'Instead of Gaza' | How should we name the new city?

Taking by force the place of one of Muslims' holy sites.
I'd like to break this one down a bit. Is it "extremism" to sign a mutual peace treaty which governs the holy site allowing access to people of all faiths?
 
I'd like to break this one down a bit. Is it "extremism" to sign a mutual peace treaty which governs the holy site allowing access to people of all faiths?
If that would be a mutually agreed decision, then not, of course.
 
Great. Would it be extremism, in the presence of such a signed peace treaty, to deny access and rights to other faiths?
Again manipulative questions? It is the Muslims place now. And they aren't obliged to sign anything that curbs their rights.

What is extremism I already told. It is taking by force other people's property using historical, ethnic or religious justification. How many times should I repeat that?
 
Again manipulative questions? It is the Muslims place now. And they aren't obliged to sign anything that curbs their rights.
They would be obliged to honor their agreements, though, yes?
What is extremism I already told. It is taking by force other people's property using historical, ethnic or religious justification. How many times should I repeat that?
Would it be extremism to exert control over property that is yours? If the property is disputed and both parties wanted to exert their rights over the property that they believe is theirs, is that extremism? Or just a dispute?
 
Read some posts here. Making Gaza 'Jewish' is one of it. By that I mean expelling Arab population from there in any significant numbers.

So what? You think only Islamist's get to invade land and use it for their own whims? Sucks to start wars and then lose them.
 
They would be obliged to honor their agreements, though, yes?

Would it be extremism to exert control over property that is yours? If the property is disputed and both parties wanted to exert their rights over the property that they believe is theirs, is that extremism? Or just a dispute?
Agreements, yes.

Extremism will be calls and deeds to take this property by force.
 
It was a Jewish holy site first, and then defiled with a fake mosque.
Yes, it was. But what do you propose? Taking over this site; expelling Arabs from Gaza, because once it was a Jewish city? Not sure, it will go down quite well.
 
Agreements, yes.

Extremism will be calls and deeds to take this property by force.
Okay. Can we add these to the list then?

Arab extremism:
  • calls to take disputed territory by force ("resistance")
  • failure to honor peace treaties, calls to break peace treaties

Jewish extremism:
  • calls to take disputed territory by force
  • failure to honor peace treaties, calls to break peace treaties
 
Yes, it was. But what do you propose?
Sharing the site still seems a good option. In order to truly share, though, Muslims will have to give up this whole notion that it is THEIR holy site, and acknowledge the Jewish origins of the Holy place, the inherent Jewish right to that place, and permit Jewish presence there. Jews will have to guarantee the preservation of the existing structures. Access for both would have to be equal.
 
Okay. Can we add these to the list then?

Arab extremism:
  • calls to take disputed territory by force ("resistance")
  • failure to honor peace treaties, calls to break peace treaties

Jewish extremism:
  • calls to take disputed territory by force
  • failure to honor peace treaties, calls to break peace treaties
Treaties not, resistance not.

Extremism is taking over other people's property by force using historical, ethnic and religious justification.

Maybe we agree to stop this awkward run around a circle?
 
Sharing the site still seems a good option. In order to truly share, though, Muslims will have to give up this whole notion that it is THEIR holy site, and acknowledge the Jewish origins of the Holy place, the inherent Jewish right to that place, and permit Jewish presence there. Jews will have to guarantee the preservation of the existing structures. Access for both would have to be equal.
The main question - will the Muslims agree to such proposal?
 
The main question - will the Muslims agree to such proposal?
Of course they won't. My claim is that usurping another's property (taking it by force) is IMMORAL. Your position seems to be that usurping another's property (taking it by force) is sometimes permissible and sometimes not permissible. It reads to me as a double standard.
 

Forum List

Back
Top