[DanaC]

My point is that the State of Israel is conducting a punitive war against the Palestinians ( whose lands they now occupy). Since Palestine has no actual army or state apparatus for the waging of war they have to use other, less conventional means.

There was a time when violence by Indians against the British, or even American against the British were both characterised as Terrorism. Any non state sanctioned violence against a dominant power is characterised by the dominant power ( and its allies) as terrorism and by those who carry it out as resistance and the fight for freedom. Bombs in civlian areas have been used by many resistance groups in history, what differentiates the current class of terrorist is that they use their own bodies as the delivery mechanism.

What differentiates the terrorist from the soldier is not merely that the terrorist targets civlians and the soldier targets other soldiers. What differentiates the two is that one wages a sanctioned war and the other wages an illegal one. America targetted villages of civlians during the Vietnam war because they were "sympathetic" to and therefore helpful to the enemy. Israel does the same thing. Britain did the same thing in Iraq whne we occupied it.

Intent however is not everything. There are other factors to consider. In Iraq we waged a war which killed thousands of Iraqi civilians. The fact that we were not actively seeking them out does not change the fact that they are dead. Likewise the fact that Israelis claim not to be actively targetting civilians does not change the fact that civilians are dying. The fact that the Palestinian suicide bombers are deliberately targetting civilians does not make the families of their victims suffer more than the families of dead Palestinians. Nor does it change the fact that there is a huge disparity betweenn the number of families made to suffer thus amongst the Israelis and their counterparts amongst the Palestinians.

Regardless of the Palestinians methodology their case is still a strong one. Israel is illegally occupying thehir land and they as a people are doing anything to resist. When America was wounded on 9/11 she struck o ut with force at those she saw as culpable. She was fortunate. She is a great nation with all the resources a great nation tends to have......America did not need to target civlians to make her point. America has the military resources to allow her the luxury of targetting armies and soldiers. If the Palestinians targetted primarily military personnel, they would be unable to make the slightest dent to Israels strength. They essentially have two choices. They can either fight for their homeland or surrender to Israel with no further resistance. If they choose to fight they would be foolish to attack Israel where she is strong. Only an incompetant general wages war on his enemy's strongest front. Since the Palestinians have no equivalent force with which to wage war against a well equipped army, they would be foolish to attack military personnel as to do so would simply bring a swift and bloody end to the battle with no gain to those that fall. It would have been a pointless sacrifice. Instead they choose easy targets. A competant general chooses to attack his enemy at his weak point. Many many armies have in the past waged their wars by "harrowing" the enemy's civilian populace. It makes military ( if not moral) sense in some circumstances to do so. Such activity has in the past proved useful in subduing civilian populations and severing their links with resistance fighters.

What the Palestinians are doing is waging war against an occupying Nation in the only way which has been left to them.