Actually no Apocalypse, you made it particular to Jews
You say
In reality in the next line DoL makes a comparison with American Indians to try and make his point. I am not going to argue the in's and out's of killing civilians, but he was trying to illustrate a particular context not trying to suggest there was something ok about killing non combatant Jews.
Yes and the point was it is acceptable to kill non combat civilian in certain cases and he was using the American aboriginal reference as justification for that position and advancing the revisionist version of history which depicts Israelis as colonialists invading native peoples.
We can all read it. He made an arguement as to when the killing of non combatants is acceptable. He stated as a general rule it is not but it is acceptable in certain instances it is. The context ican niot be ckeaer. We can all read it.
What you say with due respect is illogical because if what I do is follow your arguement then what you are arguing is was acceptable for American Indians to kill civilians and theefore its acceptable as well for Palestinians to do the same with Israeli because the two are equivalent.
For me and many others this arguement is nothing but the same recycled condoning of violence against Jews who came to Israel as has been seen thousands of times on posts in this and other poltical forums.
This is part and parcel of the selective historic revisionism that depicts Jews as colonial invaders when in fact they were people escaping colonialist tormentors in Europe and the Arab world. That we just ignore and revise. After all we now know the holocaust is a myth. The Iranians had a seminar on that rememer?
Also in this revisionist take, we just throw out Jewish history. Jews who came to Palestinine had no porigins there. We just chose it on a map. Of all the places in the world we decided on a piece of sand in the middle of nowhere for no reason. Just skip our aboriginal ties to the land. Poof they don't exist. Yah we know how that revisioism works thanks.
We also know the double standard. Jews who came to Palestinian were all illegal but all the Arabs who flooded into Palestine just as illegally displacing land from Palestinians, they are all not foreigners, no no all all everyone one was a Palestinian even though they came from outside the area no different than Jews.
Oh we know how that double standard works. If you are an Arab you can do whatever you want in the Middle East and define yourself any way you want, but if you are a Jew the same standards will not apply. A Muslim is whatever nationality he wants to be, a Jew can't be. A Muslim can have a Muslim state, a Jew can't. Yah I get the drift of the double standard...all we Jews do.
Oh yes, and when we make a comment explaining when its acceptable to kill civilians, we can revise it to say since its referring to the killing of Jews its acceptable because as we all know they are foreigner colonialist invaders and deserve it.
Never mind they fleed a holocaust and dhimmitude and Arab forced ethnic cleansing-no Jews are not refugees entitled to a country. Arabs can have multiple Muslim countries, Jews want one tiny one, never. Christians have an Anglican state, a Catholic state and numerous countries that enshrine the protection of Christians in their constitutions and state insitutional values, but if a Jew does it, oh no that can't be.
If a Jew wants to express themselves through universal sufferage as a collective entity where religion is but one component, no that can not be but if Arabs want to do so, that's fine. Over 145 countries have laws of return for people defined as having blood ties to a certain nationality, if Jews do that-oh no can't be done.
Yah yah. Been there, done that.
Here's the point-Jews have a country. Its called Israel. Its not going anywhere. Palestinias can renounce violence and terrorism and indicate they will recognize it and live peacefully with it, or they can continue as is condoning terrorism and demanding Israel be dismantled and Jews turned back into dhimmis in a Muslim Palestinian state.
We can wax poetic until doomsday over it but it aint happening.
Not only that but Mr. Abbas is in no position to make any conditions. From the get go every pre-condition Arafat layed down the Israelis met and then Arafat pissed on the concessions.
Arafat was offered 98% of what he asked for and then turned around and said everything he said was a joke and the Israelis should have known he was bargaining in bad faith and his only agenda was the taking back of all of Israel and Jordan for a Palestinian state and nothing else would be acceptable.
So Mr. Abbas after that is in no position to demad or make conditions for anything. He at best represets a frige group of splintered corupt cronies of Arafat. He is despised by Hamas whose ageda is clear-the destructio of Israel by violence and any means necessary.
Pre-coditios from Abbas? Right. We are still playing the same song as in 1948 with the Arab world wanting Israel to go bye bye only now the couched reference for its destruction isn't with guns its by flooding the country with so called Palestinians-a new definition of Palestinian that includes any Arab wishing to call themselves that and a definition different then the definition for displaced refugee of any other refugee in the world.
Yah we know the game. We know the buzz words and couched references and coded words.
There is no doubt the expansion of settlements on the West Bank have exasperated tensions and they are an obstacle to peace, but lets get real-show me one Arab leader willing to denounce terror against Israel and say terrorists must disarm and Israel as a Jewish state must be recognized.
Not 1 exists at this time. Unless someone cares to provide the name of but 1 of these leaders and give me a source for their position.
I won't hold my breath.