Oh, for heaven's sake, I certainly am not arguing that there is a moral equivalence between a terrorist who deliberately kills civilians, and a soldier who tries to avoid killing civilians. But we all know that in wars, civilians get killed.
If, after World War II, the nations who were part of the UN, instead of voting to partition Palestine as a solution to the problem of all the Jews who were fleeing from Europe, voted to let them come to their countries as immigrants, no civilians would be accidentally killed by Israeli "warriors", because there would be no Israel. No war, no dead civilians. Or maybe there would have been, but it would have happened differently. Certainly over the Arabs dead bodies.
I understand the impetus behind the desire for a Jewish homeland. It was an impossible dream of idealists until it was supported by Britain, an imperialist nation, which had little qualms about the use of force to achieve political goals, especially when the people on the other side were Wogs, and other people with brown skin.
An unpleasant fact, but the truth.
Did the Zionists have powerful friends in 1947/48? America, for one.
us-israel.org
The Soviet Union, for another.
us-israel.org
Sorry for twisting your words about Tibet. I do think that Tibet gets plenty of press, but it's not a hot button here in the US, not like Israel. |
