Hi Nadine Carroll; Re: "You could have said the same in 1943."
(a) World War II had an enemy that was easily determined. It was Hitler's government (and others). In Palestine, by comparison, there is no enemy government for Israel to attack. Instead, there are only shadowy terrorists.
(b) Your comparison with 1943 is particularly hilarious in that the war only had 2 years left in it. The whole conflict lasted what, 7 or 8 years? The Palestinians and Israelis have been going at it for close to 50 years. Come on, s**t or get off the pot.
(c) Few of the actions in WW2 could be classified as "reprisals". Here's the definition of "reprisal", according to Websters:
1. Retaliation for an injury with the intent of inflicting at least as much injury in return.
2. Forcible seizure of an enemy's goods or subjects in retaliation for injuries inflicted.
3. The practice of using political or military force without actually resorting to war.
dictionary.reference.com
What went on in WW2 was that the two sides were at WAR, not at "REPRISAL". When you're at war, your intention is not to "inflict as much injury in return", but instead to make the other side give up. This is what was done. Sure there was a lot of injury done, but the word "reprisal" is used to reference a situation that is OTHER than war.
Let's go ahead and compare these two little dustups.
This Intifada has seen what, about 1000 Israelis killed? That's not war. Compare this to WW2, when 12,000,000 people were killed in concentration camps, the vast majority of them over a 3 year period, and it was such a small part of the bloodletting that no one really cared about it until after the war was over. That's about 77,000 per week for 3 long long years.
What the Palestinians and Israelis are doing to each other would be more accurately described as a series of minor disturbances. I think it's iffy to describe it with a serious word like "reprisal".
-- Carl |
