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

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