Mani, you said
"See, that is just it. If Jews are entitled to their own country because they have been target of hatred and atrocities, then why shouldn't every body else? Almost all races and ethnicities have been target of unfair practices (granted not to the extent of the Jews) but starting to divide the earth based on religion or race, and sacrificing the very same rights of another race or religion is not the solution."
Inferences of this statement: 1. The Jews are not entitled to their own country. 2. The existence of Israel therefore does not have a legitimate basis 3. What is illegitimate, and furthermore what is "sacrificing the very same rights of another race or religion", may legitimately be attacked or destroyed.
Now I don't think you quite meant all this. But once you say or imply that an enterprise is illegitimate, certain inferences are set in motion. This is why the Arabs made such a concerted effort at Durban to have Israel declared a "racist, apartheid state". Once the Zionist enterprise has been declared illegitimate, attacks on it take on a whole different light. If it's a "colonial, apartheid state" as Arafat declared, then it ought to be destroyed, right? Or if not quite destroyed, still the armed struggle against it takes on the mantle of legitimacy. |
