Do you believe that zionist paramilitaries were justified in using terrorist tactics in support of their cause?
More generally, what tools are "valid" for non-state actors in pursuit of becoming a state?
(these are genuine questions im curious to hear your answers to, not a gotcha attempt)
Here's how Haviv Rettig Gur answers this question:
You want to know if Zionist paramilitaries were justified using terrorism against the British.
The implication is clear: if they were justified, then is Hamas justified now?
But discussion of "justification" misses what actually matters and is a strategic reframing of the comparison you're suggesting.
Here's what we should compare:
1. Could the British leave?
Yes. They had England. They were occupiers by choice.
No. They literally have No Other Land. (Yes, that's where the line comes from - it was appropriated by the makers of the propaganda film)
This isn't "colonial power vs natives." It's two peoples, both with national claims, with nowhere else to go.
2. What did Zionist groups want?
To expel the British and create a state.
To eliminate Israel. Not "end occupation," but to eliminate the state. Read the Hamas charter.
These are very different goals.
People keep reaching for "justification" because it's simple and clean. It gives you a good guy and a bad guy. You pick your side, you're done. You get to feel moral clarity. That's what the Free Palestine movement is about: emotional resonance.
The actual situation offers no clarity. You can argue about who's more wrong or who started it, but justification framing skips past the harder question: what do you actually do when neither of these two peoples is going anywhere?
Justification turns a political problem into a morality play. It lets you have an opinion without needing a solution.
"Justification" is what Hamas supporters rely on to rationalize, then excuse any Hamas atrocity.
"Justification" is a fundamentally broken way to evaluate terrorism.
Targeting civilians is always wrong, and never, ever justifiable.
The identity of the attacked doesn't matter. The identity of the attacker doesn't matter. The goals being pursued by the attack don't matter.
No attacks targeting civilians are ever justified.
