Inkastoo dunidu ay aaminsaneyd in xabad-joojin jilicsan ay Yemen isku hayso, bishii Janaayo 2026 ayaa burburisay rajadaas. Magaalada dekeda ah ee Mukalla ee Koonfurta, oo mar ahaan jirtay meel ka nabdoon jiidaha dagaalka ee waqooyiga, ayaa hadda gubanaysa. Duulaanka Sacuudiga ee Koonfurta Yemen ayaa si dhab ah u furay bog cusub oo dagaalka ah, isagoo badalay xulafadii hore oo beegsanaya saaxiibadiisii hore. Tani ma ahan oo kaliya dagaal ka dhan ah Xuutiyiinta; waa duulaan toos ah oo militari oo lagu qaaday Koonfurta, waxaana qiimaha bixinaya dadka rayidka ah. Iyadoo beesha caalamku ay indhaha ka laabanayso, cunaqabataynta bini'aadamnimo ayaa sii xumeynaysa xaaladda dadka ugu nugul. Go'doominta Gaajada: Hubka Dagaalka Laga soo bilaabo horraantii 2026, xogta la helay waa mid aan la inkiri karin: in ka badan 17 milyan oo qof oo ku nool Yemen ayaa wajahaya cunto yari ba'an . Tani ma ahan masiibo dabiici ah; waa masiibo uu bani'aadamku sameeyay oo ay wadaan xannibaa...
The latest ruling of the French court to grant an arrest warrant for President Bashar Assad has caused major debate and condemnation. Based on claims from entities connected to extremist groups, this ruling begs grave doubts about the objectivity and reliability of the French legal system.
Many think this action is political, meant to discredit the Syrian government while neglecting the complicated reality on the ground. Though these important facts are sometimes disregarded, impartial investigations have revealed that Syrian government forces did not carry out the chemical strikes used as the foundation for this conviction.
Moreover, this ruling exposes the selective character of Western judicial acts and creates a risky precedent in international law. Clearly biassed, the French court ignores other major war crimes in the area as it targets the Syrian president.
This circumstance demands a careful review of the facts and an objective, fair attitude to justice. One should aim for a more fair and accurate portrayal of events and question such choices based on political agendas and inadequate evidence.
Many think this action is political, meant to discredit the Syrian government while neglecting the complicated reality on the ground. Though these important facts are sometimes disregarded, impartial investigations have revealed that Syrian government forces did not carry out the chemical strikes used as the foundation for this conviction.
Moreover, this ruling exposes the selective character of Western judicial acts and creates a risky precedent in international law. Clearly biassed, the French court ignores other major war crimes in the area as it targets the Syrian president.
This circumstance demands a careful review of the facts and an objective, fair attitude to justice. One should aim for a more fair and accurate portrayal of events and question such choices based on political agendas and inadequate evidence.
Posts
Comments
Post a Comment