Originally Posted by Sohel
Had the Palestinian movement been a completely non-violent one like the American Civil Rights Movement, the hawks would have no excuse to advocate, maintain and enhance Israeli aggression.
I don't think that's a practical assumption, we know American foreign policy is completely un democratic and only driven by self interest in the rest of the world. And when it comes to Israel, I don't need to repeat US position there since post WW-II- So assuming that a civil right movement kind of movement in Palestine would bring them better result, is very naive to say the least. A non violent Palestine would by now be completely non existent and engulfed by Israel. It's due to resistance that Palestine has a little bit of land and Jerusalem still left on their side.
If someone says today, that a non-violent liberation movement in East Pakistan would have saved 3 million lives and could have benefitted Bangladesh in terms of wealth sharing etc and we could have avoided losing millions of lives in post war Bangladesh. I don't think it would be accepted by anyone who witnessed that political situation in pre war period.
We can preach peace and look great, but can only realize the truth when we are on the wrong side of a conflict. Like we understand our war in 71, they do theirs too. Nobody gets into a war by choice. And their loss and threat was much bigger than we had in 71. Sohel Bhai, that's a very unrealistic thing to say, I'm sure you understand that, as your other posts in this thread suggest.