Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Have to agree, this is a common benefit offered to prospective recruits, because it is something tangible and beneficial for any potential soldier after they leave the military.

    it's just incidental that Israel sends it's soldiers to brutalise civilians.

    Though I am sure there's a culture of Arab-hating in the IDF, due to various reasons (it's terrorist origins, the general racial divide between Israeli's and Palestinians, the religious element, etc), which thrive in the macho conservative military tradition.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by broscience123)
    Israel Recruited Students To Fight In Gaza War By Promising FREE University Tutition

    http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/...-gaza-massacre

    To Mods: Please do not merge this topic into the main sticky. This is a thread specifically about the recruitment methods utilised by the terrorist organisation.
    Israelis are conscripted into the army. From your own source:

    Meanwhile, Tel Aviv University announced that it would be providing students called up to serve in Gaza one year’s free tuition
    So er it turns out that your title is entirely wrong. Israel is not recruiting students and it is not Israel offering to cover tuition fees.

    But yeah, I mean, truth isn't the important part. Let's just bash Israel more because er...Israel?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Words of the world chan
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Israeli wears T-shirt that reads “Deployed - Destroyed - Enjoyed - Gaza 2014”

    Also:
    Young Israeli at Western Wall calls for ‘another war and another war and another war and another war’

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Israeli Soldiers Celebrate Shooting an 18-year-old In Hebron, not Gaza. Scum.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by well in the dark)
    Israeli Soldiers Celebrate Shooting an 18-year-old In Hebron, not Gaza. Scum.
    *******s.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A 'self-hating' Jew's guide to answering Zionist talking points

    This is a good piece. Would be interested to hear what the pro-Israelis on this thread have to say to it, if anything.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by well in the dark)
    A 'self-hating' Jew's guide to answering Zionist talking points

    This is a good piece. Would be interested to hear what the pro-Israelis on this thread have to say to it, if anything.
    Here's point by point:

    1. Zionism is the notion that (a) Jews form a national group and (b) national groups have the right to self determination if they so desire. Zionism is no different in that regard to the Palestinians wanting their own state or Scottish people wanting to be independent from the rest of the UK.

    2. I don't think very many people disagree with what he says. Of course other people lived in the area that is now Israel before the Mandate started. But this does not preclude the very long standing connection between the Jewish nation and the land of Israel.

    3. Herzl absolutely did not envisage a Jewish only country. That is a demonstrable falsehood, just read his writings, particularly Altneuland. The mass immigration of Jews to the land of Israel whilst superficially sharing some similarities to colonialism is also inherently different in two crucial regards that make it entirely different. Firstly, the Jews were returning to a land with which they had a long-standing connection. A connection going back to before the Greeks and Romans and well before Islam. Secondly, the Jews were moving there not as citizens of a country that was sending them there but as independent people separate from their host country. Colonialism was all about one country transferring its citizens to another land in order to take over that land. Zionism is not colonialism.

    4. The British absolutely did not encourage Jewish immigration to Mandate Palestine. Indeed, right on the even of WW2 in 1939 they placed strict limits on Jewish immigration and even after the Holocaust refused to expand the quote of 15,000 per year even though hundreds of thousands of Jews were stranded in DP camps in Europe desperate to move to the Mandate.

    5. The two state solution has been accepted by every major group everywhere. Both the Israelis and Palestinians want it. The Quartet of the US, EU, Russia and UN. The Arab peace proposal calls for it. So if it is racist then the entire world is racist. Moreover, the two state solution does not include plans for a two-way population transfer. The 1.5 million or more Arab citizens of Israel will remain in Israel and therefore it cannot be a racist venture to have a Jewish only state.

    6. The One-State solution is akin to demanding that Scotland remain forever part of the UK whether they like it or not. It has been rejected by every major group - see point 5 - in the International Community. It is also a bad idea in that it will inevitably lead to civil war and, after significant loss of life, two states.

    7. The principle of two states along 1967 borders has been accepted in Israel since at least 1994. The existence of Settlements in the West Bank whilst wrong and in my opinion difficult to defend, does not make a two-state solution difficult. The vast majority of settlers live within a mile or so of the border and 75% of them (or so) live within an area contiguous with Israel of just 6% or so of the West Bank. Moreover, Israel has shown its willnigness to remove settlers by force (as in Gaza in 2005). And finally, since 2000 only 1 new settlement has been constructed. There has been expansion of existing settlements but not construction of new ones in new areas. The idea that settlements preclude two states is a convenient myth.

    8. Neither Fatah nor Hamas have democratic legitimacy as both are corrupt and, at this point, effectively unelected. When the PA holds parliamentary and presidential elections then we will know which is representative and has legitimacy.

    9. I don't disagree with this point - nor do many people. He is saying what Israelis say which is that Hamas are the bad guys who are opposed by Arab states as well. It is very worth noting that Egypt is strongly opposed to Hamas. This despite Egypt having been at war with Israel for a long time. Their own experience with the Muslim Brotherhood of which Hamas is an offshoot has demonstrated to them the dangers of Hamas.

    10. Nobody disputes this - it is a simple matter of fact. The "unity government" has been tried before and it didn't last long that time.

    11. The Israeli government - and most governments around the world including the US, EU and UK - consider Hamas to be a terrorist organisation and nobody sensible denies its commitment to Israel's complete destruction. In that context it is entirely reasonable for Israel to refuse to negotiate peace with a unity government that includes Hamas. The Palestinians are entitled to choose whoever they want to represent them (though note that no elections have taken place for 8 years) but their choices come with consequences.

    12. The kidnapping of three Jewish teenagers sparked a massive Israeli operation to try and find them which included the arrest of hundreds of Hamas members and others in order to find the kidnappers. This is all that would have happened had terrorist groups in Gaza not started firing rockets into Israel. The notion that Israel's arrests in the West Bank was on a pretext presupposes that Israel did not really care about the kidnapped teens which is a position that can only be taken if you presuppose that Israel is basically evil.

    13. Gaza is not occupied it is the subject of a military blockade. Large areas of the West Bank are in Area A where the PA has complete internal control. Even if we grant Hamas the right to resist occupation this does not grant the right to fire rockets at civilian areas with the aim of killing civilians. That is demonstrably terrorism and illegal.

    14. That the author declares that Israel has no right to defend itself against Hamas rockets shows his position is untenable and not really worth anything. Moreover, his dismissal of Hamas terrorism on the basis of its ineffectiveness is likewise illogical. If someone tries repeatedly to kill you and you kill him instead in self defence, you do not become the bad guy because of his incompetence.

    15. This is patently nonsense. In his previous point he noted that the UN is housing over 100,000 Palestinians yet here he claims that they have nowhere to go. Clearly warning someone to leave their house before it is hit by a missile is very worthwhile as it gives the residents a chance to leave and avoid dying. That he says "they have nowhere to go" is patently ludicrous.

    16. Hamas have themselves admitted - nay proudly declared - their use of human shields. There are plenty of open spaces in Gaza where Hamas could build military facilities to stockpile weapons away from civilian areas. Anyone who knows anything about Gaza know this. The notion that Israel uses human shields because its soldiers live in Israel is ridiculous nonsense. Moreover, it is a mockery - as if the terrorists would refrain from one second from targeting Israeli soldiers for fear of killing Israeli civilians. They target those civilians in the first place!

    17. No one makes this assertion. Hamas have tried to murder as many Israelis as they can. Fortunately they fail in their attempts. How this shows that Israel considers an Israeli life as more valuable I do not know. Moreover, in the deal between Hamas and Israel over the release of Gilad Shalit Israel had to release 1,000 Palestinians for 1 Israeli. Obviously Israel would want to release as few as possible but Hamas would not accept fewer than 1,000 Palestinians for 1 Israeli. So that shows that Hamas value their people as worth much less than an Israeli. If Hamas were as desperate to get back every Palestinian as Israel is to get back every Israeli then the deal would have been closer to 1 for 1.

    18. In many ways he is correct here. Israel should do more to end the occupation. In 2005 they took a massive step in that direction by withdrawing completely and unconditionally from Gaza with no blockade. Hamas' takeover of the strip has made it now almost impossible for a unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank. Moreover, isolating Israel will only lead to unilateral action if successful which will not be in the interests of the Palestinians.

    19. The authors claims about colonialism have been addressed in point 3 above. It is good that many Jews worry about Israel's actions and campaign against them. It is sad that many cannot do so without falsehoods and strange and untenable claims as this author has unfortunately done. The vast majority of Jews who think about it - even those who staunchly support Israel - spend time worrying about how to solve the current situation in a moral way. The author does not hold a monopoly on morality.

    I hope this suffices to address his issues. It took a long time and I don't intend to enter long discussions on every point. I conclude that the author is right on a small number of issues, ignorant on others and plain wrong on the rest.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Especially early on, looking at the targets it's as if the top brass of the IDF are idiots or naive
    Yup, the top brass of the IDF are naive idiots. That's why they've won every single conflict they've had with the Arabs. That's why Israel is the most militarily powerful state in the Middle East today. That's why they manage to convince thousands of Arabs to turn their backs on their families, their community, their nation, and work for the Jews. It's because they're "naive idiots".

    And of course, Hamas are military geniuses. That's why the Palestinian people have no state. It's because they're geniuses. Am I right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    X
    Superb post mate. The fact that the Islamo-fascists and ISIS supporters feel the need to avoid actually responding to you, and instead simply claiming they "won" the debate, speaks volumes about the quality of your posts and the absolute garbage that constitutes theirs
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    What on earth are you talking about? The fact you don't even respond to his post, you just go around bragging about your "win" shows you're afraid to debate him.

    You lost that debate, and the fact you feel the need to parade around claiming you "won" reflects more on your personality than you could ever understand.

    It's a bit like being a lady; if you have to say you are one, you're not.
    Here comes his sidekick, funny how you didn't reply to the whole post.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mxcvii)
    Yesterday I was debating against UniOfLife and he was losing the debate and at the end when I basically won the debate he stopped posting and reported me for an "Offensive/Trolling" post. The reason he reported me was because I asked him "Are you an Idiot". remember I asked him, I never called him it. The reason I asked him was because apparently when he got crushed in the debate he replied something like "You ignored my points here" (Not the exact words but had the same meaning to what he replied) and then posted a link to a debate that he had with another user. Apparently he thought he hadn't lost the debate because I didn't reply to post he made to another member.

    After the debate the posts were deleted where he got crushed in the debate. Good job UniOfLife your the best debater I've ever met.
    I actually did not report your post, sorry. And those posts did not get deleted just merged into this thread. As to who won the debate that's really up to onlookers to decide not the participants.

    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    It's a bit like being a lady; if you have to say you are one, you're not.
    This comes to mind:



    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    Superb post mate. The fact that the Islamo-fascists and ISIS supporters feel the need to avoid actually responding to you, and instead simply claiming they "won" the debate, speaks volumes about the quality of your posts and the absolute garbage that constitutes theirs
    Thank you.

    There are real and genuine grounds to be opposed to many of Israel's actions but those grounds are rarely explored. I can only suppose that the decision to oppose Israel is made first from a position of ignorance and thereafter it is determined that opposition based on its actual actions and policies would be far weaker than opposition based on lies, so the lies win.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mxcvii)
    Here comes his sidekick, funny how you didn't reply to the whole post.
    :yawn: Really? Really?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    I actually did not report your post, sorry. And those posts did not get deleted just merged into this thread. As to who won the debate that's really up to onlookers to decide not the participants.
    This. Anyone with a modicum of class and background might say, "Me? Win the debate? Well, that's for others to decide. I couldn't possibly comment".

    One imagines tsr1269 isn't from... you know.. he's not one of us He doesn't get it.

    He might be in for a few shocks in adult life in terms of how England works, socially speaking
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    This. Anyone with a modicum of class and background might say, "Me? Win the debate? Well, that's for others to decide. I couldn't possibly comment".

    One imagines tsr1269 isn't from... you know.. he's not one of us He doesn't get it.

    He might be in for a few shocks in adult life in terms of how England works, socially speaking
    I wouldn't presume to comment on his background or indeed yours. He may be an adult already for all I know. But his behaviour and that of others suggests that he's an argumentative teen who cannot admit to being wrong and after a while just argues for the sake of arguing. Whether or not he's an adult he seems to act like a teenager.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    I wouldn't presume to comment on his background or indeed yours. He may be an adult already for all I know. But his behaviour and that of others suggests that he's an argumentative teen who cannot admit to being wrong and after a while just argues for the sake of arguing. Whether or not he's an adult he seems to act like a teenager.
    Yes I am a teen is there anything wrong with that, last time I checked this was the "student" room. What do you mean I can't admit defeat, yesterday you got crushed and then stopped posting. Like somebody said yesterday you've been crushed many times on this thread. It's also funny how your sidekick has to reply to everything when I quote and reply to you on something. Tell him to go away or can't you debate by yourself
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mxcvii)
    Yes I am a teen is there anything wrong with that, last time I checked this was the "student" room.
    Which includes postgraduate and PhD students. What are you, a GCSE student? That's undoubtedly the level of debate you're at

    What do you mean I can't admit defeat, yesterday you got crushed and then stopped posting. Like somebody said yesterday
    Wasn't it you that said that? Either way, making a claim on your own behalf is considered rather gauche in English society. Just a friendly tip for you, you'll find it useful when you enter adult society and start dealing with... ahem, people from other backgrounds

    It's also funny how your sidekick
    Feeling the heat? That's okay babe I understand
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mxcvii)
    Yes I am a teen is there anything wrong with that, last time I checked this was the "student" room. What do you mean I can't admit defeat, yesterday you got crushed and then stopped posting. Like somebody said yesterday you've been crushed many times on this thread. It's also funny how your sidekick has to reply to everything when I quote and reply to you on something. Tell him to go away or can't you debate by yourself
    There's nothing wrong with being a teen, I was merely describing your behaviour. As for my "sidekick" he is about as under my control as the media is under Zionists'. Make of that what you will.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    Which includes postgraduate and PhD students. What are you, a GCSE student? That's undoubtedly the level of debate you're at
    And it takes a 2 guys to debate this "GCSE" level student, of course ones the sidekick

    Wasn't it you that said that? Either way, making a claim on your own behalf is considered rather gauche in English society. Just a friendly tip for you, you'll find it useful when you enter adult society and start dealing with... ahem, people from other backgrounds
    I said it after somebody else said it. Aren't you the one that's been making all these claim.
    Feeling the heat? That's okay babe I understand
    Funny how you missed the rest of my post out, I take it that you agree that he cant debate by himself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mxcvii)
    And it takes a 2 guys to debate this "GCSE" level student
    I think you're having delusions of grandeur. But that's cool, I'll wait for you to actually debate by responding to UniofLife's points before taking your claim seriously.

    I said it after somebody else said it
    So you're repeating your own, self-serving claim, and ascribing it to someone else, and expecting people to take you seriously? Haha, that's cool

    I take it that you agree that he cant debate by himself
    Given you prefer these side skirmishes to actually addressing the points he's made, I rather think you're the one who can't debate
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
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
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

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

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