题目内容
Decide which of the choices given below would best complete the passage if inserted in the corresponding blanks. Mark the best choice for each blank on your ANSWER SHEET. Threats from nomadic people in the north were (31) throughout Chinese history. They were continually attacking the Chinese northern (32) . With each new emperor, came endless debate about how to (33) the barbarians. There were four options. (34) offensive campaigns to drive them away or to destroy them; create defensive garrisons; develop diplomatic and (35) ties with them, or build a wall to keep them out. All the options were (36) at various times. Experience showed that (37) campaigns were too costly and very risky, (38) defensive garrisons could not respond quickly enough (39) lightning attacks along a long border. The third option would seem to be a very (40) one and it was in fact tried successfully (41) a couple of occasions. Wall building became the most favored option in many dynasties. The three dynasties which (42) the most walls were the Qin, the Han and the Ming. The effectiveness of the Great Wall in history is still a controversial (43) . Historical records show that the wall (44) at many times (45) repel invaders. Only on two occasions when a dynasty weakened from (46) were invaders from the north (47) advance and conquer. (48) , scholars think the Chinese wall builders were themselves responsible for the unrest on the border. The nomads were people who did not farm, so they (49) trade with China for many essentials. When the Chinese refused to trade with them, they had no option (50) raid border towns.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
甲企业自2002年4月1日起为乙企业开发一项系统软件。合同约定，工期为两年，合同总收入为100000元，2002年4月1日乙企业支付项目价款50000元，余款于软件开发完成时收取。4月1日，甲企业收到乙企业支付的该项目价款50 000元，并存入银行。该项目预计总成本为40 000元。其他相关资料如下： 时间 收款余额 累计实际发生成本(元) 开发程度 2002年4月1日 50000 2002年12月31日 16000 40% 2003年12月31日 34000 85% 2004年4月1日 41000 100% 该项目于2004年4月1日完成并交付给乙企业，但余款尚未收到。甲企业按开发程度确定该项目的完工程度。假定为该项目发生的实际成本均用银行存款支付。 要求：编制甲企业2002年至2004年与开发此项目有关的会计分录。
TEXT C 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 traitorous." 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 murder. In consequence, Bevans was convicted. The order allegedly given to Bevans was pretty drastic, and Boston Harbor was not a battlefield; perhaps 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 subordinate 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, ______ .
某企业编制第四季度的直接材料预算，预计季度初材料存量为500千克，季度生产需用量为2500千克，预计季度末材料存量为300千克。若材料采购货款有40％当期付清，另外60％在下季度付清，材料单位采购成本为lO元，则该企业预计资产负债表年末“应付账款”项目为（ ）
大黄微量升华物加碱显（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付