So you are considering an unarmed and unrecognized terrorist organization the same as the British Army? That’s laughable. Again, because you agree with the cause, you’re willing to justify those attacks.
“So you are considering an unarmed and unrecognized terrorist organization the same as the British Army? That’s laughable.”
No, I consider the Irgun better than the British Armed Forces.
Look to India, the big massacre at Amritzar. Unarmed Hindus holding a rally shot down in a public square.
Look to the sinking of the Struma. 800 refugees towed out to sea in a leaky boat and torpedoed. Only one survivor. Look to the streets of Mandatory Palestine. Boys caught putting up Irgun posters sometimes summarily shot in the head and killed. Or beaten in prison and left without medical care until his wounds became infected and dying of sepsis. These are actual occurrences.
It is laughable to compare the forces deployed in the service of the British Empire at that time to the Irgun, which took great pains to observe the rules of law despite the depraved behavior of its adversary.
Why do you legitimize the one? Just because they represented an actual government? The more’s the disgrace. It’s one thing to blockade a coast and keep refugees from disembarking. It’s another to use “lend-lease” ships meant to fight the huns to do this thankless task.
What earned the Irgun this appelation “terrorist”? They took precautions to spare civilians, as previously mentioned. They had a chain of command and discipline. But they did not wear uniforms and hid among the general population. So technically, according to the Geneva Convention, they were “terrorists”. But even then, when Yaakov Meridor was captured in hiding, he surrendered without a fight so as to avoid the danger of harm to his wife and children.
What the Irgun was was a rebel force against the British. You live in the United States, a country founded by rebellion against the British. And you live in the South, a region that once fought a bloody war to secede from that country and form its own. No stigma against fighting rebellions, per se. It’s how you behave when waging war that is the question. And the Irgun, under the extreme circumstances that they had to operate, behaved a whole lot better than the American and the Southern rebels did, and infinitely better than these Pali rebels, calling the motorist who ran down and killed a newborn infant a “hero”.