[extropy-chat] ENOUGH already

[Major]

Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> writes:

> I'll notice that I've been advising those who disagree with me on
> military law subjects on this list to actually READ the Geneva
> Conventions. To date, it doesn't appear that anyone has taken me up on
> that advice.

I hadn't but I would have bet a large sum of money I could predict the
first four words. I was right.

> The High Contracting Parties [...]

The Palestinians, having been deprived of statehood by force, are not
and cannot be a "high contracting party".

> The primary reason that the British were getting guerillaed by the
> Zionist movement was that the Brits were not letting any more Jews
> return to their homeland (a right which the Palestinians think they
> deserve instead, apparently

> The British were also aiding German intelligence agents in assasinating
> Zionists on the streets of Palestine in the 1930's (targeted killing of
> militants, a practice which the Palestinians, Germans, and Mr. Grant
> seem to think is so criminal today when conducted against
> Palestinians).

So were these things wrong or not?

Were they in fact so wrong that the victims were entitled to use (what
would now be called) terrorist tactics to stop them?

If these things justified terrorism 50 years ago, why don't they
justify terrorism now?

Major