I would like to see how you would feel, if you were on the end of the rule of the fist....
I find it hypocritical that you object morally to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, yet say that they should just accept it and live with it. The latter seems morally ambiguous at best and at odds with the first statement.
If I were at the end of it, I'd still prefer it because I know what happens to a region when terrorist organisations take over. We've all seen in it in Syria and now Iraq. The Palestinians in Gaza had plenty of time to show they can do things differently, that they can work towards a lawful society but, like other people in the Middle East, they seem to choose terrorists and fundamentalists as leaders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_Government_in_Gaza
http://www.jpost.com/National-News/...ckets-as-fighting-soft-occupation-Gaza-363272
As I've said, this is a matter of choosing the lesser evil and, in my view, Israel is just that.
This is quite possibly the worst reply I ever got on this question, lol.
So are Palestinians Animals? The fact that a lot of people died in WW2 makes the current massacre of Palestinians less of an issue? Do you dare to say the same about the holocaust? So if the Palestinians were mighty, I trust it would have been OK with you if they came and occupied your home? You understand that this is what you are telling me with your "right of might" rationale? Do you realise that, unlike those countries who had armies and entered WW2, Palestinians had neither an army nor chose to be enemies with the Zionists, rather it was a thing that was imposed onto them? I'm no history fanatic, but I find your claim that many European countries were reduced to fractions of their original size after WW2 astonishing, surely it can't be many (first time I hear this)? Or maybe these are lands which had previously been illegally concurred by these countries in the first place (hint: which is not the case with Palestine)? Do you realise you are comparing apples to oranges here? These are nations who had, according to you, lost parts of their countries, not got totally displaced by another nation which had refused re-entry of the original people to their homes and which is exerting institutional discrimination, at best, and genocide, at worst, to make the remaining population flee? Who said that what your claimed countries have done is the right thing? Just because some countries have accepted degradation and dishonour means Palestinians have to do the same? Surely, just as "many" countries, according to you, have done so, I'm sure you do know that many countries haven't done so and not doing so as there are/have been many disputed territories and liberation movements across the globe. You see, your comment leaves more questions than answers - have you tried thinking before writing it?
Palestinians are animals, as are all human beings although I didn't compare them to animals, I compared strong humans taking from weak humans to humans taking from animals. I'm not saying what's happening to Palestinians right now is a lesser issue but I don't think it's a genocide either, nor that it can be compared to one.
The path the Palestinians have chosen - bombings, rockets, rioting - is a dead end. Dishonour and degradation mean nothing when you're gone. The Israeli are too strong, their international support is solid too, fighting them is pointless, it just creates more graves in the long term.
They should get right of their extremists and when they must resist, they should do so without violence, using the media in their favour.
http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...s-resist-occupation-by-planting-trees/254228/
Unfortunately, particularly in the past few weeks, they chose violence, even if the Israeli judicial system did its job and found the boy's murderers. The Israeli eventually replied with much deadlier violence (as they usually do.. ) and not much can be done about it. You can't fight fire with fire all the time, even if you are right.