| You are deliberately playing a semantic game with the word "disappear" because you know the truth is damning. The Irgun didn't "vanish." Its violent, expansionist and terrorist ideology succeeded. It then took over the "state", making the old brand name redundant. Why would Menachem Begin need a private terrorist gang when he could one day command the entire military to achieve his goals? And your argument about tactics is a pathetic diversion. The state adopted the Irgun's core ethos, a readiness to use extreme, disproportionate violence and terrorism for political ends. This is the "state" whose military ruthlessly attacked[0] its own "greatest Ally", an American naval intelligence ship, the USS Liberty including its crew, and later formalized its terrorist strategy of collective punishment into an explicit military policy, the Dahiya Doctrine[1]. The violence wasn't abandoned. It was industrialized. Instead of a terrorist bombing a hotel, Prime Minister Begin used the full force of the air force to carpet-bomb Lebanon and Gaza. The Irgun didn't disappear. It just took over the "state" and evolved its terrorism by trading its primitive zionist bombs for high-tech fighter jets. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine |
| You seem to somehow say I am misconstruing the word disappear, but everyone that was part of the Etzel/Lehi is either dead or dying. The organization itself does not exist for so many decades in no meaningful way, that I really feel I am repeating myself. Your arguments have been reduced to changing the Irgun to some metaphor or what you don't like about Israel actions. This doesn't change the fact that Israel had handled it terrorist problem in the transition to a state, while the Palestinians never succeeded in doing so, which had led them to be controlled by such an entity, culminating in that entity taking them on a national suicide in 2023 |
| |
| ▲ | kalberg6429 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are missing the point on purpose because the reality is indefensible. You talk about dead bodies because you can't talk about the ideology that outlived them. That's not a "metaphor", but a direct and documented political bloodline. The Irgun's violent, expansionist and terrorist ideology was channeled directly into the Herut party[0], which became the Likud party, which put the Irgun's commander, Menachem Begin, in the Prime Minister's office. The Dahiya Doctrine isn't a metaphor, but Irgun's philosophy of collective punishment aka terrorism written down as official state policy. And let's put down this already debunked lie you keep repeating. Israel did not "handle" its terrorist problem. It institutionalized it. It promoted it. It didn't have a version of Altalena to crush its extremists. It had an Altalena to consolidate power, and then it put the terrorist leader of the Altalena in charge of the entire "state". You didn't solve your terrorism problem. You made terrorism your state policy, which now manifested itself in the inevitable conclusion of Genocide. [0] The same Herut party btw about whom Einstein said: "a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties." - https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/2014-12-04/ty-article/.premiu... | | |
| ▲ | breppp 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | Menachem Begin went on to sign the peace accord with Egypt 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. | | |
| ▲ | yodafx 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | You call his analysis "shallow," but you are the one cherry-picking isolated facts from a deep and bloody history of Zionist terrorism. Let's look at the supposedly "complex" reality you're trying to whitewash. 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... | | |
| ▲ | breppp 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Reading your post and other posts, and similarly other posters here, it seems that getting to a shared truth, or even new understanding is hardly the goal. 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 | | |
| ▲ | yodafx 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | After having your cherry-picked "facts" dismantled, your last resort is to feign intellectual superiority and pretend to be above the conversation. It's not a "childish" story of good versus evil. It's an analysis of cause and effect, which you are desperately trying to whitewash. 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. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine |
|
|
|
|
|
