欧洲大陆的铁幕已经降落下来”，苏联对“铁幕”以东的中欧、东欧国家进行日益增强的高压控制。1947年3月12日美国总统杜鲁门提出的国情咨文的有关内容，标志着美国等西方国家对苏联等社会主义国家正式推行“冷战”政策。 1991年，苏联、“华约”解体，美、苏两大集团长达 40年的“冷战”结束。

1946年3月5日，英国前首相温斯顿·丘吉尔在美国富尔顿城威斯敏斯特学院发表的反苏联、反共产主义的演说，运用"铁幕"一词之意攻击苏联和东欧社会主义国家"用铁幕笼罩起来"，因此此演说被称为"铁幕演说"。 铁幕演说也被认为是正式拉开了美苏冷战的序幕。之后，1947年3月12日美国"杜鲁门主义"出台，标志着以美国(北约)为主的资本主义阵营，与苏联(华约)为主的社会主义阵营之间的"冷战"正式开始。 扩展资料 历史背景—— 第二次世界大战后，美国经济、军事实力急剧膨胀，成为世界头号资本主义强国。与此同时，苏联力量也逐渐强大，国际地位大大提高，东欧一些国家在苏联的影响下走上了社会主义道路，再加上苏联推行大国沙文主义， 在欧洲极力扩张自己的势力，美苏之间的矛盾日益加深。西方国家提出了用除直接武装进攻以外的一切手段和行动来遏制共产主义，一场"冷战"(Cold War)在以美国为首的资本主义国家和以苏联为首的社会主义国家之间展开。
铁幕演说是英国首相丘吉尔在1945年二战结束后在美国发表的。铁幕演说标志着冷战的开始。

1946年3月，英国前首相丘吉尔在美国富尔顿发表的反苏、反共演说。又称铁幕演说。1946年1月，丘吉尔应邀访美。3月5日，他在美国总统杜鲁门陪同下抵达密苏里州富尔顿，在杜鲁门的母校威斯敏斯特学院发表了题为“和平砥柱”的演说。丘吉尔在演说中公开攻击苏联“扩张”，宣称“从波罗的海的什切青到亚得里亚海边的里雅斯特，一幅横贯欧洲大陆的铁幕已经降落下来”，苏联对“铁幕”以东的中欧、东欧国家进行日益增强的高压控制。对苏联的扩张，不能采取“绥靖政策”。美国正高踞于世界权力的顶峰，应担负起未来的责任。主张英、美结成同盟，英语民族联合起来，制止苏联的“侵略”。富尔顿演说后不到10天，斯大林发表谈话，严厉谴责丘吉尔和他的朋友非常象希特勒及其同伴。演说是杜鲁门借他人之口发表的“冷战”宣言，是美国发动“冷战”的前奏曲 .
http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/7250915.html
发出了“冷战”的信号