Did I say that Annan is now law and order, the judge, the jury and the executioner? Please post a link to where I said that. What I said is that he probably knows a bit more about the resolution than you or I, and he would likely be considered an expert witness in providing an expert opinion if Israel in fact violated their agreement.
Dddooo, you get dumber with every post. According to you, here is what the UN resolution really says: 8. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire IF ISRAEL FEELS LIKE IT, and a long-term solution based on WHATEVER THE HELL ISRAEL FEELS LIKE DOING and on the following principles and elements: ... * security arrangements to prevent the resumption of hostilities APART FROM WHATEVER THE HELL ISRAEL WANTS TO DO, including the establishment between the Blue Line and the Litani river - NON-BINDING TO THE DARLING OF THE MIDDLE EAST, ISRAEL, OF COURSE - of an area free of any armed personnel, EXCEPT ISRAEL, WHO CAN CONDUCT RAIDS AT WILL, assets and weapons[/b] other than those of the government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL AND OF ISRAEL as authorised in paragraph 11, deployed in this area; * Full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, THAT ISRAEL CAN COMPLETELY DISREGARD and of resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, EXCEPT ISRAEL, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of July 27, 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese state; ONLY, ISRAEL CAN DO WHATEVER THE HELL THEY WANT. * No foreign forces EXCEPT FOR ISRAEL in Lebanon without the consent of its government; ISRAEL EXCLUDED FROM THAT LAST PARAGRAPH. * No sales or supply of arms and related materiel to Lebanon except as authorized by its government AND ISRAEL. "If a solution is based on certain principles and those principles are ignored - the solution is no more, what part of it is so hard to understand?" The part that is so hard to understand? That YOU continue to insist that Israel is free to slaughter whoever they want WHENEVER they want inspite of UN resolution that they STOP. Get less dumb. Iconoclast
What the UN resolution says is that the cease-fire is based on (in other words contingent on) certain principles...What that means is that the cease-fire is observed only as long as those principles are observed. As soon as those principles are no longer observed the cease-fire based on those principles is no longer in effect either and Israel is free to attack its enemies based on the rules of war. It's not hard, really.
LOL so you <i>think</i> you have an "expert witness" and therefore Israel according to you is guilty, right? That's pathetic, disgusting, dishonest and absurd.
Yes, I think that Kofi Annan is qualified to render an expert opinion on this issue, and on that basis, I will go with his opinion over yours. Even you have admitted Israel's guilt, you simply have rationalized it away...
Z, I think you're wasting your time with Dddooo. His stance is, Israel can do NO wrong - regardless. He seems to think that the USA backs Israel regardless. Therefore, whoever disagrees with his view is a Muslim, an Arab, a terrorist, an idiot. End. Iconoclast
I see, so when Justice Scalia expresses his opinion you always agree, cause he is an expert, right? And every Kofi Annan's word is the ultimate truth cause he is an expert. BTW what does Kofi Annan's opinion on the UN's inability to provide 15,000 troops he promised? Isn't he a complete failure as far as this resolution is concerned, but then he is also an expert unbiased witness, right?
You're getting "based" and "binding" conveniently mixed up. Get less dumb. "It's not hard, really." Iconoclast