M'Learned friend Mr Mac argues with some persuasion http://jonnymacsplace.blogspot.com/ that Israel has the right to defend itself against an aggressive neighbour if it is certain that they are a threat to its security. I dont think there is any doubt left that Hamas is a threat to Israel, no one denies that, and therefore Israel seems justified in taking some military action to contain / remove that threat.
So how does one argue the case of India. The government there announced yesterday that the Mumbai massacre was organised within Pakistan, by Pakistanis, with the tacit approval of the Pakistani government - in that they know these paramilitary organisations exist within their borders and they do next to nothing to stop them. So the question is asked of the world - does India have the right to stage pre-emptive attacks against regions of Pakistan where they know terrorist training camps exist - where there are weapons and lunatics poised to inflict more killing on Indian civilians. Should India (a nuclear power) launch raids on Pakistan (another nuclear power) with the same justification as Israel?
Questions like this trouble me, and the idea of India wading into the North worries me...
1 comment:
Hmm. I'd say key differences is that the attacks may have had the tacit support of the Pakastani government, but were not organised by them - they were acts of terrorism, not war. Also, the attacks are not ongoing.
Interesting comparison.
Post a Comment