This topic has been declard OT, by our moderator.
However, we can use other analogies, to make the same point. Let's say somebody could tell the future, and knew all the dead who would die in the Napoleanic wars. So he assassinated Napolean in 1790.
Would the death of one megalomanic soldier, be justified, in this case? My response is this:
The social, political, economic structure of the time, made the Napoleanic wars, and all the dead in those wars, inevitable. You'd have to change those underlying conditions (imperialism, nationalism, the Enlightenment) or, one way or another, those wars would still have happened. Maybe not at that exact time, in that exact way, but the overall result, and the number of dead in those wars, wouldn't have decreased. Killing one man would not have changed history that much, even a man like Napolean.
The exact same reasoning applies to your repeated promotion of murder (for Arafat, for the entire Hamas leadership, etc.) as a political tool. Kill Arafat, while leaving intact the reasons the Palestinians support Arafat, and nothing changes. You just get a new Arafat with a different face. |
