4 ms·

The standard you are applying is pacifism: do not use violence even if violence is being used on you.

• golergka 10y ago
  No. Use violence if it can lead to less net violence — this is my standard. Terror acts are a direct opposite of this.
  • toyg 10y ago
    Except you don't know what will ever lead to "less net violence", nor do you have a way to quantify net violence beyond bodycount -- and I don't think you want that.
  • Udik 10y ago
    And in the meantime keep grabbing somebody else's land. You're a man of high principles, indeed.
    • golergka 10y ago
      You mean like Sinai and Gaza?
      • Udik 10y ago
        Let's talk seriously. Israel withdrew from Sinai and dismantled a few settlements in in the Gaza strip. It didn't relinquish its full control over Gaza's borders, air space and maritime space (which means, in fact, on the whole Gaza economy) such that Gaza is still considered by the UN an occupied territory. In the meanwhile, Israel keeps expanding its illegal colonies in a foreign territory, the West Bank, contravening to the international law. It also unilaterally annexed the whole city of Jerusalem, also contrary to international law. And it unilaterally annexed the Golan Heights, demolishing over a hundred Syrian villages and giving the land to Israeli settlers, also against the international law (as was recently reaffirmed by the UN Security Council). As of 2016, 750000 Israelis, about 10% of the whole population of Israel, lives in illegally occupied territories. This number has been steadily growing for the past 60 years. Let me clarify the concept if these numbers seem a bit abstract. Israel is stealing houses and fields and destroying villages and driving out native populations, by economic and military oppression, in a quest for lebensraum for its own population. This is completely unacceptable by any modern western standard.