|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ANNOUNCEMENTS and ARTICLES: http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 01:17, you wrote: > ANNOUNCEMENTS and ARTICLES: http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml > > > In a message dated 4/8/2004 9:11:56 PM Central Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I certainly agree that terror directed against civilian populations is > never justified (I certainly can't think of any.). It was a disgrace > that we used it against the Germans late in WW2 (Dresden) and the > Japanese (Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki). In the heat of war terrible > things are done. > > The worked, 'terror', is being extremely loosely used, however, these > days to justify all sorts of abominable things, e.g. Iraq. > -- > "A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort > to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy) > Ed Kent, > > I wasn't referring only to the terror used by the "Palestinians" against > Israelis. In fact, I mentioned the Civil Rights bombings in the US in the > second e-mail and the arson used by the White South Africans against the > Blacks in the first, as well as the explosions in Spain and in Japan. But, > you seem determined to label everything BUT the deliberate murders of > Israeli civilians by the "Palestinians" as terror! Just for the record, > the cities of Dresden and Hiroshima weren't bombed to deliberately > terrorize a civilian population and neither was the attack on Pearl Harbor > even though civilians died in all those attacks (although the Blitzkrieg in > London certainly was using terror tactics) so those bombings don't qualify > as terror, either, although I certainly agree they were terrible. How do you differentiate between carpet-bombing a civilian population in England, and carpet-bombing a civilian population in Germany? Ethnicity? In some books I read recently - I don't actually have them with me at the moment, so I can't remember even their names - the Germans after the WWII said that the British would've got the results they were after far faster, by concentrating on the German refineries and blasting them to pieces, rather than carpet-bombing the cities. And that is a reasonable complaint. Carpet-bombing after being carpet-bombed, is just revenge, not a workable military tactic - the people who die while carpet-bombing, are still dead, and all you've done is strengthen the resolve of the enemy's civilians. > > The biggest difference in the "Palestinians" use of terror tactics from all > of your examples (including the US presence in Iraq) is their use of their > children to become "martyrs" by killing as many Israelis as they can along > with themselves. This death cult mentality is perverted and barbaric and > there is no possible justification for any people to adopt such a sick -- > and sickening -- philosophy. They can twist their "cause" until the end of > time by using words like "oppression", "humiliation", "freedom" -- it still > does not justify their use of TERROR (and I don't mean 'terror' which, by > the way, I am not using "loosely") on the Israelis or Americans or anyone > else! That is NOT a case of a "legitimate resorting to arms" (which I > assume you were referring to in your quote)! So only Arabs are not allowed resort to arms in self-defense? How do you work that one out? > > As for your quote by Livy, the Arabs have not left the Israelis any choice > but to go to war to defend themselves ever since they refused to > acknowledge Israel's existance and leave the Israelis alone in their tiny > little country. Instead, the Arabs went to war in 1947, 1956, 1967, 1968, > 1973 and all the "little" intifadas and jihads in between, with the stated > purpose of eradicating Israel off the map. So, what real "choice" have the > Israelis ever had? For a start, the Yishuv could've decided not to throw out the Palestinians out. If the Arab leaders hadn't been backed up to the wall by the presence of refugees a la the Crusades, they wouldn't have attacked in 1948. Arab Historians of the Crusades, Francesco Gabrieli (editor) http://dannyreviews.com/h/Arab_Historians_of_the_Crusades.html The Crusades Through Arab Eyes, by Amin Maalouf, Jon Rothschild http://www.heartoglory.com/Categories/crusaders1.htm And, so much for your "historical expertise", there WASN'T an Israel in 1947. That was Mandatory Palestine. And I suppose the wiping out of Deir Yassin on April the 6th 1948, by Etzl and Lehi working in conjunction with haGanah - after the Deir Yassin Mukhtar/head man had made an agreement with the local kibbutz that Deir Yassin would stay out of the fighting, no less ... I suppose to you, Dafna Yee, making that non-aggression agreement was an act of anti-Semitism and proof of ulterior Arab motives? Read it in various texts around the place, Ben Gurion was careful NEVER to leave explicit instructions to ethnically-cleanse Mandatory Palestine, he just made it plain and obvious that such was to happen. "Truth Whereby Nations Live" by Peretz Kidron, article in "Blaming the Victims", ed. Edward Said. That being said, I think it is obvious you're defining "TERROR" ethnically. And I for one cannot accept that. The last people to define "TERROR" - communist "TERROR" - ethnically, had their comuppance at the Nuremberg Trials. And no, I don't feel sorry for them at all. > > If the Arabs give up their weapons, there would be no more war in Israel. > If the Israelis give up their weapons, there would be no more Israel. Naiive. The villagers being dispossessed by the Apartheid Wall are protesting with their persons, civil disobedience such that Martin Luther King would be proud to associate with, and that doesn't stop the IDF from shooting them with live rounds on occasion - mind you, "rubber" bullets are more accurately termed "rubber-coated" steel slugs. They can cause serious wounds. Or beating them. > > Dafna Yee, director > JWD - Jewish Watch Dog > http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net > > --- > / o o \ PNEWS Topic Specific Portals (Vortals) > ===OO=====OO============================================ > [1] http://pnews.org/NWO/phpnuke/ (Piss Off George Portal) > [2] http://pnews.org/MEP/phpnuke/ (Myth Busters Portal) > [3] http://g0lem.net/PHP/phpnuke/ (Insane Planet Portal) > [4] http://g0lem.net/HTH/phpnuke/ (Wacko World Portal) > [5] http://g0lem.net/portal/ (Bad-Ass Truth Portal) > [6] http://pnews.org/portal/ (Naked Truth Portal) > ======================================================== > \_/ \_/ -- Wesley Parish * * * Clinersterton beademung - in all of love. RIP James Blish * * * Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." --- / o o \ PNEWS Topic Specific Portals (Vortals) ===OO=====OO============================================ [1] http://pnews.org/NWO/phpnuke/ (Piss Off George Portal) [2] http://pnews.org/MEP/phpnuke/ (Myth Busters Portal) [3] http://g0lem.net/PHP/phpnuke/ (Insane Planet Portal) [4] http://g0lem.net/HTH/phpnuke/ (Wacko World Portal) [5] http://g0lem.net/portal/ (Bad-Ass Truth Portal) [6] http://pnews.org/portal/ (Naked Truth Portal) ======================================================== \_/ \_/
