appease

简明释义

英[əˈpiːz]美[əˈpiːz]

v. 平息，安抚；缓解

第 三 人 称 单 数 a p p e a s e s

现 在 分 词 a p p e a s i n g

过 去 式 a p p e a s e d

过 去 分 词 a p p e a s e d

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.Livni took a much tougher line on Iran, saying Israel and the international community need to confront Tehran and not appease it.

利夫尼对伊朗则采取了比较强硬的态度。她说，以色列和国际社会需要对抗德黑兰，而不是安抚德黑兰。

2.Hodgson hopes capture will also appease torres.

霍奇森希望这笔签约能安抚托雷斯。

3.State-run media in Egypt said Mr. Bush aims to do nothing but appease Israel.

埃及官方媒体说，除了姑息以色列外，布什没有其他目的。

4.The move was widely seen as an attempt to appease critics of the regime.

普遍认为，这一举措是试图安抚批评政权的人。

5."Poor Economics" should appease some of their critics.

“穷人经济学”应该可以平息一些批评的声音。

6.The feature set available in the product should be enough to appease the market at any point in time.

产品可用的特性集应该足够满足市场任何时候的需求。

7.She brought cookies to appease her friends after their argument.

她带来了饼干来平息与朋友之间的争吵。

8.The manager tried to appease the angry customers by offering them discounts.

经理试图通过给愤怒的顾客提供折扣来安抚他们。

9.He tried to appease his guilt by volunteering for community service.

他试图通过做志愿者服务来缓解自己的内疚感。

10.To appease the protesters, the government promised to address their concerns.

为了安抚抗议者，政府承诺解决他们的担忧。

11.The diplomat worked hard to appease both sides in the conflict.

外交官努力工作以安抚冲突双方。

作文

In today's complex world, the concept of diplomacy often revolves around the idea of finding common ground and resolving conflicts peacefully. One of the key strategies employed by diplomats and leaders is to appease their adversaries in order to maintain stability and avoid escalation of tensions. The term appease, which means to pacify or placate someone by meeting their demands, has been a subject of both praise and criticism throughout history. While some argue that appeasing an aggressor can prevent war, others contend that it only emboldens them to make further demands.Historically, there have been numerous instances where nations have chosen to appease hostile powers. A notable example is the Munich Agreement of 1938, where British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain sought to appease Adolf Hitler by allowing Nazi Germany to annex parts of Czechoslovakia. This decision was made in hopes of avoiding another devastating war, but ultimately it proved to be a grave miscalculation, as it only encouraged further aggression from the Nazis. Critics of this approach argue that appeasing tyrants only serves to undermine the rule of law and embolden those who seek to exploit the weaknesses of others.On the other hand, there are situations where appeasement can lead to positive outcomes. In some diplomatic negotiations, leaders may choose to appease their counterparts by making concessions that foster goodwill and open channels for dialogue. For instance, during the Cold War, various treaties were established that included compromises from both sides, allowing for a reduction in nuclear arms and easing tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. In this context, appeasing certain demands can be seen as a pragmatic approach to achieving long-term peace.Moreover, in personal relationships, the act of appeasing can also play a significant role. People often find themselves in situations where they must choose between standing firm on their beliefs or appeasing a loved one to maintain harmony. While it is essential to stand up for oneself, sometimes compromising or appeasing can lead to a more peaceful coexistence. However, it is crucial to strike a balance, as excessive appeasement can lead to resentment and a lack of respect in relationships.In conclusion, the notion of appeasing others is a double-edged sword that requires careful consideration of the context and potential consequences. Whether in international relations or personal interactions, understanding when to appease and when to stand firm is vital. History has taught us that while appeasement can sometimes prevent conflict, it can also encourage further aggression if not handled wisely. Therefore, the challenge lies in discerning the appropriate moments to appease and when to assert one's position firmly, ultimately aiming for a balance that fosters peace and respect.

在当今复杂的世界中，外交的概念往往围绕着寻找共同点和和平解决冲突的思想展开。外交官和领导者采用的关键策略之一是为了维护稳定和避免紧张局势升级而对对手进行安抚。这个术语安抚意味着通过满足某人的要求来平息或安抚他们，在历史上一直是备受赞誉和批评的主题。虽然一些人认为对侵略者的安抚可以防止战争，但另一些人则认为这只会使他们更加胆大妄为，提出更多要求。历史上，有许多国家选择对敌对势力进行安抚的实例。一个显著的例子是1938年的慕尼黑协议，英国首相内维尔·张伯伦试图通过允许纳粹德国吞并捷克斯洛伐克的部分地区来安抚阿道夫·希特勒。这一决定是希望避免再次发生毁灭性的战争，但最终证明这是一个严重的误判，因为它只鼓励了纳粹的进一步侵略。对此方法的批评者认为，安抚暴君只会削弱法治，并助长那些试图利用他人弱点的人。另一方面，在某些情况下，安抚可能导致积极的结果。在一些外交谈判中，领导者可能选择通过作出让步来安抚他们的对手，从而促进善意并打开对话的渠道。例如，在冷战期间，建立了各种条约，其中双方都作出了妥协，减少了核武器并缓解了美国与苏联之间的紧张关系。在这种背景下，安抚某些要求可以被视为实现长期和平的务实方法。此外，在个人关系中，安抚的行为也可以发挥重要作用。人们常常发现自己处于必须在坚持自己的信念和为了维护和谐而对所爱之人进行安抚之间做出选择的情况。虽然坚持自我立场至关重要，但有时妥协或安抚可以带来更和平的共处。然而，找到平衡至关重要，因为过度的安抚可能导致怨恨和缺乏尊重。总之，安抚他人的概念是一把双刃剑，需要仔细考虑上下文和潜在后果。无论是在国际关系还是个人互动中，理解何时安抚和何时坚定立场是至关重要的。历史教会我们，虽然安抚有时可以防止冲突，但如果处理不当，也可能鼓励进一步的侵略。因此，挑战在于辨别何时安抚以及何时坚定地主张自己的立场，最终旨在实现促进和平与尊重的平衡。