The Student Room Group

I'm an Israeli soldier. AMA

Scroll to see replies

Original post by malebo55
Your analogy is flawed, but sufficient to show the lengths you have to go to justify Israel's creation.


Your narrative is flawed proven by your ignoring all the other points I gave.

Good day. :h:
Hey I'm from Israel too :h: cool to see other israelis here! :smile:

Don't know if I'll be going back for the army though, they still conscript me even though i've been living in the UK since I was 4 :s-smilie:
Original post by L'absurde
Your narrative is flawed proven by your ignoring all the other points I gave.

I don't have to engage with every single one of your arguments just to illustrate the flaws in one of them.
Original post by malebo55
I don't have to engage with every single one of your arguments just to illustrate the flaws in one of them.


Oh yeah. You did prove it was flawed...

Original post by malebo55
Your analogy is flawed


Anyways, I'm going to end this here because I'd like not to be accused of derailing.
Original post by L'absurde
Oh yeah. You did prove it was flawed...
Extending your argument to its logical conclusion = illustrating its flaw(s).
Original post by Hydeman
You know Hitchens? Interesting. :curious:
Can you link where he said this?


No I can't lol. But I can tell you the context. He was just ranting on about how religion ruins people and stuff and used Gaza as an example.

I think it was in a debate with John Lennox.
Original post by champ_mc99
No I can't lol. But I can tell you the context. He was just ranting on about how religion ruins people and stuff and used Gaza as an example.


A very objective analysis. :rolleyes: :lol:

I think it was in a debate with John Lennox.


Thanks. It's been a while since I watched that. :holmes:
Original post by DanB1991
Can't you see why Palestinians and by extension Hamas are pissed off at Israel though?

You did kinda steal their land 60 years ago and continue to this day to steal their land via illegal settlements?


I accept that the Palestinians have legitimate grievances against Israel. It is their actions, however, that have pushed Israeli public opinion into being very reluctant to concede more land to them. For example, the Gaza strip has been used to fire rockets indiscriminately into Israel after Israel allowed it to become independent. The creation of a Palestinian state with their current attitudes towards Israel would only enhance their abilities to attack.
Besides, Israel have on multiple occasions offered the Palestinian Authority their own state that would include over 90% of the West Bank, all of Gaza and the removal of over 60 Israeli settlements. Sure, this isn't everything the Palestinians want but it would have been a massive improvement on what they have now and would have stopped further settlements.

Original post by MrsSheldonCooper
On a scale of 1-10 how much do you miss me?


Can I say 9/11? :giggle:
mods i wanted to keep this anonymous so an angry liberal/muslim hate mob didn't kill me? wtf
Original post by TelAviv
mods i wanted to keep this anonymous so an angry liberal/muslim hate mob didn't kill me? wtf

now u can put ur krav maga to good use


where do they put their insignia ?

:holmes:*
Original post by Anonymous
I accept that the Palestinians have legitimate grievances against Israel. It is their actions, however, that have pushed Israeli public opinion into being very reluctant to concede more land to them.
this inverted framework assumes it is israel 'conceding' land to palestine, when in reality it is not a concession at all as israel have shown they are unwilling to return the 1967 borders which the international consensus agrees must constitute any viable future palestinian state

tldr: palestinian concessions are framed as 'concessions' by israel.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by malebo55
this inverted framework assumes it is israel 'conceding' land to palestine, when in reality it is not a concession at all as israel have shown they are unwilling to return the 1967 borders which the international consensus agrees must constitute any viable future palestinian state

tldr: palestinian concessions are framed as 'concessions' by israel.


Except that the countries that who hold influence in the region don't agree that the 1967 borders must be the boundaries of a future Palestinian state because they know such an agreement will never ever happen. Even the Palestinian Authority themselves, in previous summits with Israel, have accepted that they won't get 1967 borders.
Anyway, the West Bank today is part of Israel. So technically the formation of any new state in the West Bank would be Israel conceding territory to the creation of such state!


Spoiler

Original post by Anonymous
Except that the countries that who hold influence in the region don't agree that the 1967 borders must be the boundaries of a future Palestinian state because they know such an agreement will never ever happen. Even the Palestinian Authority themselves, in previous summits with Israel, have accepted that they won't get 1967 borders.
Saudi have sold out and don't care about the Palestinians anymore, Iran don't care about the Palestinians except to use them against Israel, and I'd be very surprised if Turkey don't support the 1967 borders.

Regardless, I don't think it is feasible to keep strictly to the 1967 borders anymore (due to the illegal settlements etc), so the 1967 borders would just be the basis of a future resolution, with land swaps to add flexibility to reflect the new reality on the ground.


Anyway, the West Bank today is part of Israel. So technically the formation of any new state in the West Bank would be Israel conceding territory to the creation of such state!

Just because Israel militarily occupies the West Bank doesn't mean it is legally part of Israel - not even the U.S. is willing to have an embassy in Jerusalem.

It is like me stealing £20 from you, saying it's mine now, then 'conceding' £10 back to you and expecting you to be grateful.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Anonymous
I accept that the Palestinians have legitimate grievances against Israel. It is their actions, however, that have pushed Israeli public opinion into being very reluctant to concede more land to them. For example, the Gaza strip has been used to fire rockets indiscriminately into Israel after Israel allowed it to become independent. The creation of a Palestinian state with their current attitudes towards Israel would only enhance their abilities to attack.
Besides, Israel have on multiple occasions offered the Palestinian Authority their own state that would include over 90% of the West Bank, all of Gaza and the removal of over 60 Israeli settlements. Sure, this isn't everything the Palestinians want but it would have been a massive improvement on what they have now and would have stopped further settlements.


The main issue there is both Israel and Palestinians harbour militant actions against the other. People always state how Palestine launches rockets out of the Gaza Strip, while ignore the fact Israel also launches airstrikes out of their own land, often being on the offensive themselves.

Just because one side has a higher technology level and is often seen as a western country in social terms, doesn't mean it's automatically the victim. The very fact you see indiscriminate bombing of civillians in an attempt to hit real targets and Israeli soldiers shooting women and children in the Gaza Strip kind of makes me loose sympathy for them. The fact Palestine is firing crude rockets back in this case is like comparing someone throwing rocks while the other fires machine guns.

The Palestine civilian death toll grossly outweighs the Israeli's.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by DanB1991
The Palestine civilian death toll grossly outweighs the Israeli's.

Not enough Jews died? :cool:
Original post by admonit
Not enough Jews died?

i think the point is that when (as in the last conflict in 2014) 6 civilians are killed on the Israeli side, and over 1500 civilians are killed on the Palestinian side, that puts into question whether Israel are really acting in 'self-defence' and fulfilling its legal requirements of necessity and proportionality

but then, you knew that didnt you - thus you played your (favourite) anti semitism card to deflect. sadly youre not fooling anyone. :redface:
Original post by L'absurde
Who care about what Hamas thinks, they're a terrorist group that use children as shields and combatants.

Why is it the Arab's land? Jews have been living in the region before Islam was even a religion. Might wanna read up on the history of the region. (:

Can't you see why they would want their own (official) country after centuries of persecution?

Also, Palestinians live in a backwards culture that persecuted homosexuals and has things such as honour killings (whether or not it's justified by Islam, I'm not sure). Giving them a state in their current mindset would only legitimise the nation of Islamic theocracy.

Spoiler



Because it wasn't Jewish land for about 2,000 years.... even then old testament claims of a historical ancient kingdom of the Jews is extremely questionable.

The archaeological and non Jewish records fail to show any reference to the entire kingdoms between certain dates and even entire cities claimed in the old testament. Such a large and important kingdom would of been recorded by many civilisations in the area, but it's simply lacking. The idea of a Kingdom of Israel under David or Solomon is further in question that if the kingdom was so powerful, why was the massive city of Gath so close and four times the size of Jerusalem. By extent the archaeological record shows that the kingdom of Judah was no more than an extremely small tribe in reality and extremely unlikely to of been a real kingdom of any real note. The most likely explanation was editing of the Old Testament by later generations (albeit still in ancient or classical times) to help legitimise uprisings by creating an ancient and powerful Jewish homeland that historically was never anywhere near as large nor as powerful as the bible suggested. Even under Babylonian and Persian rule the Jewish population was extremely small and lower than many surrounding peoples, which continued to be the case until the creation of the modern jewish state.

The fact is why should an group of people, have the right to persecute, discriminate and steal land from people who have lived in that land themselves for thousands of years, based on a biblical fairy tail? The fact that the Jews were oppressed themselves by others, gives them no rights to oppress other nor steal their land to make their own country.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by malebo55
Saudi have sold out and don't care about the Palestinians anymore, Iran don't care about the Palestinians except to use them against Israel, and I'd be very surprised if Turkey don't support the 1967 borders.

Regardless, I don't think it is feasible to keep strictly to the 1967 borders anymore (due to the illegal settlements etc), so the 1967 borders would just be the basis of a future resolution, with land swaps to add flexibility to reflect the new reality on the ground.


Just because Israel militarily occupies the West Bank doesn't mean it is legally part of Israel - not even the U.S. is willing to have an embassy in Jerusalem.

It is like me stealing £20 from you, saying it's mine now, then 'conceding' £10 back to you and expecting you to be grateful.


Are you familiar with the 2000 Camp David Summit? That largely went along with what you've written in your 2nd paragraph. The 1967 border formed the basic outline of the proposed Palestinian state with land from Israel being given in exchange for retaining the largest settlements past the Green Line.

And yet Israel has de facto control over what happens in the West Bank - so an independent Palestine (which I support) would be made up of land that Israel has given.
Original post by L'absurde
You've basically ignored all my other points, as expected. You assume that Jews just popped up yesterday, as if they haven't been living in the region for over 3000 years.


Ignoring the fact most of their biblically claimed area's they never lived in and the native Palestinians have also lived in the area for the last 3,000 or so area's, many being the descendants themselves of converted jews and other Levant natives.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you