Something that should be understood
Part of a very interesting debate on Tal's blog, includes Tal's remark "It's a bit surreal that we're discussing it in terms of "who started it?". ie. since attacks on civilians are supposed to be crimes against humanity etc."
And again (and again and again):
Killing civilians, indiscriminately, en masse, cannot ever be regarded as an appropriate or acceptable response to the killing of a soldier, freedom fighter, warrior, terrorist (call him or her what you will) nor innocents who were regrettably killed by mistake, or even by lack of caution or negligence, as a result of their physical proximity to this person (an occurrence that far greater steps should be made to avoid). Until this is understood, deeply understood, really understand (with no "Yes, but..."s) by Palestinians and their supporters in the West, no peace is possible in this country.

Why do we have to repeat this again and again? Shouldn't it go without saying?