It points to an interesting change in the political environment in the last half of the 20th century. The UN simply inhibits (most of the time) the imposition of "unconditional surrender" where the victor of a conflict imposes its conditions on the vanquished. Apparently, that luxury is no longer afforded, but to the superpowers and of course NATO. This actually causes conflicts to brew for much longer than necessary. It also provides for aggressors an impetus to continue their military aggression, time and time again, since they can count on the UN to come to their rescue in the event such an aggression fails.
I think that the new policy of holding leaders of such aggression personally responsible with their own lives, rather the lives of easily influenced and brainwashed teen agers and children, is the right and moral approach. It took me sometime to agree with Sharon decision to target a blind wheelchair bound old Yassin. But after serious deliberations, I have come to the conclusion that Sharon was not only right, he did the morally right thing.
Consider when the action was taken, in response to the Ashdod port attack. Yes, "only" ten people where murdered in that Yassin instigated attack, paling to the 30 or so murders in the Netania Park Hotel attack, instigated by the same Yassin (and taken credit for in both cases by Hammas) two years ago. But the intent of the Ashdod attack, was not the murder of 10 people it was targeted to cause 100 or thousands of death through the release over the town of bromine and ammonia fumes, an attack of the same if not greater proportion as our own tragedy in the World Trade Center. We hold, rightfully, the right to go after an "old sick man with failing kidneys" and kill him if he does not surrender, what moral right do we have to hold the Israeli to a lower standard of exacting punishment on the leadership of the murderous organization? It is therefore a natural extension that Arafat would be held to the same standard, surrender and stand trial for instigating the Intifada, as a tool to try and get what he could not at the negotiating table, as a war criminal , or, be subject to the same fate as Yassin. Just like in the case of Saddam, eventually, the Palestinian nation will benefit from the removal of this corrupt, self enriching murderer, who wantonly squandered any and every opportunity to lead his people to nationhood.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
