Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sultan who wrote (115666)	9/25/2003 8:05:20 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 281500

Thanks. He seems ambivalent, both about how to respond to fascism, and how the Palestinians should respond to Zionist colonization. <If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified.> but... < But I do not believe in any war.> <I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their country.> but... <But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.> I think Gandhi goes to far, in rejecting even defensive wars. I get the sense, from this and other writings, that his rejection of war in fighting fascism was pro forma. Of course, almost all wars are called defensive, even when they obviously aren't. It's an over-used excuse. But Gandhi's advice to the Jews of Germany was wholly impractical. The only practical way to avert the Holocaust, would have been for the U.S. or the British to accept millions of Jewish refugees. I do think that non-violent resistance to Zionism, by the Palestinians, would have worked better, in furthering their cause, than the methods Arafat and Hamas have used.