Click on the Manage Content for adding and managing content.
Click on the Rotator Settings and choose what and how it will be displayed.

Las preguntas que Trump debe hacerse antes de atacar a Irán

Kraig Pakulski 0 25 Article rating: No rating

Análisis por Stephen Collinson, CNN

El presidente Donald Trump parece estar convenciéndose de entrar en un nuevo y fatídico capítulo del amargo duelo entre Estados Unidos y la República Islámica de Irán.

La justificación de los ataques militares estadounidenses para ayudar a los manifestantes iraníes en un momento de crisis para el régimen teocrático se está volviendo cada hora más urgente y convincente.

Trump sigue creando nuevas líneas rojas después de que los líderes iraníes desafiaran su advertencia previa de que si comenzaban a disparar, él también lo haría.

El presidente advirtió este martes en una entrevista con CBS News que si Irán ejecutaba a los manifestantes según lo planeado, tomaría “medidas enérgicas”.

Esto no garantiza una respuesta militar estadounidense. Pero cualquier operación de combate que parezca meramente simbólica podría debilitar su autoridad para disuadir a Teherán.

“El presidente informó al pueblo iraní que la ayuda está en camino. Por lo tanto, creo que le corresponde al presidente tomar medidas al respecto”, declaró Leon Panetta a CNN News Central el martes.

El exsecretario de Defensa de Estados Unidos y director de la CIA no especificó la necesidad de un ataque militar a gran escala. Sin embargo, añadió: “Creo que la credibilidad de Estados Unidos en este momento requiere que Estados Unidos haga algo para mostrar su apoyo a los manifestantes”.

La necesidad de acción humanitaria también crece. Un apagón de internet sigue ocultando el horror de una represión autoritaria. Pero imágenes recientes sugieren una masacre. Se reportan 2.400 muertos.

Si el régimen sobrevive, muchos dudarán de los poderosos foráneos que se quedaron parados observando.

Las reiteradas advertencias de Trump también podrían haber generado expectativas entre los manifestantes que arriesgan sus vidas. Un presidente que recientemente afirmó que el único límite a su poder en el extranjero era su “moralidad” podría percibir una obligación moral de actuar.

“Hoy conté que, en siete ocasiones durante las últimas dos semanas, el presidente Trump ha amenazado con tomar medidas militares contra Irán si asesinaba a manifestantes pacíficos”, declaró a Erin Burnett de CNN Karim Sadjadpour, uno de los expertos más destacados en Irán con sede en Estados Unidos.

“Eso fue hace más de 2.000 muertes… Creo que muchos se tomaron en serio sus palabras y esperan, como mínimo, un escudo estadounidense que los proteja de este régimen brutal”, agregó Sadjadpour, del Fondo Carnegie para la Paz Internacional.

Existen tentadoras razones estratégicas por las cuales Trump podría intentar darle un empujón a la historia.

► La dictadura clerical de Irán nunca ha sido tan débil, ni dentro ni fuera del país. La desgarradora escasez económica dificulta la tarea básica de alimentar a su pueblo. La desesperación es una poderosa fuerza organizativa para los manifestantes.

► El líder supremo, el ayatolá Ali Jamenei, tiene 86 años y se está desarrollando un drama sucesorio desestabilizador, separado de los recientes disturbios, que plantea la posibilidad de un nuevo amanecer político.

► Un número signific

Al menos 12 muertos al caer una grúa sobre un tren en Tailandia

Kraig Pakulski 0 24 Article rating: No rating

Reuters

Un tren que viajaba desde la capital de Tailandia al noreste del país se descarriló el miércoles después de que una grúa de construcción cayera sobre uno de sus vagones, al menos a 12 personas murieron y al menos 30 resultaron heridas, dijo la policía.

La policía local dijo a Reuters por teléfono que una grúa que trabajaba en un proyecto ferroviario de alta velocidad se derrumbó y golpeó el tren que pasaba, provocando que descarrilara y se incendiara brevemente.

El accidente tuvo lugar el miércoles por la mañana en el distrito de Sikhio de la provincia de Nakhon Ratchasima, 230 kilómetros al noreste de Bangkok, en un tren con destino a la provincia de Ubon Ratchathani.

El incendio ha sido extinguido y los trabajos de rescate están en marcha, dijo la policía.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The post Al menos 12 muertos al caer una grúa sobre un tren en Tailandia appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

Kavanaugh and Roberts are already looking ahead to the next major transgender controversy

Kraig Pakulski 0 20 Article rating: No rating

By Joan Biskupic, CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst

(CNN) — During a marathon Supreme Court session Tuesday over whether states may ban transgender women from participating in women and girls’ sports, some justices were already focused on what may lie around the corner in the controversial area of trans rights.

The majority appeared poised to uphold bans in Idaho, West Virginia and about 25 other mostly Republican-controlled states. One next question, not far from their minds, was whether California and about 20 other mainly Democratic states may move in the opposite direction and specifically permit trans women to compete on female school sports teams.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised concerns about trans women putting girls and women at a disadvantage.

“It’s kind of a zero-sum game for a lot of teams,” Kavanaugh said. “And someone who tries out and makes it, who is a transgender girl, will bump from the starting lineup, from playing time, from the team, from the all-league – and those things matter to people big time – will bump someone else.”

Kavanaugh, who has coached girls’ sports on the side, had pressed the issue of safety and competitive fairness in an unrelated trans case last year.

Other conservative justices seemed to be anticipating how their interpretation of Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in school programs that receive federal funds, could affect programs beyond the pending sports case in a broader educational context.

Liberal justices separately pressed for some avenue that would allow transgender women to persist in lawsuits based on their specific circumstances, for example, because their suppressed testosterone levels may ensure no competitive advantage.

Overall, the three-and-a-half hours of arguments in the packed courtroom showed the justices grappling with an array of possibilities on a societal dilemma that personally affects only about 1% of the United States population but has become a flashpoint in politics and American culture wars.

President Donald Trump ran against trans rights in the 2024 election campaign that returned him to the White House, and one of his immediate executive orders said: “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable … .”

Trump’s administration has since banned trans troops in the military, required US passport holders to use their sex at birth rather than gender identity and ordered an end to federal funding for certain medical care for trans youths. It has also tried to keep trans women from competing in women’s school sports – a point of contention that repeatedly surfaced in Tuesday’s argument.

But while deputy US Solicitor General Hashim Mooppan acknowledged the administration’s efforts to stop states from letting trans women and girls compete, he urged the justices to rule narrowly on the disputed Idaho and West Virginia state bans and leave that litigation for another day.

“As we said in our brief, we would urge the court to just reserve judgment,” on whether such blue state measures are lawful, he said.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who has played a key role in p

Kavanaugh and Roberts are already looking ahead to the next major transgender controversy

Kraig Pakulski 0 24 Article rating: No rating


CNN

By Joan Biskupic, CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst

(CNN) — During a marathon Supreme Court session Tuesday over whether states may ban transgender women from participating in women and girls’ sports, some justices were already focused on what may lie around the corner in the controversial area of trans rights.

The majority appeared poised to uphold bans in Idaho, West Virginia and about 25 other mostly Republican-controlled states. One next question, not far from their minds, was whether California and about 20 other mainly Democratic states may move in the opposite direction and specifically permit trans women to compete on female school sports teams.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised concerns about trans women putting girls and women at a disadvantage.

“It’s kind of a zero-sum game for a lot of teams,” Kavanaugh said. “And someone who tries out and makes it, who is a transgender girl, will bump from the starting lineup, from playing time, from the team, from the all-league – and those things matter to people big time – will bump someone else.”

Kavanaugh, who has coached girls’ sports on the side, had pressed the issue of safety and competitive fairness in an unrelated trans case last year.

Other conservative justices seemed to be anticipating how their interpretation of Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in school programs that receive federal funds, could affect programs beyond the pending sports case in a broader educational context.

Liberal justices separately pressed for some avenue that would allow transgender women to persist in lawsuits based on their specific circumstances, for example, because their suppressed testosterone levels may ensure no competitive advantage.

Overall, the three-and-a-half hours of arguments in the packed courtroom showed the justices grappling with an array of possibilities on a societal dilemma that personally affects only about 1% of the United States population but has become a flashpoint in politics and American culture wars.

President Donald Trump ran against trans rights in the 2024 election campaign that returned him to the White House, and one of his immediate executive orders said: “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable … .”

Trump’s administration has since banned trans troops in the military, required US passport holders to use their sex at birth rather than gender identity and ordered an end to federal funding for certain medical care for trans youths. It has also tried to keep trans women from competing in women’s school sports – a point of contention that repeatedly surfaced in Tuesday’s argument.

But while deputy US Solicitor General Hashim Mooppan acknowledged the administration’s efforts to stop states from letting trans women and girls compete, he urged the justices to rule narrow

Kavanaugh and Roberts are already looking ahead to the next major transgender controversy

Kraig Pakulski 0 24 Article rating: No rating


CNN

By Joan Biskupic, CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst

(CNN) — During a marathon Supreme Court session Tuesday over whether states may ban transgender women from participating in women and girls’ sports, some justices were already focused on what may lie around the corner in the controversial area of trans rights.

The majority appeared poised to uphold bans in Idaho, West Virginia and about 25 other mostly Republican-controlled states. One next question, not far from their minds, was whether California and about 20 other mainly Democratic states may move in the opposite direction and specifically permit trans women to compete on female school sports teams.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised concerns about trans women putting girls and women at a disadvantage.

“It’s kind of a zero-sum game for a lot of teams,” Kavanaugh said. “And someone who tries out and makes it, who is a transgender girl, will bump from the starting lineup, from playing time, from the team, from the all-league – and those things matter to people big time – will bump someone else.”

Kavanaugh, who has coached girls’ sports on the side, had pressed the issue of safety and competitive fairness in an unrelated trans case last year.

Other conservative justices seemed to be anticipating how their interpretation of Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in school programs that receive federal funds, could affect programs beyond the pending sports case in a broader educational context.

Liberal justices separately pressed for some avenue that would allow transgender women to persist in lawsuits based on their specific circumstances, for example, because their suppressed testosterone levels may ensure no competitive advantage.

Overall, the three-and-a-half hours of arguments in the packed courtroom showed the justices grappling with an array of possibilities on a societal dilemma that personally affects only about 1% of the United States population but has become a flashpoint in politics and American culture wars.

President Donald Trump ran against trans rights in the 2024 election campaign that returned him to the White House, and one of his immediate executive orders said: “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable … .”

Trump’s administration has since banned trans troops in the military, required US passport holders to use their sex at birth rather than gender identity and ordered an end to federal funding for certain medical care for trans youths. It has also tried to keep trans women from competing in women’s school sports – a point of contention that repeatedly surfaced in Tuesday’s argument.

But while deputy US Solicitor General Hashim Mooppan acknowledged the administration’s efforts to stop states from letting trans women and girls compete, he urged the justices to rule narrow

RSS
First38013802380338043806380838093810Last