The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Israel VS Gaza?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Oblivion99
Despite there being "a wave" of transquility (lets say) between the two oppositions, what's our opinions towards whose in the right and whose in the wrong - following the 2014 war which resulted in many casualties, in particular, in Gaza with over 10 soldiers killed in Israel. Thus, Israel was accused of violating many human rights from the UN? Was this the case? Was it self defence?


I fully support Israel here. While i do think they've probably pushed their luck since 67 the fact is that i'd rather have a Jewish democracy than yet another failed Muslim state and i consider Hamas to be terrorists.

Iarael was wrong to withdraw in 05 (something people forget) and while i have some sympathy for the West Bank (Fatah seem to be reasonably sane) i don't to be honest much care. Give Israel Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan Heights and lets be done with it, the Palestinian men can be deported and the women can stay (they can breed with the Jews or not all, either way the problem solves itself in a century).
Posted from TSR Mobile


I know what you're saying, and I understand your point. However, as an Arab, i dont feel obliged to stand with Gaza. Reasons: the arab world has already marginalised Gaza itself, with Egypt failing to open borders and wealthy economies such as Qatar, the gulf and Saudi Arabia failing to deposit financial aid. Israel cant be reversed back to the 1950's where it was seen as Palestine because it has undergone such an evolution thanks to fortified aid from Britian and the USA. I do sympathise with Gaza, alot, because they are innocent people who have gone through three brutal wars, mothera losing kids, fathers losing children.
Original post by mkap
you again?! i dont follow everything of saudi so chill the hell out. i simply follow the Islamic concept that there is no bidah done here. please stop quoting me your really doing my head in!


Just ignore him.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Callous Twits
So what was the point in invoking Crimea as an example of the inconsistency of how international law is applied (unfavourably to Israel, in your contention)?


It's fairly absurd to even raise international law as an argument if it's applied with absolutely no consistency by our own politicians to either appease public fad or push a geopolitical agenda.
Original post by Free Kurdistan
It's fairly absurd to even raise international law as an argument

Peddling the Israeli line well I see...


Every State thinks they are treated unfairly under international law. That doesn't mean that international law doesn't continue to regulate inter-State relations.
Original post by Callous Twits
Peddling the Israeli line well I see...


Every State thinks they are treated unfairly under international law. That doesn't mean that international law doesn't continue to regulate inter-State relations.




Russia breaks international law in Crimea, apply sanctions


UK's selling of arms to Saudi Arabia may well be illegal under international law, do it anyway


It is a total absurdity to create laws which are regularly flouted and nobody cares only to apply them when one of your enemies contravenes these laws.
Free Kurdistan

It is a total absurdity to create laws which are regularly flouted and nobody cares only to apply them when one of your enemies contravenes these laws.
These laws are not just created unilaterally or randomly; they are usually created with an international consensus and reflect State practice etc.


Just because certain rules do not always manifest themselves in consistent/identical ways does not mean that they stop providing a useful means for us to examine the legality of a State's actions/claims.


Do not underestimate international law, countless disputes have been settled by the ICJ. It is only when a State like Israel starts to think that it is above such jurisdiction, and it has Western - more particularly US - backing for that, that the international regime cannot be applied effectively. But that doesn't mean that their actions are not contrary to international law, and the pressure will build - not even the US will maintain their patience with Israel forever.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
Uch, it's not a football match.

Why not? It may look like this..

Spoiler

Original post by admonit
Why not? It may look like this..
Yes, it is all an anti-Jewish conspiracy.


Move along now.
Original post by admonit
Why not? It may look like this..

Spoiler



All you've demonstrated is that Israel suffers from a persecution complex and Zionists have to resort to ridiculous tangential football analogies to valiantly justify the wide scale destruction, deaths and suffering of the Palestinian people.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
All you've demonstrated is that Israel suffers from a persecution complex and Zionists have to resort to ridiculous tangential football analogies to valiantly justify the wide scale destruction, deaths and suffering of the Palestinian people.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTtFaFITODY

Watching that just exploits how vulnerable the Palestinians are, all I see is innocent families fleeing^
Original post by Oblivion99
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTtFaFITODY

Watching that just exploits how vulnerable the Palestinians are, all I see is innocent families fleeing^


Like you give a ****. Wasn't it just two days ago you were telling another user you hoped Israel bombed her country?
So sadImageUploadedByTapatalk1456068982.671172.jpg
Original post by teenhorrorstory
So sadImageUploadedByTapatalk1456068982.671172.jpg


Almost certainly completely fabricated

Do you have any evidence that this is a true story?
Original post by Mathemagicien
Almost certainly completely fabricated

Do you have any evidence that this is a true story?


Why do you assume it's false?

I believe his account. The expulsion of Palestinians from their homes is not some sort of myth
http://imeu.org/article/quick-facts-the-palestinian-nakba
Original post by Mathemagicien
Almost certainly completely fabricated

Do you have any evidence that this is a true story?


Why do you assume it's a lie? This was only one post of several put up by the same guy, which provides considerable detail about his family history, of which this is only one part. It is not inconsistent with the known history of the Nakba. It's a witness account that might or might not be true (or possibly it's true but exaggerated), but there's no basis for simply assuming it to be false.
Original post by teenhorrorstory
Why do you assume it's false?

I believe his account. The expulsion of Palestinians from their homes is not some sort of myth
http://imeu.org/article/quick-facts-the-palestinian-nakba


Original post by anarchism101
Why do you assume it's a lie? This was only one post of several put up by the same guy, which provides considerable detail about his family history, of which this is only one part. It is not inconsistent with the known history of the Nakba. It's a witness account that might or might not be true (or possibly it's true but exaggerated), but there's no basis for simply assuming it to be false.


Because I don't believe claims without evidence.

If you make a claim, its on you to provide the evidence, not me to disprove it

Its all too easy to make up emotional stories to manipulate people, and the anti-Israelis are very good at this, bypassing facts in favour of manipulating emotions.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Camoron
The borders after 1950 are all wrong, Palestine still has those borders. It's internationally recognised so what are you on about?


Palestinians don't yet have statehood in the fully recognised sense. Palestine claimed a state in 1988 claiming the area of the West Bank and Gaza with East jerusalem as capitol - 22% of historic Palestine in total. If you knew anything at all you'd know that these areas claimed have been under Israeli occupation since 1967, following the 6 day war - this alone refutes your claim that Palestine should still have borders from 'the 1950s' as 1967 qualitiavely changed land holding.

The Oslo Accords, as the start of Peace talks, what i was 'on about', was an agreement that Palestinians could have limited autonomy over certain areas of land and gov functions the occupied territories they claimed (the borders you refer to) until full statehood implemented was eventually granted based on the establishment of agreement over outstanding issues (called: 'final status issues' ) INCLUDING EXACT BORDERS. As Israel retains control over 66% of the West Bank, and control of everything in the other 44% other than Security and admin, Palestinians don't have a state, what they control as indicated by the green on the map, represents in a sense their 'borders'.

Don't quote 'international law' without providing any validation for this claim, lol weak. Oslo is international law. The map is 'internationally recognised' in that its true. Im not engaging with a response unless you step it up to at least engage with facts instead of cocky self righteousness vested in a baseless opinion of objective facts. Google is your friend so maybe check 'what Im on about' yourself next time.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Mathemagicien
Because I don't believe claims without evidence.

If you make a claim, its on you to provide the evidence, not me to disprove it

Its all too easy to make up emotional stories to manipulate people, and the anti-Israelis are very good at this, bypassing facts in favour of manipulating emotions.


What an idiot.
The life stories of individuals such as Elie Wiesell and many famous Jewish family histories concerning personal involvement in the holocaust are taken as fact on face value. The nakba is a historical event, like the historical holocaust

- The holocaust has the general facts of concentration and death camps
- The Nakba has the general facts of mass expulsion
- Therefore through the principle of contextual verification (the only historical verification possible and used far and wide), testimonies can be generally validated based on their consistency with the general picture of events gained from corroboration by peoples testimonies. Through this we can know the nature of 'the holocaust experience' and determine it probably true.

The Nakba, therefore demands the same credulity given to all individual accounts, as being consistent with the general framework of events. If not then you must revoke it also from emotive Jewish biographies.

Most of all, the distant possibility of a possibly false individual account of the Nakba is irrelevant. The Nakba still happened, there is no need to forward the possibility of falsehood in one instance as in any way significant. What is being proposed is broadly consistent with Nakba accounts generally. If this one is false, its only success of emotional manipulation would be through using the truth. You're playing on distant feats of credibility in an individual case as a tactic of manipulation so the discussion is derailed from a broader concern for the Nakba itself, which indicted Israel.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Mathemagicien
Because I don't believe claims without evidence.

If you make a claim, its on you to provide the evidence, not me to disprove it

Its all too easy to make up emotional stories to manipulate people, and the anti-Israelis are very good at this, bypassing facts in favour of manipulating emotions.


No-one asked you to disprove it. They asked why you assumed it was false. What is it about the story that screams made up and fake? You find it unbelievable that a Palestinian family were kicked out of their home? The truth is that thousands upon thousands of Palestinians faced a similar fate. If you don't want to accept it,then that's your problem. Anti-Israelis are good at 'bypassing facts'?? Lol-and it'd seem that pro-Israelis are good at being blind to pretty much everything.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you