I must say, I do like the way the Israelis don't fvck about.

[Burney]

I mean universal in the sense of all countries. All governments, at least. (Not all nations have governments, and some nations are in multiple countries.)

Of course. All governments must protect their people as they see fit. However, that is not a carte blanche for external aggression.

[Ash]

Of course. All governments must protect their people as they see fit. However, that is not a carte blanche for external aggression.

Right. So, for example, a secular government is entitled to defend against an externally-funded (and staffed) assault by head-chopping jihadis?

[Burney]

Right. So, for example, a secular government is entitled to defend against an externally-funded (and staffed) assault by head-chopping jihadis?

Yes, well here we get into questions of justification, don't we? The US and UK justified their actions in Iraq in 2003 on the basis of preventing another 9/11. That claim looks a bit sick now, though, doesn't it? In other words, where a clear and present danger to the country and its people cannot be proved, it is more difficult to claim an entitlement to overseas action.