Umm.. What about the crusaiders? 

That happened more than seven hundred years ago. Are you going to use that as an excuse forever?

Some people honestly kill me.

What the heck is this "belong to the jew" thing?

Since when do a religion own a land? I don't effing care if they were driven out of their land thousands of fucking years ago, the thing is, when your gone, what was yours isn't anymore.

Palestine was never a country because it was ALWAYS OCCUPIED. Always.

And I think it is just common sense that any form of conquest or occupation is WRONG. Could someone please explain how can we support the fact that big country bully smaller countries and steal their land? Nothing is possibly right in that.

So even if palestine was UK property before being stolen by the israeli (I say israeli and not jew cause I know a ton of jews that are against israel, they have something called common sense) does this make it less of a country? No, people were living there, in their land, they had homes, family and an entire family tree living there for centuries now, and THEY STAYED EVEN IF THEY WERE OCCUPIED WHILE THE ISRAELI FLED THAT LAND so please don't throw that shit on me, it's fucking ridiculous.

Now, right after seeing the atrocity of world war 2, and how occupation was something that should stop, what did the ONU do? Liberate every occupied country? No.
They basically told everyone who was living in what was considered by them as palestine to "fuck off, this land youve been living in for the past centuries is not yours anymore because these people claim that they were here before, and even tho they fled while you had to put up with occupation, they now decided that they want their land back, and as the Organization for peace, our first action ever is going to steal your land, steal your homes, and let these people kill you because they don't like you."

I can't understand what is possibly "right" in this. Even if palestine never was a state, it's because it was OCCUPIED. It doesnt change the FACT that PEOPLE WERE LIVING THERE FOR CENTURIES. NOTHING Justify stealing their land to give it to another group of people, absolutly nothing.

And then, some idiots are shocked by palestinians replying and trying to claim their lands back.

And that's where I just go ape shit.

When the citizens of the USofA rebelled against the UK, they were called revolutionist, fighting for their freedom, claiming back their land (which was basically given to them by the UK) they were labeled heroes all over the media and the history. Did they fight legally? No they used guerilla tactics, just like every revolutionist.

When Palestinians try to drive away the conquerors who are constantly destroying their houses and stealing more of their lands, killing thousands of civilians every day, eradicating entire family tree's, and they have to resort to guerilla tactics, what are they labeled? Terrorist.

And yet, both are fighting the same fight, a fight for their land.

Crusades were caused by muslim takeover of jerusalem from christians. once again, the muslims attacked first. christians were recapturing lands they owned before muslims

This is one of those instances where the two sides have a wildly different perspective on it. Just like Al-Andalus represents a golden age of tolerance and progress to Muslims, for the Christians it was an unbearable incursion and occupation of their land. Similarly, the Muslims see the Crusades as a series of unprovoked aggressions, while the Christians figure that they were just trying to take back what was originally theirs. Not to say that the Crusades were completely right or just or particularly "holy" given the behavior of the crusaders, but surely the Christians could hardly seek to restore their control over the Holy Land if the Muslims hadn't invaded it to begin with?

Well Israel believes Palestine is their land cause they were their hundreds of years before... so yeah :P

I'm a muslim and i do believe that the Andalus being a golden age of tolerance is bullshit... But you're right, each side will be biased of course to his/her opinion.

The main thing though is that I am against Israel for the way they got their holy land back, not because they want to go back to their rightful place. True maybe they do deserve to go back home, but killing people and destroying homes of families who have been there for hundreds of years is just not right. I'm not gonna say I'm pro-Hamas either cause i'm not, but i am definitely with the Palestinian cause and against the Israeli government and those who protect it.

I support Palestine because I am a Communist.  In addition I don't believe Jews have any "right" to the land.  They left by choice to spread the religion and only later became endegomous.   2,000 years later you come back and displace the native people, some of which are Jews who converted to Islam?

Yeah. I was speaking broadly, of course. Likewise, there are lots of Christians who believe the Crusades were 100% an aggressive act rather than of part of a cycle of violence and conquest.

And fair enough.

Umm, Muslims took over Jerusalem from the Byzantine Empire. The people who led the Crudades had no right to have any pretense of Jerusalem (not to mention that the crusaders also looted Constantinopole). The whole religious argument of the crusaders was just pure madness.