No, I didn't claim that Arafat was an innocent bystander.

But.

It was the loonies who do the bombing.

Isreal utilizes its armed force and violate another "nation" in the name of retaliation against terrorism.

End effect, civilian deaths and innocents wounded on both sides.

If the loonies sucide bombing is terrorism, what is Israel's?

Of course, I'm neither Palestinian, nor Israeli, so I'm NOT sure which side of the story is in fact the truth, but AFAIK, the UN has ruled that Israel was "guilty" of illegally occupying Palestinian territories.

So speaking from pure 3rd party viewpoint, if the sucide bombing are terrorism, then the Israel retaliation is pretty much the same or worse.

And viewed from a different perspective, to the Afghanistanis, the American carpet bombings are nothing less than terrorism, and since President Bush openly hail the "perpetrator" as heroes doing their heroic deeds, would that changes your mind if government sanctioned "retaliations" sprung up in the states?

But you seem to missed my point.

Now, Israel is using the "exact" phrasing the US used when it "justified" its action against the Taliban. Whether the US would have asked Israel to stop is irrelevant as even if it would, it would not have any justification in view of its own "retaliation" against terror perpetrators.

Will you then also brand US as a terrorist state in view of Cuba or Nicaragua?

Just curious.