I've always been a history buff, and it only stands to reason that I'm studying history in school right now. Areas of interest are Classical Mediterranean history, World History, Twentieth-century Middle Eastern history, Great Power history, and the history of American foreign relations. Whenever possible I always feel that researching primary source material is most important, though it's not always that interesting. My main focus right now are the Middle Eastern conflicts, in particular the Arab israeli, and more specifically the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
With regards to these two conflicts in particular, I am striving to ensure that wikipedia maintains a neutral point of view. These conflicts are so controversial, so polarizing and so heated that there is often no consensus on what is objective. The one thing which amazes me most about this conflict is how two intelligent and educated scholars can take the same set of facts and publish dichotomous and polar opposite works purporting to represent the "myths and facts" of the conflict. I have no time for people who don't cite credible sources or who aren't aware of their own biases. Far too many people purport to know the "truth" of this conflict.
I'm one of the lucky few who gets to study what I really enjoy, history and politics. As such, I double-major in international history and political science in university, in my fourth and last year right now. This gives me plenty of fortunate time to access primary sources and credible scholarly texts. And of course, to voice my own insignificant opinions.
Peoples and Ethnicities who deserve a free and independent State
.svg){kind=small}
