Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thoughtomator
The aggressor is the one whose aims of conquest force the conflict.

I don't accept your idea of an aggressor because that would make european colonialism aggressors and would make the US the aggressor against the indians.

But while we are at it, I see that Israel took the west bank by force and intends to keep it. Further, Israel has always wanted the west bank and Jerusalem. Even by your definition, that makes them the aggressors in the 6 day war.

16 posted on 08/27/2006 12:10:57 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: staytrue

Israel took the West Bank along with the Golan because the strategic depth provided was necessary to insure its survival as a nation. This is defensive, not aggressive, in nature. Without the Arab seige Israel would not have taken those territories.

The European colonial experience was aggressive as well. The US expansion is a mix of both defensive and aggressive.


17 posted on 08/27/2006 12:21:53 AM PDT by thoughtomator (There is no "Islamofascism" - there is only Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson