Follow Christiane on social media:
On Twitter + Facebook + Instagram Amanpour producers on Twitter
What time is Amanpour on CNN?
Check showtimes to see when Amanpour is on CNN where you are. Or watch online.
Check showtimes to see when Amanpour is on CNN where you are. Or watch online.
@camanpour on Twitter
RT @AmanpourCoPBS: “It is systemic racism to say that a sex crime is not racist.” -George Ta@GeorgeTakeia@harihari https://t.co/VhICQI9sDr
RT @AmanpourCoPBS: “We were terrorized--that is the history of America, as I know it,” says George Takei of growing up Japanese-American in…
In Cuba, some towns have only two hours of running water every five days. Dutch photographer Sanne Derks has spenttwitter.com/i/web/status/1…bo
What are some of the steps we can do to quell our anxieties during this difficult time?
"Any kind of grounding litwitter.com/i/web/status/1…WN
Anxiety and depressive disorders have reportedly increased during the pandemic. Psychologist Christine Runyan saystwitter.com/i/web/status/1…2k
The use of drones is suffering the same criticisms that every change in warfare has probably experienced as soldiers have continually increased their striking distance from their enemies.
I believe the only reason the term "assassination" is being used now, is that the typical targets in Afghanistan are individuals or small groups of personnel. If the drones were dropping the same bombs on large groups of soldiers, the term "assassination" would not be used. If delivering a stealthy attack is the measure, high-flying B-52 bombers qualify too, and they are an acceptable method of warfare.
However, it seems obvious that drones are much less likely to cause collateral damage than traditional aircraft bombers or rockets, as well as artillery and mortar fire.
The use of drones is simply something new in warfare, that will be completely accepted with time, making previous methods seem foolish in hindsight along with countless others used throughout history.
The more civilians are killed, the more you create enemies of normal civilians. This alone make rubbish of the cost benefit analysis I heard on this program!!!
What bugs most foreigners about this topic is the obvious double standard that the US has on foreign lives vs American lives. One statement rings particularly hypocritical: The US government calls the death of civilians "regrettable".
What if the 9-11 deaths were deemed as "regrettable". Why should one innocent life be more important than another? What justifies a family obliterated in Pakistan just because some "targeted" Pakistani warlord they are in no way involved with was driving by their family home when he was targeted.
Maybe, the west needs to realize one of the reasons so many people take up armed resistance against them is because of this systemic double standard that exists between the haves and have-nots of this world.
I guess just factual non-bias news reporting is dead. Ms. Amanpour definitely projects a bias in her show. Who's side is she on?
I enjoyed your piece on the use of drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I salute you for trying to bring the issue more squarely into the public discourse. However, I was disappointed by the complete absence of any international law perspective, or any person on your panel who could speak to the international law issues raised by the use of drones. While the former CIA legal counsel made some very good points, and added value to the discussion, her perspective was largely informed by domestic US law.
The fact is that even targeted killing of non-combatants within the parameters of a recognized armed conflict is highly problematic. The Israeli Supreme Court wrestled with the issue in its decision regarding the policy of targeted killing by the Israeli government against Hamas and Hezbollah militants after the commencement of the 2000 Intifada. The court held that "terrorists" are, under the laws of international armed conflict (or jus in bello, or international humanitarian law – all three terms refer to the same body of law), are non-combatants and thus "civilians". They can, therefore, only be targeted if and while they are directly engaged in hostilities in the armed conflict. The Court held that there could be no blanket authority for such killing, but only a case by case analysis to determine if a particular target was in fact a person directly involved in hostilities.
But that is when the targeted killing involves terrorists operating in a recognized armed conflict and within the "war zone" so to speak. That is the threshold question for triggering the operation of the laws of war. If the targeted killing is taking place outside of that zone, and involves killing terrorists not involved directly in hostilities in a recognized armed conflict (involving the state doing the targeted killing), then the laws of war do not apply at all. And if the laws of war do not apply, then there is a body of international law that prohibits such conduct, from the International conventions on extra-judicial killing and assassination, through to the foundational human rights conventions that enshrine the right to life. Moreover, in the event that the laws of war are not operating, thus creating an immunity from the operation of domestic law, then the killing of individuals within the jurisdiction of Pakistan would constitute murder under domestic law – unless the killings were explicitly authorized by the state of Pakistan, and even then, the acts of the Pakistani government in so doing would likely run afoul of domestic constitutional and criminal laws. And what of drones used in Somalia? Clearly these are not authorized by any Somali government, and so would constitute not only extra-judicial killing under international law, but a violation of Somali sovereignty, and, if it occurs on a large enough scale, armed attack constituting aggression under jus ad bellum (the other side of the laws of war, that govern when states may resort to use of force).
The former CIA legal counsel who was your guest did allude to this problem of killing outside of the theatre of armed conflict, but did not flesh out the serious legal issues that arise – not under US law but under international law, and the laws of Pakistan. And if the US is going to continue to preach to other countries about the rule of law, and indeed rely upon international law in trying to prevent countries like Iran from developing nuclear weapons, then its own adherence to international law prohibitions on extra-judicial killing and assassination, and to the fundamental international human right to life, ought to be an issue of considerable debate in this country.
Christiane; bringing a stupid pro-killing Pakistani ex general to the debate didn't help. You are basically the only one in that table (I hope) somehow protesting the killing of hundreds of innocents by US drones!!
drones use is simply luxurious terrorism.. That guy there sitting in US and playing video games to kill people because he has 2% suspicion they are terrorists.... is himself a terrorist. I want to take his kids and place them in those areas of Afghanistan, and tell him to keep shooting because he might have a chance to target a known terorist...
will he keep playing then?
Just a smiling visitant here to share the love (:, btw outstanding pattern .
http://6dollarmillion.xyz
eye shadows can really make a great looking face specially if it was done by a professional make up artist.
http://yourmatrixcashmachine.com
We are a group of volunteers and opening a new scheme in our community. Your web site offered us with valuable info to work on. You've done an impressive job and our entire community will be thankful to you.
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/
esenyurt escort bayanar bu sitede üstelik hepsi ücretsiz...
http://www.cuba.tc/escort-kategori/malatya-escort-bayan
iskenderun escort bayanlarla tanışmak için bu siteyi ziyaret edebilirsiniz.
http://www.iskenderunescort.xyz
esenyurt escort bayanar bu sitede üstelik hepsi ücretsiz...
http://www.elitescorthatun.com/ad-category/mersin-escort/
iskenderun escort bayanlarla tanışmak için bu siteyi ziyaret edebilirsiniz.
http://www.gu8.pw
iskenderun escort bayanlarla tanışmak için bu siteyi ziyaret edebilirsiniz.
http://www.iskenderunescort.xyz
iskenderun escort bayanlarla tanışmak için bu siteyi ziyaret edebilirsiniz.
http://www.gu8.pw
iskenderun escort bayanlarla tanışmak için bu siteyi ziyaret edebilirsiniz.
http://www.cuba.tc/escort-kategori/adana-escort-bayan
child porns
http://www.iskenderunescort.com
child porns
http://www.hataygencradyo.net/
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/