Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    oh yeah, on the Egypt war thing, Egypt's army was almost completely destroyed.... they couldn't fight anymore, we bribed the Isrealis not to go in and kill every survivor..... Egypt was paid so that they could save face...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mcspence)
    oh yeah, on the Egypt war thing, Egypt's army was almost completely destroyed.... they couldn't fight anymore, we bribed the Isrealis not to go in and kill every survivor..... Egypt was paid so that they could save face...
    Well, the Egyptians refused to sign a peace agreement eaven after their defences were smashed. And it wasnt that much bribing, it was more threats. Basicly the US threatened to break trade relations with Israel did they not withdraw, and they threatened to let the Israelis do whatever they wanted (occupy Kairo for instance) if the Egyptians did not accept defeat and a peace agreement.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    I have no problem with arafat rejecting a proposal , no matter hwo fair it would be. The reason I blaim arafat is that he responded to the proposal by encouraging the intifada. Thats unacceptable. If he didnt want to accept the proposal thats one thing, but you dont go about encouraging sparadic atacks on civilians merely because you didnt get the offer you had hoped for.
    Thats a bloody myth...the intifida was triggered when Sharon took his ass to the Dome of the Rock and declared it Isreals land, clearly not because there is a mosque there and it happens to be in the palestinian quarter of Jerusalem.

    The amount of times ive heard he encourages 'attacks on civilians' is just silly, and funnily, its all churned out from the Israeli propaganda machine, the same source, you never hear it anywhere else, except for recently Bush!...no surprises there.
    Gee...i remember the first time i read that in Time's interview with Barak, just after he was voted out of office, and i can quote; "Arafat condemns suicide bombers in English, but in Arabic he calls for more 'shahid' '' and its been echoed time and time again, the exact phrase. I garuntee if you ever listen to any Israeli politician interviewed or on tv it will be said...watch out for it! They try to make it seem more credible by using an arabic word...ohh....
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThornsnRoses)
    Thats a bloody myth...the intifida was triggered when Sharon took his ass to the Dome of the Rock and declared it Isreals land, clearly not because there is a mosque there and it happens to be in the palestinian quarter of Jerusalem.

    The amount of times ive heard he encourages 'attacks on civilians' is just silly, and funnily, its all churned out from the Israeli propaganda machine, the same source, you never hear it anywhere else, except for recently Bush!...no surprises there.
    Gee...i remember the first time i read that in Time's interview with Barak, just after he was voted out of office, and i can quote; "Arafat condemns suicide bombers in English, but in Arabic he calls for more 'shahid' '' and its been echoed time and time again, the exact phrase. I garuntee if you ever listen to any Israeli politician interviewed or on tv it will be said...watch out for it! They try to make it seem more credible by using an arabic word...ohh....
    Arafats political party , Fateh, has this written in their constitution:

    Article (19) Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated. http://www.fateh.net/e_public/constitution.htm#Goals

    But of course, they are not encouraging violence at all, no no....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Yes there is a very strong reason why. Israel has previously withdrawn from arreas under its controll. Remember Lebanon? Remember Sinai? In both these cases when Israel decided to withdraw its troops you got a tidal wave of palestinian extremists and terror atacks. This is also what will happen if Israel would simply withdraw from the occupied territories now. Do you think Hamaz's failure to avenge Yassin has nothing to do with teh fact that Israel maintains a military controll of these areas? Leaving these Areas to be controlled by the PLO will only cause Hamaz to ressurect itself and start launching suecide atacks again. The consequence of that will be another violence spiral ending in a massive Israeli reoccupation.
    You incorrectly fudge the issues of settlement removal and full-scale withdrawal, whilst the two are no doubt linked, I think you need reminding that they are not intricably intertwined. Thus your following arguments against full scale withdrawal need not be relevant to a settlement pull-out as Israel can simply remove the settlements whilst remaining in overall security and military control (as the situation was post 1967 but before any settlements were built).

    Yes, Israel has previously withdrawn from areas under its control thats entirely true (in answer to your question marks). Firstly following the Sinai withdrawal in the 1970's (I'm aware there was an earlier withdrawal following the Suez Canal war) there was actually no major rise in Arab resistance (against troops within the territories) and terror attacks (against innocent civilians) against the Israeli occupation in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, certainly nothing on the scale on the intifada. Instead the withdrawal allowed for the creation of a peace settlement between Israel and Egpyt, one that has despite all the violence and numerous other problems survived to this day. If anything surely this is an example of why Israel should reach a negotiated peaceful withdrawal with the Palestinians, on the basis that a previous one was highly successful?

    Similarly when Ehud Barak unilaterally pulled Israeli troops (not settlements as there was basically none) out of Lebanon, there was no upsurge in violence from Lebanon based Hizbullah, in fact the numbers of people killed on both sides markedly fell following the withdrawal (check Israeli military stats if you don't believe me), with only a few 'minor' spats of violence along the border region. You suggest this to was followed by a wave of Palestinian extremism and terror attacks, whilst undoubtedly the seeming success of Hizbullahs resistance tactics bouyed Palestinian terror groups to some extent, this is largely overstated and other factors missed out. You yourself admit that one reason for the rise in Palestinian violence was Arafat, I would add to that, Israeli failure to offer Palestinians fair deal (which added to perception in Palestine that Israelis never intend to leave) and Israeli military tactics (sometimes heavy handed).
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I thought that this was relevent to this thread so what do people think. Is the building of these new houses fair or justified or is Israel just trying to provoke a response.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3527548.stm
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I thought that this was relevent to this thread so what do people think. Is the building of these new houses fair or justified or is Israel just trying to provoke a response.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3527548.stm
    Yes it is very relevant, it illustrates that the long-term policy of the Israeli right to talk the language of peace whilst simultaneously undermining it continues as we speak. Fortunately, many of the new homes built since Sharons election actually remain empty since many Israelis are unwilling to buy houses in the occupied territories - despite the financial inducements offered for them to do so - due to fears about their legality, terrorism and their long-term value. Thus if one day an Israeli leader with a bit more foresight (rather than just short-sighted policies aimed at strengthening Israeli position and undermining peace), is eventually elected the new vacant homes, along with the homes for the 400,000 settlers can be put to good use housing Palestinians who have lost their housing and/or who currently have very poor quality housing.

    As regards to provoking a response, are you suggestion that Sharon, the Ariel Sharon, would intentionally expand a settlement to anger the Palestinians into a terrorist reaction which he can then denounce and claim the moral high-ground? Surely not, not good old Sharon, he would never do such a thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    SUPPORT ISREAL!
    Lets crush the common enemy of islam which is a blot on our planet!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MyHappyEnding)
    SUPPORT ISREAL!
    Lets crush the common enemy of islam which is a blot on our planet!
    Lovely let's destroy all the people who share a faith where a select few pose a threat to us lovely peaceful westerners
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No lets crush a opressive 'religion' which activly supports attacks against non muslims as stated in the quran
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MyHappyEnding)
    SUPPORT ISREAL!
    Lets crush the common enemy of islam which is a blot on our planet!
    Islam is a genuin religion just like any other. It doen't deserve all the bashing and horrible things that are said about it by you and other people on this forum. But this is off topic anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    has everyone figured out that this is an issue where neither side CAN back down due to actual religious beliefs, not saying the leaders are saints.... but it really does come down to the idea that the dome of the rock is a sacred place... which sits on the grounds of the temple... which is sacred.... and there will not and cannot be an agreement or compromise? this isn't about land or human rights violations.... it is a good old fashioned biblical holy way. oh yeah, the site is also considered holy to Christians because the prophecies say that Christ will return once the temple is re-built.... which requires bye bye dome of the rock... <the site where Abraham was to sacrifice his son>.... and faith or no... enough people do believe. This was the driving force behind England supporting the ressurection of the Isreali state.... the Zionist actually went to a few Lords... and said hey you want Christ to return right? well get us our land back?

    so lets keep our eyes on the real problem... and not what outsiders like to come up with to make it all logical, cause it aint....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wonder why on this forum zionism and judaism are up for discussion but not islam.

    Why not study islam critically and see why muslim students here on this forum behave the way they do against nonmuslims.


    Arab conspiracy against islam;

    http://www.free-minds.org/Arab_Conspiracy.html

    islamic history;

    http://www.salagram.net/VWH-Kaaba.html
    http://www.masada2000.org/islam.html

    http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/india.html
    http://www.geocities.com/akhandbharat1947/ISLAM.html
    http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/Dec-01/031201.html
    http://www.angelfire.com/ms/dore/text3.html
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/ne.../posts#comment
    http://www.westerndefense.org/bulletins/June-02.htm
    http://www.hillary.org/hc/Hillary_Cl..._775_chat1.cgi

    http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/Commentar...p?option=print
    http://www.hinduism-today.com/archiv...999-3-14.shtml
    http://www.bharatvani.org/books/negaind/ch2.htm
    http://www.bharatvani.org/books/negaind/index.htm

    http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.org/englis...hapter_01.html


    muslim women and islam;

    http://wluml.org/english/
    http://www.paktaste.com/womens_corner/interview.html
    http://www.azadizan.com/english/index.htm
    http://www.middleastwomen.org/
    http://www.irandwr.org/english/
    http://www.stopstoningnow.com/
    http://debate.domini.org/newton/

    Islam, quran and muhammad;

    http://thespiritofislam.com/books/imk/index.html
    http://www.geocities.com/islampencer..._the_koran.htm
    http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99jan/koran.htm
    http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/index.htm
    http://answering-islam.org/Green/seven.htm
    http://www.youngmuslims.ca/online_li...uran/index.htm
    http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/



    http://www.prophetofdoom.net/toc.html
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mughal)
    I wonder why on this forum zionism and judaism are up for discussion but not islam.

    Why not study islam critically and see why muslim students here on this forum behave the way they do against nonmuslims.
    Trust me this forum isn't tip toeing around the religion of Islam. There was a thread about it a while ago which went on for ages but it got unfairly deleted. If you want to start that debate up again in may be worth searching the forum or starting a new thread.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Dear randdom thank you for your suggestion.

    Islam need to be discussed because here is what islam teaches its followers regarding its apostates ie kill them. There is no punishment in islam for a muslim who kills an apostate. Salman Rushdie and other such people who have turned away from islam are still living in fear of being murdered.

    http://www.muhammadanism.com/Governm...apostasy_1.htm
    http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/96a.htm
    http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm
    http://www.barnabasfund.org/Apostasy/Consequences.htm
    http://www.radiodirectory.com/usstor...591020689.html
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=9000
    http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamen...i/084.sbt.html






    The answers to questions like was Muhammad a pedophile and does islam encourage pedophila etc becomes clear when one reads through islamic sources like the quran and Hadith etc.

    1) The quran states that when it comes to divorcing women, the women that yet do not have periods are to wait for three months and so should the ones who have passed the age of having periods 65/4.

    065.004
    YUSUFALI: Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.

    PICKTHAL: And for such of your women as despair of menstruation, if ye doubt, their period (of waiting) shall be three months, along with those who have it not. And for those with child, their period shall be till they bring forth their burden. And whosoever keepeth his duty to Allah, He maketh his course easy for him.

    SHAKIR: And (as for) those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time shall be three months, and of those too who have not had their courses; and (as for) the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah He will make easy for him his affair.

    Here is what Ibn Kathseer says:

    http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54100


    (divorce them at their `Iddah), "The `Iddah is made up of clean- liness and the menstrual period.'' So he divorces her while it is clear that she is pregnant, or he does not due to having sex, or since he does not know if she is pregnant or not. This is why the scholars said that there are two types of divorce, one that conforms to the Sunnah and another innovated. The divorce that conforms to the Sunnah is one where the husband pronounces one divorce to his wife when she is not having her menses and without having had sexual intercourse with her after the menses ended. One could divorce his wife when it is clear that she is pregnant. As for the innovated divorce, it occurs when one divorces his wife when she is having her menses, or after the menses ends, has sexual intercourse with her and then divorces her, even though he does not know if she became pregnant or not. There is a third type of divorce, which is neither a Sunnah nor an innovation where one divorces a young wife who has not begun to have menses, the wife who is beyond the age of having menses, and divorcing one's wife before the marriage was consummated. Allah said,


    [وَأَحْصُواْ الْعِدَّةَ]


    (and count their `Iddah.) meaning, count for it and know its beginning and end, so that the `Iddah does not become prolonged for the woman and she cannot get married again,

    2) We have in the Bukhaari clearlhadith that state that Muhammad married Ayesha at the age of 53 when she was only 6.

    Since Muhammad is said in the quran to be an exellent example for muslims to follow, so many would go for child brides to please Allah and themselves. Many parents are therefore forced to marry their daughters off at a very young age to save their honour. In my view honour killings are a cultural thing but the culture seems to be shaped by pressures from islamic teachings wherein sexual misconduct -as seen by islam- is punished severely eg even by stoning people to death. One can see my other posts for references from the quran and the hadith etc.

    I therefore see a sort of connection between islamic teachings and pedophila in islamic societies.



    http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1860
    http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1997
    http://www.muhammadanism.com/Hadith/Topics/Marriage.htm
    http://www.prophetofdoom.net/chapter13.html

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=27975
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0615-04.htm
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/698981/posts
    http://www.homa.org/Details.asp?Cont...CID=2083225348




    http://www.themodernreligion.com/pro...phet_aisha.htm
    http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/St...x?StoryId=3209



    Such problem are bottom of the pile when it comes to muslims declaring jihad on infidels, thanks to the teachings of the quran and hadith.

    Anyway, thank again and all the best.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mughal)
    Dear randdom thank you for your suggestion.

    Blah blah blah blah.....

    Such problem are bottom of the pile when it comes to muslims declaring jihad on infidels, thanks to the teachings of the quran and hadith.

    Anyway, thank again and all the best.
    Firstly this is not the topic of the thread.
    Secondly the topic has been up several times before
    Thirdly your post is very offensive, contains mainly material that has basicly been coppied from elsewhere and it does not invite to further debate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Firstly this is not the topic of the thread.
    Secondly the topic has been up several times before
    Thirdly your post is very offensive, contains mainly material that has basicly been coppied from elsewhere and it does not invite to further debate.
    thank you...finally!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mughal)
    Dear randdom thank you for your suggestion.

    Islam need to be discussed because here is what islam teaches its followers regarding its apostates ie kill them. There is no punishment in islam for a muslim who kills an apostate. Salman Rushdie and other such people who have turned away from islam are still living in fear of being murdered......
    PLEASE If you want to evangelise Islam do it somewhere else. I think everyone here would agree that we're pretty set in our beliefs, whether religious, political or otherwise. We're here to debate, not to be converted. Go target the general chat forum or something. They all need something to think about. I think this highlights the problem we face when productive debate (which this thread has proved we can acheive!) is interrupted by someone who has an agenda which doesn't involve debating.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    DEAR FRIENDS, READ THE LINKS BEFORE YOU REPLY.



    http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatc...ves/002721.php

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3530608.stm
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by carldaman)
    PLEASE If you want to evangelise Islam do it somewhere else. I think everyone here would agree that we're pretty set in our beliefs, whether religious, political or otherwise. We're here to debate, not to be converted. Go target the general chat forum or something. They all need something to think about. I think this highlights the problem we face when productive debate (which this thread has proved we can acheive!) is interrupted by someone who has an agenda which doesn't involve debating.
    I don't think he is evangelising or trying to convert people, just trying forcefully to discuss Islam. Mentioning the fatwa on Salman Rushdie is hardly the way you would go about trying to convert people.
 
 
 
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: September 2, 2004
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
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.