> All this talk about how Israel's intelligence agencies were turned to the task of Palestinian terrorism without a single mention of why these palestinians, an occupied people on their own land, might resort to force.
(A) Because everyone knows why; how can someone read the New York Times and not be aware of the Palestinian cause?
(B) Not everyone agrees that terrorism and electing terrorist-supporting politicians (Hezbollah, etc.) is a reasonable way to solve problems
> an occupied people on their own land
Do we only care about recent history here?
—-
Exhausting to have otherwise seemingly intelligent folks so consistently make this into a black and white issue.
All this talk about how Israel's intelligence agencies were turned to the task of Palestinian terrorism without a single mention of why these palestinians, an occupied people on their own land, might resort to force.
Then there's the almost gloating tone they took to the planned murder of a 12 year old boy, justified by "jewish blood will not be spilled with impunity"
I wonder if the author will take the same attitude when Palestinians assasinate an Israeli soldier in retaliation for the countless airstrikes and starvation campaigns conducted against the palestinian bantustans.