Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Et Tu, Brute?)
    I am well aware they are scum. But all I am saying is more can be done to reduce innocent casualties. The IDF respect for human life isn't much better than that of Hamas in my opinion.
    in terms of the current conflict , the primary thing that can be dome to stop casualties is to stop hamas firing rockets - surely 1.5 million palestinans can try do something about this ( they arnt even making an effort of course, becuase they are brainwashed by islamst propaganda) i agree israel are hardly humanitarians, but that hardly surprising- they are dealing with islamists with the morals less than rats, it is inevitable they would become hardened in their outlook. imagine the response of the USA if say cuba started lauching rockets at its cities
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zen Baphomet)
    Hitler believed(from his private writings, discussions, documents and manifestos) in the unity and supremacy of the Nordic race as a whole, with a special place for the German Aryan as the Ideal candiate.

    Contrary to popular belief, he didn't view non Aryan Caucasians as inherently inferior or that they need to be exterminated.
    He also had a overwhelming respect for the Asians(specifically the Japanese) in which he openly stated that there culture and history was far superior to the Germans, and he had open admiration for there Nationalist strength and determination.

    The concept(you stated) that all Non-Germans would have been purged is absolute nonsense, and not an idea supported by his actions during the War or his writings and conversations prior and during it either.
    Hitler was a psychopath. His 'writings' were ridden with contradictions. I believe this idea was supported, because otherwise he wouldn't have thrown every non german he could get his hands on in a furnace. Not to mention disabled or homosexual germans.

    If you have deluded yourself to believe that he was in any way a rational thinker who had clear ideas, that's your issue. He was an erratic psychopath who, if given the chance, would have if not purged the entire non aryan population, then at least enslaved it in labor camps.

    Then again, I believe you were the guy who said you would have liked to finish what Hitler started, so one can't expect for you to have less than a deluded vision of him.
    • Offline

      0
      (Original post by miavdbt)
      Hitler was a psychopath. His 'writings' were ridden with contradictions. I believe this idea was supported, because otherwise he wouldn't have thrown every non german he could get his hands on in a furnace. Not to mention disabled or homosexual germans.
      He had no desire to mindlessly eradicate non-germans, in theory or in practice.

      Your statements are baseless.

      If you have deluded yourself to believe that he was in any way a rational thinker who had clear ideas, that's your issue. He was an erratic psychopath who, if given the chance, would have if not purged the entire non aryan population, then at least enslaved it in labor camps.
      Actually he doesn't fit the main criteria for Psychopathy at all, trust me it's an area of human psychology I know an awful lot about.

      Then again, I believe you were the guy who said you would have liked to finish what Hitler started, so one can't expect for you to have less than a deluded vision of him.
      Tut tut.

      Focus on the argument, not the opponent.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by young_guns)
      Oh right, that's in your "expert" military opinion, is it? Everyone becomes an armchair military expert on what is disproportionate in wartime since the start of this conflict. Given Hamas sites their assets and operatives in civilian areas, what would be the "correct" percentage of civilian casualties?
      I never claimed to have an 'expert' opinion. And since when do you need to be an expert to think that when your killing 80% civilians that your maybe not having all the success in the world? I think it's just a basic human instinct to feel somewhat saddened by hundreds of children being killed.

      Your right that Hamas do store munitions in civilian areas and they most certainly shouldn't do that. Of course that is going to be a factor in a higher number of civilian casualties. But you can't blame Hamas for Israel hitting civilian targets. This is the thing that annoys me with this conflict. A lot of Pro-Israel people seem to pile the blame on Hamas (for the record, they are also to blame for this ongoing conflict before someone accuses me of being an 'islamonazi terrorist'), whilst forgetting the Israeli's are the ones firing the rockets.



      (Original post by Sic semper erat)
      I never said that the 2014 Gaza war is a retaliation for what happened in Jordan in 1970, lol. I did mention those periods however as all that was happening before Hamas even existed. This goes back as far as 1920 when the Palestinian Arabs started massacring the Palestinian Jews. These Arabs have been anything but peaceful.

      Palestinian civilians are no more victims than Israeli civilians are. This phenomenon of not many Israeli dying is relatively new, only back in 2002 more than 1,500 Israelis were killed entirely through suicide bombings. Anyway, that aside, I think if we're speaking of 'solutions' it should be obvious through history that solutions are either military or they are diplomatic. How exactly does feeling sorry for civilians (I most certainly do not feel sorry for them, they are hateful savages who would murder any Jew given the chance) help bring a solution? Are you sure this is the logical side of you rather than the emotional one?
      Your right Israeli civilians are victims as well, of course they are. I was talking about this current conflict in the past few weeks when I said Palestinians were the main victims, I don't think you can make the argument other wise. Of course Israeli's have been killed during this most recent conflict but generally the group who are the worst off at the moment are Palestinians.

      The solutions have to be diplomatic. It's either that or Israel wipes Gaza out to achieve peace. I think both sides need to stop killing each other and come to an agreement to end the occupation and have two states. Of course there will still be violence but any that does occur it will be clear as to who is to blame and hopefully everyone will agree on which group is at fault, which clearly is not the case at the moment. Feeling sympathy for civilians may bring more change than you think. If enough people and governments start feeling sympathy for Palestinian's then the pressure put on Israel could possibly lead to an end of this conflict. I also think it's fairly impossible not to feel sympathy with a mother and father whose child has been killed or a child who's parents have been killed, if you don't feel bad when innocent children, who lets face it pose no threat to anyone, are being killed then thats kinda messed up.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sic semper erat)
      How on earth is this Israel's fault? I think its insincere that people say 'Israel must withdraw to 67' lines' and yet when Israel does do this, theyre still somehow to blame for whatever happens next. In 2005 Ariel Sharon cleansed Gaza from Jews and gave the entire thing back, no blockades no nothing. People used to say "Gaza can now become the Singapore of the Middle East". Its the pals that elected Hamas and fired rockets at Israel, how on earth is this Israel's fault? what is this 'pressure' you want to put on Israel? give them more land? they have 0 claims over Israeli territory. When are you going to accept the simple truth that these muslims are violent savages that dont understand the language of diplomacy? theyve violated 6 ceasefires. Its like pressuring the US to negotiate with Al Qaeda.
      I didn't say it was Israel's fault, read the post again. Both Hamas and Israel share responsibility for this mess. Well Israel withdrew from Gaza which was great, well done to Israel for doing that. However they still controlled the borders, the airspace and the waters around Gaza so really Israel were not quite as brilliant as you suggested. Hamas were then elected and started firing rockets at Israel and that was clearly stupid. They could have then negotiated for full control of Gaza but they chose not too. The pressure to put on Israel clearly isn't to give them Palestinian lands, that is pressuring them to continue the hostilities. The pressure I was talking about is to pressure the Israeli government into stopping military action and come to the negotiation table wanting peace. I think both sides are war hungry. Hamas have around 85% support of Palestinians in Gaza and 97% of Israeli's support the current conflict, clearly neither side is going to want to lose that public support by finding a peaceful solution.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Zen Baphomet)
      He had no desire to mindlessly eradicate non-germans, in theory or in practice.


      Your statements are baseless.

      Um, no. They're not. Haven't you heard about the holocaust for starters?


      Actually he doesn't fit the main criteria for Psychopathy at all, trust me it's an area of human psychology I know an awful lot about.

      Really? What was he then? A perfectly rational thinking human being? Could you explain why he wasn't a psychopath?


      Tut tut.

      Focus on the argument, not the opponent.
      In this case, it made sense to bring it up as your blind support for Hitler could be attributed to your desire to continue his work. Which is sick, by the way. You should see someone about that.

      Could you tell me what Hitler planned for the Soviets? Maybe you could tell us about his theory of lebensraum and then explain how that would have worked out without eradicating or at least enslaving the entire non Aryan population?

      Could you explain what is the evidence that he never planned to eradicate non- germans and then explain how the holocaust fits in with that agenda?
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sic semper erat)
      No, they didnt. That's precisely what I'm getting at - that not only was there withdrawal in 2005, but also none of what you said (blockades) existed until 2007. Gaza was completely on its own.

      You saw that Hamas violated all 6 ceasefires in this conflict. You saw that after every Israeli withdrawal and "ceasefire" (after 2009 and 2012 conflicts), it just took Hamas a couple years to rearm and start another conflict. What's the point of "Israel stopping military action"? Hamas will rearm and Israel will react and civilians will once again be killed. Is that your solution? We need a permanent one. President Obama recently said that Gaza must be demilitarized. Congress might cut off all aid to the Palestinians until all terror groups in Gaza are disarmed. THAT is the solution. The Israelis never attack Gaza unless Gaza shoots rockets at them. How come the West Bank is never targeted? maybe because the Palestinians there never attack Israel.

      Hamas is a terror organization and an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. If you knew their ideology you wouldn't even imagine words like "peace" or "negotiations". The way Egypt's Sisi successfully dealt with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt should teach us a lesson about how these rats should be dealt with.
      Ok, my mistake that did start to happen in '07. Although I think Israel having all these blockades just incites the attacks. Any group anywhere would resort to violence if they couldn't control the most basic things in there country.

      A study by The Jerusalem Fund in Washington D.C has actually found that Israel breaks the ceasefires more often than any Palestinan group - heres a link http://antiwar.com/blog/2014/02/06/t...rael-and-gaza/

      Wow, please read my posts. I said that a permanent solution is to end the blockades and have a two state solution. I agree the terrorist groups in Gaza need to go, they are a huge hindrance to the peace process. I read there are around 300,000 Israeli's in the West Bank, that is another reason why the Israeli govt wouldn't bomb the West Bank.

      I agree Hamas need to go, agreed with that all along.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by MattBerry96)
      Ok, my mistake that did start to happen in '07. Although I think Israel having all these blockades just incites the attacks. Any group anywhere would resort to violence if they couldn't control the most basic things in there country.

      Except the other poster pointed out (which is true) that the blockade is a result of an escalation of attacks after the Israelis fully retreated from Gaza. What do you have to say about that?



      Wow, please read my posts. I said that a permanent solution is to end the blockades and have a two state solution. I agree the terrorist groups in Gaza need to go, they are a huge hindrance to the peace process. I read there are around 300,000 Israeli's in the West Bank, that is another reason why the Israeli govt wouldn't bomb the West Bank.

      The West Bank is separated into three Areas. In Area A, there are no Israelis allowed. It's just for Palestinians. So, no. That's not why they're not bombing them.


      I agree Hamas need to go, agreed with that all along.

      But well done, you ended on a good note!
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sic semper erat)
      Yup, good stuff. A two state solution however practical is a dead idea that has been tried over and over again for many decades and failed. 'My' solution is for the West Bank to be annexed to Israel and everyone there given Israeli citizenship. It should have been done straight after the 6 Day War.
      But will that not in itself bring problems of increased extremism and Hamas activities (they have a branch in the West Bank) ? Also, presumably this will mean the end of checkpoints, would that not make terrorism in Israeli towns a lot easier? Also, what will become of Gaza?

      I agree with you that the two state solution sounds ideal in theory, though history has shown it to be impractical. To be honest, whenever I think about a practical solution to the issue, I'm stumped. It seems to be a lose lose situation for everyone in all cases.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sic semper erat)
      Yup, good stuff. A two state solution however practical is a dead idea that has been tried over and over again for many decades and failed. 'My' solution is for the West Bank to be annexed to Israel and everyone there given Israeli citizenship. It should have been done straight after the 6 Day War.
      It isn't a dead idea though. Both sides need to agree to it and both sides need to stay away from violence. At the moment it wouldn't work because of the blockades and neither side wanting to reach any form of peaceful solution. If both sides actually wanted a two state solution, note this would never be possible with the current Israeli govt and Hamas, then I think it could work. Anyway I've said my part on the issue and have nothing more to say on it.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by miavdbt)
      Who said anything about starving out Palestinians? Gaza cannot rely fully on the crops that it grows for sustenance (if even just because they can't grow everything they need due to climate issues) . Just the other day, the UN brought more food aid to Gaza. Gaza gets food aid from outside, and if the situation gets so dire that they are starving, I'm sure even more aid will arrive from outside countries and the UN.

      Sure, Middle Eastern countries are reluctant to aid Hamas, but many have sent Humanitarian aid to Gaza. This includes food.
      So you want Gazans to become dependent on the goodwill of others as opposed to "growing organically"?

      They do have sources, as I said. So you're saying that ultimately it is better to fire from civilian areas so more civilian people die, and less people have to be fed rather than destroy the crops, save the civilians and rely on a little bit more Humanitarian aid than usual for a few years after the conflict?
      ​It seems like you're running out of arguments here.
      I'm saying that there is no point in firing from the relative farm areas, however lightly populated they are because it would result in loss of both civilians and food.

      Another thought I had is, while the tunnels are being destroyed now, this was not the case before. In fact, there was no ground invasion, just airstrikes. Why didn't Hamas place their civilians in the tunnels, originating in various areas in Gaza? They could have acted as shelters for the time being, and would have decreased the human casualties.
      So you want the Gazans to live in the shelters perpetually?
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by tsr1269)
      So you want Gazans to become dependent on the goodwill of others as opposed to "growing organically"?
      [B]

      This is war we're talking about. They can grow organically when they are not involved in such a conflict. They have dependent on the goodwill of others for a good while now, what's a few more years?


      I'm saying that there is no point in firing from the relative farm areas, however lightly populated they are because it would result in loss of both civilians and food.
      [B]

      Why civilians? If all of the military activity is coming from empty fields, I believe the civilian casualties will be lowered. Food < Civilian Life.

      Again, ​this is not their only source of food. Why can't you just concede to the fact that the idea that Hamas HAS to fire from heavily populated civilian areas such as hospitals and schools is ludicrous considering the fact that they're renting farmland to civilians?


      So you want the Gazans to live in the shelters perpetually?

      What? No! The Israelis are also in shelters whenever the sirens go off. They have warnings about these airstrikes from the Israelis, so they will know when to make their way to a tunnel and when not to. But this is no longer possible, of course, I was just saying that they could have used those tunnels as shelters before. They didn't. I was just curious why they wouldn't when they could have but then they complained they didn't have shelters.

      Not to mention, even in my original post, I said that they could have acted as shelters 'for the time being'.
      • Offline

        0
        (Original post by miavdbt)
        Um, no. They're not. Haven't you heard about the holocaust for starters?

        The Holocaust was an eradication, of Jews, Cripples, Degenerates and Political dissidents.

        It wasn't as a I said a killing ground for all non-germans, if it was the death toll would have a been a "wee" bit higher, and citizens of every captured territory would have been sent there during the war.

        Most Historians agree that Hitler didn't even find out about the Holocaust untill it was underway, and simply gave his approval after the fact due to it's primary use of killing Jews.
        Really? What was he then? A perfectly rational thinking human being? Could you explain why he wasn't a psychopath?
        Out of Facet One of the PLC-R Verification Model for Psychopathy he ticks only two of the four criteria and the fourth not to a degree that is notewrothy.

        In facet two he again meets only two of the four criteria, one extremely and one moderately.

        In Facet Three he meets only two of the five critiera, both acceptably.

        In Facet Four he meets possibly one of the five criteria, moderately.

        In facet Five he meets possibly one of two criteria.

        He meets in total only eight of the twenty requirements in moderate amounts, generally one must meet eighteen out of twenty requirements(seven of those manifesting before the age of 13) and out of the sixty point system(each requirement having a 1-3 rating) score a minimum of twenty.

        Clinically he was not a Psychopath.

        Evil according to common moral views, yes.
        Mentally unstable , possibly.
        A Narcissist very likely.

        But not a psychopath.

        in this case, it made sense to bring it up as your blind support for Hitler could be attributed to your desire to continue his work. Which is sick, by the way. You should see someone about that.
        My support isn't blind, that would Suggest I view him as a perfect/ideal individual.

        I do not, he was a deeply flawed man and I do not agree with a lot of his ethnic ideals nor his political/social/economic ideas.

        [quote]Could you tell me what Hitler planned for the Soviets? Maybe you could tell us about his theory of lebensraum and then explain how that would have worked out without eradicating or at least enslaving the entire non Aryan population?

        As for the suggestion I need to see someone, what do you suggest I am suffering fro,?
        Could you explain what is the evidence that he never planned to eradicate non- germans and then explain how the holocaust fits in with that agenda?
        I said "all" Non-germans, obviously some non-germans were going to die that much would have been inevitable, stop taking my statements out of context it does you no service.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by miavdbt)
        This is war we're talking about. They can grow organically when they are not involved in such a conflict. They have dependent on the goodwill of others for a good while now, what's a few more years?
        The Gazans need to develop themselves in order to get ahead. Making them rely on aid is akin to economic subjugation and oppression.

        Why civilians? If all of the military activity is coming from empty fields, I believe the civilian casualties will be lowered. Food < Civilian Life.
        Even though there are relatively few areas of farming in the Gaza, most of these will still be populated. People just don't abandon their farms. They work on them...

        Again, ​this is not their only source of food. Why can't you just concede to the fact that the idea that Hamas HAS to fire from heavily populated civilian areas such as hospitals and schools is ludicrous considering the fact that they're renting farmland to civilians?
        Renting farmland =/= no civilians.

        What? No! The Israelis are also in shelters whenever the sirens go off. They have warnings about these airstrikes from the Israelis, so they will know when to make their way to a tunnel and when not to. But this is no longer possible, of course, I was just saying that they could have used those tunnels as shelters before. They didn't. I was just curious why they wouldn't when they could have but then they complained they didn't have shelters.
        You do realize that these are tunnels as opposed to shelters?

        Furthermore, even if they had access to the shelter, they would have to live in there all the time as there are no warning systems.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by tsr1269)
        The Gazans need to develop themselves in order to get ahead. Making them rely on aid is akin to economic subjugation and oppression.

        You can't develop yourself in the middle of a conflict. The Gazans are already relying on aid, this wouldn't be new to them. During a conflict, the primary objective on a domestic level should be to keep your civilians from harm's way.

        Once the conflict is over, then you start to rebuild.


        Even though there are relatively few areas of farming in the Gaza, most of these will still be populated. People just don't abandon their farms. They work on them...

        Yes, but this doesn't have to be the case during a conflict especially in the situation of land scarcity which you claim Gaza has. If the most empty areas in the entire Gaza strip are just those farm lands, then it makes perfect sense that the few farmers occupying the farms would evacuate them for the duration of the conflict.




        Renting farmland =/= no civilians.
        [I]

        Yes, I'm well aware of that. See above.



        You do realize that these are tunnels as opposed to shelters?

        Yes, but taking into account that there were no shelters, surely underground tunnels would have achieved a similar job?


        Furthermore, even if they had access to the shelter, they would have to live in there all the time as there are no warning systems.
        ​There aren't warning systems in place by Hamas (another thing they should have thought about) but the fact remains that Israel lets Palestinians know when there will be airstrikes through various methods.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        [QUOTE=Zen Baphomet;48982690][/FONT][/COLOR]The Holocaust was an eradication, of Jews, Cripples, Degenerates and Political dissidents

        As well as gypsies, Slavs (where he could get his hands on them), and homosexuals. Ultimately, everyone who wasn't Aryan German whom Hitler managed to get his hands on. Gee, I wonder what would have happened if he ever got his hands on the Middle East and Africa! Pretty sure he wasn't that fond of blacks either, now was he?


        It wasn't as a I said a killing ground for all non-germans, if it was the death toll would have a been a "wee" bit higher, and citizens of every captured territory would have been sent there during the war.
        Citizens of every captured territory were sent there during the war. Where do you get your textbooks from? Whitepride.com?

        Most Historians agree that Hitler didn't even find out about the Holocaust untill it was underway, and simply gave his approval after the fact due to it's primary use of killing Jews.

        Which Historians? He holds superior responsibility either way. He put in the mechanisms that allowed monsters capable of carrying out the holocaust to exist.


        Out of Facet One of the PLC-R Verification Model for Psychopathy he ticks only two of the four criteria and the fourth not to a degree that is notewrothy.

        In facet two he again meets only two of the four criteria, one extremely and one moderately.

        In Facet Three he meets only two of the five critiera, both acceptably.

        In Facet Four he meets possibly one of the five criteria, moderately.

        In facet Five he meets possibly one of two criteria.

        He meets in total only eight of the twenty requirements in moderate amounts, generally one must meet eighteen out of twenty requirements(seven of those manifesting before the age of 13) and out of the sixty point system(each requirement having a 1-3 rating) score a minimum of twenty.

        Clinically he was not a Psychopath.

        Evil according to common moral views, yes.
        Mentally unstable , possibly.
        A Narcissist very likely.

        But not a psychopath.


        My support isn't blind, that would Suggest I view him as a perfect/ideal individual.

        I do not, he was a deeply flawed man and I do not agree with a lot of his ethnic ideals nor his political/social/economic ideas.

        Could you tell me what Hitler planned for the Soviets? Maybe you could tell us about his theory of lebensraum and then explain how that would have worked out without eradicating or at least enslaving the entire non Aryan population?


        I said "all" Non-germans, obviously some non-germans were going to die that much would have been inevitable, stop taking my statements out of context it does you no service.

        Up until now, I have not seen convincing evidence to back up this unconventional statement.

        Either way, the jews were semitic. The Arabs would have been right up there on his hit list, along with gypsies, slavs and jews. So if you are wanting to finish Hitler's job, you'd have to eradicate the Arabs too. People who you seem to be rather fond of, it would seem.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by layahuudi)
        Disgusting comment calling for the eradication of all Israelis, since they're all 'zionist filth'
        This is what we mean when we say that pro - Palestinians are simply anti Semites. They believe that all Israelis are zionists, even those who were simply born there and actively call for the liberty of Palestinians.

        The vast majority of Pro Palestinians equate Zionists with Israelis and Jews. Nothing wrong with being a zionist, but being Israeli or Jewish does not necessarily make you a zionist. This just exposes the fact that rather than any other surface argument they may propose to justify their anti-Israel drivel, they simply hate jews.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by layahuudi)
        Listen you silly cow, if you live on land which Palestinians hold ownership deeds and documents to yet are still expelled to the west bank of Gaza, then you are a filthy zionist, this means that 90% of Israelis are filthy zionists. the other 10% can be 'collateral damage'.
        1. Palestine lost, Israel won. Get over it.

        2. A lot of those 'deeds' are sold to Israelis and then the Palestinian Propaganda Machine says that the Israelis 'stole' their land, when in fact it was sold to them.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by layahuudi)
        If it was sold they wouldn't have the deeds you silly biatch. The filthy zionists only owned 10% of land when it became occupied by the filth. Go check the population census of Palestine and the land ownership registers.

        I didn't say they still had them. I said that they sold a lot of their deeds to Israelis and then said their land was stolen. At least, most recently this has been happening.


        The fight to liberate Palestine from the river to sea will go on, however long it takes. Our will never ever break, no matter how filthy the zionist and the pigs like you become, the will to fight will only get stronger and fiercer and when reign over Palestine, your ilk will be made to pay to the point that you will beg for your deaths.

        LOL, Good luck with that. We're seeing how well Hamas is failing right now. Fact remains, Arabs and Jews can live good lives in Israel. Many Arabs work in respectable jobs there and are respected by their community. Do you know why? Because they're not whack jobs like you.

        I hope you're not one of those terrorists who calls themselves Muslim, simply because once again, you'd be tainting a religion where there are a lot of good, kind hearted people with your disgusting hatred and hunger for revenge on something that happened many years ago.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        Daily life for Israelis for over 13 years

        Rocket attack on beach.

        http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=eff_1407019247
       
       
       
      Reply
      Submit reply
      TSR Support Team

      We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

      Updated: January 8, 2017
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Poll
      Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
      Useful resources
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

      Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.