The only reason Islam built a mosque on the most holy site of the Jews was to deny it to them. Since Islam is a made up religion that borrowed heavily from Judaism and Christianity, it needed to manufacture for itself an identity.
The whole debacle of the "Dome of the Rock" mosque was akin to a dog urinating on its "territory."
Actually, I have seen some very good evidence that everyone may be fighting over the wrong ruins. I won't claim to be an expert on the subject, I have simply read a few articles, but I love archeology and was very intrigued by the arguments in the links below. Here is a summary:
Titus (the Roman general ordered to destroy Jerusalem), Josephus (the Jewish historian that many see as a traitor) and Eleazar (a leader of the Jewish rebels at Masada) all state that the temple was completely destroyed. Even scriptures prophesied that no two stones would be left on top of each other, yet the Western Wall shows a lot of stones still in place. When Muhammad arrived, unaware of historical documents showing the temple was completely destroyed, he designated the largest ruins he could find as the Temple Mount and everyone accepted that as true. Then the "we took your temple" fighting began, as I believe was the intention.
The known dimensions of the actual temple would have this foundation being much bigger than the actual Temple structure required. However, we do know that Rome had a large fort here, Fort Antonio, to house up to 3000 soldiers that were based in Jerusalem. It is also known that Rome left a military presence in the area, after destroying Jerusalem.
It would make sense, as the research below states, that Muhammad would have a much easier time finding the ruins of a large military fortress that was never dismantled than finding the ruins of a temple that was destroyed and completely dismantled as a warning to all future rebels in the Roman Empire.
Right or wrong, there is a chance that Muhammad did a big "I stole your Temple", and then Jews and Christians retaliated with a big "give it back". Once you get behind a cause, then spend several hundred years fighting and dying for it, it becomes very difficult to step back and ask if it is accurate. On the other hand, maybe that is the best time to do so. Maybe the real Temple Mount is accessible, and maybe it can be restored without the bloodshed necessary t gain access to the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
I love reading issues like this, so if you know of other links on the topic, even other theories, please send me the links.
http://israel.cephasministry.com/who_moved_the_temple.htmlhttp://askelm.com/temple/index.htmhttp://askelm.com/books/book008.htm
As well as a critique of the research linked above at:
http://www.askelm.com/temple/t010513.htm