That was the question presented by Jeremy Paxman to a panel consisting of General Sir Mike Jackson the former head of the Army, leading QC Philippe Sands and Professor William Taft former legal advisor to the US State Department. The question was in reference to the legality of the Iraq War.

What followed was a game of 3 against 1, with Philippe Sands QC trying in vain to present his case that the Iraq war was illegal - whilst the other 3 (including Paxman) weighed in with self-righteous arguments, ganging up to dismiss Philippe Sands' legal expertise.

The arguments presented by Paxman, Jackson and Taft were intriguing. For instance General Sir Mike Jackson reminded everyone that 17 resolutions had already been passed against Saddam Hussein’s regime therefore there was no need for another UN resolution in 2003.

The argument of legitimacy vs. legality was thrown in, with Kosovo being used as a case in point. The intervention in Kosovo was done without UN authorisation but was justified to prevent a humanitarian disaster. Therefore the same supposedly applied to Saddam Hussein because he had undoubtedly committed horrible crimes against his own population.

So in conclusion, humanitarian concerns and defiance of past UN resolutions were positioned as just grounds for action against Iraq.

Why then do these self-righteous folks not apply their same humanitarian concerns when it comes to the plight of the Palestinians?

• Has Israel not defied enough UN resolutions?

• Has Israel not flouted International law by illegally building vast Jewish-only settlements in the Occupied Territories?

• Has Israel not enforced collective punishment on the population of Gaza?

• Has Israeli aggression not resulted in the deaths of countless Palestinian civilians including babies?

But despite all this, where’s the criticism or call for action to stop Israeli aggression against the Palestinians?