Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by MyHappyEnding)
    Honest i would agree with you if this is what i thought was achievable but it wont it truely wont, militants will not stop until every single American Britain and Israeli are dead. If you give a mouse a cookie, there gonna want a glass of milk. it will never end. unfortunatly we just have to ride it out, yes its bloody but its the only way. atleast thats my view
    Most of the people fighting in the occupied territories are not hardline militants wanting world wide islamic rule. they are not Al-Queda. Sure Al-Queda would be more than happy to help them, and alot fo them are not jobs who see Jewish conspiracies everywhere, but its a display of incredible ignorace to think the situation in israel and that in american/britain(9/11, 7/7) are related.

    I mean when push comes to shove do you honestly think this conflict is based just on religion?
    No, its about territory, something people of the same religion have been fighting over for many centuries worldwide.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Great player, so sad his career was ruined by drink.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by The Black Rider)
    I think your policy for the Middle East lacks clarity. The solution is unlikely to involve taking pot shots at the local population on a whim.

    Shooting the 'suspect Muslim' has already been road-tested right here in Blighty. It turned out he was Brazilian.
    Spot on.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think the most disgraceful comment on the issue came from a young woman from tel aviv this evening on radio4. She said that she didn't support the pull-out because "the Palestinians hadn't shown themselves to deserve the land". i worry when the you people, who are traditionally the most radical elements of society come out with crap like this.

    MB
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Watching these settlers whining on tv makes me furious. It just beggars belief!

    They're complaining that they're losing their homes - excuse moi, but what happened to the Palestinians in '67? Did they not lose their homes, were they not forcibly evicted? The settlers should be thankful they're not being killed like the Palestinians were.

    And they're getting at least £100,000 compensation! This is insane! Did anyone ever compensate the Palestinians? I don't recall all the refugees who had their homes stolen by Zionist settlers being given a nice tidy sum like that.

    And these spiteful evil people are knocking the houses down so there's nothing there when the Palestinians regain their land. Though if I was a Palestinian I suppose I wouldn't want to live in a house that murdering scum had lived in.

    It's just sickening, these settlers don't have a damn thing to complain about. They should never have been there in the first place. *******s.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fivebyfive)
    I think the pull out of Israel citizens from Gaza settlements is a good start. Hopefully it will lead to a reduction to the amount of attacks from Palestine bombers and further peaceful acts between the two peoples.
    IMO Israel has no right to be in Gaza in the first place. No one can deny Israels right to exist now they have developed/invested into the country/land so greatly but I defiantly think Israel should make major concessions to the Palestine’s as it took their land illegally in the first place.
    It wasn't taken illegally. If you disagree Id be interested to know on what basis.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SolInvincitus)
    Oh please. Those settlers moved into Palestinian land, because they think they can just take any d**n thing they want. Well I have news for some of those settlers. If they did what they do in any other part of the world, they would be deported or jailed. Give me a break!!
    Part of the land was under Israeli jurisdiction up until the mid 90s when the Declaration of Principles passed some sovereignity to the Palestinian authorities. The Mandate for Palestine offered Jewish settlers the right of passage in Gaza and to settle there if they so wished, and the Oslo Agreement recognised the Jewish settlers until further sovereignity in Gaza could be determined. Furthermore, the land is disputed. I dont know what part of the world jails and deports immigrants from land it has no full sovereign jurisdiction over, certainly not the non-existent nation state of Palestine.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MyHappyEnding)
    It is an absolute joke, ofcourse the Gaza withdrawal should not continue. Ok its accepted that Israel 'took' the land during the 1967 war, however the state of Israel has only been in excistance for just under 60 years. So this conflict with palestien was 20 years after the Israeli state was created following WWII. So the arguement is either 1) this is palestieian land or 2) its a jesture of good faith towards the musilms next door.

    Both are a joke. firstly what nation throughout the world has ever settled with what they have. probly all countires have that lil bit extra land somewhere. Uk having atleast the fawklands, france has its island in the couth atlantic and the states simply bought Alaska off the russians. so this land is just it is like no other state bit of extra terriory that has justly been taken from another.
    Israel had legal right to take the land as recognised by the UN in UNSCR 242, which deliberately highlighted Israel's right to take the disputed land as a defensive measure. Whatsmore, legal precedent also errs in favour of a power who takes disputed land under conflict in an act of self-defense. Until a sovereign Palestinian nation state is declared and Israel has sufficient guarantees as to its security, it has legal entitlement to remain in disputed territories until those lands are otherwise declared or recognised to be under the sovereign control of another power.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    Now i can't stand the terror groups like hamas - i'll say that from the outset so i don't get vienna or someone demanding i add it in.
    Disappointing that Im the only reason you think terrorist groups are worth condemning, if indeed thats what this amounts to.

    Can you not see that this is righting a wrong. The land that these people are living on belonged to people before they seized it. In several of the larger settlements they are actually founded on old palestinian villages. Now at first when it was announced the siraelis would tear up houses when they go i thought it a horrid idea, but now i think its spot on. Let the palestinians have their land back and do what they will. Let them reclaim properties for which many have deeds.
    No, because I dont see that such a wrong was ever committed by Jewish settlers. The land that the Jewish settlers came to live on was never under the jurisdiction or sovereign control of the Palestinian people. Interesting that you've already declared the disputed territories in favour of the state of Palestine, with no rights afforded to Jewish settlers despite those afforded to them under the Mandate for Palestine, the UN Charter and the Oslo Agreements. This may very well be your outcome of preference but it isnt the reality of the situation which is clearly yet to be resolved.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Israel had legal right to take the land as recognised by the UN in UNSCR 242, which deliberately highlighted Israel's right to take the disputed land as a defensive measure. Whatsmore, legal precedent also errs in favour of a power who takes disputed land under conflict in an act of self-defense. Until a sovereign Palestinian nation state is declared and Israel has sufficient guarantees as to its security, it has legal entitlement to remain in disputed territories until those lands are otherwise declared or recognised to be under the sovereign control of another power.
    1) how is putting civilians settlers in a land defensive?
    2) the conflict was technically started by israel. Egypt had already stood down hours before the israeli strike due to pressure form the US (by way of russia)
    3) Israel has kep the PA under its shoe for decades, from which it has only just been released. Give it time.
    4) How does one declare themselves a sovereign state these days? Especially when most your borders are disputed.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Disappointing that Im the only reason you think terrorist groups are worth condemning, if indeed thats what this amounts to.



    No, because I dont see that such a wrong was ever committed by Jewish settlers. The land that the Jewish settlers came to live on was never under the jurisdiction or sovereign control of the Palestinian people.
    And yet it was banned under international law, so there must be some strong precedent for that - remembering that back then your accusation of "the UN is controlled by arabs" certainly wouldn't stand.
    How about the moral wrong. Contrary to the common assertion, palestine isn't an abandoned wilderness. many of the areas settled had people living on them with farms, which were subsequently taken.


    I don't see the point in condemning terrorists everyday just like i don't see the point in praying everyday.
    Why remind someone everyday what they already know?
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Part of the land was under Israeli jurisdiction up until the mid 90s when the Declaration of Principles passed some sovereignity to the Palestinian authorities. The Mandate for Palestine offered Jewish settlers the right of passage in Gaza and to settle there if they so wished, and the Oslo Agreement recognised the Jewish settlers until further sovereignity in Gaza could be determined. Furthermore, the land is disputed. I dont know what part of the world jails and deports immigrants from land it has no full sovereign jurisdiction over, certainly not the non-existent nation state of Palestine.
    So no one owns palestine, its common land?
    :rolleyes:

    Have you ever heard of the word 'moral'
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I cant understand Gaza. People live in a place where everyone around them is equipped with mortars and hostile.

    And you cant really call it the promised land seeing as Israel invaded. There would be less friction if you werent in the West bank too.

    It will be interesting to see the Israelis finally test non fatal crowd control measures
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    1) how is putting civilians settlers in a land defensive?
    Israel hasnt forced settlements, persons are free to settle outside of Israeli jurisdiction and they are afforded rights accordingly. Land under Israeli jurisdiction and outside of the 1948 armistice lines are a result of a defensive action following the Six day war, whose legitimacy remains.

    2) the conflict was technically started by israel. Egypt had already stood down hours before the israeli strike due to pressure form the US (by way of russia)
    Israeli action was in response to repeated Jordanian fire and breach of the agreed Armistice lines, all despite Israeli warnings. Since you mention Egypt, I think its worth remembering that Israel believed that Egypt's blocade of the Straits of tiran constituted an act of war under the Geneva Convention.

    3) Israel has kep the PA under its shoe for decades, from which it has only just been released. Give it time.
    Too ambiguous to warrant a response.

    4) How does one declare themselves a sovereign state these days? Especially when most your borders are disputed.
    Well im glad you recognise the borders to be disputed, this certainly invalidates your claim that disputed land legally belongs to 'Palestinians'.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Noxid)
    I cant understand Gaza. People live in a place where everyone around them is equipped with mortars and hostile.

    And you cant really call it the promised land seeing as Israel invaded. There would be less friction if you werent in the West bank too.

    It will be interesting to see the Israelis finally test non fatal crowd control measures
    I think they're probablary amongst the best in the world at non-lethal crowd control. But lets face it, all crowd control methods have some degree o lethality.
    if you use a water cannon theres always the risk it'll knock someone over, they'll hit their head get a subdural bleed and die.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Israel hasnt forced settlements, persons are free to settle outside of Israeli jurisdiction and they are afforded rights accordingly. Land under Israeli jurisdiction and outside of the 1948 armistice lines are a result of a defensive action following the Six day war, whose legitimacy remains.


    Israeli action was in response to repeated Jordanian fire and breach of the agreed Armistice lines, all despite Israeli warnings.


    Too ambiguous to warrant a response.



    Well im glad you recognise the borders to be disputed, this certainly invalidates your claim that the Gaza belongs to 'Palestinians'.
    WEll im struggling to see how the borders can possibly 'belong' to israel. Tyhhis 'use ground taken for defensive reasons' doesn't wash for me because they take land, settle it, then need more 'defensive buffer'.
    defensive, HA!
    More like Lebensraum
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    And yet it was banned under international law, so there must be some strong precedent for that - remembering that back then your accusation of "the UN is controlled by arabs" certainly wouldn't stand.
    How about the moral wrong. Contrary to the common assertion, palestine isn't an abandoned wilderness. many of the areas settled had people living on them with farms, which were subsequently taken.
    What was banned under international law?

    Interesting this "moral wrong", when does moral wrong spread to Jordanian occupation, Arab terrorism and the rights of Jewish settlers? International law one minute, moral wrongs the next.

    I don't see the point in condemning terrorists everyday just like i don't see the point in praying everyday
    If it wasnt necessary, I dont see why it was relevant to mention it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    WEll im struggling to see how the borders can possibly 'belong' to israel.
    Which borders? The Armstice lines of 1949?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Which borders? The Armstice lines of 1949
    palestine claims the 1967 borders israel claims more than that

    but the entire international community including america backs the 1967 borders it will be interesting to see if israel respect the will of the entire international community !!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    p.s anyone notice how much media coverage this gaza withdrawl has got !! under the israelis are losing there homes its so terrible yet when palestinians lose there homes it barely makes the international news !
 
 
 
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: October 8, 2005
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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.