Ted Honderich's "Right and Wrong and Palestine, 9-11, Iraq, 7-7" review by Swanson

[papau]

...civil disobedience by Palestinians in defense of Palestine...is...effective...(but) suicide bombing (appears doomed to fail because it is not) effective. (Swanson disagreement with Honerich)

The Ethics of Palestinian Resistance

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16825

By David Swanson

With Jimmy Carter's book a best seller and the Iraq War a top political concern, many Americans may have an interest right now in thinking about Israel and Palestine. I'd like to recommend to anyone with that interest picking up a copy of a short and brilliant book by the British philosopher Ted Honderich called "Right and Wrong and Palestine, 9-11, Iraq, 7-7."

"7-7," for Americans who haven't memorized that number, is the date of the terrorist attack in London's subway. Honderich addresses ethical questions raised by the four topics in his title, but does so after laying out a general understanding of the philosophy of ethics. In fact, it is on page 114 of a 247-page book that he finally gets around to a preliminary discussion of the definition of terrorism and on page 131 that he first touches on the four topics named. The preceding pages may, however, be the most valuable portion of his book.

Honderich provides a compelling overview of the place of philosophy in ethical inquiry, of the standards of human rights, just war theory, conservatism and liberalism, and democracy. He gives a powerful defense of consequentialist and non-utilitarian ethics (and explains what that means). And he sets out in the place of utilitarianism or any other past system of ethics something he calls "The Principle of Humanity." Humans, Honderich writes, desire a decent length of life, the means to support a quality of life, freedom and power, relationships with others, respect and self-respect, and the goods of culture. A bad life is one deprived of some or all of these things. The principle of humanity is that the right thing to do is aimed at getting and keeping people out of bad lives.

I've grossly oversimplified and recommend reading Honderich's position in the original. I think it outdoes the ethical positions of the vast majority of philosophy professors. I also think the rest of the book demonstrates the limited usefulness of having done so. That is to say, my reaction to Honderich's book is one that he has pre-interpreted in his conclusion as based on fear and inconsistency: I accept his ethical premises and then reject one of his conclusions. Of course I do so under the belief that I am not lacking courage, and rather that Honderich is lacking sufficient imagination.

<snip>So, why do I recommend Honderich's book so strongly if I disagree with his conclusion (Poster note: Swanson rejects Honerich's conclusion that Palestinian terrorism against Israel is ethically right and good but accepts his conclusion that Jewish State of Israel within greenline must be allowed to exist forever)? Well, I disagree with one of his four sets of conclusions. I think he gets 9-11, 7-7, and Iraq exactly right. I think he draws the connections between his four topics in exactly the right way. And I think he provides one of the most compelling possible rigorous arguments against a vast array of positions on Palestine that are even more wrong than his own. Until you understand the Palestinians as engaged in self-defense, and understand that as a position that is not anti-Semitic, you cannot even get to the debate over whether the tools employed should be violent ones. Honderich is an author who can guide you to this understanding, and to an understanding of ethics that may be useful in other areas as well

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[papau]

2. "A little bit of sarcasm intended" - and understood - but the book is a good one on

the way you get to "right" and "wrong" using the logic of philosophy.

And Swanson's point on the effectiveness of nonviolent resistance against a state where folks discuss the right and wrong of an action and feel guilt if they believe they've done a wrong action, which is the type of state Israel is, believe it or not, seems proven by the results of various types of actions taken to date so far.

Many of the greater Israel folks in Israel were pushed there by our US fundies in the GOP - and as in the US, those US fundi goals need to be taken out of politics - and the settlement blocks in the west bank given over to PA control except for those blocks near the green line where land exchanges can make a win-win situation possible - as in the Taba/Geneva proposals.

Ar least that is my opinion.

In any case the book is a very interesting read - again, in my opinion.

[Tom Joad]

12. Palestinians use nonviolent resistance all the time, and they are an

example of courage and steadfastness in this regard.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Joad]

8. Where in that post do i support violence?

Imagination at work.

Might as well accuse me of developing and elaborating on a new theory of quantum physics in that post, it would be just as ludicrous.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Joad]

11. I was being sarcastic, and said that if Israel was such a benovolent nation

there would be no need for resistance whatsoever.

Bull Connor (a brutal police chief) and George Wallace (the governor of Alabama), leaders for segragation who confronted and villified King and civil rights activists (much as some villify ISM and such groups are spoken of here and elsewhere by some) never suggested that the systems they supported should be resisted in any way. They were at least logical in their support of an unjust system.

If you support a system, why call for resistance of any sort to it? Why wouldn't a supporter of such policies instead urge Palestinians to write Thank You letters to Olmert? Get well cards to Sharon? WHY advocate any kind of resistance?

How you can read what you did into it defies all logic. Fascinating.

[pelsar]

13. i apologies..

for the misunderstanding, didnt see your sarcasim....though your attempt to make it identical to the black struggle in the south is rather absurd. It was pointed out already, that the blacks werent blowing up white people in busses, werent vilifying them in their churches calling them pigs and teaching their children to hate them, werent threatening to take over the south with their "friends" in other countries, etc.

you might as well claim that black is now white....

perhaps you should study a bit about jewish history, we tried the "turn the other cheek"....didnt work out too well, nor do we have to be "benevolent" i dont know anybody who thinks so, nor do we have to apologies for living and surviving.....nor will we.

I definitely support the society i live in, for those who have problem with it, its best they use the democratic tools, that are acceptable......your inability to look at the history of the violence in the area and notice that every time the Palestinians use it they not only lose, but their lives get more and more miserable.

theres a saying about that: someone who trys the same thing over and over again, thinking that next time they will get a different result....

[Tom Joad]

14. There is no democracy in Military Occupation!

You want the people in the west bank to vote for the Israeli military to go away?
They don't have that right.

I thought i should inform you, maybe you have not noticed.

[pelsar]

15. there are still rules.....

and since israel is a democracy those are the rules to play by.....those are the rules that work.....(they cant vote, but there are other ways and methods)...violence sure aint working...did you check the progression of their land area?...check the progression of their income? check the progression of their "freedom of speach?"

all downhill since intifada I and taken a nose dive since intifada II...and still going down...a smart person would look at that and might question the tactics being used....

[Tom Joad]

17. The land lost to Palestinians was great between the 2 intifadahs.

The settlements greatly expanded during that time.

Military force certainly works for the Occupation forces.
Colonization is the central policy of the Israeli govt in regard to the West Bank. That has been the central obstacle to peace. I agree with President Carter on that issue.

[pelsar]

18. and gaza...

kinda of ruins the 'colonization theory"...as does the sinai.....and given that most israelis have no problem with giving the Palestinians the westbank, you should try looking at other factors, though it does ruin the simplistic scenario i admit.

The settlements greatly expanded during that time. ...and the Palestinians also never stopped shooting and teaching their kids how bad we are. The only time israel actually destroyed settlements and left was in gaza...and we all know who well that turned out...the Palestinians on the other hand, have never stopped shooting and trying to kill israelis.

thems the real facts, simple as they are, they speak volumes for those who are listening with an open mind.

thats what i love about the gaza withdrawl, it made it so clear what leaving the westbank means: chaos within, missiles without, but hey as long as there is no occupation who cares what happens to the Palestenians.

[breakaleg]

19. How do you figure?

Even as we write this, the settlements are expanding. The pullout of Gaza doesn't debunk they colonization theory. It just shows that's not the piece of land they want. It's the West Bank where their desires lie.

[pelsar]

21. who is "they"..

the "historical narration" of ancient judiaism includes both gaza and the westbank.... (not only did israel give the palestenains gaza, israel also returned the sinai....that also debunks the "colonization theory"...and open mind would wonder if there is something else at play...btw the sinai contained enough oil for all of israels needs)

the real question you should be asking is if most israelis have no problem in giving the Palestenians the westbank, why isnt there any pressure on the govt to?..answer that and you'll then understand a lot about israelis.

[breakaleg]

22. Israel. Since you haven't addressed my post, I'll take that as agreement.

[pelsar]

24. that the settlements expanded?

yes its a fact.....your attempt at claiming "colonization"...as in your attempt (previous posts) claiming israel needs the westbank for the water are both false. Leaving gaza and the sinai proved that returning land is quite possible....

[breakaleg]

25. Yet if they intended to withdraw from that land, why expand them now?

Why move more families into the West Bank only to have them move again in a year (idealistic of me, I know. It will never happen) Don't you think this current expansion is just proof to the Palestinians (as it is to the rest of the world) that Israel has no plan to withdraw? And where can any peace negotiations go if they don't? (assuming there were negotiations, that is)

[pelsar]

26. reverse the question....

since the palestenains have shown no real ability to govern at this point in time, in fact quite the opposite, gaza as an entity under palestenian authority has proven to be dangerous not just to israel, but to the palestenians and any foreigner as well.

why on earth would israel want to bring that chaos next to its population centers*?

Once again (like your water claim) your "proof" is no proof at all. The same was said of the sinai, gaza and even lebanon....all contain israeli withdrawls. The westbank is no different.

Its well known and pretty much accepted that the taba agreement with its land swaps will be the way to go, when the time is right...5-10 years from now..or maybe more. The expanding settlements simply means the land swap will be larger.

-------

*Untold damage would be done to this economy if one anti-aircraft missile, fired from the West Bank, brought down an airliner flying out of the futuristic new Ben Gurion International Airport. Israel can't afford to let this happen.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/a-sovereign-palestine-no-chance/2006/12/31/1167500013390.html?page=fullpage

[breakaleg]

27. I stand by my water claim, as you put it.

So, you admit they will grab more land when they can. And Israel gets to continue to impose their will on Palestinians until Israel decides they are ready to govern. Is it any wonder there is so much animosity coming from their side?

Israel is breeding hate and they are succeeding very nicely.

[pelsar]

28. yes....

protecting israeli citizens from the chaos of gaza is what a country is supposed to do.....and not letting it spread to the westbank is common sense....at least for those us who dont like the idea of mortar and rockets coming down upon our cities.

they dont like it?....i doubt they like the self rule they have in gaza either.....because it sure doesnt inspire any confidence in their ''authority"

as far as your water claim goes...i would love to hear how israel "needs to be in the westbank to access those acquifers when those same acquifers reach under both sides of the 67 border....so go ahead explain....if you stand by your claim, i'm sure you have some kind of information......


and if your so insistence on you "colonial claim" perhaps you can explain how gaza, the sinai and lebanon are not included in israeli colonialization? (i'm sure you have some rational....)

[breakaleg]

29. Those quotes in your post - who are you quoting? Because you'd better not

think you are quoting me.

And the picture you paint of benevolent Israel is a pretty one - beating a group of people into submission for their own good. Too bad it's just not true.

[oberliner]

30. What are your ideas for a peaceful resolution to this conflict?

What is your vision of the future for the Israeli and Palestinian people in an ideal world?

[breakaleg]

31. Israel needs to pull out of the occupied territories and give Palestinians their own state.

If it's idealistic to expect that Israel needs to do the right thing, then so be it.

[pelsar]

33. israel is not benevolent...

i dont know any country that is, during a war......nor do i know of anyone who has ever claimed that israel is "benevolent." I sure havent.....especially towards the palestenians....

no i'm not quoting you..i recall you said that israel has to be in the westbank to steal the water......i'm just wondering why, since the two main acquifers reach under the 67 border.
_____

i realize you probably wont answer this question..but i'll try: and if their state is a copy of gaza today.....would you:

still be for it?
expect israel to not respond to rocket attacks on its cities?

[Tom Joad]

20. Israeli soldiers teach Palestinian children to hate.

Could not be better teachers.

[pelsar]

23. the palestenian mosques teach hate....

the children experience bad things with the soldiers...theres a difference. What your taught is hard to 'shake" a bad experience(s) can be overcome with new better ones (to a certain extent).

If the Palestenains would change their teaching/media messages, that would be half the battle (for the good), there is after all no excuse for such messages....

[idontwantaname]

32. this "teaching hate" BS has got to end!

where would you say the largest concentration of antiisraeli feelings are? nablus?
certainly not tulkarem region... maybe jenin?
maybe hebron but im sure its more fear than anything.
so nablus... i wonder why?
hostile settlements and 2 hostile checkpoints at either ends of the city. the once shining modern city in the hills is dying thanks to the IDF. the IDF fucks with the residence daily like its the IDFs own personal antfarm. nablus is the only place i know of where israeli anarchists are not invited to join the protests... and seeing what the people in nablus and balata are being put through daily its amazing that a person from that society would openly point the finger at mosques and not his own.

----------------------

ive been out of the circuit for some time now but last i checked al aqsa had a decent presence in nablus... though things may have changed.

[pelsar]

34. theres a difference

between anti israel....and degrading jews......from what i read/seen/heard for many palestenians they are one and the same......the translations from PA TV are not "flattering" in the least nor is there any excuse for it

the comparison would be israeli TV....there is no excuse for hate speach, no matter who it doing what to whom......you should read up on Hamas spokesman, he has somethings to say about that....or the head editor of Al jazeer...both have interesting viewpoints

[idontwantaname]

36. ah, but thats TV and hamas...

of course id not expect anything different from hamas. the extreme(and sometimes not so extreme) members dont like anyone who isnt 110% muslim.

[pelsar]

41. but that is part of the landscape now

and it doesnt matter so much as "why".....its part and pacel of the present media that is now flowing along within gaza and parts of the westbank.

[idontwantaname]

52. it still matters why

to ignore the question of why will only seal the fate of the west bank to become like gaza. the same routines and mistakes the IDF made in gaza they are now/still doing in the west bank. close off the west bank for 5 years so you can have guerrilla warfare without international attention or casualties and you will have another gaza. is it too late??? maybe. but going after al aqsa is only making hamas stronger.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

35. Pelsar it is flat-out disingenous to

continue with the "Palestinians hate us b/c their elders teach them to..." nonsense.

You might be able to fool some Americans who are prone to dislike Arabs and Muslims to begin with, but you'll never convince anyone who takes a moment to honestly contemplate the brutal nature of living under Israeli occupation...

... and certainly no one who has been an eye-witness. There are scores of daily humiliations that are visited upon Palestinians, not to mention the fact that nearly every family members who are or have been jailed or killed by the IDF.

This issue isn't anyone's feelings on either side of the conflict. It's the land. And settlers grab more land while Israel apologists reprimand Palestinians for hating them.

Time to get real.

[Behind the Aegis]

37. Do read post #34

The time to get real is now! Pelsar is an Israeli and lives in the region and is familiar with what is said on the TV. There is also a difference between hating the occupation, hating Israelis, and hating Jews. You do understand that ALL three appear on TV and are preached by some of the religious leaders. Do not pretend that it doesn't happen.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

46. I know

where Pelsar lives and his residence hardly excuses the 5 decade+ actions of his government.

Like I said, the "hate" mantra is yet another smokescreen to obscure the brutality of occupation.

I only lived under it for 2.5 years, but saw enough with my own eyes to know that there is no such thing as a benign occupation.

[Behind the Aegis]

53. And?

Where is anyone claiming that where he lives excuses the actions of the Israeli government?! That doesn't even make sense!

You may say "...the "hate" mantra is yet another smokescreen to obscure the brutality of occupation.", but that is not even remotely accurate. Some of the items that Pelsar listed weren't even from Gaza or the West Bank. Imans and clerics are preaching hate from a variety of places not under Israeli occupation. What's their excuse? Besides, the other thing that he said, which you keep skirting is that they are preaching hate of JEWS, not Israelis! That means they are being to taught to hate a group of people who have nothing to do with their circumstances. There is no excuse for preaching/teaching anti-Semitism or any other type of bigotry...ever!

As for a "benign occupation," well that could be debatable too, but I don't recall ever reading here the word "benign" ever being used to describe what is happening in the West Bank (or formerly in Gaza).

[pelsar]

38. a reality show?....

its not so much "hatred" as i see it ...its seeing the "jew/israeli as some kind of "other"

some of the more blatent media are: (these have been seen within gaza/westbank)
irans zahra blue eyes
egypt producing a moving called the protocols of zion

the editor in chief of Al-jazzera (most popular show here) blaming israel for Jordans lack of health care as well as everything else

those are the easiest to find on the net and irrefutable. The other material is shown every so often on israeli TV news.

so question is now back to you: how would you characterize the above 3 examples?

__________

time to get real....that too goes back to you: the land grab excuse was shown to be false with examples of Lebanon, the Sinai and Gaza.

the problem is not the "butal nature of the occupation...the real problem is what comes when its gone: chaos in gaza, religious fanatics fed by a foreign power taking over the country as in Hezballa in Lebanon and just the general "failed nation state" with missiles and endless threats and attacks (seems nothing has really changed since pre 47 has it?)
i doubt you would like to address that, but that is precisly how avg joe israeli sees future palestinian state.... (along with the usual anti jew/israeli laws that are
found in jordan, egypt, etc)

and the percular fact that once the palestinians are "on their own" as in gaza, all those nice "human rights groups" will suddenly dissappear and no longer concern themselves with palestinian human rights (ISM for example sure doesnt write much about the peoples rights being trampled by hamas in gaza these days....)

[breakaleg]

39. The land grab excuse was not shown to be false! All those show is that

those weren't the pieces of land Israel wants - the West Bank is where it's set it's sights as EVIDENCED by the EXPANSION of the settlements. I really wish you'd stop making that false claim.

[pelsar]

40. and you?

perhaps explain for someone who doenst understand why israel "doesnt want gaza" but wants the westbank?....i dont really see the difference....

show me how the israeli population sees the two differently and perhaps i'll understand...or if you cant perhaps you'll have to rethink why israel is in the westbanak and showing no signs of leaving

I'm open to be convinced with a logical reasoned arguement....are you?

[breakaleg]

42. How the heck would I know why? All I know is settlements speak for themselves.

[pelsar]

43. thats your answer?

so your claiming you have no idea why israel left gaza, left lebanon, left the sinai, have no idea how it relates to the westbank...and then claim you know why israeli actions show no intention of leaving the westbank.

and i guess we can assume you know little about israeli politics as well interms of the happenings in the westbank

that sure is a strong arguement....i give up, that arguement is very compelling, i cant find any holes in it

(btw thats the "black and white style which is such a non starter, as its usually based on, how did you put it?

how the heck would i know why.......

[breakaleg]

44. Well,

to be honest I barely skimmed your first question. But it appears you believe their has to be some difference in population between Gaza and the West Bank to account for why Israel wants one and not the other. That's your claim to prove, if that's what you think.

If you can look at it objectively for a minute, would any country move settlers into the West Bank today (or this year) given that they've already pulled out of Gaza, and given the demand for a pullout of the West Bank to get the peace Israel says it wants, if only to ask them to move a year from now? It makes no sense.

Add to that, in many of the posts even here from pro-Israeli posters, when they talk of a pullout, it's never a complete pullout. It's always assumed that Israel will keep many or the "larger" or "strategic" settlements in the West Bank as it sees fit.

Perhaps our problem is that you view a partial pullout as a pullout and I don't. Perhaps you believe the parts of the West Bank that Israel has annexed should become part of Israel and I don't.

As I said. Actions speak louder than words. You just have to open your eyes in order to see them. I can't help it if you refuse.

[pelsar]

45. i dont see the difference between gaza and the westbank

in terms of popuation....the palestineans actually have different cultures in both places but for the "settlers and their judiaism its one and the same......this is part of knowing and learning about the "why"

knowledge and history tend to have more weight than specualation:

the israeli population of gaza grew and that of the two settlements in the sinai before both pullouts....so there goes your theory "looking at it objectivly". To understand why, once again takes learning about the politics and players, something you have already claimed you know nothing about.

the pullout, and land trade has already been agreed to in principle by the PA and israel (taba).....i think the problem is that you dont agree to what the principle players have already agree to.

Its the "spoilers" that want the fight to continue....those that not only will not accept what negotiations bring, but will do what they can to spoil it, and that means for everyone and so the violence will continue...that i understand is your position....

once again: a position that allows for no negotiation is/was/has been the palesinenian position for so many years...and its gotten them exactly where they are today.....a position that keeps getting worse as time goes by, flexibilty may be inorder for peace

[ProgressiveMuslim]

48. The difference is this:

Gaza is a tiny piece of land, that a few thousand settlers lived in. It was not a bedroom community to any major Israeli cities. too many troops were required to keep a few thousand ideologues safe.

As with Southern Lebanon, the price became too high to maintain.

The Israeli government knew full well that by forcing the settlers to leave, they'd leave behind chaos they'd be able to point to for the next 2 decades.

It is indeed chaotic. Of course the fact that Israel illegally withholds VAT due Palestinians, the fact that Israel and the US have isolated Hamas and basically IGNORED A DEMOCRATIC ELECTION haven't exactly helped matters.

Why don't you guys give them their money, leave them alone for 2 years and see what they can do? Maybe they'll be bums and the people of Gaza and the WB will kick them out of office next time.

Israel and the US telling the Palestinians: YOU CAN'T BE REPPED BY HAMAS just makes them more attractive. Let them try and fail without your help.

I believe that's what Israel and the US would do if peace were goal....

... but I don't believe peace is!

[pelsar]

51. i thought you wanted israel to leave gaza?

but according to what you wrote, the enusing chaos "was planned by israel"

this is classic:
The Israeli government knew full well that by forcing the settlers to leave, they'd leave behind chaos they'd be able to point to for the next 2 decades.

blame israel for internal palestinian problems....classic!!

ok...which means that israel shouldnt force the settlers to leave the westbank....after all thats means according to your logic that we'll be able to point to the next 2 decades of chaos.
___________________________

or maybe that the palestenians (and others) should listen to the Hamas speaker and stop blaming israel for every failure...as your are doing.
(your behind the times, they received their money and karni is open for trade)

excuses are no more than that....excuses. thats what i like about the gaza withdrawl...its makes the excuses so obvious

Hopes of economic prosperity and peace in the Gaza Strip after Israel withdrew settlers and troops from there have been systematically shattered as the Palestinian Authority failed to enforce law and order and provide basic services to 1.3 million Palestinians living in the tiny coastal strip.
 
Hundreds of dunams of agricultural land evacuated by Jewish settlers were expected to create as many as 4,000 jobs and generate millions of dollars in revenue. But corruption in the ranks of the company assigned the task of managing the land crippled the once rosy agriculture of Gush Katif and many of the land is now used as training bases by Palestinian groups.
 
'Let's admit we erred'

Dr Ghazi Hamad, the spokesperson of the Palestinian government,
Ali Waked
Published: 
08.27.06, 20:59




and if israel gives back the westbank and instead of shooting missiles at sederot they start landing in jersualem.....(and the political deadlock within the PA continues..) your suggestion to israelis would be......

[ProgressiveMuslim]

47. The fact that Israel occassionally is forced to give land back

or doesn't deem the price worth it (as in gaza) hardly negates the facts.

How in the heck do you explain the most recent illegal settlements on the WB.

I'm not saying there is no hating of Jews among Palestinians. I think it's arrogant to expect the oppressed to think positively of their oppressors.

Furthermore, I repeat that those feelings are fundamentally irrelevant to solving the conflict. They won't change until the situation on the ground changes, and even then it will take generations to undo the damage done.

Are you telling me that plenty of your neighbors don't "hate" Arabs? There might not be rabbis preaching it on national TV, but there are plenty of haters, and a handful of rabbis who DO!

Puh-leeze.

[pelsar]

50. i would expect them to hate us...

that would be natural given the situation.....but that hate should not be taught by their leadership as part and pacel of their education....thats whats not acceptable......

it maybe that you see it as "irrelevant"....but most of the israelis i know dont. We dont get excited over it, but we do see it as a fundamental building block to ensure that the conflict continues no matter what we do...give back land or not...

btw...its very very very arrogant to tell us what is and what is not important to us.......

as far as jews hating palestenians and rabbis preaching of it, sure it exists...its just not a staple in our public media......


perhaps you would like to explain irans "zaras blue eyes"..tv series or Egypt producing the protocols of zion....both are govt funded...outside of promoting hatred i cant think of a reason, can you? and yes it is directly related as both fund the various Palestinian groups....

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Poll_Blind]

4. It should be unsurprising that the Palestinians use violent resistance.

  Their land is being taken away by force. Whether by another country or by Israel they have the right to defend themselves by force to retain their land. Israel has a much greater military force at its disposal and it will almost certainly successfully ethnically cleanse the area of Arabs.

  I would hope they would choose non-violent resistance, but who can be surprised that some don't?

  If Israel were in the same role as the Palestinians I believe they would make the same (sometimes very bad) choices about defending themselves from conquerers. Even the worst form of violent resistance- suicide bombing, and consider their dead blessed martyrs. Masada.

PB

[pelsar]

5. its not a matter of 'being right"

there is no such thing as an absolute right (outside of fanatics)...if the goal is some form of justice for all, then those who advocate violence are not part of of those goals. The last 50+ years has shown what "justice" had done for the area. and for the Palestinians in paticular....as they keep on losing, their lives, and the violence becomes part and parcel of their society (see gaza) their lives become more and more miserable.

that is the legacy for those who keep on promoting violence as a way to solve problems.....as it should be.

your attempt at equating people who kill as many women an children as possible with the suicide of Masada so as not be slaves is a rather pathetic attempt at moral equivilance....

[Poll_Blind]

6. It's not my moral equivalence. If, as I said, Israel were in the same...

...position as the Palestinians today, they would not be immune from the temptation of the same spectrum of responses.

  I would agree with you that those who advocate violence are generally not on the side of Justice but you and I may be in the minority, ultimately, on that. I believe Finkelstein said something akin to "Every society believes it has the God-given right to take and hold as much territory as its military might will allow it." I have found mostly to be true.

PB

[pelsar]

7. well we hope that is now changing .....

Every society believes it has the God-given right to take and hold as much territory as its military might will allow it....i suspect it will change to be "resources" as opposed to territory. That i doubt wil change in the near future.

As far as the question of "are sucide bombers inevitable" given an occupation and oppression, i would say no. I definitely believe its a choice born out of ones culture. I also believe that its self defeating, as once that becomes part of ones culture, life is "cheapened" and a death cult emerges....which may be hard to remove. But thats just theory.....i get the feeling were just getting started with the suicide cults.....

[ProgressiveMuslim]

49. It worked pretty well in Southern Lebanon. n/t