The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by AdvanceAndVanquish
I believe I am answering you respectfully and with full consideration. That is certainly my intention. But there is just so much in what you write that screams of a total unfamiliarity with this region and its situation and history. You write that Every aspect of this is simply incorrect and/or poorly understood. 'East Jerusalem' in general is not holy for Muslims. The al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, contained within what Muslims call the Haram-al-Sharif, is considered the third holiest site in Islam. This is just a tiny part of 'East Jerusalem.' This location is also known as the Temple Mount, and was the location of the First and Second Jewish Temples long before the rise of Islam, and is the holiest site in Judaism. The Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif, the part of East Jerusalem which is holy to both Jews and Muslims, is currently governed by Muslim religious authorities. Furthermore, 'East Jerusalem' was not 'given to the Israeli community.' It was captured by Israel from Jordan in 1967, after it had been captured by Jordan in 1948.


If I wanted to go to my mosque in, let's say, London but i couldn't access that area at all, what would I do? I couldn't go in due to a lack of access. Third holiest place or not, a mosque is a holy place for muslims who have every right to enter. That is hard when it is in a country like Israel.
Original post by alexgr97
But then it got attacked and had to take the land to defend itself...unless you're suggesting you would have preferred Israel to keel over and let itself be destroyed?

Israel wasn't attacked in 1967. Yes, there was a crisis, but it could have been solved by diplomacy. At the very least Israel should have withdrawn from the West Bank and Gaza after it had conquered them.
Original post by The Clockwork Apple
I'm sure there was a conflict in 1948 for territory which was not started by Israel? Please correct me if I'm wrong!

Yes, there was - Israel was attacked and was therefore perfectly justified in defending itself and keeping the territory it conquered. That's why I said '1948 boundaries' as in boundaries after the 1948 war.
The driving problem is and always has been the colonisation of Palestine which was always the mission of Zionism. Policies of both sides can be criticised from both practical and moral standpoints, but these ultimately only shape the pattern of the conflict rather than drive it. The right of Palestinians to resist their colonisation and dispossession does not, of course, make every act that purports to be part of that resistance right.

Ending a colonial policy does not mean reversing it; trying to do so would be both implausible and wrong. However it requires at least some sort of equality of agreement, and ideally redress as well (the latter most likely requiring a one-state solution, while the former not necessarily).
(edited 8 years ago)
As long as they're both firing rockets at each other, I consider them both to be at blame.
Original post by Zaki Hendrix
If I wanted to go to my mosque in, let's say, London but i couldn't access that area at all, what would I do? I couldn't go in due to a lack of access. Third holiest place or not, a mosque is a holy place for muslims who have every right to enter. That is hard when it is in a country like Israel.


These sorts of statements are what keep giving me the impression that you don't understand the region or the issues. Muslims have free access to the Temple Mount (Haram al-Sharif) and the al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock which sit on it. They can wander in and out to their heart's content. It's Ramadan now and the Old City has been absolutely packed with Muslims on their way to and from prayers there. It's non-Muslims, especially Jews, who are restricted to visiting the area for just a few hours a week, are not allowed to enter the buildings at all, and are prohibited from doing anything that even looks like worship while they are there. Remember that this is the holiest place in the world for Jews, who had two Temples there before Islam existed, and Jews aren't even allowed to share it. This is in the centre of Jerusalem.
Original post by Zaki Hendrix
Ok so this is a conflict which has been going on for well over 6 decades. What I want to know is who is to blame? My opinion at the moment is Israel is pushing things too far. Building on Palestinian land and breaking international laws. Oh and let's not forget the number of casualties in Palestine in comparison to Israel. Big difference.

I'd like to know what your opinions are. Who agrees and who disagrees?


It's really not that simple. You cannot simply put blame upon one side or the other. The history is very long, very tangled, and very complicated. Clearly you have your own opinion, and clearly you have just provided a very biased, very simplistic answer to your very simplistic question.
But no doubt this will turn into another one of those threads where people on both sides bash the other, with a bit of anti-Semitism thrown in for good measure.
Original post by queen-bee
Israel are the oppressors. Just murdering and massacring the Arabs one by one and stealing their land


Good.
Original post by The Dictator
Good.


Good? You heartless pig. What have those innocent women and children ever done?
Original post by queen-bee
Good? You heartless pig. What have those innocent women and children ever done?


Idk, lived like savages?

Israel is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Palestinian barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.

I don't give a hoot about people who vote for terrorists. They have it good in Israel.
Original post by The Dictator
Idk, lived like savages?

Israel is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Palestinian barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.

I don't give a hoot about people who vote for terrorists. They have it good in Israel.


Israel has the blood of the innocent on its hands
Original post by queen-bee
Israel has the blood of the innocent on its hands


Savages and terrorists cannot be innocent.

Your Arab bias is playing up.

I back Israel all the way. If they decide to nuke all of Palestine, I would back them.
Israel are obviously to blame
Original post by The Dictator
Savages and terrorists cannot be innocent.

Your Arab bias is playing up.

I back Israel all the way. If they decide to nuke all of Palestine, I would back them.


lol If Iran decided to do the same to Israel nobody would care but america
Original post by anarchism101
The driving problem is and always has been the colonisation of Palestine which was always the mission of Zionism. Policies of both sides can be criticised from both practical and moral standpoints, but these ultimately only shape the pattern of the conflict rather than drive it. The right of Palestinians to resist their colonisation and dispossession does not, of course, make every act that purports to be part of that resistance right.

Ending a colonial policy does not mean reversing it; trying to do so would be both implausible and wrong. However it requires at least some sort of equality of agreement, and ideally redress as well (the latter most likely requiring a one-state solution, while the former not necessarily).


They deserve to be colonised and dispossessed.

It's not like they owned the land in the first place, I don't even see the "dispossession".
Original post by The Dictator
Idk, lived like savages?

Israel is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Palestinian barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.

I don't give a hoot about people who vote for terrorists. They have it good in Israel.


Right, so civilians are to blame? Young children? Women?

I understand if you say you want to kill the terrorist organisations but women and children? Innocent civilians? **** me, you should be on a 'watch-list' of some kind of potential to become a serial killer. You clearly have no empathy whatsoever. Also, you're a hypocrite. You care about the innocents in Israel dying and declare all Palestinians as 'barbaric' for the innocent deaths in Israel...by that logic, is Israel also 'barbaric' as innocent Palestinians are dying?

Oh, wait, no you have selective empathy. Based on your racist views. If the case of that little boy (Muhammed Al Durrah) doesn't evoke anything in you, you are truly a repulsive, nasty little creature.
Original post by ChampEon
No, you are a filthy Jew supremacist. Please leave the West immediately.

And don't bother crying pathetic crocodile tears about that being 'anti-semitic' because I'm in fact parodying the drivel you wrote by replacing the word Arab with Jew. Note that Arabs are Semites.



His name says it all.
'The Dictator' - more like 'Wannabe-the-next-Jewish-tyrant'.

What's funny about him is he hates the Palestinians for doing what Israel does to them. How does that work, exactly?
That's like me saying 'Don't you, ChampEon, dare come near my darling mother, though I have just killed yours, you TERRORIST!'

(This whole 'terrorist' thing is also just semantics. The Oxford-American-Israel World Dictionary tampers with its meaning as and when it sees fit - not fooling anybody).
Original post by sparkletoo
His name says it all.
'The Dictator' - more like 'Wannabe-the-next-Jewish-tyrant'.

What's funny about him is he hates the Palestinians for doing what Israel does to them. How does that work, exactly?
That's like me saying 'Don't you, ChampEon, dare come near my darling mother, though I have just killed yours, you TERRORIST!'

(This whole 'terrorist' thing is also just semantics. The Oxford-American-Israel World Dictionary tampers with its meaning as and when it sees fit - not fooling anybody).


Yeah, I get what you're saying! He's nothing more than a heartless hypocrite.

The only tiny issue I have with what you said is the "he hates the Palestinians for doing what Israel does to them" bit. All Palestinians are doing is trying to survive in their homeland where they are being persecuted as if they're subhuman. There's a blockade on all sides - even the sea - and they have no food, water, electricity or shelter (courtesy of Israeli bombs funded by hardworking US taxpayers). Despite all that, Palestinians haven't turned violent at all. What I'm trying to say is that Palestinians are not even 0.001% as murderous as Israelis.

Thought I should throw in, just in case you weren't aware that stuff like the use of Palestinians as human shields is simply a pile of crap (proof: http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/07/jeremy-bowens-gaza-notebook-i-saw-no-evidence-hamas-using-palestinians-human). The IDF shoots innocent Palestian children and then lies that the kids were throwing stones, whereas Palestinians don't do the same even when Israeli illegal settlers do far worse than stone throwing! It's all so wrong...
Original post by yo radical one
This thread is the equivalent of an Atheist saying:


'What do you think of religion; btw I think Muhammad was a paedophile, a warlord, a mass-murderer and a child molester'



I'm not saying that Atheists should make such a thread (it's clearly immature and insensitive), but a lot of Muslims on this website behave in a way which is very caustic towards other people's religion as well as people who simply question Islam and when people create things such as the ex-Muslim thread in response to this, they then go on to claim that this website is racist and Islamophobic despite their constant antagonism towards everyone else


So the truth is immature and insensitive?
Original post by The Dictator

Israel is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Palestinian barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.


Replacing the two terms makes for quite interesting reading:


England is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Gaelic barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.



Belgium is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Congolese barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.



Britain/USA/Spain/etc is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Native American barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.



Germany is a great and civilised country. Please tell me what the Polish barbarians have contributed to civilisation in comparison.


But genocide, mass killing and ethnic cleansing come under 'civilised', apparently, according to The Dictator.

Latest

Trending

Trending