Comment by IOT_Apprentice
2 years ago
I suspect you ignore the history of terrorism by Irgun and the bombing of the King David Hotel, which house the British military command. Menachem Begin was a key player in that attack & was extremely proud of it. Who are the modern day parties following in those footsteps? Why Likud, & Begin was a co-founder of that very party— now led by Netanyahu.
I think dang made a mistake by allowing this topic onto HN. Nothing good is going to come out of that.
Begin is rolling in his grave as we speak. There is nothing between today's Likud and any historic version of that party. That's one thing.
The Likud (under the leadership of Sharon, who is also rolling in his grave) is also the party that withdrew from Gaza and handed it to the Palestinian Authority, dismantling settlements (by force). The Likud (under Begin's leadership) was the party that made peace with Egypt and gave Sinai back, also dismantling Israeli settlements (by force).
I don't think the history of the Irgun is really relevant here. At any rate, the views of the Likud shifted substantially and current party called "Likud" has really zero connection to the Likud at the time of Begin/Shamir/Sharon etc.
> dang made a mistake by allowing this topic
Strongly disagree. There are honest debates and questions here. I am learning from them, though I’m also fact checking everything that surprises.
Too loaded. Too complex. Too many strong emotions/feelings. Destruction, death, loss. Amplified. Weaponized. I know I feel very strongly and it's hard to put things in objective terms.
You need to zoom in, zoom out, the history is vast, there's the big picture, there are details. Most of what you'll encounter online and in the media, on both sides really, is propaganda.
7 replies →
> I think dang made a mistake by allowing this topic onto HN. Nothing good is going to come out of that.
Actually I find the discussion on HN has brought up many useful insights on a complex conflict that provokes emotional responses. It's a model that many other communities could learn from.
I wasn't ignorant of it - that's why I said "any modern Israeli party". I'm aware past Israeli/Zionist groups have engaged in terrorism and in some cases deliberate civilian massacres. As far as I know Likud hasn't within the past 50 years.
What do you call what's going on right now, if not deliberate civilian massacres in order to get to relative handful of freedom-fighters/terrorists hiding amongst them?
Let us imagine a residential building with about 100 people living there, and let us imagine that there is information that some enemy combatants are living among them. A decision is made to strike at the building in order to eliminate the combatants. Consider two different approaches:
1) An air strike at the building, destroying it and killing most of its inhabitants, and leaving a minority of them wounded.
2) A squad of soldiers enters the building and executes most of the inhabitants at close range, and wounds and leaves alive a minority of them.
Most people would call scenario 2) a deliberate massacre that cannot be justified. Many people would, however, call scenario 1) a legitimate military strategy with unfortunate collateral damage that cannot be avoided. Question is, why? The outcome is the same, but for some reason the impersonality of striking from distance (air strikes, missiles, or artillery fire) seems to make it acceptable in many bystanders' eyes.
10 replies →
What do you call what's going on right now, if not deliberate civilian massacres in order to get to relative handful of fighters hiding amongst them?
Well, what other way is there? Hamas is a terrorist organization, with in the picture, there will never be peace. The only option thus is the most targeted elimination of all terrorists. Unfortunately, 100% specificity is impossible to achieve. So the question is, is Israel doing their absolute best on minimizing casualties or not?
Do you have a reason to assume they don’t do so? The reported 2:1 ratio is absolutely in line with modern warfares, especially considering the very very densely populated urban environment.
5 replies →