Accessed Jan 21 , 2019






林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

“China launches more rockets than US, Russia in 2018”

Li Ruohan, Global Times Dec 28, 2018 pp3

Accessed Jan 21 , 2019




林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

“Putin: A Leader made for the Russian Federation”

Ruslan Pukhov, Defense News Dec.10, 2018

Accessed Jan 21 , 2019

From Defense News Dec.10, 2018
國防新聞 20181210
-- According to a Russian security expert in Moscow, Putin, though portrayed in the West as "an architect of an anti-Western approach" , is "far more liberal and pro-Western than most of the Russian public or majority of the Russian elites."
-- He also writes that " In the general public opinion in Russia...even Moscow were to capitulate on all key foreign policy fronts, there would be no tangible easing of U.S. sanctions."


-- Look at what former US security officials say about Putin. Sure enough:


"Putin is a bully" (Leon Paneta, former secretary of defense)

"Putin...operates ...opportunistically ...but has a vision based on fear..."(H.R.McMaster, former national security advisor)

"Putin is afraid of his middle class coming out in the streets.(Mike Morels, former acting director of the CIA)





The main Russian event of 2018 was President Vladimir Putin’s re-election for another six-year term. In view of the nature of the Putin regime, the re-election itself came as no surprise. But it has also demonstrated that there is still no alternative to Putin as the Russian national leader — the president continues to enjoy broad grassroot support and has the unanimous backing of the Russian elites.

As a result, Russia’s domestic and foreign policy course is set to remain unchanged for many years to come; no one is in any doubt that one way or another, Putin will remain in charge even after his current presidential term runs out in 2024. In fact, most Russians perceive that continuity and stability of Putin’s course as his main achievement because he has been instrumental in the steady improvement of the Russian economy, prosperity, and law and order. Putin has basically put into practice the famous strategy formulated by the early 20th century Russian Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin: “Give me 20 years of calm and you won’t recognize Russia.”

In that sense, by voting for Putin, the Russian electorate votes primarily for a continued “calm” that is fundamental to the country’s modernization. The success of that modernization, the rapid growth in Russian prosperity and the impressive improvement in the Russian infrastructure were amply demonstrated by the success of the 2018 FIFA World Cup.

Putin and his administration still remain a powerful engine of Russia’s Western-style modernization. In that sense, we can only admire the president’s determination to maintain the country’s pro-Western course — which is especially impressive given the ongoing foreign policy confrontation with the West.

In the West itself, Putin is portrayed as an architect of an anti-Western approach, a leader of the global anti-Western forces and a man determined to undermine Western democracy. It is clear, however, that in the Russian context, Putin is far more liberal and pro-Western than most of the Russian public or the majority of the Russian elites.

According to opinion surveys and election results, most Russians are far less liberal and far more populist, or socialist-minded, on economic issues than their president. They also advocate a far more forceful and conservative domestic and foreign policy course. In that sense, Putin embodies Alexander Puskhin’s 200-year-old dictum that “the government are the only Europeans in this country.”

The authoritarian nature of Putin’s rule enables the Russian government to pursue a sensible and responsible financial policy, taking unpopular measures — such as the recent rise in the retirement age — when the situation calls for it. As a result, Russia’s macroeconomic indicators remain sound, despite the growing pressure of U.S. sanctions.

In his domestic policy and on matters of defense, Putin is likely to carry on with the cautious approach that aims to minimize the costs of the confrontation with the West. A case in point is the draft federal budget for 2019-2021, which includes real-term defense spending cuts. (Based on our own estimates, defense spending will remain flat thanks to various budgetary chicanery, but there will certainly be no increase.)

Russia will continue to pursue a cautious and conservative program of bolstering its military capability, with an emphasis on gradual technological modernization — including a continued buildup of forces stationed along the border with Ukraine in order to give Moscow more instruments for intervening in the course of the Ukrainian conflict. At the same time, Moscow will desist from any tangible military buildup in the European (northwestern) theater, despite the mutually belligerent rhetoric by NATO and Russia, and the growing U.S. military presence in Europe.

Judging from the new State Armament Program for 2018-2027, which Putin signed off in December 2017, many of the most ambitious and expensive aerospace and naval weapons programs have effectively been pushed back to the mid-2020s or even beyond 2027.

In Syria, Putin will keep trying to convert the military success of the Russian intervention into political and diplomatic gains, but he will be hampered by the growing Syrian involvement of the United States. Unlike Moscow, Washington has no constructive agenda in Syria, which gives the Americans a greater freedom of maneuver.

The growing U.S. pressure in recent years, including the constant ramping up of anti-Russian sanctions, has led the Russian political elite to believe that there are no tangible prospects for any political normalization with the United States anytime soon, and that the sanctions are here to stay. It is now the general opinion in Russia that even if Moscow were to capitulate on all the key foreign policy fronts, there would be no tangible easing of U.S. sanctions — and the sanctions themselves would be vindicated as an effective instrument of pressure.

As a result, the Russian public opinion is increasingly determined to endure a long-term confrontation with the West and with the United States in particular. Long-term stability of the Russian economy and society will be crucial if Russia is to emerge relatively unscathed from that confrontation.

In fact, Russia can probably survive 10 to 15 years of such confrontation without too much damage to itself. It is believed, however, that the West will gradually become weary of that confrontation in the absence of any ideological underpinnings for it. That Western weariness — as well as the changing global balance of power, reinforced by the growing Sino-U.S. confrontation — will eventually open up a window of opportunity for Moscow to achieve a normalization with the West without relinquishing any of its key holdings (such as Crimea and the Russian sphere of influence in the former Soviet republics).

In the eyes of the Russian people, Vladimir Putin is the ideal leader to steer their country during such a period of confrontation.

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

“American Companies Need Chinese Consumers”

Weijian Shan, New York Times January 7, 2019

Accessed Jan 21 , 2019



-- China accounts for about $52 billion in sales for Apple, and its third largest market. 

-- Others with big bets on China include Intel (24% of sales), Micron Technology (51%), and Texas Instruments (44%).

-- The perception of China as the "factory of the world" is badly out of date...

-- Exports have dropped from 36% of China's gross domestic product in 2006 to 20% in 2018.

-- General Motors sells more car in China than in North America.

-- And the threat of trade war with the U.S. is real (for China). But the long-term outlook has not changed. The Chinese consumer market will continue to grow, albeit at a slower pace.





In a rare bit of bad news for its investors, Apple last week laid the blame for lower than expected revenue on its performance in China. The news sent Apple’s stock price plunging, and investors also ditched other companies with significant exposure in China. The scale of the damage, both to Apple’s bottom line and to the broader market, underscores how critically important China — and Chinese consumers — have become for American companies.

China accounts for about $52 billion in sales for Apple, and is its third-largest market. Apple is not the only technology company that relies on sales in China. For Qualcomm, a chip maker whose technology is used in many Apple smartphones, the figure is $15 billion, or about 65 percent of its total sales, according to an estimate by FactSet. Others with big bets on China include Intel (24 percent of sales), Micron Technology (51 percent), and Texas Instruments (44 percent).

These numbers make it very clear that the perception of China as the “factory of the world,” flooding global markets with cheap goods, is badly out of date. Exports and capital investments such as buildings and roads are no longer the main engines of China’s growth. Exports have dropped from 36 percent of China’s gross domestic product in 2006 to 20 percent in 2018. Going after China’s exports with tariffs, as the Trump administration is attempting, is, to a certain extent, fighting yesterday’s war.

In recent years, China’s economy has shifted to one that is much more dependent on domestic household consumption — ordinary Chinese people buying things for themselves and their families. In China over the last decade, the growth in private consumption has outpaced overall economic growth rate. In 2018, G.D.P. in China grew by 6.5 percent, and household consumption accounted for about four-fifths of that growth.

China is now the fastest-growing consumer market in the world, with private consumption amounting to about $5 trillion, more than 10 percent of the world’s total. Competition for Chinese consumers’ hard-earned renminbi has become intense.

Consider the smartphone market. As recently as 2016, Apple was China’s leading maker of handsets. But by the third quarter of 2018, China’s dominant telecommunications company, Huawei, was on top, with 23 percent of the market. The Chinese smartphone makers Oppo, Vivo and Xiaomi occupy the next three spots, while Apple ranked fifth, with 9 percent. South Korea’s Samsung, the global leader in smartphone sales, has all but disappeared from China, having failed to recover from the fiasco over its dangerously overheating Galaxy Note 7 batteries.

Even industries where American consumers once reigned supreme are now increasingly shifting toward China. General Motors, for example, sells more cars in China than in North America. For global filmmakers, box office sales in 2018 totaled about $9 billion in China, compared with almost $12 billion for North America in 2018.

My company made a decision more than a decade ago not to invest in China’s export sector. Costs for Chinese manufacturers are rising, and prices for their exports are flat or falling. Instead, I feel strongly that there is much greater potential for companies — inside and outside China — that cater to the Chinese consumer market.

Yes, China’s economic growth has begun to slow, and there has been a decrease in investments as Beijing has moved to tighten credit. And the threat of a trade war with the United States is real. But my long-term outlook has not changed. The Chinese consumer market will continue to grow, albeit at a slower pace, and it will continue to be a market that any global company must pay serious attention to if it wants to remain competitive.

So where does this leave companies like Apple that find themselves caught in the middle of the trade war? They must hope, first of all, for a swift conclusion to the latest round of trade negotiations between China and the United States, which began in Beijing on Monday. The best possible outcome is a deal that will encourage China to open its economy further, commit to shrinking its bloated state-owned sector and ease barriers to further foreign investment and trade.

Tariffs were supposed to hurt China by hitting its exports to the United States. That hasn’t happened. Should it persist, the trade war will, of course, hurt Chinese companies, just as it has already hurt so many American companies. But if the conflict eventually drags down Chinese consumer demand, businesses all over the world will be the losers.

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

“Why 2018 was the best year ever”

Nicholas Kristof, New York Times January 9, 2019 pp.11

Accessed Jan 21 , 2019

-- 2018是人類歷史上最好的一年。
-- 世界的人口活得更常了,過得更好了。
-- 全球媒體都一樣,報導戰爭、殺戮、飢荒,但不聚焦於人類的進步。
-- 美國是例外,平均壽命下降。而全世界別處都在上升。



The world is, as everyone knows, going to hell, but there’s still the nervous thrill of waiting to see precisely which dark force will take us down. Will the economy collapse first, the ice sheets melt first, or chaos and war envelop us first?

So here’s my antidote to that gloom: Let me try to make the case that 2018 was actually the best year in human history.

Each day on average, about another 295,000 people around the world gained access to electricity for the first time, according to Max Roser of Oxford University and his Our World in Data website. Every day, another 305,000 were able to access clean drinking water for the first time. And each day an additional 620,000 people were able to get online for the first time.

Never before has such a large portion of humanity been literate, enjoyed a middle-class cushion, lived such long lives, had access to family planning or been confident that their children would survive. Let’s hit pause on our fears and frustrations and share a nanosecond of celebration at this backdrop of progress.


On a dirt road in rural Angola a few years ago, I met a woman named Delfina Fernandes who had lost 10 children, out of 15; she had endured perhaps the greatest blow any parent can, and she had suffered it 10 times.

Yet such child deaths are becoming far less common. Only about 4 percent of children worldwide now die by the age of 5. That’s still horrifying, but it’s down from 19 percent in 1960 and 7 percent in 2003.


Indeed, children today in Mexico or Brazil are less likely to die by the age of 5 than American children were as recently as 1970.

The big news that won’t make a headline and won’t appear on television is that 15,000 children died around the world in the last 24 hours. But in the 1990s, it was 30,000 kids dying each day.

Perhaps it seems Pollyannish or tasteless to trumpet progress at a time when there is so much butchery, misrule and threat hanging over us. But I cover the butchery and misrule every other day of the year, and I do this annual column about progress to try to place those tragedies in perspective.


One reason for this column is that journalism is supposed to inform people about the world, and it turns out that most Americans (and citizens of other countries, too) are spectacularly misinformed.

For example, nine out of 10 Americans say in polls that global poverty is worsening or staying the same, when in fact the most important trend in the world is arguably a huge reduction in poverty. Until about the 1950s, a majority of humans had always lived in “extreme poverty,” defined as less than about $2 a person per day. When I was a university student in the early 1980s, 44 percent of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty.

Now, fewer than 10 percent of the world’s population lives in extreme poverty, as adjusted for inflation.

Likewise, Americans estimate that 35 percent of the world’s children have been vaccinated. In fact, 86 percent of all 1-year-olds have been vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.

“Everyone seems to get the world devastatingly wrong,” Dr. Hans Rosling, a brilliant scholar of international health, wrote in “Factfulness,” published in 2018, after his death. “Every group of people I ask thinks the world is more frightening, more violent and more hopeless — in short, more dramatic — than it really is.”

I suspect that this misperception reflects in part how we in journalism cover news. We cover wars, massacres and famines but are less focused on progress.

In the last year, I’ve covered atrocities against the Rohingya in Myanmar, starvation in Yemen, climate change in Bangladesh, refugees and child marriage at home, and some of the world’s worst poverty, in Central African Republic. All those stories deserve more attention, not less. But I never wrote columns or newsletters about three nations that registered astounding progress against authoritarianism and poor governance in 2018, Armenia, Ethiopia and Malaysia.


It is of course true that there are huge challenges ahead. The gains against global poverty and disease seem to be slowing, and climate change is an enormous threat to poor nations in particular. And the United States is an outlier, where life expectancy is falling, not rising as in most of the world. 

So there’s plenty to fret about. But a failure to acknowledge global progress can leave people feeling hopeless and ready to give up. In fact, the gains should show us what is possible and spur greater efforts to improve opportunity worldwide.

Every other day of the year, go ahead and gnash your teeth about President Trump or Nancy Pelosi, but take a break today (remember, just for a nanosecond!) to recognize that arguably the most important thing in the world now is not Trumpian bombast. Rather, it may be the way the world’s poorest and most desperate inhabitants are enjoying improved literacy and well-being, leading to a day when no mom will again lose 10 children.


林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

“Hear the notes. See the notes. Be the notes.”

Corina Da Fonseca-Wollheim, New York Times January 19, 2019

Accessed Jan 21 , 2019

-- 結合古典音樂和靜坐開闢新的天地。
-- 普林斯頓大學宗教生活院地院長 Matthew Weiner 說:"佛教提倡的靜坐並不是指舌頭不動的安靜,而是淡化內心的活動,以除去阻礙我們如實的活在當下。"



For as long as I can remember, I have loved the silences of the concert hall almost as much as the sounds. The expectant hush that falls on an auditorium when the oboe’s A pierces through the hum of voices and the lights dim. The way a spellbound audience can wrap a protective silence around a pianissimo ending. But on a recent afternoon in Richardson Auditorium at Princeton University here, silence became an equal partner to the music. I was in the hall for a series called Live Music Meditation. (The next event, on March 28, features the violinist Patricia Kopatchinskaja.) For the first 20 minutes, while listeners quietly filed in, I sat motionless with my eyes closed, noting the sounds of footsteps and the rustle of coats. Gradually, the calm deepened, broken now and then by a male voice inviting us to focus on our breath, relax our shoulders and clear our minds. From inside this stillness, the sound of a gong rang out like a bright explosion, followed by waves of amber overtones that seemed to dance with each other in space. Then more silence, long minutes of nothing to hear but the breathing of strangers. When the first notes of a clarinet threaded their way into my consciousness, they seemed to come from inside me. For the next half-hour, as a piano joined the clarinet, music wound its way through me as sound turned pure sensation. Eventually the last note settled back into silence. Then one more time the gong, followed by that male voice, sounding a little sheepish: “Some people would find it appropriate to clap now.” The applause, when it came, did seem out of place. And the performers, the clarinetist Martin Frost and the pianist Henrik Mawe, didn’t bow. In an onstage discussion after the unusual concert, they professed to being somewhat overwhelmed. “We were so aware of you listening to us so intensely that we started to listen to ourselves even more intensely, too,” Mr. Mawe said. An audience member told the musicians that, for him, “the most special thing was the silence before and after you played. There was anticipation without expectation.” The series, which is free to the public, was conceived by Dasha Koltunyuk, a pianist and a longtime member of a meditation group led by Matthew Weiner, a dean in the office of religious life at the university. By combining guided meditation with live music, she hoped to create a space in which, she said in a statement, “our tendency toward passivity or judgment while hearing music disperses into a pure, perceptive and receptive state of intense, present listening.” Composers have long played with silence. In the 20th century, they began to dissolve the border between scripted silence inside the music — the rests — and the ambient silence of a given acoustic space. Ligeti’s “Lux Aeterna” fades into seven bars of rest at the end. John Cage’s “4’33”” consists entirely of notated silence. These days, more presenters are experimenting with ways to make the audience aware of its role in creating the silence out of which music grows. When the artist Marina Abramovic presented the pianist Igor Levit in Bach’s “Goldberg” Variations at the Park Avenue Armory in 2015, listeners were relieved of their cellphones and outfitted with noise-dampening headphones that helped them sink into deep quiet for 30 minutes before the first notes of Bach. Concerts inside the Moab Music Festival’s red rock grotto in Utah begin with an invitation to take in the stillness of the natural setting. A twominute “celebration of silence” is at the center of Chatter in Albuquerque, N.M., and Gather NYC at SubCulture in Manhattan, both Sunday morning series combining classical music and storytelling. In a telephone interview, the violinist and conductor David Felberg, who runs Chatter, said that most audience members close their eyes for that period. “They’re either meditating or trying to listen to the sounds that exist naturally around them,” he said. “For us, it’s a bit of a palate cleanser. It’s almost like you’re fresh and ready to listen to the music.” Mr. Weiner, the Princeton dean, who led the guided meditation, said in an interview that he thinks of the quality created in the room not so much as silence but as sensitivity. In Buddhism, he said, that “doesn’t just mean verbal silence with your tongue. It means softening the constructions in your mind that get in the way of experiencing what’s in front of you.” As a critic normally tasked with shaping those constructions into written words, I was keenly aware of that softening. And as a diligent but novice meditator, I caught a glimpse, through the music, of what it means to let thoughts bubble up without engaging with them — through applause or judgment. Here was music not as a text to be read nor a recreational drug to be consumed for mood management, but as an audible process of coming into being and fading away. And, for a short while, listening turned into a state of pure receptivity: beginner’s ear.

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()



Accessed Jan 21 , 2019


林中斌 2019.1.18



面臨新情勢 建設新國防
字數:2202 口述:20090309 修訂:20090318








第一,多元化軍事教育。在先進超強的美軍,預備軍官佔總軍官人數三九%,佔四星上將十四%。美軍至今七百八十二位四星上將中,預備軍官有一六位。第一次波灣戰爭統帥、後來的國務卿包威爾(Colin Powell)便是其中之一。



美軍許多將領有碩、博士學位。八年代美軍最高職位的參謀聯席會主席(相當於我參謀總長)科勞(William Crowe)上將就有博士學位。目前指揮伊拉克及阿富汗作戰的佩崔烏斯(David Petraeus)上將也是博士。共軍近年來大幅增加碩、博士軍官。比起美軍與共軍鼓勵在職軍人入研究所進修,國軍已落後。迎頭趕上應為台灣下一個國防建設的必要和重要決定。


第二方面,多元化將領晉升。在一九七年代,美國晉升一位幾乎沒帶過兵的海格(Alexander Haig)為四星上將,和一位出身士兵的四星上將魏塞(John Vessey)為參謀聯席會主席。八年十一月,美國甚至晉升了第一位女性四星上將鄧伍迪(Ann Dunwoody)。解放軍效法美軍,九八年解放軍晉升了未統御大部隊的曹剛川為上將,後昇國防部長。兩千年,解放軍晉升長於外交、收集情報與語言能力,但從未帶過兵的熊光楷為上將。





林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

林中斌 心靈:民主的救藥


Accessed Jan 21 , 2019

林中斌 2019.1.17




















過去兩百年,科學快速發展,物質文明突飛猛進,影響社會價值。學術界,七年代達顛峰的「行為主義」便是典型。它重視外在行為和物質,蔑視內在心靈和道德。優點是追求客觀排斥主觀,提倡「價值中立」(value free),但演變到極端成為沒有對錯(value relativism)。教授甚至嘲笑探索道德是非的學生。廿世紀中期之後,政治學重視講權力的現實主義,嘲笑講理念的理想主義。其實歷史上成功的領袖無不兼顧現實與理想。



一九九一年底,前蘇聯崩解,共產主義實驗七十多年後失敗了。曾經在六九年預言此結局的布里辛斯基(Zbigniew Brzezinski)教授接受訪問:「您過去預言實現了。您對將來的預言是什麼?」他曾主持卡特總統的國安會,任教哈佛及哥倫比亞大學,兼具學理背景和實務經驗。

「心靈主義將復興(the renaissance of spiritualism)。」他的回答令我吃驚。






林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

林中斌川普逆勢頓增 剋星華倫入場


Accessed Jan 21 , 2019

-- 2019.1.3 ()下午開始找及讀資料
-- 2019.1.8 ()上午寄出稿件。1100字共花5天。週六例外 
-- 2019.1.13()寄出二次修正稿。
-- 2019.1.15 () 稿件登出。從找資料至登出共12天。
-- 參考資料21件如下圖所示。
林中斌 2019.1.16

50096363_2260716150626455_4719430031871311872_o (1).jpg


聯合報名人堂 2019115A15


重臣離職:川普打破歷任總統紀錄,就任兩年內,撤換或流失六十五趴政府最重要的六十五位A團隊官員。最矚目的是備受尊重的國防部長馬提斯求去,至一月六日止,已帶動三位國防部高官辭職。原副總統幕僚長Nick Ayers,是川普上月下旬宣佈的新總統幕僚長,以接任被川普撤換的凱利上將。Ayers次日便公開回絕。 
通俄門進逼:川普一六年大選是否非法的獲得俄羅斯協助打擊對手希拉蕊?負責調查的美國司法部特別檢察官前FBI局長穆勒至今已獲得八位有關人士認罪,包括川普國安會顧問Michael Flynn,他的競選經理Paul Manafort,以及他的律師Michael CohenManafort下月將判刑,Cohen將赴國會作證。一旦至今仍保持緘默的穆勒發言,對川普威脅不可小覷。


林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

Lily Marlene/Lili Marleen 莉莉瑪蓮

 Accessed Dec 24 , 2018


以下附上兩項 Youtube 音樂 以及 英文和德文的歌詞。

Below please find links to two Youtube pieces and both the Englsih and German lyrics

Outside the barracks, by the corner light

I'll always stand and wait for you at night

We will create a world for two

I'll wait for you the whole night through

For you, Lili Marlene

For you, Lili Marlene

Bugler tonight don't play the call to arms

I want another evening with her charms

Then we will say goodbye and part

I'll always keep you in my heart

With me, Lili Marlene

With me, Lili Marlene

Give me a rose to show how much you care

Tie to the stem a lock of golden hair

Surely tomorrow, you'll feel blue

But then will come a love that's new

For you, Lili Marlene

For you, Lili Marlene

When we are marching in the mud and cold

And when my pack seems more than I can hold

My love for you renews my might

I'm warm again, my pack is light

It's you, Lili Marlene

It's you, Lili Marlene

My love for you renews my might

I'm warm again, my pack is light

It's you, Lili Marlene

It's you, Lili Marlene




Lied eines jungen Wachpostens (Lili Marleen)


1. Vor der Kaserne

Vor dem grossen Tor

Stand eine Laterne

Und steht sie noch davor

So woll'n wir uns da wieder seh'n

Bei der Laterne wollen wir steh'n

Wie einst Lili Marleen.


2. Unsere beide Schatten

Sah'n wie einer aus

Dass wir so lieb uns hatten

Das sah man gleich daraus

Und alle Leute soll'n es seh'n

Wenn wir bei der Laterne steh'n

Wie einst Lili Marleen.


3. Schon rief der Posten,

Sie blasen Zapfenstreich

Das kann drei Tage kosten

Kam'rad, ich komm sogleich

Da sagten wir auf Wiedersehen

Wie gerne wollt ich mit dir geh'n

Mit dir Lili Marleen.


4. Deine Schritte kennt sie,

Deinen zieren Gang

Alle Abend brennt sie,

Doch mich vergass sie lang

Und sollte mir ein Leids gescheh'n

Wer wird bei der Laterne stehen

Mit dir Lili Marleen?


5. Aus dem stillen Raume,

Aus der Erde Grund

Hebt mich wie im Traume

Dein verliebter Mund

Wenn sich die späten Nebel drehn

Werd' ich bei der Laterne steh'n

Wie einst Lili Marleen.

20181224 平安夜 渴求和平聲音 OK.jpg

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()