優(yōu)秀的英語演講稿
演講稿具有觀點(diǎn)鮮明，內(nèi)容具有鼓動(dòng)性的特點(diǎn)。在充滿活力，日益開放的今天，演講稿對(duì)我們的作用越來越大，那要怎么寫好演講稿呢？以下是小編為大家收集的優(yōu)秀的英語演講稿，僅供參考，大家一起來看看吧。
優(yōu)秀的英語演講稿1
老師們，同學(xué)們，我親愛的戰(zhàn)友們：
大家好!
今天我們齊聚一堂，我們即將奔赴戰(zhàn)場。此時(shí)此刻，讓我想起了前天看的電視劇康熙王朝，講到施瑯即將出兵攻打中國臺(tái)灣，出發(fā)前，命所有的士兵大聲吶喊，要喊出氣勢，這還不曾發(fā)炮，就要在氣勢上壓倒敵人——中國臺(tái)灣的鄭經(jīng)。那么，大家說，施瑯要的是什么?
好，精氣神。那么，今天，我們要的是什么?對(duì)，依然是，精氣神。那你能同我一起吶喊嗎?好，來來來。我們要喊出我們橋中人的氣魄，展現(xiàn)出橋中高三人的精氣神：我們，我們是同一戰(zhàn)壕的勇士;我們，我們是橋中的驕傲!
今天，在這個(gè)莊嚴(yán)而又難忘的時(shí)刻，作為一線教師，面對(duì)全體同學(xué)，面對(duì)學(xué)校、年級(jí)的`領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，我們莊嚴(yán)承諾——我們?nèi)w教師仍將會(huì)一如既往地踏實(shí)工作;我們會(huì)刻苦鉆研，耐心輔導(dǎo)，通力合作，隨時(shí)關(guān)注高考動(dòng)態(tài)，采集高考最新信息，不漏掉每一個(gè)問題，不放棄你們中的任何一個(gè)人。請(qǐng)你們記住，在這87天里，我們?nèi)w教師將時(shí)刻與你們同在，以最優(yōu)秀的教學(xué)質(zhì)量、最無私的投入、最真摯的情感與你們同舟共濟(jì)!永遠(yuǎn)做你們最堅(jiān)強(qiáng)、最可信賴的后盾!同學(xué)們，你知道嗎?我的喜悅來自哪里?對(duì)，你們的改變!當(dāng)你們真正地做到了“靜下心，坐得住，潛心學(xué)習(xí)”的時(shí)候，那是我最快樂的時(shí)候。20xx年2月27日，正月初九，我們開始上課了，我滿懷信心地步入我的課堂，踏上三尺講臺(tái)——在我的內(nèi)心，這就是我的殿堂，我的舞臺(tái)�？僧�(dāng)我講得興趣正濃時(shí)，有些同學(xué)嘻嘻哈哈的表情、左顧右盼的尋找他的目標(biāo)的時(shí)候，我的心很是糾結(jié)，Duang的一下：是我講得不好，亦或是你全然沒有大戰(zhàn)在即的意識(shí)?下課了，我在沉思，自己哪里備課不夠充分，我到底該如何改進(jìn)?我到底該如何真正地吸引你的注意力——哪怕只有20分鐘?自習(xí)課上，當(dāng)我一次又一次地把你從睡夢中死死地拽出來的時(shí)候，我又一次陷入沉思中，我知道了，原來真的是你，自己把自己丟棄!是你，放棄了自己!曾經(jīng)的你，踏入橋中時(shí)，信誓旦旦，你的豪言壯到底去了哪里?曾經(jīng)的你，穩(wěn)坐桌前，潛心讀書，我到底還能再次看到這種場景嗎?你們說，能不能? (能!)是啊，在這短短的87天里，我們?nèi)詫?duì)你充滿期待，期待你的改變!你的改變，我們銘記于心。
那一天，我看到了這樣一個(gè)場景：高三4班，一個(gè)還曾在上學(xué)期的課堂上，東張西望，“左右逢源”的大男孩，今天，靜靜地坐在課桌旁，認(rèn)認(rèn)真真地讀完型填空，很負(fù)責(zé)任的寫下了一個(gè)又一個(gè)答案;自習(xí)課上，我再也沒有見到他“只看不動(dòng)筆”的情形，相反，他邊思索邊計(jì)算，他就是高三(4)班的吳勝旭;我這還有一個(gè)他，他不喜歡英語，更不喜歡我這個(gè)英語老師，這是我的感覺，前幾天，他居然拿出了英文詞典，逐個(gè)查閱單詞，我笑了，笑得好甜好美，在心底樂開了花!他就是陳興。同學(xué)們!我要告訴你的就是你點(diǎn)點(diǎn)滴滴的改變真的能帶給我們無限的快樂!我堅(jiān)信，在這87天里，我們一定能收獲滿滿的幸福與快樂!
同學(xué)們，在你的身邊，我的眼前，有許許多多橋中人的驕傲：有鍥而不舍，永不放棄的李子闖、盧學(xué)文、劉曉彤、趙胤、李帥、陳俊瑤、蔡夢穎、馬藝書;還有抓緊一切時(shí)間，全心投入到學(xué)習(xí)中的劉丹陽、夏朝陽、王天賜、周建、楊世光、賈麗娜、付宇成、孫穎、候崢;他們，他們就是我們的榜樣!我們的榜樣，就在身邊，就在眼前!所以，我要說，只要你想，只要你腳踏實(shí)地地去做，奇跡就會(huì)發(fā)生!我相信，你們87天無悔的付出一定能帶來奇跡!
20xx年3月9日，也就是前天周一的晚自習(xí)值班，離下課還有兩分鐘，我抬頭往下環(huán)顧，一秒、兩秒、三秒……一個(gè)小男孩看了我一眼，又快速地低下了頭;一秒、兩秒、三秒……又有一個(gè)大男孩看了我一眼，也低下了頭。除此之外，無一人抬頭，大家仍埋頭看書寫字。同學(xué)們，你知道我要說什么嗎!我要說，這就是我們想要看到的學(xué)習(xí)氛圍“靜下心，坐得住，潛心學(xué)習(xí)”。
這，就是我們橋中人想要的氛圍;這就是我們橋中人想要的改變!一個(gè)又一個(gè)的改變，一個(gè)又一個(gè)的高三勇士，你們真真的是我們的親學(xué)生，所以我要問：親，你準(zhǔn)備好了嗎?(準(zhǔn)備好了)
你們就是橋中的勇士!
有勇士在，87天，我們風(fēng)雨同舟，一起走過!
有勇士在，87天，我們引吭高歌，燃燒火熱的激情，奮斗不止，拼搏不休!最后，祝愿全體同學(xué)心想事成，金榜題名!祝愿我的戰(zhàn)友健康、快樂、幸福!祝愿我們的橋中更加美好!
謝謝大家!
優(yōu)秀的英語演講稿2
They must see Americans as strange liberators. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1954 -- in 1945 rather -- after a combined French and Japanese occupation and before the communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony. Our government felt then that the Vietnamese people were not ready for independence, and we again fell victim to the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long. With that tragic decision we rejected a revolutionary government seeking self-determination and a government that had been established not by China -- for whom the Vietnamese have no great love -- but by clearly indigenous forces that included some communists. For the peasants this new government meant real land reform, one of the most important needs in their lives.
For nine years following 1945 we denied the people of Vietnam the right of independence. For nine years we vigorously supported the French in their abortive effort to recolonize Vietnam. Before the end of the war we were meeting eighty percent of the French war costs. Even before the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu, they began to despair of their reckless action, but we did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will. Soon we would be paying almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization.
After the French were defeated, it looked as if independence and land reform would come again through the Geneva Agreement. But instead there came the United States, determined that Ho should not unify the temporarily divided nation, and the peasants watched again as we supported one of the most vicious modern dictators, our chosen man, Premier Diem. The peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition, supported their extortionist landlords, and refused even to discuss reunification with the North. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by United States' influence and then by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem's methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictators seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace.
The only change came from America, as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support. All the while the people read our leaflets and received the regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us, not their fellow Vietnamese, the real enemy. They move sadly and apathetically as we herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps where minimal social needs are rarely met. They know they must move on or be destroyed by our bombs.
So they go, primarily women and children and the aged. They watch as we poison their water, as we kill a million acres of their crops. They must weep as the bulldozers roar through their areas preparing to destroy the precious trees. They wander into the hospitals with at least twenty casualties from American firepower for one Vietcong-inflicted injury. So far we may have killed a million of them, mostly children. They wander into the towns and see thousands of the children, homeless, without clothes, running in packs on the streets like animals. They see the children degraded by our soldiers as they beg for food. They see the children selling their sisters to our soldiers, soliciting for their mothers.
What do the peasants think as we ally ourselves with the landlords and as we refuse to put any action into our many words concerning land reform? What do they think as we test out our latest weapons on them, just as the Germans tested out new medicine and new tortures in the concentration camps of Europe? Where are the roots of the independent Vietnam we claim to be building? Is it among these voiceless ones?
We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops. We have cooperated in the crushing of the nation's only noncommunist revolutionary political force, the unified Buddhist Church. We have supported the enemies of the peasants of Saigon. We have corrupted their women and children and killed their men.
Now there is little left to build on, save bitterness. Soon the only solid physical foundations remaining will be found at our military bases and in the concrete of the concentration camps we call "fortified hamlets." The peasants may well wonder if we plan to build our new Vietnam on such grounds as these. Could we blame them for such thoughts? We must speak for them and raise the questions they cannot raise. These, too, are our brothers.
Perhaps a more difficult but no less necessary task is to speak for those who have been designated as our enemies. What of the National Liberation Front, that strangely anonymous group we call "VC" or "communists"? What must they think of the United States of America when they realize that we permitted the repression and cruelty of Diem, which helped to bring them into being as a resistance group in the South? What do they think of our condoning the violence which led to their own taking up of arms? How can they believe in our integrity when now we speak of "aggression from the North" as if there were nothing more essential to the war? How can they trust us when now we charge them with violence after the murderous reign of Diem and charge them with violence while we pour every new weapon of death into their land? Surely we must understand their feelings, even if we do not condone their actions. Surely we must see that the men we supported pressed them to their violence. Surely we must see that our own computerized plans of destruction simply dwarf their greatest acts.
How do they judge us when our officials know that their membership is less than twenty-five percent communist, and yet insist on giving them the blanket name? What must they be thinking when they know that we are aware of their control of major sections of Vietnam, and yet we appear ready to allow national elections in which this highly organized political parallel government will not have a part? They ask how we can speak of free elections when the Saigon press is censored and controlled by the military junta. And they are surely right to wonder what kind of new government we plan to help form without them, the only party in real touch with the peasants. They question our political goals and they deny the reality of a peace settlement from which they will be excluded. Their questions are frighteningly relevant. Is our nation planning to build on political myth again, and then shore it up upon the power of new violence?
Here is the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence, when it helps us to see the enemy's point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition.
So, too, with Hanoi. In the North, where our bombs now pummel the land, and our mines endanger the waterways, we are met by a deep but understandable mistrust. To speak for them is to explain this lack of confidence in Western words, and especially their distrust of American intentions now. In Hanoi are the men who led the nation to independence against the Japanese and the French, the men who sought membership in the French Commonwealth and were betrayed by the weakness of Paris and the willfulness of the colonial armies. It was they who led a second struggle against French domination at tremendous costs, and then were persuaded to give up the land they controlled between the thirteenth and seventeenth parallel as a temporary measure at Geneva. After 1954 they watched us conspire with Diem to prevent elections which could have surely brought Ho Chi Minh to power over a united Vietnam, and they realized they had been betrayed again. When we ask why they do not leap to negotiate, these things must be remembered.
Also, it must be clear that the leaders of Hanoi considered the presence of American troops in support of the Diem regime to have been the initial military breach of the Geneva Agreement concerning foreign troops. They remind us that they did not begin to send troops in large numbers and even supplies into the South until American forces had moved into the tens of thousands.
Hanoi remembers how our leaders refused to tell us the truth about the earlier North Vietnamese overtures for peace, how the president claimed that none existed when they had clearly been made. Ho Chi Minh has watched as America has spoken of peace and built up its forces, and now he has surely heard the increasing international rumors of American plans for an invasion of the North. He knows the bombing and shelling and mining we are doing are part of traditional pre-invasion strategy. Perhaps only his sense of humor and of irony can save him when he hears the most powerful nation of the world speaking of aggression as it drops thousands of bombs on a poor, weak nation more than eight hundred, or rather, eight thousand miles away from its shores.
At this point I should make it clear that while I have tried in these last few minutes to give a voice to the voiceless in Vietnam and to understand the arguments of those who are called "enemy," I am as deeply concerned about our own troops there as anything else. For it occurs to me that what we are submitting them to in Vietnam is not simply the brutalizing process that goes on in any war where armies face each other and seek to destroy. We are adding cynicism to the process of death, for they must know after a short period there that none of the things we claim to be fighting for are really involved. Before long they must know that their government has sent them into a struggle among Vietnamese, and the more sophisticated surely realize that we are on the side of the wealthy, and the secure, while we create a hell for the poor.
Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.
This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote:
Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism .
If we continue, there will be no doubt in my mind and in the mind of the world that we have no honorable intentions in Vietnam. If we do not stop our war against the people of Vietnam immediately, the world will be left with no other alternative than to see this as some horrible, clumsy, and deadly game we have decided to play. The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people. The situation is one in which we must be ready to turn sharply from our present ways. In order to atone for our sins and errors in Vietnam, we should take the initiative in bringing a halt to this tragic war.
【優(yōu)秀的英語演講稿】相關(guān)文章：
英語優(yōu)秀演講稿01-04
英語優(yōu)秀演講稿04-25
優(yōu)秀英語演講稿07-27
學(xué)生英語優(yōu)秀演講稿10-21
優(yōu)秀英語演講稿08-29
英語優(yōu)秀演講稿短文10-11
感恩的英語優(yōu)秀演講稿08-13
關(guān)于英語優(yōu)秀演講稿04-26
優(yōu)秀英語演講稿11-22