What's new

Gaza-Israel Conflict | October 2023

First of all, I'd like to thank you for confirming my last post against yours with this lovely table.

What did I say?
• 500,000 Jews migrated from 1917 on.
What does the table you posted say?
• 500,000 Jews migrated from 1917 on.

Show me evidence of Arab migration into Palestine from 1917-1948 that matches the figures in the table above.


Yes, it would be unfair because they were a minority group always, and the majority within the minority were foreigners from Europe.
And to add further,

The Treaty of Umar with the Byzantines upon the surrender of Jerusalem, April 637/638 AD
In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. This is the assurance of safety which the servant of God, Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, has given to the people of Jerusalem. He has given them an assurance of safety for themselves for their property, their churches, their crosses, the sick and healthy of the city and for all the rituals which belong to their religion. Their churches will not be inhabited by Muslims and will not be destroyed. Neither they, nor the land on which they stand, nor their cross, nor their property will be damaged. They will not be forcibly converted. No Jew will live with them in Jerusalem.
...
[Source: Tarikh Tabari]

Ottoman Policy and Restrictions on Jewish Settlement in Palestine: 1881-1908: Part I
[Jewish] immigrants will be able to settle as scattered groups throughout Turkey, excluding Palestine.
[Middle Eastern Studies
Vol. 10, No. 3 (Oct., 1974), pp. 312-332 (21 pages)
Published By: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.]

Jews were allowed pilgrimage but forbidden from living in Jerusalem from 637/638 on. This condition was upheld by all subsequent rulers including the Crusaders, Ayyubis, Seljuks and Ottoman.

So how did this native Jew appear in Jerusalem in 1917? They arrived with the British. None of them were natives. It was a physical impossibility to be a Jewish resident of Jerusalem post-638 AD.
 
You said that Israel is controlling Gaza and thus Israel is responsible if Hamas attacks Israeli citizens. What kind of logic is this?
These are Palestinians who brought Hamas to power and Muslim States who support them and Muslim people who support them (which seems to be majority of Muslims). So, if you want to condemn, then condemn them.


You are an individual, and I already made clear my comment was directed towards huge majority of Muslims who support Hamas and its attacks.
I also told in my post that violent resistance is allowed if you can face the opponent. But International law does not allow you to attack opponent's civilians and then hide behind your own civilian population.


Everywhere Muslims are demanding rights like the right to make mosques, the right to make minarets, the right to recite Adhan on loud speakers, the right to do Hijab. While the Secular western world is JUST and it already provided the right to preach and criticize and to convert by default as a basic human right.
Do you think that Muslims will not protest and demand if they are banned from preaching Islam and converting people in Western countries? Are you so blind? No, you are not so blind, but you don't have an argument to defend the injustices of Muslim countries where they usurp this right from non-Muslims.

You see the clear double standards, but you turn your eyes shut.


Then bring your argument to prove your point instead of making empty accusations.

Please you open it, as admins have already warned me when I previously did so.


Indiscriminate killing, YES of course.
But is it indiscriminate?
How to prove it when Hamas is using its civilians as human shields?
I told you many times to see the facts that Hamas is more responsible for this situation than Israel. That is why the International Justice Court will never declare Israel a war criminal on this basis, as the same International Law allows you to still target the terrorists if they are using civilians as human shields.

I still condemn the Israeli bombardment, as I believe not enough time is given to Palestinian citizens to evacuate the buildings. I personally demand to end the bombardment and engage Hamas on ground.

At the same time, I also give Israel full right at this point to kill each and every Hamas member and all those who raise weapons to protect Hamas and those who support Hamas.



Yes, I condemn all racist apartheid setups and I want a 100% Secular Israel.
But the issue is, the Secular Constitution and laws of Israel are still better than any Hamas-influenced Muslim state, which will usurp the rights of non-Muslims, ex-Muslims and homosexual people.
I will support the end of any racist apartheid setups, and reforms in Israel, and end of illegal settlements, and two state solution with Secular al-Fateh.



Yes. If they talk about the genocide of Palestinian civilians, then yes. But if they want to genocide Hamas, then I welcome it, while we will go nowhere further till Hamas does not lay down its weapon and agrees that Israel has the right to exist.



I would have supported it in 1967.
And I still support it if all security issues of Israel are resolved. I don't know how much the Oslo Accords affects this previous pact, but in general, I do agree.
I don't agree with Zionist argument that they have God given birthright to this land.
You continue to lie about what i have said by creating strawman arguments a few people have pointed out your trolling so I'm not going to get into lengthy discussions with you. You want to discuss Islam open another thread if you can STOP trying to derail this thread.

I'm glad you condemn Israeli deliberate killing of civilians and this wanton destruction. I am glad you condemn apartheid and the genocide being committed by Israel. You also don't have an issue with a Palestinian state which I think we all agree on. So I don't know what your trying to argue with me about.

Stop making false assumptions and using strawman fallacies with me. You want to challenge what I said on the conflict go ahead but quote me don't make stuff up or misconstrue what I have written.
 
He is trying to clear the facts on record that Oct 7 was not planned and executed by Hezbollah and/or Iran. Which is why he is summarizing the chain of events and crediting Hamas for the secrecy.

Let's see what the final announcement is going to be.
I don't think they will get involved personally. They have damaged Israeli assets on the border quite a lot
 
Yes, it would be unfair because they were a minority group always, and the majority within the minority were foreigners from Europe.
So,Turks came and conquered Anatolia. So according to you,they are occupiers.

First of all, I'd like to thank you for confirming my last post against yours with this lovely table.
I showed you that 94,000 Jews lived there already before 1917,while the Muslim population was around 525,000.

So again,they were a significant part of the population. By 1945,there maybe have been 500,000 Jews,but there were also a bit over 1,000,000 Muslims. Of course,a lot of Jews came from abroad,but just like Arabs bred,so did Jews who already lived there.

So it all comes to down to this: In 1947 the UN decided to partition the land. You disagree because you say Jews are a minority and therefore shouldn't have their own country there. Right?
 
This video doesn't show tanks destroyed. It has very good armour and those RPG-s are probably not enough. We down see a tank cook offs like we see in Ukraine.

Im sure they can get them, but it probably requires many hits.

Based on the below tweet, the Yasin 105 rocket's smaller charge at the tip would detonate the reactive armor of the tank first, and then the much larger grenade would penetrate the main armour & hull of the vehicle. The Palestinian resistance in Gaza ha mdany battles with the IOF in the past and tested their Yasin 105 ricket on Israeli APCs and tanks. They fully know where to hit and how the dual charge rocket is supposed to work.


And how do you know it is working? Look at the announcements of the casualties from the IOF: They're mostly tank units.

Also looking at Hamas' pronouncements, most of their attacks are based on Yasin 105 rockets. They're maximizing the good use of the Yasin 105 rocket. That rocket owns the day!
 
Based on the below tweet, the Yasin 105 rocket's smaller charge at the tip would detonate the reactive armor of the tank first, and then the much larger grenade would penetrate the main armour & hull of the vehicle. The Palestinian resistance in Gaza ha mdany battles with the IOF in the past and tested their Yasin 105 ricket on Israeli APCs and tanks. They fully know where to hit and how the dual charge rocket is supposed to work.


And how do you know it is working? Look at the announcements of the casualties from the IOF: They're mostly tank units.

Also looking at Hamas' pronouncements, most of their attacks are based on Yasin 105 rockets. They're maximizing the good use of the Yasin 105 rocket. That rocket owns the day!

Hamas have destroyed APCs and attacked tanks. There is only one confirmed disabling/destruction of tank. That was an October 7 footage of Hamas Quadcopter dropping an anti tank round on a tank. None of the other footages shows the result of the attack. So nobody can say for sure whether it penetrated the armour or not.
 
still going on

I am not in a position to listen right now. I will listen to the entire speech at a convenient time in the evening. It would be great if a friend could quote the headlines he deems important and quote them to the forum.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom