Europe and "Those People"

[Provost Harrison]

One mans terrorist is another mans hero. The likes of George Washington et al at one point were regarded as terrorists. It comes down to definition.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


A cornered rat fights hard. The Israeli state has had the opportunity to solve this mess in the past, but the whole affair has flared up again since the election of Sharon. It's a difficult one to solve, but brutality is just going to fan the flames, not solve it. That will take something a little less 'easy' than simple thuggery.

And the Israelis have made peace where they had evidence of a willing partner in peace. Unfortunately, Arafat has never been able to fake good intentions for long enough.

People sometimes elect or appoint the people they need for the hour. Seems to me a lot of people would have said similar nasty things about Churchill in the 1920s and 30s.

Brutality sometimes must be met with brutality. To be weak is to invite destruction. If you are refering to recent actions of the IDF, just what would you have them do when there is a never ending stream of human bombs targeting Israeli children?

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
That was not what happened though was it? Germany wanted to occupy Poland for completely different reasons. The allocation of territories were the result of the settlement of WWI. They may have returned at a later date. But you know as well as I do, that was not the intention of Nazi Germany to return those provinces, but to take Poland.

Just as it is not the intention of the Arab powers to merely return the West Bank and Gaza to Arab control. They want to take all of Palestine back. Aren't you seeing the similarities? The plight of oppressed ethnic "brothers" has been used before as a cover for greater plans.

[Velociryx]

This is true, however, I would argue that a man or woman who ties a load of TNT to their body, walks into a non-military target (say, a cafe or hotel) and detonates is clearly not trying to make a military statement. Wouldn't you agree?

-=Vel=-

[notyoueither]

There is a very big difference between modern terrorism directed at civilians and rebellions where soldiers are the enemy.

[Ned]

Here in California I find that a significant number of liberals are saying things about Jews, Sharon and Israel that are indistinguishable from what Hitler said about the Jews in Mein Kampf. "Those people" is an expression I have heard, and often. There is true hatred in their speech.

I don't live in France or England, but I would like to enquire: Does the discussion of the Middle East among the average person sound more like a principled discussion of ideas or hatred?

Note above that I identified "liberals" as the somewhat exclusive source of the anti-Israeli hatred. I suspect that the same is true in France and England.

Why?

Ned

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Velociryx
I would argue that a man or woman who ties a load of TNT to their body, walks into a non-military target (say, a cafe or hotel) and detonates is clearly not trying to make a military statement. Wouldn't you agree?

No, I wouldn't. Terrorism is as much a military problem as a law enforcement problem, IMO.

[notyoueither]

Neo-nazis are liberal?

[Velociryx]

I agree it's a military and law enforcement problem but the terrorist doing the exploding is just out to cause indiscriminent harm....he's not targeting enemy military units to drive them out of his homeland, he's just hurting anybody on hand.

-=Vel=-

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Velociryx
This is true, however, I would argue that a man or woman who ties a load of TNT to their body, walks into a non-military target (say, a cafe or hotel) and detonates is clearly not trying to make a military statement. Wouldn't you agree?

-=Vel=-

I would agree. However the problem is, how much of this is directly state sponsored? Is overwhelming power going to solve the situation? No, it is exacerbating the problem. This is a mess, and one that isn't going to be resolved like this by either side. Still, it is no justification for the IDF to just carry on like this.

[notyoueither]

And here I thought that 9/11 might have heralded an end for toleration of terrorism directed at civilians. D*mn. It was looking good there for a few weeks.

[DinoDoc]

Vel: I would still say that the terrorist should be classified as a soldier because that is what they are. Warfare against the civilian population of an area has been part and parcel of military history for centuries. It is one of the most counterproductive forms that one could choose though.

[notyoueither]

Terrorists do not wear uniforms while on a mission. Therefore they would be subject to summary execution if they were treated as soldiers.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Terrorists do not wear uniforms while on a mission. Therefore they would be subject to summary execution if they were treated as soldiers.

And?

[notyoueither]

If you call them soldiers, you are legitimizing their tactics.