File talk:Quneitra - Flickr - edbrambley.jpg

Judging from the source (on Flickr), this picture was probably taken in the Syrian part of the Golan Heights. However, it doesn't seem like a building within a city (even a ruined city), and it is hard to tell whether it is Quneitra. The filename suggests that Israelis destroyed the house (or Quneitra in general) which is a matter of controversy, and reflects more of a political opinion than a genuine description of the image. Drork (talk) 08:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know exactly where in Quenitra this picture was taken, it might have been in the outskirts of the city, I do not support "war-ruined Syrian building in the Golan Heights.jpg" because the image shows several buildings. And according to the vast majority of reliable sources, Quenitra was systematically destroyed after the war and was not "war ruined". I can support "Destroyed buildings in Quenitra" --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

For the moment this has been removed due to the dispute over naming. When you have a compromise naming, then please feel welcome to add the rename again. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I can accept that the image be renamed to "Quneitra destroyed". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done — billinghurst sDrewth 14:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I suggest to put {{Fact}} tag on the description. The photographer dos'nt know if Israelis destroyed the house or not. Geagea (talk) 17:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

There is a lot of evidence that show that Israel destroyed Quneitra. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Even if it's truth we still dont know if these buildings destroyed by the Israelis. Geagea (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes we do. Israel destroyed the entire city. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

You dony know it for sure. And you dont know when thos specific buildings destroyed or if they destroyed Israel. Geagea (talk) 23:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes I do know for sure that Israel destroyed these buildings. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Uploader should know. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Being a Syrian official he must have seen the bulldozers with his own eyes, ah wait, actually they were Israeli bulldozers, so how come they let a Syrian official be present? Or maybe he actually saw Syrian bulldozers and thought they were Israeli? Yes, an uploader should know better. Kàkhvelokákh (talk) 10:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)sockpuppet of Drork

Quneitra is not war ruined, it was destroyed after the war: "Before leaving, however, the Israelis leveled the city with bulldozers and dynamite." [1] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Just a small sample of reliable sources that state that the destruction was the result of "war time damage." Some sources actually refer to Syrian claims as a "crude fabrication," while others say the damage resulted from Syrian artillery fire.[2][3][4][5] Accordingly, I'm going to make changes that are more in line with NPOV--Jiujitsuguy 15:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

And why should we believe the Syrian version? Is it because they were so candid and honest during their wars with Israel? Just in case you didn't realize, that's what we call sarcasm. Take for example, what the Syrian said about their defense of Quneitra during the war. "Our brave forces are still fighting in Quneitra," and "our victory in Quneitra today means victory in Tel-Aviv tomorrow." These outrageous almost laughable comments were made when the Syrian army was in full flight[6] But yeh SD, you go on believeing what the great humanitarians in Damascus tell you, just dont heap the stink on the rest of us.--Jiujitsuguy 17:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything in the first source you brought saying Syria destroyed it, there is no research in the book about the destruction of the city, the second source is written by an Israeli soldier which disqualifies it right there. Third book is minority claims by an Israeli, no evidence that the author is a reliable researcher. The fourth is named "Jihad al-Kuffar", which pretty much says what kind of book this is, there is no evidence of reliability here, it consists of minority claims and its a clear pov source as he is even admitting that what he is saying is not mainstream. You have made a Google search and then cherry picked the sources following your pov and you have disregarded all the other sources which are the vast majority ones, saying Israel destroyed the city. Its not a Syrian pov that Israel destroyed the city, its a well known fact reported by the vast majority of sources.

These are just a few sources quickly found, hundreds of others can be found saying the same thing:

U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants: "Before leaving, however, the Israelis leveled the city with bulldozers and dynamite." [7]

"Quneitra itself was razed to the ground by Israeli bulldozers" [8]

"the Israeli forces intentionally flattened much of the city using bulldozers." [9]

"He came into Quneitra in the early evening. Nothing moved. The town had been systematically bulldozed and shelled by the Israelis in 1974" [10]

But we must look for the reliable research and that is this one: Report of the UN A/RES/3240(XXIX)(A-C) 29 November 1974 Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories "Noting the Special Committee's deep-seated conviction that the Israeli forces and the Israeli occupying authorities were responsible for the deliberate and total devastation of Quneitra, in violation of article 53 of the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 and under article 147 thereof," "1. Endorses the conclusion of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories that Israel is responsible for the destruction and devastation of the town of Quneitra" "2. Regards Israel's deliberate destruction and devastation of the town of Quneitra as a grave breach of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and condemns Israel for such" [11] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Jiujitsuguy, why are you here? Do you realize that these descriptions do not even show up in articles on Wikipedia? Kindly take your shoddy sources and outright propaganda back to Wikipedia. They arent needed here. Nableezy (talk) 02:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

SD I needn’t remind you that you have already been twice topic banned for being dismissive of Israeli or Jewish sources and using deprecatory language towards Israelis and Jews. You are now doing precisely the same thing you were topic banned for, dismissing sources simply because they originate with Israelis. It seems painfully clear that you have not learned from your past mistakes. As far as the UN “investigative” report is concerned, it was a non-binding report whose author and chief investigator was on the Syrian payroll. The report ignored eyewitness evidence, took no testimony from Israelis. Moreover, is was adopted by the GA in 1974 at a time when the GA was controlled and dominated by the Soviet Bloc. More importantly, this is what Elisabeth Eaves From Slate.com had to say about Syria’s bogus claims concerning Quneitra: So, what is UNDOF up against? I'll give two examples. One is the town of Quneitra. Unlike the rest of the Area of Separation, Syria has preserved Quneitra as a ghost town. It had suffered damage in 1967, when Israel first seized it along with the rest of the Golan Heights. Syrian forces shelled it in subsequent years, and it was the site of fierce fighting during the October War, changing hands several times. The subsequent cease-fire required Israel to hand Quneitra back to Syria. What happened next remains the subject of a propaganda war. Syria says that all the houses in the town were systematically destroyed by Israel, while Israel says the destruction was the result of the preceding battles. In his briefing, Maj. Perr said that "as a provocative act it was flattened and destroyed by the IDF before it was returned to Syria," but asked about this later, his force commander told me merely that there were competing claims: that Quneitra was destroyed during the wars, that the Israelis did it just before their withdrawal, and even that the Syrians did it after the withdrawal to burnish their monument to Israeli perfidy. I couldn't read any tales from Quneitra itself. Aside from a church, a mosque, and a heavily damaged hospital, the town is a field of rubble heaps. Hundreds of homes rest in eerily similar piles. A large slab, once a flat roof, juts up from almost every one. Whatever the source of the destruction, Quneitra has been frozen in this state for clearly political aims. Lest there be any doubt, the sign in broken English on the hospital makes it clear: "Destructed by Zionists and changed it to firing target!" This preservation of defeat represents feelings about history and loss that I find difficult to understand. Isn't the enshrining of destroyed Quneitra a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face? What kind of society shows off its failures this way? Can anyone imagine Americans preserving the destroyed World Trade Towers as ruins? The citizens of an industrious, optimistic, successful civilization would find the very idea ridiculous. Whatever else it is, this preserving of wounds is a weapon of the weak, a last resort of the defeated. But it also suggests a profound unwillingness to move on from war to peace. You haven't articulated one cogent reason why your version complies with NPOV given the abiguities and competing claims. Warmest regards,--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 16:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Ive never been topic banned for being dismissive of Israeli or Jewish sources. I am not dismissing any sources here simply because they are Israeli, I have brought up several reasons above that you have chosen to ignore, one of them being that its from one side of the involved conflict. Its an official UN investigation that was endorsed. Do you have any evidence for that the reports author and chief investigator was on the Syrian payroll? You are bringing up irrelevant points about the soviet block, the US is Israels biggest supporter and vetoes every single resolution not in accordance with a special pov til this day. The Eaves source says: "In his briefing, Maj. Perr said that "as a provocative act it was flattened and destroyed by the IDF before it was returned to Syria," but asked about this later, his force commander told me merely that there were competing claims: that Quneitra was destroyed during the wars, that the Israelis did it just before their withdrawal, and even that the Syrians did it after the withdrawal to burnish their monument to Israeli perfidy." So its one pov from one person, him mentioning that there are different believes, the Israeli pov, and the majority pov. How does this give evidence that Quneitra was "war-ruined" ? The version that you are removing is the neutral version: "Remains of destroyed homes in Quneitra." even if you don't believe the majority view that Israel destroyed the city, then these are destroyed buildings in the city, while its a minority view that its "war ruined". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Please read COM:NPOV before using acronyms that you do not understand. There are a large number of sources saying that Israel intentionally razed Quneitra when withdrawing. Including official UN reports. Kindly take your propaganda push back to en.wiki, it is not needed here. See sources such ad this, or this, or this or ... . Nableezy (talk) 20:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)