Why the Jews and Muslims fight...

...

It wasn't the Brits to give.

The League of Nations approved the British Mandate of Palestine with the intent of creating a "national home for the Jewish people." In 1947, the United Nations approved the partition of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab.


The land mass was divided, 56% in favor of the Jews, when the population was roughly 3:1 in favor of Arabs. And the Arabs did not agree, it was decided for them by the UN, so much for equitable democratic decisions based on those who would be affected. I don't think any leader could accept those terms.


By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

It wasn't decided for them. They refuse to negotiate anything but total and complete takeover and destruction of the Jews. Your right, no leader would accept those terms. Which is why they needed UN intervention. The British hoped to establish self-governing institutions in Palestine. The Jews were alarmed by the prospect, which would have an Arab majority. However, the Arabs would not accept proposals for such institutions if they included any Jews at all, and so no institutions were created. The Arabs wanted as little as possible to do with the Jews and the mandate, and would not participate in municipal councils, nor even in the Arab Agency that the British wanted to set up.


It depends on whether they (the Palestinians), had faith in any institution that could make a ruling so self evidently unfair. The UN failed. As a result, the reaction demonstrated the lack of belief of any fair resolutions. Both parties haven't been able to come to any terms, which is why the Muslims and Jews are embroiled in war.

It's also a question of autonomy which the Pal's have seen little of.

...

It wasn't the Brits to give.

The League of Nations approved the British Mandate of Palestine with the intent of creating a "national home for the Jewish people." In 1947, the United Nations approved the partition of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab.


The land mass was divided, 56% in favor of the Jews, when the population was roughly 3:1 in favor of Arabs. And the Arabs did not agree, it was decided for them by the UN, so much for equitable democratic decisions based on those who would be affected. I don't think any leader could accept those terms.


By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

It wasn't decided for them. They refuse to negotiate anything but total and complete takeover and destruction of the Jews. Your right, no leader would accept those terms. Which is why they needed UN intervention. The British hoped to establish self-governing institutions in Palestine. The Jews were alarmed by the prospect, which would have an Arab majority. However, the Arabs would not accept proposals for such institutions if they included any Jews at all, and so no institutions were created. The Arabs wanted as little as possible to do with the Jews and the mandate, and would not participate in municipal councils, nor even in the Arab Agency that the British wanted to set up.


It depends on whether they (the Palestinians), had faith in any institution that could make a ruling so self evidently unfair. The UN failed. As a result, the reaction demonstrated the lack of belief of any fair resolutions. Both parties haven't been able to come to any terms, which is why the Muslims and Jews are embroiled in war.

It's also a question of autonomy which the Pal's have seen little of.
No, those are not facts. Your opinion doesn't rewrite history.

the Anti-Christ (The Deceiver). He will present a false vision of Paradise and Hell and claim to be God.

...

It wasn't the Brits to give.

The League of Nations approved the British Mandate of Palestine with the intent of creating a "national home for the Jewish people." In 1947, the United Nations approved the partition of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab.


The land mass was divided, 56% in favor of the Jews, when the population was roughly 3:1 in favor of Arabs. And the Arabs did not agree, it was decided for them by the UN, so much for equitable democratic decisions based on those who would be affected. I don't think any leader could accept those terms.


By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

It wasn't decided for them. They refuse to negotiate anything but total and complete takeover and destruction of the Jews. Your right, no leader would accept those terms. Which is why they needed UN intervention. The British hoped to establish self-governing institutions in Palestine. The Jews were alarmed by the prospect, which would have an Arab majority. However, the Arabs would not accept proposals for such institutions if they included any Jews at all, and so no institutions were created. The Arabs wanted as little as possible to do with the Jews and the mandate, and would not participate in municipal councils, nor even in the Arab Agency that the British wanted to set up.


It depends on whether they (the Palestinians), had faith in any institution that could make a ruling so self evidently unfair. The UN failed. As a result, the reaction demonstrated the lack of belief of any fair resolutions. Both parties haven't been able to come to any terms, which is why the Muslims and Jews are embroiled in war.

It's also a question of autonomy which the Pal's have seen little of.
No, those are not facts. Your opinion doesn't rewrite history.


The "facts" were written by the "winners."

...

By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

...

Again, no. Try Google.

...

By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

...

Again, no. Try Google.


How is that democratically fair?

...

By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

...

Again, no. Try Google.


How is that democratically fair?

Many reasons - but I'm not going to do your research for you. I gave you the 33% figure to refute your 3-1 nonsense. You can't have it both ways. Look it up and do your own reading and quit spewing opinions.

...

By the end of World War II, Jews accounted for 33% of the population of Palestine. The land was divided into two approximately equal portions.

...

Again, no. Try Google.


How is that democratically fair?

Many reasons - but I'm not going to do your research for you. I gave you the 33% figure to refute your 3-1 nonsense. You can't have it both ways. Look it up and do your own reading and quit spewing opinions.


Yet you resort to insults and make assumptions...

Jerusalem is an amazing place.
It seems to revolve around the Old City, which itself seems to revolve around the Temple Mount. The Old City is divided into four quarters - Jewish, Arab, Christian and Armenian, It's as if everyone has claimed their corner. The Wall itself seems like a dividing line between civilizations. The Muslims up top often throw rocks down on the worshipping Jews. Eventually the Jews get hacked off and send police up to chase them off. Only secular Jews are allowed up on the Mount as it is considered to be desecrated at the moment.

The Jews have actually excavated tunnels alongside the Wall so they can get closer to the Holy of Holies. There are amazing prayer rooms down there, only 100m from the Rock.

It wasn't the Brits to give.