Monitors condemn the Army raids. Should they?

Regardless of what your opinion may be, I think the Scandinavians’ have tried to implement an equitable solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka. But I also think along the way, they have upped their stakes so high that they have inherently succumbed to the predisposition of achieving that solution. Would the Scandinavians, assuming that they were taken seriously by the Americans, ever call the American aggression against the Taliban unacceptable? Of course not - because Taliban is accepted by the west to be a terrorist group and not least because Americans aren’t a signatory to a ceasefire with the Taliban. But notwithstanding the ceasefire in Sri Lanka, which in all’s opinion is close to non-existent, there is little difference between the Sri Lankan offensive against the LTTE. LTTE after all, is listed as a terrorist group by most civilized countries except perhaps understandably, Norway. So, though Norwegians expectedly criticize raids on the LTTE, objectively, a nation defending it self against a terrorist group is hardly an incident to be condemned. If LTTE was a legitimate entity - that is not by the definition of the word a group formed to kill innocent civilians and carry out indiscriminate destruction - then that would be a different story. So condemning attacks on a terrorist organization is while the right strategy in view of the parochial goal of the Scandinavians, it can be safely ignored as a deed carried out only in the interest of their own goals and not something that is objective. So yes, they should condemn; but as long as LTTE is engaged in violence, it is perfectly sensible for the government to disregard the Scandinavian opinion.