题目内容
如有下程序： #include＜iostream＞ using namespace std； long fun(int n) { if(n＞2) return(fun(n-1)+fun(n-2))； else return 2； } int main() { cout＜＜fun(3)＜＜endl； return 0； } 则该程序的输出结果应该是()。
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
有如下程序： #include＜iostream＞ using namespace std； class Con { char ID； public： Con()：ID('A'){cout＜＜1;} Con(char ID)：ID(ID'){cout＜＜2；} Con(Con&c)：ID(c.getID()){cout＜＜3；} char getID()const{returnID；} }； void show(Con c){to
Moral responsibility is all very well, but what about military orders？ Is it not the soldier's duty to give instant obedience to orders given by his military superiors？ And apart from duty, will not the soldier suffer severe punishment, even death, if he refuses to do what he is ordered to？ If, then, a soldier is told by his superior to burn this house or to shoot that prisoner, how can he be held criminally accountable on the ground' that the burning or shooting was a violation of the laws of war？
These are some of the questions that are raised by the concept commonly called "superior orders", and its use as a defense in war crimes trials. It is an issue that must be as old as the laws of war themselves, and it emerged in legal guise over three centuries ago when, after the Stuart restoration in 1660, the commander of the guards at the trial and execution of Charles I was put on trial for treason and murder. The officer defended himself on the ground "that all I did was as a soldier, by the command of my superior officer whom I must obey or die," but the court gave him short shrift, saying that "When the command is traitorous, then the obedience to that command is also traitorous①."
Though not precisely articulated, the rule that is necessarily implied by this decision is that it is the soldier's duty to obey lawful orders, but that he may disobey—and indeed must, under some circum stances-unlawful orders. Such has been the law of the United States since the birth of the nation. In 1804, Chief Justice John Marshall declared that superior orders would justify a subordinate's conduct only "if not to perform. a prohibited act," and there are many other early decisions to the same effect.
A strikingly illustrative case occurred in the wake of that conflict which most Englishmen have never heard (although their troops burned the White House) and which we call the War of 1812. Our country was baldly split by that war too and, at a time when the United States Navy was not especially popular in New England, the ship-in-the-line Independence was lying in Boston Harbor. A passer-by directed abusive language at a marine standing guard on the ship, and the marine, Bevans by name, ran his bayonet through the man. Charged with murder, Bevans produced evidence that the marines on the Independence had been ordered to bayonet anyone showing them disrespect. The case was tried before Justice Joseph Story, next to Marshall, the leading judicial figure of those years, who charged that any such order as Bevans had invoked "would be illegal and void," and, if given and put into practice, both the superior and the subordinate would be guilty of murder②. In consequence, Bevans was convicted.
The order allegedly given to Bevans was pretty drastic, and Boston Harbor was not a battlefield; per haps it was not too much to expect the marine to realize that literal compliance might lead to bad trouble. But it is only too easy to conceive of circumstances where the matter might not be at all clear. Does the sub ordinate obey at peril that the order may later be ruled illegal, or is protected unless he has a good reason to doubt its validity？
It can be inferred from the first paragraph that if a soldier obeys his superior's order to burn a house or to kill a prisoner, ______.
Whenever two or more unusual traits or situations are found in the same place, it is tempting to look for more than a coincidental relationship between them. The high Himalayas and the Tibetan plateau certainly have extraordinary physical characteristics and the cultures that are found there are also unusual, though not unique. However there is no intention of adopting Montesquieu's view of climate and soil as cultural determents. The ecology of a region merely poses some of the problems faced by the inhabitants of the region, and while the problems facing a culture are important to its development, they do not determine it.
The appearance of the Himalayas during the late Tertiary Period and the accompanying further raising of the previously established rages had a marked effect on the climate of the region. Primarily, of course, it blocked the Indian monsoon from reaching Central Asia at all. Secondly, air and moisture from other directions were also reduced.
Prior to the raising of the Himalayas, the land now forming the Tibetan uplands had a dry, continental climate with vegetation and animal's life similar to that of much of the rest of the region on the same parallel, but somewhat different from that of the areas farther north, which were already drier①. With the coming of the Himalayas and the relatively sudden drying out of the region, there was a severe thinning out of the animal and plant population. The ensuing incomplete Pleistocene glaciations had a further thinning effect, but significantly did not wipe out life in the area. Thus after the end of the glaciations there were only a few varieties of life extant from the original continental species. Isolated by the Kunlun range from the Tarim basin and Turfan depression, species that had already adapted to the dry steppe climate, and would otherwise have been expected to flourish in Tibetan, the remaining native fauna and flora multiplied②. Armand de scribed the Tibetan fauna as not having great variety, but being "striking" in the abundance of the particular species that are present. The plant life is similarly limited in variety, with some observers finding no more than seventy varieties of plants in even the relatively fertile Eastern Tibetan valleys, with fewer than ten food crops. Tibetan "tea" is a major staple, perhaps replacing the unavailable vegetables.
The difficulties of living in an environment at once dry and cold, and populated with species more usually found in more hospitable climates, are great. These difficulties may well have influenced the unusual polyandrous societies typical of the region. Lattimore sees the maintenance of multi-husband households as being preserved from earlier forms by the harsh conditions of the Tibetan uplands, which permitted no experimentation and "froze" the cultures that came there. Kawakiwa, on the other hand, sees the polyandry as a way of easily permitting the best householder to become the head husband regardless of age. His de tailed studies of the Bhotea village of Tsumje do seem to support this idea of polyandry as a method of talent mobility in a situation where even the best talent is barely enough for survival.
In sum, though arguments can be made that a pre-existing polyandrous system was strengthened and preserved (insofar as it has been) by the rigors of the land, it would certainly be an overstatement to lay causative factors of any stronger nature to the ecological influences in this case③.
What are the "unusual traits or situations" referred to in the first sentence？
The body and the mind are closely interwoven in all of us, and certainly in Johnson's case the influence of the body was extremely oblivious. His melancholy, his constantly repeated conviction of the general unhappiness of human life, was certainly the result of his constitutional infirmities. On the other hand, his courage, and his entire indifference to pain, was partly due to his great bodily strength. Perhaps the vein of rudeness, almost of fierceness, which sometimes showed itself in his conversation, was the natural temper of an invalid and suffering giant. That at any rate is what he was. He was the victim from childhood of a disease that resembled St. Vitus's dance. He never knew the natural joy of a free and vigorous use of his limbs; when he walked it was like the struggling walk of one in irons. All accounts agree that his strange gestures and contortions were painful for his friends to witness and attracted crows of starters in the streets.
But Reynolds says that he could sit still for his portrait to be taken, and that when his mind was engaged by a conversation the convulsions ceased. In any case, it is certain that neither this perpetual misery, nor his constant fear of losing his reason, nor his many grave attacks of illness, ever induced him to surrender the privileges that belonged to his physical strength②. He justly thought no character so disagreeable as that of a chronic invalid, and was determined not to be one himself. He had known what it was to live on four pence a day and scorned the life of sofa cushions and tea into which well-attended old gentlemen so easily slip.
Visitors to St. Paul Cathedral are surprised when they look at Johnson's statue because ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付