International Trump: US will take over Gaza, resettle Palestinians

[Patrick Jane]

Goatnald is about to lay the smack down on Humus. They dont want to get in the way of him building Gaz a Lago or they’ll feel his wrath.

I want him to rename it to Gaz A Lago so bad.

 

[cincymma79]

LOL they were chased out of the middle eastern countries AFTER they did the colonization thing and ethnically cleansed 700k palestineans in the Nakba. Now I dont condone eye for an eye, but lets not assume those countries just woke up one day and realized they hated the jooos.

Sigh that’s just not true. I’m not rehashing this again. You’re just making shit up. Go brush your tiny moustache

 

[cincymma79]

I want him to rename it to Gaz A Lago so bad.

Hang up rainbow flags and have pride rallies

 

[avenue94]

are we pretending there wasn't yet another war and violence towards israelis?

There have been several wars, with varying degrees of culpability for everyone involved. But hose are secondary to the core issue of why this conflict continues to persist.

i just looked back and realized you called it the "inflection point that started the road to the modern conflict.". lol. it's interesting that alot of you have access to quotes that only attempt to point the finger at the jews, but never quote other zionists that preach for peace with the local population. i think you may need to diversify your sources.....

What sources have I quoted? Zionism, jus like pan-Arab and Palestinian nationalism, means many different things. Regardless, it's clear what strain of Zionism was most popular during the settlement of the region. The Irgun didn't come out of nothing, and it was effectively absorbed by the state anyways.

jews immigrating to palestine by definition can be called the "inflection point" because they wouldn't be there to conflict without being there. but there are lots of "inflection points". arab / muslims ALSO immigrated to palestine. and the broader arab / muslim world wanted to protect their monopoly. suggesting the only "inflection point" was hezl in 1902 is a joke. jews had a right to be there.

You can't in good faith claim the Zionist movement's colonization of the region was not an inflection point. The level of violence was night and day between pre and post. Once again, you're attempting to deflect by trying to portray a very modern conflict as something that's been around for centuries. It hasn't. The expansion of Islam has some similarities but is quite distinct for colonialism in the Western sense.

it's not inherently violent and the land was available, with alot of it undesirable land.....at the time........

And yet we have copious amounts of violence between settler and indigenous population, with both sides to blame for their share of atrocities.

and fuck, even with restrictions hamas STILL built terror infrastructure throughout ALL of gaza.

That might tell you that the blockade was mighty counterproductive. It didn't achieve it's goal and it further led to Palestinian hate of Israel. There's a reason sanctions and blockades rarely succeed in history. They're statistically more likely to cause conflict.

again, look at the map above. "mass settlement" is relative. there was a tiny area where no nation stood that was mostly sparsely populated. there was no palestinian national identity, jews purchased land, and had a right to settle there. the idea that only arab / muslims belong there is just a fallacy. jews had just as much of a right to settle there as the incoming arab / muslims (that are now "palestinian refugees").

Sparsely populated or not, it's still colonialism. Note that portraying new lands as "empty" is among the most common colonial refrains, and half a million is quite a respectable population.

Palestinian identity as a group also pre-dates the Zionist movement, so pretty lazy argument there.

And I didn't say only arab/muslims belong there. What a ridiculous straw man.

@avenue94 is presenting the conflict in a very one sided way. and it's just not accurate.

Ah, those classic hallucinations of yours. I've been critical of nearly every party involved, but just because I'm pointing out that it's a colonial conflict to its core, suddenly I am a Hamas sympathizer.

 

[avenue94]

Simple sherdog heuristic, if you are saying the opposite of avenue94 you are almost certainly correct. Far left extremism is never good.

Lol at thinking my foreign policy views are far left. John Mearsheimer is among by favorite scholars in that field, and he's anything but far left. Or are you going to argue to me that Mearsheimer is a far leftie?

 

[kflo]

There have been several wars, with varying degrees of culpability for everyone involved. But hose are secondary to the core issue of why this conflict continues to persist.

What sources have I quoted?

Whatever your sources, they aren’t balanced.

Zionism, jus like pan-Arab and Palestinian nationalism, means many different things. Regardless, it's clear what strain of Zionism was most popular during the settlement of the region. The Irgun didn't come out of nothing, and it was effectively absorbed by the state anyways.

You can't in good faith claim the Zionist movement's colonization of the region was not an inflection point.

Zionist movement without a counter movement orchestrated at least in part by outsiders would not have resulted in the same backlash and violence.

The level of violence was night and day between pre and post. Once again, you're attempting to deflect by trying to portray a very modern conflict as something that's been around for centuries. It hasn't. The expansion of Islam has some similarities but is quite distinct for colonialism in the Western sense.

Yeah the scale is also very different…..I never implied anything was around for centuries. The Arab / Muslim population in the region……not Palestine, took exception to Jews settling in what they considered theirs……even though it wasn’t all theirs……..

And yet we have copious amounts of violence between settler and indigenous population, with both sides to blame for their share of atrocities.

That might tell you that the blockade was mighty counterproductive. It didn't achieve it's goal and it further led to Palestinian hate of Israel.

You might want to acknowledge here there were no good options. Either expose your own population to daily substantial risk or try to limit it. No good options when your neighbor population wants to eradicate you…..

There's a reason sanctions and blockades rarely succeed in history. They're statistically more likely to cause conflict.

And giving freedom to terrorists rarely has good outcomes as well…

Sparsely populated or not, it's still colonialism. Note that portraying new lands as "empty" is among the most common colonial refrains, and half a million is quite a respectable population.

It’s also accurate. Oh, and it wasn’t theirs (Arabs) either. This part seems to be lost on you. Again, Jews had a right to settle there.

Palestinian identity as a group also pre-dates the Zionist movement, so pretty lazy argument there.

No, it doesn’t. It was basically a 20th century creation.

And I didn't say only arab/muslims belong there. What a ridiculous straw man.

Glad we agree Jews had a right to buy land and settle there. That the Arab population there didn’t agree doesn’t mean they were justified in trying to prevent it.

Ah, those classic hallucinations of yours. I've been critical of nearly every party involved, but just because I'm pointing out that it's a colonial conflict to its core, suddenly I am a Hamas sympathizer.

You’re trying to place the core squarely at the feet of the Jews. Without context of the time period, realities of the land at the time, the tiny scale in context of the greater region, the reality of Jews globally, and the lack of any Palestinian identity or ownership of the land.

Again, it’s a tiny piece of land surrounded by massive arab / Muslim land. It was too much…….

I never called you a Hamas sympathizer. You just don’t place enough blame on them and seem to think hamas is just the fault of Israel.

 

[avenue94]

Zionist movement without a counter movement orchestrated at least in part by outsiders would not have resulted in the same backlash and violence.

Again. Colonialism is inherently violent. Please feel free to name all these peaceful colonies that have sprung up throughout history.

You might want to acknowledge here there were no good options. Either expose your own population to daily substantial risk or try to limit it. No good options when your neighbor population wants to eradicate you…..

Again, carrot and stick. You have to offer the former if you want to defuse a nationalist conflict. Otherwise you just get Vietnam or nearly every other failed attempt to crush them. Israel's rightward lurch has really made this problematic. There's been compromises the PLO could have taken on paper, but all of it is predicate don trust that doesn't exist after decades of deceit from most parties involved in negotiations.

And giving freedom to terrorists rarely has good outcomes as well…

Did you Mandela Effect Nelson Mandela?

It’s also accurate. Oh, and it wasn’t theirs (Arabs) either. This part seems to be lost on you. Again, Jews had a right to settle there.

Settle, sort of (settling comes with things like assimilation, and the Ottomans tossed bad wrench in the whole process). But again, settlement wasn't the goal, it was also colonialism...aka a Jewish ethnocratic state.

Something tells me you don't think migrants seeking asylum in the US have a right to settle in NYC...is that correct by any chance?

You’re trying to place the core squarely at the feet of the Jews. Without context of the time period, realities of the land at the time, the tiny scale in context of the greater region, the reality of Jews globally, and the lack of any Palestinian identity or ownership of the land.

Again, it’s a tiny piece of land surrounded by massive arab / Muslim land. It was too much…….

I never called you a Hamas sympathizer. You just don’t place enough blame on them and seem to think hamas is just the fault of Israel.

I place the blame mostly on imperialism and colonialism -- both from Jewish settlers and from European powers (I've mentioned breaking promises to the future Arab states multiple times). I'm more than willing to caveat that colonialism and imperialism were far more acceptable back then, but it's kind of moot because what matters is how Gazans perceived it.

I blame Hamas plenty, but the difference is I acknowledge that we have to negotiate with whose in power, not who we wish was or wasn't in power.

 

[Patrick Jane]

Hang up rainbow flags and have pride rallies

Village People concerts.