ארגון; for HaIrgun HaTzva'i HaLe'umi BeEretz Yisra'el, הארגון הצבאי הלאומי בארץ ישראל"National Military Organization in the Land of Israel") was a militant Zionist group that operated in Palestine between 1931 and 1948. It was established as a militant offshoot of the Jewish paramilitary organization Haganah ("The Defense", ההגנה). People often refer as Haganah Bet (Hebrew: literally "Defense 'B' " or "Second Defense", הגנה ב), or alternatively as Haganah Ha'leumit (ההגנה הלאומית) or Ha'ma'amad (המעמד). In present-day Israel, Irgun is commonly referred to as Etzel (אצ"ל) founded by Ze'ev Jabotinsky. He expressed this ideology as "every Jew had the right to enter Palestine; only active retaliation would deter the Arabs and the British.
Attacks by Irgun were the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin massacre (together with the Stern Gang) on 9 April 1948.
Irgun was a terrorist organization...leaded of course by Menachim BEGIN
...happy now ???
Why IRGUN was never on the black list of terrorist (non-governmental) organization ???
About the peace of BEGIN u can ask the dead bodies ....
Why did BARAK warn personally all IDF officers to travel abroad ???
now tell me your clever stories...
I am afraid Aurora you speak as though Hamas is the only party in the conflict that uses religion as a means of justifying their actions. The children of Israel believe themselves to be "the chosen people of God"! They may not codify this belief in a constitution, but the amount of people I have personally heard express the sentiment that they as God's chosen people are allowed to act however they wish, is astonishing.
I also find it absolutely amazing the way so many people simply argue that Hamas has done this to the Palestinian people! ABSOLUTELY RUBBISH! ISREAL DID NOT HAVE TO KILL INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Israel kept reminding Hamas that they are no match for the strength of the IDF. If that was the case then why did Israel not send in special forces to eliminate Hamas fighters face to face on the ground?!? The answer is simple....Israel's intention was merely to kill Palestinians regardless of whether they are innocent or Hamas combatants!!!
My message is simple...ISRAEL! DO NOT DESECRATE THE MEMORY OF YOUR ANCESTORS IN EUROPE BY LOWERING YOURSELF TO SUCH EVIL!!!
If Hamas militant will say they will not build more arms, there would be no objection for lifting the siege on Gaza .... but they claim again that they will bring Arms and give Israel the excuse to put under siege 1,500,000 people.
The fact that Hamas chose not to do so calls into question the validity of any justification of Hamas militants's actions.
By international law occupied people are permitted ANY action to struggle against an occupying power whereas an occupying power is strictly limited in its actions particularly against civilians.Israels actions bring into question the validity of any justification for its continued existence!
Paul asks for a reply proposing what Israel could have done to defend itself. I am only too happy to oblige:
"They hit first..." is the kind of justification for "violence in response" that might be expected from children who have not yet learnt how to behave in a civilised manner.
Hamas rockets and grenades are weapons of mass destruction just like Israeli bombs and missiles. Israel, like Iraq in the time of Saddam Hussein, is a member state of the United Nations. It is under the same obligations to act in accordance with international law. So, just like the fears of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction lead to a thorough investigation, monitoring, verification, inspection and decommissioning operation by the UN through UNMOVIC, so Israel's fears of weapons of mass destruction in Gaza threatening Israeli civilians should be dealt with in a similar manner through the UN.
Furthermore, Israel's proven willingness to use its weapons of mass destruction time and time again against civilian areas should no longer be tolerated. It is high time that Israel was also stripped of its weapons of mass destruction so that it can no longer jeopardize the lives of civilians. The only way for Israel to deal with terrorists is through the International Criminal Court or the system of Special Tribunals, as happened in Yugoslavia. A civilised nation state member of the UN must only use the Might of Law. A terrorist organization uses the Law of Might. Israel cannot be both!
Each Israeli weapon of mass destruction used against Gaza will only cause more Palestinians to lose hope for a just resolution, leaving them with no perceived option remaining but to join Hamas fighters. The only way for Israel to defeat Hamas is to fully embrace its obligations in accordance with international law and use the UN system to defend its legitimate interests to protect its civilian population. Then Hamas will have to become a true partner for peace, otherwise, they will depart from power just the same way as they arrived - through an election, as they will be seen by the Palestinian voters as not being the best option for a just peace.
The resolution of the Israeli Palestinian conflict is extremely simple, especially concerning Gaza. What is the world waiting for?
I mourn the loss of all human life through the incompetence of political leaders. What a disgusting and tragic waste!!!
In closing, I answer Paul's question with a question: What will it take for Israel to try working in partnership with the UN in order to secure the safety of all residents of Israel?
Absolutely it must stop, but, as I tried to explain in my comment above, violence can never be the long term solution to violence. If Israel is really serious about stopping this, then it must be serious about stopping all of this, meaning that its only option is to fully comply with its obligations under international law, including UN resolutions and also use the UN to protect its citizens. Instead of taking the law into its own hands, it must put itself in the hands of the law, starting with the Law "Thou shalt not kill"
This is the situation Israel is in:
The facts remain that since the establishment of the UN "to save future generations from the scourge of War", the acquisition of territory by force has been inadmissible under international law, and yet Israel has continued to acquire territory by force, relying on its own impunity.
The Israeli government strategy has been the same since the foundation of the Israeli State - the forced dispossession, displacement and expatriation of the majority of Palestinian residents and the total subjugation of those who remain. The only variation in this strategy has been the attitude to 'peace negotiations' as shown in "The Iron Wall" by Avi Shlaim, sometimes pretending to engage in such negotiations as a stalling tactic while erecting settlements and 'creating facts on the ground' to make a viable independent contiguous Palestinian State more impossible in practice, while other times refusing to enter into peace negotiations at all, in order to deprive Palestinians of all hope so that they will eventually give up their struggle.
This strategy has not succeeded, cannot succeed and is doomed to fail, for the simple reason that while Israel chooses to practice the Law of Might, a relic of the Dark Ages, the establishment of the UN marked the dawn of a new era - that of the Might of Law.
Israel's only viable option in the long term is to fully embrace its responsibilities and rights under international law, withdraw from all territories acquired during and since the 1967 war and use the UN system to protect its civilians. The alternative is Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD!!
our problem is that we are witnessing a bloody dance of extremists and by taking sides we are helping the flames.
Dear Ramsey we need to confront our people who are extremists and not play their game and only claim Hamas to be terrorists or Israel to be criminal. yes, both description can work to justify aggression, but we seek cooperation and mutual future that respect all Showing that the resolution of the Israeli Palestinian conflict is possible while addressing the demands, aspirations and fears of all sides..
Dear Neri, I totally agree that the extremism on both sides is a significant part of the problem.
Extremists on each side would justify their course of action as the only option because peace negotiations in the last sixty years have not been successful, and that the other side continues to use violent aggression.
This suggests that there is an easier and more effective alternative to confronting extremists - make their ideology obsolete by proving that their course of action is not an option at all.
The way to do this is through a successful negotiated resolution in accordance with the demands of international law and the UN.