Perhaps you could tell me what caused you to think this? I am trying to improve my communication. I was intending to compare the actions of Hitler with the actions of Gadafi. NEVER the people themselves.
It's a general truism on internet discussions that anyone invoking Hitler has already lost the debate. There was a guy who formulated it as a principle (albeit tongue in cheek). I can't remember his name but google will find it for you quick enough if you can be bothered to look. I can't.

And comparing the actions of G & H is no more legitimate than comparing the individuals. They're utterly different in both scale and nature.


I have to say Marman, at this point I really do think you're the one willfully missunderstanding the points that are made against you. Zazas argument is quite clear. He's not making a judgement about the Palestinian/Israeli situation, he's merely highlighting the fact that there is a judgement to be made.

You may take the view that Palestinian terrorists are unjustified in killing Israelis and are, in fact, murderous sadists but there are a large number of people who take the view that the Israelis are engaged in an illegal occupation that has so impoverished the indiginous Palestinian that they starve to death and are denied basic healthcare. By your own terms that would justify the palestinian freedom fighters in their act of killing Israelis.

Whether you or I, as individuals, agree or disagree with either of these points of view is irrelevent. What's relevent is that there is more than one point of view and significant sections of the human race adhere to each of them. So who decides, in this scenario, who is right or wrong. Who deserves to live and who deserves to die? Who arbitrates which of these deaths are somehow justified and which represent a murder? You've implied that there is some sort of world wide consensus that dictates the answer but there simply isn't.

In fact from reading your posts it's increasingly apparent that you see yourself as the arbitrator. You believe you see the world for what it is and the rest of the world will agree with you as long as it's right minded. Anyone who disagrees must be ill informed and can therefore have their opinion dismissed. I'm afraid that that kind of narcisim would, again, cast you in the role of the tyrant.

This is akward for me because, at least as far as Gadaffi is concerned, I believe your opinion is correct. The difference is that I don't believe it's the only one worthy of consideration.