You are blinded by your bias. The Israelis are targeting children and civilians no less, no more than the Palestinians. When they go after Hamas leaders, they fire their missiles straight into crowded Gaza neighbors........."children and defenseless civilians" are always hit.
No Ted. The Palestinian terrorists are aiming at children and defenseless civilians.
Tim, they may be aiming at defenseless civilians but they are not aiming at children. I have never heard of a suicide bomber blowing up in a school or an amusement park.
Even when their actions could have no impact on anyone else they we'll gladly kill innocent civilians. The Israelis may not be sufficiently careful to avoid civilian casualties at times (although at others they are extraordinarily careful). If this is so it may be a moral failing but it isn't the same as deliberately attacking civilians. And your statement about how "children and defenseless civilians are always hit", when Israel targets "Hammas leaders is far from true.
What are you talking about? The Israelis time and time again fire into crowded streets and missile bomb an apt building. They make little effort to protect "the children and defenseless civilians". The proof is in the pudding.........three times as many Palestinians have been killed as Israelis.
palestinemonitor.org
They aren't sneaking on to over overrunning Palestinian farms to slit the throats of children.
And the Israeli soldiers are killing Palestinian children in the streets while they play.
In one case you have deliberate murder. In the other you have people getting caught in a crossfire. The number of Palestinian children being killed in the streets by Palestinian gunman shooting at Israelis probably isn't a lot less then the number killed by the Israelis and the Palestinians are more often the ones who choose a battleground with a lot of children in-between the two sides.
Do you really think it matters to the dead? Do you really think it matters to God if the dead are civilian or military? Both the Israelis and the Palestinians have blood on their hands. Its why its called a blood feud. They both should be ashamed.
Once again, your bias is showing.......the murderers are on both sides. The Israelis' AK-47s are no more blessed than the suicide bombers.
If someone is trying to kill you, and I shoot at him to save you but I miss and hit an innocent third party I did not commit murder. Even if I was reckless in my shooting it wouldn't be murder (even if it would then be a crime short of murder).
First that is not what is happening. The Israelis are shooting at the Palestinians to keep them in their place.
Secondly, if I use your reference point, then a bomber who decides to commit suicide can not be called a murderer when people around him 'accidently' die from his suicide. If the Israelis had any kind of restraint, they would not be shooting people in crowded neighborhoods. But Sharon believes the only good Palestinian is a dead one.
Also you have not supported the idea that the Indians had no concept of private or tribal property.
In the PNW, the Indians had some ownership of trinkets and artifacts but not property or land. Much like bedoins they moved around a lot so private ownership of property did not make a lot of sense. And its my further understanding that that was very typical of the Indian culture throughout the US. Deeds, mortgages, private homes etc are a European/ME innovation.
Why are the terrorist methods of the Zionists okay and the Palestinian methods not?
I didn't say they where. I said the mainstream and proto-government Jewish organizations denounced the Zionist bombings, while there has been no similar Palestinian denunciation. Either way its terrorism but there is a difference between terrorism from the fringe that is denounced by the center and terrorism that receives official support from all the relevant groups and most of the population.
The World Zionist Org.[WZO] did not denounce Zionist terrorism......it was their official policy. And David Ben Gurion was not fringe; he was mainstream.
You link to Ben Gurion bio but he was not part of the Irgun.
So what.....there were more than one Zionist terror group just as there is more than one Palestinian terror group.
Menachem Begin was but he didn't become prime minister until 1977, 31 years after the bombing of the King David Hotel and 29 years after the dismantling of the Irgun.
The Irgun was dismantled because it was no longer needed. Begin did not become PM for 31 years because he was young at the time of Israel's independence.
Please......you are trying to excuse the Zionist terrorists. They were not fringe and they had the support of the Zionist movement. Nothing you say will change or diminish those facts. It was the Haganah who saved Israel's butt when war broke out in 1948. Haganah was the main Zionist terrorist group.
The Irgun and their ilk where the radical fringe of the Zionist movement. Hammas and the various "martyr brigades" are at the center of the Palestinian nationalist movement. That's a big difference.
If they were fringe, why were they in the gov't once Israel became independent?
The fringe was the Stern Gang. Haganah and Irgun were more mainstream:
angelfire.com
Some more recent Zionist terrorist groups:
ihr.org
palestine-info.co.uk
At the time of the UN partition, the Palestinians had been majorly screwed. During the past fifty years, what was offered in 1947 has been reduced further. The Palestinians would be stupid to take what Israel is offering now. I would fight to the bitter end. The Palestinians have little to lose; the Israelis a lot.
The 47 boundaries where not a "major screw". And after years of terrorism and warfare, Israel giving up control of enough land to leave it with something along the lines of the 67 borders wouldn't be either. But even if it was the 47 boundaries simply wont happen. Ending the war with Israel would benefit them far more then moving the borders a few miles in a few places. Not only because they wouldn't face the death from the war but also because their energy could go in to improving their lot in life rather then trying to kill and destroy.
If I were Palestinian, I would choose murder. I bet you would too.
If I were Palestinian I would try to emigrate to the West if possible, failing that to a moderate Arab regime. Failing that I would probably try to keep my head low and do what I can to improve my life. A much better strategy then extending a pointless conflict for another generation and then another...
I think we agree more than we disagree on this issue.
"Native Americans"/"Indians" and American blacks where screwed but for the most part they didn't get violent about it. Black Americans now have dozens or times the per capita wealth that their distant relatives in Africa had.
Huh? There have been some Indian riots and there were major black riots in the 60s.
Eastern Poland became part of the USSR after WWII, parts of Germany became Polish territory. 3.3 million ethnic Germans and over a million Poles fled or were driven out of their homes. Should Polish and German people's from those areas wage war to get their homelands back? Are Polish bombs going off in Moscow or German bombs in Warsaw? No they have gotten on with their lives as much as they where given a raw deal.
They have been reparated as were the Lithunians, Latvians and Estonians after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In fact, family members went back and claimed their dead relative's property. It was a big brouhaha in the mid 90s.
The Israelis got reparations for the confiscation of their bank accts during WW II. Why shouldn't the Palestinians get reparations for their property?
The Palestinians have as good of claim to have a state as any group that doesn't have one, but its one thing to fight for a state its another to fight for more generations because you want to shift the borders a few more miles, esp. when you are not primarily fighting the occupying army but seeking out and killing civilians.
Again, I understand their attitude......they are getting the royal shaft.
ted |
