But they can be very thankful to people perpetrating total war if the Jews are beneficiaries.
What do Hamas and parts of the German troops in the Operation Barbarossa have in common? They believed in total war and acted accordingly. They also acted to the detriment of Jews.
What do Red Army and IDF have in common? They believe in total war and act accordingly or believed and acted. But they act to the benefit of Jews.
I will not consider a traumatised Palestinian who hates Jews and supports Hamas as fully equivalent of a peaceful citizen of a peaceful country.
But that's not the point about civilians. It's not about how they feel, it's about what they do. They are different from armies and from partisans. They are not the same category.
One does not justify acts of war against civilians because they sympathise with the opposing army, not even if it's an evil army. Not even if the sympathy is an evil one.
The first camp of prisoners with atrocities of the century recently past was not Auschwitz. It was not some camp in the Gulag which was even earlier. It was some camp in South Africa, where Boers were interned to stop them supporting Kruger with food and water and perhaps occasionally ammo. And yes, they were treated in evil and brutal ways, because back then, the UK believed in total war too.
"I can bomb a civilian building if there is a tunnel under it" sounds a bit too much like "I can massacre Jews in Russia if they have sympathy for Lenin" ... no, you can't, either situation./HGL
The following picture is not a painting by Picasso, it's the real thing:
Von Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-H25224 / Autor/-in unbekannt / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 de, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5434009
And no, it doesn't justify Dresden or Vienna getting bombed./HGK
No comments:
Post a Comment