You mention Begin's peace with Egypt. That was not about "peace" but a cynical, strategic move that took the biggest Arab army off the board so Zionists could invade Lebanon and accelerate the violent colonization of the West Bank.
Then you mention the Likud removing settlements from Gaza. That was Ariel Sharon's unilateral plan to turn Gaza into an open-air prison and, in the documented words of his own top advisor, "freeze the peace process indefinitely."[0]
These are not rejections of the Irgun's ideology. They are its most cunning applications. And your claim that the Dahiya Doctrine is "anachronistic" is nonsense, even Biden had the honesty to admit it when he recognized it.[1] It is the modern, state-sanctioned culmination of the Irgun's terrorist philosophy of collective punishment. Their ideology didn't vanish, it just became Israeli state policy. The only complexity in that is your attempt to whitewash it. It's a straight line, and you are deliberately trying to obscure it.
[0] https://www.haaretz.com/2004-10-06/ty-article/top-pm-aide-ga...
[1] "Biden takes a tougher stance on Israel’s ‘indiscriminate bombing’ of Gaza" https://apnews.com/article/biden-israel-hamas-oct-7-44c4229d...
Rather it is only trying to put everything in a childish context of good vs bad. Where the "evil" was predetermined. I don't subscribe to the evil vs good analysis of the world events, which in my opinion is a bit childish.
I therefore let you and the three other users keep copy pasting "Dahiya Doctrine" which I would never ever think of connecting to the Irgun, and I still struggle to see the connection. So although I am intrigued how you all got to this shared deeply anachronistic idea, I'll let that curiosity pass this time
You claim you "struggle to see the connection" between the Irgun and the Dahiya Doctrine[1]. Let me make it simple for you, since you find reality so "complex." The Irgun's philosophy was to use terrorism against a civilian population to achieve a political goal. The Dahiya Doctrine is the state-sanctioned military policy of using disproportionate force against a civilian population to achieve a political goal.
It's the same ideology. It just evolved from primitive bombs to a state-funded air force. Your refusal to see this direct, documented line is not a sign of intellectual curiosity, but a Zionist's attempt at upholding an impossible cognitive dissonance.
The end result was not some massive terror bombing, but warnings before bombing which gave enough time for civilian evacuations and the targets themselves were indeed civilian buildings, but those that either stored massive amount of munitions, as can clearly be seen in secondary explosion videos or bunkers of Hezbollah leaders such as Nasrallah, as confirmed by Hezbollah confirmation of casualties.
All of these make the above valid military targets, and makes your claim the primary reason was to cause terror as a bit dubious.
Actually the reverse had happened, as weapons that were used against Israeli civilian population as terror weapons (non-precise artillery rockets) were destroyed
In any case you still haven't shown how the IDF planners behind these were all part of the Irgun Forever secret society, so in any case the connection is a huge logical leap
Shamir mentioned earlier was part of the Israeli-Palestine Madrid Conference which was the precursor to the Oslo accords.
The Likud party is the one the removed all settlements and all Israeli troops from Gaza at the time.
Do you think these are indications of the Etzel/Lehi ideology? I think you will find life is more complex than propaganda
Your take on the Dahiya Doctrine is going in time 70 years, and therefore is extremely anachronistic, especially military tactics-wise
You are presenting a very shallow representation of a very long period of time and very complex politics. I am not sure if on purpose or due to shallow understanding of the conflict.