He won't speak to Hamas because they are a terrorist organization. He feels tremendous sympathy for and supports the people of Sderot. He is a staunch critic of the Israel's siege in Gaza. He fully supports Israel's right to defend herself. O.K., I'm dizzy and confused by how to integrate these disparate positions. So, how should Israel defend herself? Ask for the extradition of leaders of Hamas and other terrorist's organizations? Obviously, Israel HAS TO fight violence by targeting those that seek to destroy her. So, it all boils down to so-called excessive force. In self defence, its a universal principle that those defending themselves do not have to measure their response with nicety. A very tough response is required to those using hit and run tactics with rockets. Unless there is evidence, and there isn't, that Israel is indeed targeting Pal civilians, then its behaviour is not only justifiable but admirable. It is not offensive, as evidenced by its constant withdrawals. And given modern warfare, its totally amazing how few casualties and deaths their were given the concentration of population in Gaza. Clegg needs to come to grips that the terror organization that he won't speak with is the Government of Gaza, is sworn to the destruction of Israel, acts on that avowed goal and that Israel is entitled to defend herself. As to siege, Israel doesn't guard the Western border, hence the word siege is outrageous, unbalanced, unjustifiable and clearly prejudicial. In any event, the criticism is irrelevant. Faced with the choice of defending herself on one hand and alienating the Brits or others, on the other hand, we know what will happen. Never again.
U.S. asks Uzbekistan to join anti-ISIS coalition (Reuters)