There is an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal this morning saying that
But here is my review and some clips.
It starts by saying that
The writer of this op-ed, Mr. Bisharat, explains that the UN charter allows the right of a state to self-defense, but Hamas attacks do not rise to the level of an “armed attack” that threatens
He says that neither side kept the six month truce perfectly, but it was
then broke the truce on Nov. 4, raiding the Gaza Strip and killing a Palestinian. Hamas retaliated with rocket fire; Israel then killed five more Palestinians. In the following days, Hamas continued rocket fire -- yet still no Israelis died. Israel Israelcannot claim self-defense against this escalation, because it was provoked by 's own violation. Israel
And this is an important part of his argument:
An armed attack that is not justified by self-defense is a war of aggression.
Now, at this point, I have to point out that there was no attack whatsoever from
But, regardless, this op-ed does a fine job of detailing other aspects of
Israel has also failed to adequately discriminate between military and nonmilitary targets.
's American-made F-16s and Apache helicopters have destroyed mosques, the education and justice ministries, a university, prisons, courts and police stations. These institutions were part of Israel 's civilian infrastructure. And when nonmilitary institutions are targeted, civilians die. Many killed in the last week were young police recruits with no military roles. Civilian employees in the Hamas-led government deserve the protections of international law like all others. Hamas's ideology -- which employees may or may not share -- is abhorrent, but civilized nations do not kill people merely for what they think. Gaza
It ends with this:
Israelshould be held accountable for its crimes, and the should stop abetting it with unconditional military and diplomatic support. U.S.
Now, if only we could get an op ed in the WSJ that points out the war crimes committed by the