[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;26233756]Regardless of how much they are or are not oppressed, /nothing/ justified deliberate targeting of civilians. Nor does it matter if that's the "inevitable outcome", although it often is - it's still not right, and should not be treated as something to be reluctantly tolerated.[/QUOTE]
I'd agree it shouldn't, they can defend themselves. But to continually oppress them because some of them are fighting back (an inevitable outcome) is just foolish. I'm stressing my point that if they poke enough people with a stick they're going to get poked back.
Theres a lot of badblood out there obviously but if there was to be peace the first steps would be up to the Israelis not the Palestinians. They're the ones who have power.
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;26233890]I'd agree it shouldn't, they can defend themselves. But to continually oppress them because some of them are fighting back (an inevitable outcome) is just foolish. I'm stressing my point that if they poke enough people with a stick they're going to get poked back.
Theres a lot of badblood out there obviously but if there was to be peace the first steps would be up to the Israelis not the Palestinians. They're the ones who have power.[/QUOTE]
But there's a difference between "fighting back" and unjustified acts of brutality. If they were striking against military targets in retaliation to having their own military targets struck, that's justified "fighting back". However, shelling civilian suburbs is not "fighting back", it's an attack on innocents and is unjustifiably wrong. Anyone who does the latter does not deserve justification or respect.
You're right, there /is/ a lot of bad blood. However, I disagree that the first steps need be up to the Israelis, or that there's even really a single-group first-step at all. To me, in order to achieve a lasting peace, Hamas needs to halt its anti-Semitic activities and attacks, and become a partner worth negotiating with - an example of said partner is the Palestinian Authority. If a kind of reconciliation can be achieved between the two Palestinian groups, then a long-term peace could be negotiated. Naturally, one of the steps involved would be stopping Jewish settlers. However, I'm not sure if the current Israeli government and power order will be able to do that.
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;26233890]I'd agree it shouldn't, they can defend themselves. But to continually oppress them because some of them are fighting back (an inevitable outcome) is just foolish. I'm stressing my point that if they poke enough people with a stick they're going to get poked back.
Theres a lot of badblood out there obviously but if there was to be peace the first steps would be up to the Israelis not the Palestinians. They're the ones who have power.[/QUOTE]
Defending themselves is reactionary and occurs when they are attacked. If they were to return fire on Israelis, that would be defending themselves. Launching attacks on them randomly is not defending, it is resisting. It is also violent resistance which they certainly have a choice in doing.
Either side can step up. Israel's not likely to do so when there's a fairly good chance they are going to take advantage and attack them.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.