Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Resolution on Jerusalem?

  1. Sep 21, 2007 #1


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Israel urged to turn over Arab areas
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070921/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians [Broken]

    Here's an idea - stop the hostility and give peace a chance.

    Youngbloods - Let's Get Together
    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 21, 2007 #2


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    yeah, John Lennon was right too. :smile:
    let's all not be so greedy and value the lives of all sentient beings.
  4. Sep 21, 2007 #3
    I don't think the resolution goes nearly far enough. The US should give Manhattan back to the Indians, along with a few other parcels. Every country that was founded in blood should give back what they stole.
  5. Sep 21, 2007 #4


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    when that happens, there is probably nothing left in Manhattan or any other of those countries....

    first and foremost.. we need religious and racial tolerance in the Middle East.
  6. Sep 24, 2007 #5
    I think we should evacuate jerusalem and then nuke it to the ground so that all that's left is a bunch of radioactive dirt.

    When children can't share, you take it away.
  7. Sep 24, 2007 #6
    funny, sounds like something an ignorant child might say :rolleyes:
  8. Sep 25, 2007 #7

    that should be done to any country around the world. that will be fair enough if it happen. peace to the world
  9. Sep 29, 2007 #8
    It is an unjust and violent occupation based on fictive stories that has been disproven and it must end. If necessary, peace must be defended with force. They should stop their genocide.
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2007
  10. Sep 29, 2007 #9
    peace does not rely on any kind of talk, since fatah is powerless, and hamas does not care for any kind of agreement with israel.(fatah has already shown impotency against hamas, so they have no peace to offer)

    there is no one to talk to, they have no strong reliable leadership.
    even if an agreement is made, if a revolution is made, the new government will not hold to the former government's agreements with israel. yet israel as a lawful country will always remain true to its agreement with the palestinians.

    i believe that there is no place for talk, since there is none to talk to and none to rely on.
    also that they use our power station and water resources and pumps, so they cant even be economically free even if they wanted...

    its so crowded here... if you hand over half jerusalem every fart could take a long pipe, some fertilizer, and there you have a kasam rocket launched at our capitol...

    do not use the word genocide so lightly, the people killed by this conflict in many years is nothing compared to the amount that are killed by a genocide in a day. and those that are killed are a result of terrorist aggression from civil environments.

    "unjust and violent occupation" - trust me, we have no interest in east jerusalem, nothing but keeping the peace in west jerusalem.
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2007
  11. Sep 29, 2007 #10


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    so, what do you propose in order to try achieving peace? Or do you actually want peace at all? alternatively, one of you could try wipe out the other and then there will surely be no need for talks. :eek:
  12. Sep 29, 2007 #11


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Tuvia has said that talking now cannot be effective; why do you think that implies that he doesn't want peace, or wants to wipe out the other side?
  13. Sep 29, 2007 #12


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    my only question is if talking is no good, then what can one do instead?

    I did not think that he/she doesn't want peace,... the later questions were there just as a natural response for an onlooker (note the smilie, wasn't intended to be an assertion/condemnation as such). while there is nothing wrong in saying that talking is hopeless, but unless you suggest something which is better... you either mean that don't worry about the issue or you just want some other drastic solution or you have no solutions....
    my bad english may have set the tone wrong...
  14. Sep 30, 2007 #13
    That is a question many Israelis ask these days.

    It is not only the Fatah leadership who are powerless - public opinion in Israel does not allow for any more territorial concessions, particularly with regards to Jerusalem. There is much distrust of the Palestinians. The basic argument against territorial concessions is that past experience shows when Israel pulls out of an occupied territory, it eventually is used to attack Israel. Tuvia's comment about rockets is a good example of current Israeli public opinion.

    On another note, I cannot imagine a solution to the Jerusalem problem that will satisfy all sides. There is the ultra-sensitive matter of the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.
  15. Sep 30, 2007 #14


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    This seems to be the major sticky point, isn't it? People don't trust each other... I am pretty sure that the Palestinians don't trust Israelis either. :frown:

    this is a classic example of an age old religious friction... until we learn to respect each other, this will never end (at least until one side disappear for better or for worse).

    as an onlooker, all I could say is "what kind of future do you want for your grand-grand-grandchildern?"
  16. Sep 30, 2007 #15
    Distrust is indeed a root cause for the perpetuation of this conflict. Unfortunately, radical elements have succeeded in completely separating Palestinians and Israelis.
    Prior to the Second Intifada there were 40,000 Palestinian workers crossing into Israel through the Erez Crossing in the Gaza Strip alone. Following the waves of suicide bombings the Security Services toughened the screening procedures until only several thousands could trickle through. Crossings would be closed often due to intelligence regarding impending attacks or attempted suicide bombers crossings or after attacks on the crossings themselves. These attacks would range from mortar fire (which quite obviously claimed mostly Palestinian lives) to suicide bombings. Ariel Sharon, popularly elected after several governments failed to stop the violence, established the "unilateral disengagement" policy. Under this policy Israel evacuated its settlements in Gaza and withdrew its forces there and began the establishment of the separation barrier in the West Bank.
    The policy has brought relative security to Israel - the number of successful suicide attacks has dropped sharply; but it also means few people on either side interact with each other, and this interaction is mostly negative in nature. Thus trust, as always, has to be regained slowly.

    Israel respects the Muslim world's claims to the Temple Mount. Even though it is technically sovereign Israeli territory, the Temple Mount is overseen by a Muslim organization, the Waqf, and Israeli law forbids Jews from performing worship on the Temple Mount. The Waqf repeatedly incites the Muslim world with lies about Israeli intentions to harm to the Temple Mount (usually spinning genuine salvage and maintenance efforts), while at the same time causing irreparable archaeological damage to the Temple Mount - apparently with the intent of weakening any Jewish claim to the site, and doing away with the status-quo that has existed since Jerusalem's unification.

    I would like my descendants to be both safe and free - I would like to see Israel's continued existence as a national home for the Jewish People.
  17. Sep 30, 2007 #16


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    do the palestinians or arabs see it that way (ie. it is Israeli territory fair-and-square)?

    safe and free eh? I am sure the palestinians would want stability too.
    who doesn't? :smile:
  18. Sep 30, 2007 #17
    Depends who you ask, and the definition of sovereignty that's applied. It is Israeli territory de facto, and it is managed more benignly than ever.

    I suppose they would, though sometimes it seems some prefer the destruction of Israel over it.
  19. Sep 30, 2007 #18
    Yeah that was an interesting experience. When I was in Jerusalem this summer there was an armed guard standing at the entrance to the COURTYARD of the Temple Mount and told us we weren't allowed in even to see that unless we were Muslims. He was nice enough though to walk inside and take a picture for us.
  20. Sep 30, 2007 #19


    User Avatar

    You seem to suggest the Palestinians are acting unreasonably? They have tried the legal route and won but to no avail. The UN which represents the world says the Israeli's claims have no legal basis so I'm sure the Palestinians would be quite happy if Israel were to abide by this ruling and some of the other 80+ UN resolutions Israel have thus far ignored and that's not including the 40 or so resolutions the US vetoed but unfortunately Israel ignores any resolutions they do not like; which todate is every single one.

    When folk in the ME see countries such as Iraq being destroyed for failing to abide by UN resolutions they get understandably angry when they see the same countries who are prepared to go to war to enforce UN resolutions against Arab countries stand idly by while Israel breachs more resolutions than the rest of the world combined.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2007
  21. Sep 30, 2007 #20


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So, Art, you think the destruction of Israel is reasonable?

    Or, at least, is a reasonable alternative to being safe and free?
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2007
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook