speech delivered at National Defense University. Speaking without his familiar conviction he tried to justify it on grounds that looked made up and lacking in substance. Declaring that use of drones was legal and generally moral and was the only option left when it was not possible to arrest terrorists or intervene through armed forces in the absence of lack of support from the local Governments. These strikes according to him save lives although admitting that civilian casualties can serve as a powerful recruiting tool for terrorist groups. So while saving lives of Americans looked to be his top priority he does not look much disturbed about innocent lives lost due to these attacks what to talk about offering apology or compensating the affected families. While warning against the temptation to see drone strikes as "a cure-all-for- terrorism", he asked Congress to help him set modest new safeguards instead of trying to end this dangerous temptation. Those deciding about drone attacks have the discretion to decide about the imminent threat to US without clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future. They have become judge as well as the executioner. If the analogy is taken to its logical conclusion, then every country will have the right to define imminent threat and the corresponding right to use weapons available, drones or others. What about International Law and UN's
Friday, May 31, 2013
OBAMA, DRONES, LAW, AAFIA AND PAKISTAN
speech delivered at National Defense University. Speaking without his familiar conviction he tried to justify it on grounds that looked made up and lacking in substance. Declaring that use of drones was legal and generally moral and was the only option left when it was not possible to arrest terrorists or intervene through armed forces in the absence of lack of support from the local Governments. These strikes according to him save lives although admitting that civilian casualties can serve as a powerful recruiting tool for terrorist groups. So while saving lives of Americans looked to be his top priority he does not look much disturbed about innocent lives lost due to these attacks what to talk about offering apology or compensating the affected families. While warning against the temptation to see drone strikes as "a cure-all-for- terrorism", he asked Congress to help him set modest new safeguards instead of trying to end this dangerous temptation. Those deciding about drone attacks have the discretion to decide about the imminent threat to US without clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future. They have become judge as well as the executioner. If the analogy is taken to its logical conclusion, then every country will have the right to define imminent threat and the corresponding right to use weapons available, drones or others. What about International Law and UN's
Labels:
Aaafia,
Ben Emmerson,
drone attacks,
Human rights,
Justice,
law,
Obama
Friday, May 17, 2013
DREAMS
When dreams
don't come true it does not mean dreams were false or unattainable, it means
that there was something we missed out while going for them. Perhaps the time
was not right, perhaps we underestimated the obstacles or perhaps we did too
little or too much. Whatever the reasons the first step must be to resolve that
our inability to achieve what we wanted does not lead either to defeatist
mentality or ignoring the reality. As Colin Powell rightly said; “A dream doesn't become reality through magic; it takes
sweat, determination and hard work.” We must stand up to the
challenge and must know that Rome was not built in a day and that a hard-fought
battle defeat that test us ferociously is much better than a victory achieved
easily. It may lead to complacency. Remember the words of Jesse Owens: We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into
reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline,
and effort.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)