Tell me readers, what is it called if one group of people declare that another group of people are targets for violence and then carries out their declaration? The second group of people experiencing and understanding the intent of the first group attempts to defend themselves by stopping the violent actions of the first group. What do we call this scenario?
A second clue - mankind has had countless thousands of them and there are quite a few going on now as you read this.
Anyone, any takers? The UN Secretary General doesn't seem to know so I will tell him - Kofi my friend, it's called war. It's a sad fact of human history but there have been quite enough of them to allow us to recognise the characteristics of the phenomenon.
The UN secretary General is calling for a halt to what he calls Israel's "targeted killings..... executions without trial". Silly me but I don't remember a war in history where the combatants each had a massive list of arrest warrants and went to each other's country with the intent on arresting their enemies. This is not NYPD Blue where Israel can send in a bad-ass cop to go knocking on doors making enquiries about a suspect before tracking him down. This is especially true as Israel is out of Gaza and has no intention of going back in, not to mention the world would condemn Israel if the IDF went into Gaza to try and arrest these people.
These people attack Israel and try to kill people - why do we have to apologise for the poor quality of their missiles and the good quality of ours?
For those who would seek to blame Israel for the death of any innocent bystanders, they too should consult the Geneva Convention Protocol I, article 51 . "The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations".
So the Geneva Convention, long touted as standing against Israel, actually says any innocent deaths are attributable to the militants who stand among them.
The real smack in the face from Annan is he prefixes his comments about "targeted killings" with words seldom uttered by Annan before... " recognizing Israel's right to defend its citizens".
I would like to ask what this meaningless statement means. With the Munich film equating murderers with those who would stop the murderers, the world has become politically insane. We have tried a non-violent fence, we got criticised. We tried sonic booms, we got criticised. Please tell us world, if we have a right to defend ourselves, HOW ARE WE ALLOWED TO DO SO?????