Hamas have actually stated that the goal of the rockets is primarily to show resistance and to spread fear throughout Israelis the way Israel does in Occupied Territories. Simply stating that you are going to blow up suicide bombs is in no way a more effective method of spreading fear than firing rockets that so often they impact the everyday lives of citizens.
The killing is a bonus and a secondary objective, according to Hamas.
Sorry, I apologise. I read recently there had been no deaths in 3 years. According to Wiki that figure is wrong, there had been 8.
And I didn't say there aren't for killing. I stated that killing was not their primary desired effect. Spreading fear and terror was.
The definition was given with regards to German occupation. It was stated that because Germany still controlled the land, sea and air and the movement of the people of the country, they still technically occupied them.
This doesn't matter anyway. The Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank are one people, therefore if one is occupied, they are all, by definition, an occupied people. It's like Norway invading northern Scotland then someone trying to claim that only half of the Scottish would be occupied. Scotland as a whole would still be referred to as being an occupied country and an occupied people.
There are many reasons for Gaza to still be defined as occupied.
This is yet another example of you not being able to interpret the written word. I have NEVER said that. What I have said - and please do try to keep up - is this:
With regards to Israel targeting homes of Hamas leaders and such, I stated that by applying the same logic and reasons given to defend such actions (that it is alright for Israel to target these building, killing civilians, so they can kill a Hamas leader) to Hamas, then it is alright for Hamas to blow up a bomb in a cafe to kill a military officer.
I used the analogy merely as a tool to show how weak the argument from Israel is. I reversed the situations to show just how immoral it is to use this method of killing, and the excuses given. Feel free to do a forum search and you will see clearly that all I was doing was applying the same faulty logic to show the flaws in that reasoning.
Again, I have never said it is alright to blow up bombs in cafes, no matter the reason given.
An entity? What are you talking about? I was referring, obviously, to the Israeli government.
In your opinion they would be, but by definition, they are not.
But you see, using the definition of terrorism means that they cannot be defined as such. If they could be, every British, Israeli and American government that has ever existed, would be defined as terrorists.
No one recognises it as the legitimate government of Palestine? They won a free and fair election for all the World to witness. They are recognised as the legitimate government of the Palestinians, almost worldwide (the U.S., "the EU" and Israel do not recognise them).
Edited by ExpandMyMind, 21 November 2012 - 05:24 PM.