This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- I think i'm losing a friendship because of the Israel-Palestine conflict
- Epq on Palestine
- I am an Israeli - AMA
- how could anyone be pro-israel?
- Anyone else not get boycotting brands or even countries trend?
- Writing about personal politics in Personal Statement
- I am half russian, half israeli, ask me anything.
- Is SOAS good for IR?
- [Official thread] Hamas-Israel Conflict
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- Friend harassing me over my Palestine views
- Is Israel winning
- 50,000 women in Gaza are pregnant.
- USA bombing Syria
- My very rude Islam teacher
- Study BA Politics or BA International Relations at SOAS?
- Soas vs Queen Mary for International relations and politics
- MA International Relations
- Opinions on geopolitical?
- Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP
The Israel/Palestine Conflict Mk. IV
Scroll to see replies
Original post by miavdbt
REALLY? What about the photo attached here? Also, among others, I have included sources from the BBC, CNN and New York Times. I suppose they are solely biased and propagandist sources, because they might have included the Israeli point of view, instead of completely ignored it like your Al Jazeera sources. Whereas you using Al Jazeera and fake photos of dead kids, and making claims that Israel is now targeting children from Gaza is very impartial and completely unbiased.
Dead kids? I don't understand. Are you seriously saying that the child in that picture was not killed?
Here is an article stating that a UN report confined that the IDF notified Gazan civilians prior to bombings:
http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/07/14/un-israel-warned-gaza-civilians-evacuate-attacks/
http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/07/14/un-israel-warned-gaza-civilians-evacuate-attacks/
Hey, get out of your homes! I'm coming to bomb them!!!!!
But master, where shall we go?
Go to the south of Gaza. You will not be bombed there!
2 mins later:
***This is Foxtrot Alpha 982. Visual confirmation of target killed in Khan Younis. Roger and out****
Here is an article outlining where the Gazans are looking for shelter, including UN shelters and evacuating to countries such as Australia, Britain and the US if they have passports there. The evacuation procedure was aided by the IDF . This article also includes a statement by the UN Secretary General who condemns Hamas's targeting of civilians. It also explains that the Gaza rockets hit infrastructure in Israel which actually provided Electricity in Gaza. Way to shoot yourself in the foot.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/13/israel-gaza-evacuation-
raid_n_5581540.html
It's very frustrating when people who do not seemingly know how to utilize a computer post broken links.
At this stage, I can't find the article that stated that some Gaza civilians had evacuated to Israel. I admit that it must have been my mistake, and I must have misread something when I was looking for sources. If I do find it, I will provide a source, but for now, I admit I've made an error and this did not happen.
Good, let's start clearing up some of your other misconceptions. It will be a long and arduous task given the fact that you have made many, but nevertheless we shall persist.
Something shouty about Palestine
The question was simple:
So by the same reasoning, if Israel suddenly happened to be destroyed tomorrow, all the land which Israel currently encompasses will be forfeit and the "new owners" can do whatever they like with that land?'
A yes or no would suffice...
Original post by Chindits
tsr1269 is relentless 
The fact remains Israel accepted a ceasefire and halted all operations.
'palestinians' rejected a ceasefire and fired 30 rockets. The whole world knows this, every media is reporting it.
The fact remains Israel accepted a ceasefire and halted all operations.
'palestinians' rejected a ceasefire and fired 30 rockets. The whole world knows this, every media is reporting it.
I saw the most recent developments. Of course the extreme leftists will still keep on insisting that Israel is the evil perpetrator while Gaza is simply defending its self from those evil zionists. Ridiculous.
Unfortunately, it's trendy now to hate on Israel, so the entire herd flocks to the Pro Palestine side. A pity, but the masses are incapable of critical thinking and like to be fed their opinions rather than develop them.
Original post by Chindits
Why would they hold to a ceasefire that only they were observing?
The 'palestinians' rejected the ceasefire and fired 30 rockets into Israel.
No sympathy now. Go and get them Israel
The 'palestinians' rejected the ceasefire and fired 30 rockets into Israel.
No sympathy now. Go and get them Israel
It's not a ceasefire
Those terms were despicable.
Those children didn't die for nothing to take effect. We want the siege to end. On OUR terms. Ask any Gazan, they all agree. This won't remain a cycle of violence. The ceasefire will be accepted once israel accepts that gaza is to live free from the siege, once borders are open for basic needs, once fisherman can make a living without being shot. You do not control and will not control our lives. So we won't be down to bull**** terms. Even if it means you gladly kill and massacre more of us. This cycle is going to stop.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by miavdbt
I saw the most recent developments. Of course the extreme leftists will still keep on insisting that Israel is the evil perpetrator while Gaza is simply defending its self from those evil zionists. Ridiculous.
Unfortunately, it's trendy now to hate on Israel, so the entire herd flocks to the Pro Palestine side. A pity, but the masses are incapable of critical thinking and like to be fed their opinions rather than develop them.
Unfortunately, it's trendy now to hate on Israel, so the entire herd flocks to the Pro Palestine side. A pity, but the masses are incapable of critical thinking and like to be fed their opinions rather than develop them.
Times are a changing.
Hard line leftists will of course support Hamas, they will support any rogue dictator/terror group if it's anti-western to do so.
But apart from the obviously brainwashed adherent to Islam, I think they will lose support over this.
Already I can see a more muted response in this conflict - now this ceasefire fiasco that the 'palestinians' broke and many of their supporters are keeping a low profile.
There are a few (as you can see in this thread) wide-eyed fanatics who support Hamas more than the 'palestinians' themselves
The Arabs seem to be fed up with them too.
Original post by tsr1269
Dead kids? I don't understand. Are you seriously saying that the child in that picture was not killed?
Maybe that child was killed. Maybe it was even killed by the IDF bombing Gaza because its parents chose not to listen to the warnings and move to UN shelters, which were not bombed.
But, many of these photos and videos were in fact faked.
I'm not saying an operation like this won't have civilian casualties. But when you look at these photos, look to Hamas and its refusal of a ceasefire which it's in no position to refuse. Look to Hamas and its insistence that its people don't need to evacuate as mentioned in one of my previous sources. Don't look to the IDF which attempted to limit civilian casualties, even though that should be HAMAS's job.
So by the same reasoning, if Israel suddenly happened to be destroyed tomorrow, all the land which Israel currently encompasses will be forfeit and the "new owners" can do whatever they like with that land?'
A yes or no would suffice...
No. Irrelevant, because this was not the situation as explained, but since you can't get it through your skull, I will simply say no. An exercise in futility.
Maybe that child was killed. Maybe it was even killed by the IDF bombing Gaza because its parents chose not to listen to the warnings and move to UN shelters, which were not bombed.
But, many of these photos and videos were in fact faked.
I'm not saying an operation like this won't have civilian casualties. But when you look at these photos, look to Hamas and its refusal of a ceasefire which it's in no position to refuse. Look to Hamas and its insistence that its people don't need to evacuate as mentioned in one of my previous sources. Don't look to the IDF which attempted to limit civilian casualties, even though that should be HAMAS's job.
So by the same reasoning, if Israel suddenly happened to be destroyed tomorrow, all the land which Israel currently encompasses will be forfeit and the "new owners" can do whatever they like with that land?'
A yes or no would suffice...
No. Irrelevant, because this was not the situation as explained, but since you can't get it through your skull, I will simply say no. An exercise in futility.
I wonder if you could address the statement by Ban Ki Moon who condemned Hamas's actions. I wonder if you could explain to me, in your own words, how the State of Israel came to be.
Original post by DeemzBeamz
It's not a ceasefire
Those terms were despicable.
Those children didn't die for nothing to take effect. We want the siege to end. On OUR terms.
Those terms were despicable.
Those children didn't die for nothing to take effect. We want the siege to end. On OUR terms.
1) You're in no position to dictate the terms.
2) The blockade is in place BECAUSE of your rocket fire.
When Israel left Gaza in 2005, there was NO blockade.
The blockade came in 2007 because of your incessant rocket fire and Hamas coming to power.
Original post by Chindits
1) You're in no position to dictate the terms.
2) The blockade is in place BECAUSE of your rocket fire.
When Israel left Gaza in 2005, there was NO blockade.
The blockade came in 2007 because of your incessant rocket fire and Hamas coming to power.
Rockets came in because of the killing of civilians and "assassinations".
I'm just repeating what ALL palestinian parties have said.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Chindits
tsr1269 is relentless
I know. It must get you down, right?
The fact remains Israel accepted a ceasefire and halted all operations.
Which they then broke, it seems not 7 hours later...
'palestinians' rejected a ceasefire and fired 30 rockets. The whole world knows this, every media is reporting it.
Correction: HAMAS, who state that they were not made aware (an understandable situation so we'll give them the benefit of doubt), rejected a "PROPOSED" ceasefire/truce advocated by the Egyptian Government who are vehemently opposed to all things MB which includes HAMAS.
Except BBC, Independent, Reuters, RT, Voice of America (Who are they?), Telegraph, Yahoo, Sky News Australia, Guardian, CBC, Haaretz, JP, ToI, Al-Arabiyah, ABC, WSJ.
All contain the word "proposed". It is not a unilateral condition which Israel have tried to make it out it was.
Original post by Chindits
1) You're in no position to dictate the terms.
2) The blockade is in place BECAUSE of your rocket fire.
When Israel left Gaza in 2005, there was NO blockade.
The blockade came in 2007 because of your incessant rocket fire and Hamas coming to power.
And neither will israel get away with bull**** terms. As I said, we are determined to make this cycle of violence stop. You would be stupid to believe this started from the 3 settlers killed. Because earlier 6 palestinians were killed, never mentioned in the media. Then 5 during the searching throughout the west bank, again, never mentioned in the media. Then burned a child to death as a retaliation and let the suspects go away. Then killed a hamas member. And you think you can simply blame hamas and get away with such killings?
No, the gazans said no to such terms because they won't bow down to the occupier and accept another circle of violence. They want the siege to end.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Chindits
1) You're in no position to dictate the terms.
2) The blockade is in place BECAUSE of your rocket fire.
When Israel left Gaza in 2005, there was NO blockade.
The blockade came in 2007 because of your incessant rocket fire and Hamas coming to power.
Incorrect and propagandist bull****...
There was no blockade because Israel thought Fatah would win the elections which HAMAS won by a landslide.
The blockade kicked in then as punishment to Gaza for voting for HAMAS and for HAMAS making a unity deal with Fatah in the PA.
Get your facts straight...
Original post by DeemzBeamz
Rockets came in because of the killing of civilians and "assassinations".
I'm just repeating what ALL palestinian parties have said.
I'm just repeating what ALL palestinian parties have said.
Parroting propaganda more like.
Israel left in 2005. No settlements, no joos in Gaza.
No restrictions on imports/exports. The Rafah crossing was open with EU monitors, the port was open and Israel said that if there was quiet after withdrawing, the airport would open.
So what 'palestinians' decided to do instead, is use the vacated land to bring Israel into closer rocket range and started bombarding Israel with rockets daily.
It was only after thousands of rockets and Hamas coming to power (slaughtering their political opponents) and chasing the EU monitors out of Rafah, that gave Israel no choice but to implement the blockade.
Don't forget, Egypt also has the blockade because of Hamas terrorism in Egypt.
Original post by miavdbt
I saw the most recent developments. Of course the extreme leftists will still keep on insisting that Israel is the evil perpetrator while Gaza is simply defending its self from those evil zionists. Ridiculous.
Unfortunately, it's trendy now to hate on Israel, so the entire herd flocks to the Pro Palestine side. A pity, but the masses are incapable of critical thinking and like to be fed their opinions rather than develop them.
Unfortunately, it's trendy now to hate on Israel, so the entire herd flocks to the Pro Palestine side. A pity, but the masses are incapable of critical thinking and like to be fed their opinions rather than develop them.
A bit rich coming from the person who only has superficial arguments and shys away from engaging in discussion...
Original post by miavdbt
Maybe that child was killed. Maybe it was even killed by the IDF bombing Gaza because its parents chose not to listen to the warnings and move to UN shelters, which were not bombed.
But, many of these photos and videos were in fact faked.
I'm not saying an operation like this won't have civilian casualties. But when you look at these photos, look to Hamas and its refusal of a ceasefire which it's in no position to refuse. Look to Hamas and its insistence that its people don't need to evacuate as mentioned in one of my previous sources. Don't look to the IDF which attempted to limit civilian casualties, even though that should be HAMAS's job.
But, many of these photos and videos were in fact faked.
I'm not saying an operation like this won't have civilian casualties. But when you look at these photos, look to Hamas and its refusal of a ceasefire which it's in no position to refuse. Look to Hamas and its insistence that its people don't need to evacuate as mentioned in one of my previous sources. Don't look to the IDF which attempted to limit civilian casualties, even though that should be HAMAS's job.
Thank you, we have agreed that the picture was not faked and that wee child was killed by the IDF.
No. Irrelevant, because this was not the situation as explained, but since you can't get it through your skull, I will simply say no. An exercise in futility.
Why would the land not be "forfeit"? It is essentially what happened to the Ottoman Empire except there was just a middle man (UN)...
I can amend the question to show the historical development and you will still end up saying that "the new owners can not do what they like with the land because it is theirs" or something along them lines.
I wonder if you could address the statement by Ban Ki Moon who condemned Hamas's actions.
You want me to analyse the speech of a toothless dog? What do you want me to say?
In fact, because this will be an "exercise in futility", why don't you just go ahead and make up your own arguments and then put it here. It'll save some time...
I wonder if you could explain to me, in your own words, how the State of Israel came to be.
Through violence.
Original post by Chindits
Parroting propaganda more like.
Israel left in 2005. No settlements, no joos in Gaza.
No restrictions on imports/exports. The Rafah crossing was open with EU monitors, the port was open and Israel said that if there was quiet after withdrawing, the airport would open.
So what 'palestinians' decided to do instead, is use the vacated land to bring Israel into closer rocket range and started bombarding Israel with rockets daily.
It was only after thousands of rockets and Hamas coming to power (slaughtering their political opponents) and chasing the EU monitors out of Rafah, that gave Israel no choice but to implement the blockade.
Don't forget, Egypt also has the blockade because of Hamas terrorism in Egypt.
Israel left in 2005. No settlements, no joos in Gaza.
No restrictions on imports/exports. The Rafah crossing was open with EU monitors, the port was open and Israel said that if there was quiet after withdrawing, the airport would open.
So what 'palestinians' decided to do instead, is use the vacated land to bring Israel into closer rocket range and started bombarding Israel with rockets daily.
It was only after thousands of rockets and Hamas coming to power (slaughtering their political opponents) and chasing the EU monitors out of Rafah, that gave Israel no choice but to implement the blockade.
Don't forget, Egypt also has the blockade because of Hamas terrorism in Egypt.
Claim whatever the **** you want. You haven't visited Palestine, I have, and I know what occupation is. I don't need someone like you enlightening me.
Your pathetic self needs to know you're dealing with Palestinians here; a very stubborn people. No matter what the costs are, the siege will end. And later, it will be the occupation.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Chindits
Don't forget, Egypt also has the blockade because of Hamas terrorism in Egypt.
A brutal dictator and a coup instigator against a democratically elected government are hardly the most shining examples to look for guidance in humanitarian areas...
Original post by tsr1269
Thank you, we have agreed that the picture was not faked and that wee child was killed by the IDF.
War will cause some civilian casualties. Can you tell me what Hamas has done to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza? Can you tell me whether Hamas has chosen its targets to ensure that they're not civilian targets, but legitimate military ones? Can you provide sources for this?
Why would the land not be "forfeit"? It is essentially what happened to the Ottoman Empire except there was just a middle man (UN)...
But it never belonged to this fictional Palestinian state you seem to imply existed prior to this. Nobody dismantled a sovereign Palestinian state. It was essentially Ottoman controlled land, which was then under the British mandate, and once this ended it was partitioned by the UN to form two states. However, as this deal was rejected by one side, only one state was created.
I can amend the question to show the historical development and you will still end up saying that "the new owners can not do what they like with the land because it is theirs" or something along them line
I have no idea what you're trying to say. Can you try and write coherently next time?
You want me to analyse the speech of a toothless dog? What do you want me to say?
Sorry, it's not a Hamas official so of course you disagree with anything they might have said. I forgot that everything which is not a statement by a Hamas official is a superficial, biased, unfounded argument in your books.
In fact, because this will be an "exercise in futility", why don't you just go ahead and make up your own arguments and then put it here. It'll save some time...
Through violence.
War will cause some civilian casualties. Can you tell me what Hamas has done to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza? Can you tell me whether Hamas has chosen its targets to ensure that they're not civilian targets, but legitimate military ones? Can you provide sources for this?
Why would the land not be "forfeit"? It is essentially what happened to the Ottoman Empire except there was just a middle man (UN)...
But it never belonged to this fictional Palestinian state you seem to imply existed prior to this. Nobody dismantled a sovereign Palestinian state. It was essentially Ottoman controlled land, which was then under the British mandate, and once this ended it was partitioned by the UN to form two states. However, as this deal was rejected by one side, only one state was created.
I can amend the question to show the historical development and you will still end up saying that "the new owners can not do what they like with the land because it is theirs" or something along them line
I have no idea what you're trying to say. Can you try and write coherently next time?
You want me to analyse the speech of a toothless dog? What do you want me to say?
Sorry, it's not a Hamas official so of course you disagree with anything they might have said. I forgot that everything which is not a statement by a Hamas official is a superficial, biased, unfounded argument in your books.
In fact, because this will be an "exercise in futility", why don't you just go ahead and make up your own arguments and then put it here. It'll save some time...
Through violence.
And you accuse me of superficial arguments! Who started the violence? What was the cause of the violence starting? As you can see, I'm not shying away from debate. Maybe you're a lost cause and have sold your soul to the liberal propaganda machine, but there is hope for others.
No, please, if you want to be taken seriously in this debate, you need to explain to me how the Israeli state came to be. When arguing with someone and using the same terms, there are misunderstandings sometimes simply because people define things differently. I need you to define for me what 'through violence' means.
Also, I'd like a reliable source to back up your claim that Israel is now targeting children in Gaza specifically. Oh, you don't have one? Oh, shoot! Isn't that making up opinions on the spot without being able to back them up? Or, well maybe it's not because your favorite tv, Al Aqsa might have said so.
Original post by DeemzBeamz
Claim whatever the **** you want. You haven't visited Palestine, I have, and I know what occupation is. I don't need someone like you enlightening me.
Losing an argument, so getting angry now?
By the way, I've been there plenty of times.
Your pathetic self needs to know you're dealing with Palestinians here; a very stubborn people. No matter what the costs are
Then don't cry when they're killed.
A ceasefire was in place and as you've correctly stated, they are a stubborn people no matter what the cost.
They rejected the ceasefire and will now suffer more.
No complaints when the casualties go up please, you want this.
Original post by Chindits
Times are a changing.
Hard line leftists will of course support Hamas, they will support any rogue dictator/terror group if it's anti-western to do so.
But apart from the obviously brainwashed adherent to Islam, I think they will lose support over this.
Already I can see a more muted response in this conflict - now this ceasefire fiasco that the 'palestinians' broke and many of their supporters are keeping a low profile.
There are a few (as you can see in this thread) wide-eyed fanatics who support Hamas more than the 'palestinians' themselves
The Arabs seem to be fed up with them too.
Hard line leftists will of course support Hamas, they will support any rogue dictator/terror group if it's anti-western to do so.
But apart from the obviously brainwashed adherent to Islam, I think they will lose support over this.
Already I can see a more muted response in this conflict - now this ceasefire fiasco that the 'palestinians' broke and many of their supporters are keeping a low profile.
There are a few (as you can see in this thread) wide-eyed fanatics who support Hamas more than the 'palestinians' themselves
The Arabs seem to be fed up with them too.
Of course they'd be fed up! Nobody wants Hamas to stay in power, no one sane anyway. Brainwashed Hamas supporters don't count.
I hope they do lose support over this, but with or without popular support for Hamas, I sincerely hope the IDF continues its operation and ensures that Hamas is no longer a threat. It would be a pity if they decide to adhere to the ridiculous demands of Hamas. Israel should not negotiate with terrorists.
Original post by Chindits
A ceasefire was in place and as you've correctly stated, they are a stubborn people no matter what the cost.
They rejected the ceasefire and will now suffer more.
No complaints when the casualties go up please, you want this.
A ceasefire was in place and as you've correctly stated, they are a stubborn people no matter what the cost.
They rejected the ceasefire and will now suffer more.
No complaints when the casualties go up please, you want this.
If the casualties go up now, I think Hamas should be the only one to blame for this, not Israel or the IDF. They're the ones who rejected the ceasefire proposal. Which, may I add, they were in no position to do if they were really concerned about 'civilian' casualties.
Original post by miavdbt
War will cause some civilian casualties. Can you tell me what Hamas has done to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza? Can you tell me whether Hamas has chosen its targets to ensure that they're not civilian targets, but legitimate military ones? Can you provide sources for this?
I thought the whole point in labeling an organisation as a "terrorist" was because they didn't adhere to some stuffy old international regulations?
But it never belonged to this fictional Palestinian state you seem to imply existed prior to this. Nobody dismantled a sovereign Palestinian state. It was essentially Ottoman controlled land, which was then under the British mandate, and once this ended it was partitioned by the UN to form two states. However, as this deal was rejected by one side, only one state was created.
The Ottoman Empire was split. Does this give the right for the new owners to determine who lives on what land?
I have no idea what you're trying to say. Can you try and write coherently next time?
Clearly not the first time that you have been flummoxed by a little bit of intelligence.
Sorry, it's not a Hamas official so of course you disagree with anything they might have said. I forgot that everything which is not a statement by a Hamas official is a superficial, biased, unfounded argument in your books.
I'm saying why should I listen to Ban Ki Moon when Israel doesn't?
And you accuse me of superficial arguments! Who started the violence? What was the cause of the violence starting? As you can see, I'm not shying away from debate. Maybe you're a lost cause and have sold your soul to the liberal propaganda machine, but there is hope for others.
Israel? with the bombing of those tunnels and those militants which in turn drew rocket fire from Gaza?
No, please, if you want to be taken seriously in this debate, you need to explain to me how the Israeli state came to be. When arguing with someone and using the same terms, there are misunderstandings sometimes simply because people define things differently. I need you to define for me what 'through violence' means.
I have neither the inclination nor the desire to start posting long tracts of information which I have previously posted in the past in segments...
Also, I'd like a reliable source to back up your claim that Israel is now targeting children in Gaza specifically. Oh, you don't have one? Oh, shoot! Isn't that making up opinions on the spot without being able to back them up? Or, well maybe it's not because your favorite tv, Al Aqsa might have said so.
I would, of course, "back it up" if I had actually made a statement along those lines. Find a corroborating statement FROM ME specifically and if it is deemed that I have, then I will find a source to back it up.
Of course, you won't find one but it'll be hilarious to watch you scrabble around trying to pick up the marbles out of your head which dropped out when you bowed to your Israeli puppet-master...
Related discussions
- I think i'm losing a friendship because of the Israel-Palestine conflict
- Epq on Palestine
- I am an Israeli - AMA
- how could anyone be pro-israel?
- Anyone else not get boycotting brands or even countries trend?
- Writing about personal politics in Personal Statement
- I am half russian, half israeli, ask me anything.
- Is SOAS good for IR?
- [Official thread] Hamas-Israel Conflict
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- Friend harassing me over my Palestine views
- Is Israel winning
- 50,000 women in Gaza are pregnant.
- USA bombing Syria
- My very rude Islam teacher
- Study BA Politics or BA International Relations at SOAS?
- Soas vs Queen Mary for International relations and politics
- MA International Relations
- Opinions on geopolitical?
- Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
