You didn't reply to Raoul's eye-witness observations here.

If one is treated like a criminal because of one's ethnic group, or any other arbitrary factor, rather than because of any evidence of wrong-doing, degradation of law enforcement's moral authority is inevitable. Bulldozers and roadblocks are not precision instruments.

One can refuse to defend terrorism, but the terror wrought by both sides must be measured by the same yardstick regarding its effects on its victims, especially those who just happen to live in the wrong place. The continual threat of violence, randomly punctuated by real violence, has the same effect on the psychology of the people living through it no matter what the justifications used by the perpetrators. If the terror of the one side is "good", or "justified", terrorism, where does that leave the people on the receiving end? To whom do they appeal for redress of the wrongs done to them if they are "wrong" or "evil" by the very definition of their opponents as "good"? Where is their hope? And where does despair lead?

You are right about my reluctance to use force. I have not been bombed or shot at, but I have had force used on me when I had nothing with which to defend myself, and I understand its residual effects. The requirement to be grateful for the beatings ("oh thank you for coming uninvited and flattening my house to rid us of the tyrant") complicates the ability to recover, and to forgive, no less so with nations than with individuals. For nations, along with their corporate and political natures, are large groups of individuals.

Regards--
Mary Anne