winjim
Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
A bit too glib, that one.
Would be reasonable if the attacks had been against the military, but they weren't. It was an attack purely aimed at civilians. Pop back and tell me how the massacre of 1000 civilians (or 900, or 800, makes no difference) sits within international law.
I mean, don't think that I don't realise you are hoping to manoeuvre me into a position where I am defending Israeli occupation and atrocities. I'm not quite that thick, TC
Tell us how the 'right to self defence' sits in international law, whence it derives, how it is structured and who is the arbiter.