9 of 32

No

Write now Article Tools

No! No! No! Jerusalem should not be spit between the Palestinians and Israelis. Jerusalem belongs to Israel and nothing can change that fact.]

Jerusalem became a city in 1010 B.C.E. when King David defeated the Jebusites. King David made that city his seat of government.In fact, King David loved Jerusalem that he brought the sacred Ark of the Covenant into that city and stripped the so-called twelve tribes of Israel of some of their spiritual and administrative functions.

King David developed that city. He wanted to build a temple for G-d and he foresaw Jerusalem as a permanent place where the Ark of the Covenant would be. Because David was a great warrior, it was inevitable that he had to kill. That was why G-d told him, at least from the Biblical account, that he would not be the one to build the temple. But his son King Solomon did. King Soloman build the temple which became the place where the Jews would gather and worship G-d.

Why do I refer to history and the Bible account? Because the Torah or the Bible (Old Testament) is the History of Israel. Jerusalem historically was created and founded by an Israeli and I see no logical nor historical reason why Palestinians would have any right to the same city founded even before Jesus existed on earth. I would even daresay that there were no Palestinians then, so I find it illogical to have to "return" Jerusalem to people who never owned it in the first place. The Palestinians have no right to Jerusalem as much as they have no right to make Washington DC their capital. Jerusalem has nothing to do with the Palestinians at all.

Besides, Israel is a democracy and is doing a fair job in keeping the city open to all three main monotheistic religions. Despite the Inquisition which ruined the Jews and the city, Christians today have been welcomed to the city and their holy places have been given both respect and honor by the State of Israel. Even Muslims have been given the right to maintain their Dome of the Rock - or the Al-Aksa Mosque. I see no reason why this "fair religious arrangement" should be changed. Even Rome, the seat of the Catholicism has accepted and appreciated teh manner by which Israel is keeping Jerusalem free for all religions.

In short, why fix what isn't broken? Why should the Palestinians even have a right to a capital that does not belong to them when current events show that they can't even manage the security of their own "land"? I also would be weary of dividing the city because the Palestinian people cannot (or do not wish?) even control their own terrorists - so, why hand a perfectly great city to a bunch of terrorist-sympathizers?

Some reason so it will bring peace. I am all for peace but not for peace at any price.And not at the expense of the historical, moral and legal right of the State of Israel. Besides, I cannot be sure than should the Palestinians share Jerusalem, there would REALLY be peace. In fact, the Arab/Palestinian record on "religious tolerance" is dismal. You only have to recall the Sudan "Teddy Bear" incident and the stoning of women for adultery to be afraid of sharing Jerusalem with the Palestinians.

The problem of the Palestinians is not Jerusalem but themselves. Perhaps, they should leave Jerusalem and maybe even the Gaza strip to Israel and move over to Mecca. Maybe the Saudis would share their capital with them... instead of just Arabic "tea and sympathy."

Leave Jerusalem to Israel.

Learn more about this author, Chavie Cyn.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should Jerusalem be split between the Israelis and Palestinians??
We want to hear your view. Write now!