Your Opinion on Israel

[Mohamed_Sadiq]

My opinion on Israel is:
Non-existing state, thats populated by the cursed Jews that refused Allah (swt) commands. At the moment they are murderers and deserve harsh punishment. But they won't suceed with what they want, as Islam will overshadow them one day. Basically Israel is nothing in my eyes.

 

[shuraimfan4lyf]

And yes Indeed, they disobeyed commands of Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala through Prophet Musa Alayhi As-salam, not once but many times. That is why the La'nah of Allah is upon them. Our Sheikh was just giving a lecture about that on Monday.

 

[Mohamed_Sadiq]

Yeh, The Jews have so much arrogance. They think they know everything. They know about Islam more than the other non-muslims yet they are distant and would never convert. What a bunch of lunatics.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

Amen to that, as long as you mean both sides.

These are the two sides

- mature people.

- immature people.

The immature people should become mature and then we would have
peace. There are two ways to become mature

- pain
- giving up immature ego.

Hopefully it would be the second way and not the first (sad experience teaches
us that it is not what usually happens)

By the way if you notice - maturing usually means loosing ego. For instance a parent
has much less ego than a child.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

The problem is Israel, and ONLY Israel. They need they pack their bags and get the heck out of Shams. Before the whooping starts and they will hide behind trees. I heard that they started to plant those trees that wont speak against them near day of Judgement.

This cannot be.

There is never a one sided problem. You are just making things too simple and an over simplified
solution can never hold.

There has to be a solution which is fair for everybody - otherwise it would not be a solution.

 

[Dagless]

There is never a one sided problem. You are just making things too simple and an over simplified
solution can never hold.

It depends on the goal. Currently the goal from Israel and the US is not to have peace. Therefore it is a one sided problem.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

It depends on the goal. Currently the goal from Israel and the US is not to have peace. Therefore it is a one sided problem.

So, with all due respect - who asks them?

Peace is the ultimate interest of 99% of the people on this planet.

Putting aside all sorts of unimportant bureaucratic considerations.

 

[shuraimfan4lyf]

So, with all due respect - who asks them?

Peace is the ultimate interest of 99% of the people on this planet.

Putting aside all sorts of unimportant bureaucratic considerations.

I am not too sure about the "99%"..probably only 10-20% of Israeli people want peace. The rest want to finish the people of Ghazza by destorying their homes and preventing supplies to enter the city.

 

[Dagless]

So, with all due respect - who asks them?

The Palestinians.
The Arabs.
The UN.
The world.

Peace is the ultimate interest of 99% of the people on this planet.

Lots of answers:

1) Peace where you live is in interest of 99% of the planet. Having instability over which you have control in other areas can be an advantage.
2) To achieve peace, Israel would have to agree to the rights of the Palestinians and lose land.
3) Israel is slowly expanding and killing off Palestinians anyway, maybe they figure they'll just carry on... its not like anyone is stopping them.

Putting aside all sorts of unimportant bureaucratic considerations

If by "unimportant bureaucratic considerations" you mean the rights of the Palestinians then no.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

The Palestinians.
The Arabs.
The UN.
The world.



Lots of answers:

1) Peace where you live is in interest of 99% of the planet. Having instability over which you have control in other areas can be an advantage.
2) To achieve peace, Israel would have to agree to the rights of the Palestinians and lose land.
3) Israel is slowly expanding and killing off Palestinians anyway, maybe they figure they'll just carry on... its not like anyone is stopping them.



If by "bureaucratic considerations" you mean the rights of the Palestinians then no.

You took it to places which are very far away from what I meant.

1. The rights of the Palestinian people should be on the top of the list of things to be
considered as it goes under the category of - fairness.

2. By bureaucratic considerations I mean the fact that currently it is neither you
are me or any of us here who make the calls but rather other people - these people
are bureaucrats (all of them) and are driven by bureaucratic considerations which
have no human applications - and this is the main reason why we are in this situation
to begin with.

3. Israel is not a person - it is a state - we are doing a huge mistake by speaking of
it as a person - it is simply a bureaucratic organization.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

I am not too sure about the "99%"..probably only 10-20% of Israeli people want peace. The rest want to finish the people of Ghazza by destorying their homes and preventing supplies to enter the city.

Everybody wants peace for himself and to protect himself and the people he cares for. This is on the top of the list for most people I know.

The problem begins when people think that my peace and your peace cannot come together.

The only way to understand that this is not true is by maturing and understanding how to solve conflicts.

This is more than possible - in fact there is no other way.

 

[Dagless]

2. By bureaucratic considerations I mean the fact that currently it is neither you
are me or any of us here who make the calls but rather other people - these people
are bureaucrats (all of them) and are driven by bureaucratic considerations which
have no human applications - and this is the main reason why we are in this situation
to begin with.

Both governments were voted in democratically.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

Both governments were voted in democratically.

So? Democracy is by definition a bureaucratic concept and voting is a bureaucratic process.

The conflict we are speaking about can be described as follows:

A religious conflict which turned into a bureaucratic confusion which has implication on human lives.

Thus human beings have to take hold of the bureaucratic systems and solve the religious conflicts - this
is the only way out.

I say that the conflict is religious is because the only reason why Palestinians and Israeli's do not qualify
as the same people (and thus could all live under the same state whatever its name would be) - is because
the first group is Muslim and a bit of Christian and the second is secular and a bit of Jewish.

 

[shuraimfan4lyf]

Everybody wants peace for himself and to protect himself and the people he cares for. This is on the top of the list for most people I know.

The problem begins when people think that my peace and your peace cannot come together.

The only way to understand that this is not true is by maturing and understanding how to solve conflicts.

This is more than possible - in fact there is no other way.

The confict can be solved easily if Israel sticks to what they say, but are you saying that Israel and Palestinians have to share land? The land which was stolen from the Muslims by using violence, rape and all sorts of disgusting methods the media hides(only for Israel). The land which contains Masjid Al Aqsa, and is mentioned in Quran. The land which recently just became holy to the so called jews. The land which was once dear to the Muslims who fled to other Countries.

The land which is supposed to Look like

but instead it looks like

 

[marwen]

Ok guys, lets forget the diplomacy bla bla, and keep it simple : What on earth make Israel a ligitimate state ? =>
1) religion ? no (a big LIE)
2) history ? no (a bigger L I E !)
3) Power ? yes

Today, it's all about power. You have power then you are respected and you are beyond the law : you are the law ! Examples :
The USA !
CHINA !
RUSSIA !
They don't respect the low, they make the law !

Another emerging example : Iran. Why is the world hesitating on how to deal with Iran ? It's because Iran seems to have nuclear weapons. Why we didn't see the USA hesitating before invading Iraq ? the same reason : Iraq has no power.

Today the whole world is thinking that way. Israel is the most "powerful" State in the Middle East, so no need for legal reasons for Isreal : the military power is the most convincing.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

The confict can be solved easily if Israel sticks to what they say, but are you saying that Israel and Palestinians have to share land? The land which was stolen from the Muslims by using violence, rape and all sorts of disgusting methods the media hides(only for Israel). The land which contains Masjid Al Aqsa, and is mentioned in Quran. The land which recently just became holy to the so called jews. The land which was once dear to the Muslims who fled to other Countries.

The land which is supposed to Look like

but instead it looks like

Well. What you say is not correct.

Israel has been first mentioned in the Bible and wether we like it or not.

The reason it belongs to the Muslims is because that after the the Prophet came and
gave the final revelation.

Thus - in order for the Jews to be truly deserving to the land - they have to embrace
the Prophet and Islam.

But this solves the problem I think.

 

[Dagless]

So? Democracy is by definition a bureaucratic concept and voting is a bureaucratic process.

The conflict we are speaking about can be described as follows:

A religious conflict which turned into a bureaucratic confusion which has implication on human lives.

Thus human beings have to take hold of the bureaucratic systems and solve the religious conflicts - this
is the only way out.

The government is expressing the views of the majority. Whether the conflict is religious or not doesn't matter, they still need a voice. How can each human alone solve the conflict? It can only be done as a group.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

Ok guys, lets forget the diplomacy bla bla, and keep it simple : What on earth make Israel a ligitimate state ? =>
1) religion ? no (a big LIE)
2) history ? no (a bigger L I E !)
3) Power ? yes

Today, it's all about power. You have power then you are respected and you are beyond the low : you are the low ! Examples :
The USA !
CHINA !
RUSSIA !
They don't respect the low, they make the low !

Another emerging example : Iran. Why is the world hesitating on how to deal with Iran ? It's because Iran seems to have nuclear weapons. Why we didn't see the USA hesitating before invading Iraq ? the same reason : Iraq has no power.

Today the whole world is thinking that way. Israel is the most "powerful" State in the Middle East, so no need for legal reasons for Isreal : the military power is the most convincing.

This is not the Islamic point of view.

The islamic point of view is that

Things are legitimate if Allah wants them to be legitimate.

Things have power if Allah wishes them to have power.

At the end of the day all power is a manifestation of his power.

military power is the most convincing.

Thus, believers have to find the way to make belief more convincing than military
physical inferior power.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

The government is expressing the views of the majority. Whether the conflict is religious or not doesn't matter, they still need a voice. How can each human alone solve the conflict? It can only be done as a group.

The majority is not in position to lead.

Either people govern themselves and lead themselves by themselves.

Or either people are governed by Allah and have religious guidance that helps
them live in peace in Allah's world.

It must be done in a group. There has been many process like this through out history
in which groups changed the situations in their area.

 

[Dagless]

The majority is not in position to lead.

Either people govern themselves and lead themselves by themselves.

Or either people are governed by Allah and have religious guidance that helps
them live in peace in Allah's world.

It must be done in a group. There has been many process like this through out history
in which groups changed the situations in their area.

Groups need leadership. Those leaders speak for the people. Give me one example of where this is not the case.