> I'm neutral to the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Each side is doing what they believe is just.
Doesn't seem to me a very sound stance, as you can do very evil or wrong things while doing what you believe is just.
I agree with the "asymmetric warfare" definition (which by the way implies conventional warfare from one of the two sides); however you should not forget that is one of the two parties that is illegally occupying, controlling and expropriating a good portion of the other's territory.
If you see two people fighting in the street,the fact that one has illegally appropriated (i.e. stolen) something from the other might give you a better idea of what's going on.
Palestinians fight for their freedom and very right to exist. Israel fights to keep control over territories that have been stolen to somebody else. Nobody would object if they were fighting in self-defense, but they're not (though of course that is what they want you to believe, otherwise how could you support them or even declare yourself neutral?).
> All I've done is just depict the situation as it is.
No, you didn't. You described the Israeli position as they made you believe it is, not as it really is.
Doesn't seem to me a very sound stance, as you can do very evil or wrong things while doing what you believe is just.
I agree with the "asymmetric warfare" definition (which by the way implies conventional warfare from one of the two sides); however you should not forget that is one of the two parties that is illegally occupying, controlling and expropriating a good portion of the other's territory.
If you see two people fighting in the street,the fact that one has illegally appropriated (i.e. stolen) something from the other might give you a better idea of what's going on.