International Trump: US will take over Gaza, resettle Palestinians

[Deleted member 449757]

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.

 

[Deleted member 449757]

Hang up rainbow flags and have pride rallies

Village People concerts.

 

[Motivated BJ Penn]

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

Google is your friend.

 

[kflo]

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

feel free to name the colonies that have "sprung up" that purchased land and used diplomatic means and treaties.......as opposed to violent conquering......

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.

i don't know what point you're making on the PLO. are you also putting all the blame on israel for the lack of a permanent peace agreement?

Did you Mandela Effect Nelson Mandela?

lol

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?

i have no idea why you think this question is relevant.

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.

it's not moot at all. and gazan's need to get over it. palestinian's need to get over it. they need to focus on their own future, not continuing to believe israel is theirs and that they just need to keep up the fight. and people who continue to blame the jews again empower continued conflict (as does the permanent refugee tag from the UN). the entire middle east was colonized, far more violently and brutally. the entire world. everyone can have grievances. but it's better to deal with reality. the only ottoman territory that seems to be of any interest in terms of how it came to be is the little spec called israel. there were massive territorial battles and disputes and wars and genocides concurrent.

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.

you should acknowledge that there will never be any peaceful solution that is agreeable with hamas as the negotiating partner. it can't happen. because there's no carrot to offer them that will allow autonomy. that's just reality. they can't and won't be trusted to operate independently. the best you can hope for is gaza 2.0 with hamas.

 

[cincymma79]

 

[djacobox372]

Gaza should be taken over by Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia... Israel and the US should make it clear that they must take it, or it will be annexed by Israel.

If those countries refuse to do their part to help their fellow Arab Muslims, they need to STFU.

 

[The Diplomat]

Gaza should be taken over by Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia... Israel and the US should make it clear that they must take it, or it will be annexed by Israel.

If those countries refuse to do their part to help their fellow Arab Muslims, they need to STFU.

I'm gonna say the two state solution failed. Shocking, I know.

Apparently, having fragmented segments of Palestine surrounded by Israel, one of the tiniest countries in the ME, clearly doesn't work.

The real issue is that nobody wants the Palestinians if a true annex were to take place. Egypt, Jordan, etc. doesn't want them. That is a human crisis, which nobody knows the answer to.

IMO, Iran should step up, considering they've been the ones funding and fueling the fire.

 

[Scott Stapp]

AIPAC should be resettled first.

 

[SuperAlly]

AIPAC should be resettled first.

Scott Stpp should be resettled first.

 

[Hog-train]

All the Israel shills on this forum were denying ethnic cleansing wasn't happening or will not happen. That they just want to destroy Hamas.

Now they're on the verge of it happening. Israel CLEARLY wants to steal Gaza and displace the locals to some other country. AND get the US to pay for Gaza's reconstruction.

What say you?

 

[kflo]

All the Israel shills on this forum were denying ethnic cleansing wasn't happening.

Now they're on the verge of it happening. Israel CLEARLY wants to steal Gaza and displace the locals to some other country. AND get the US to pay for Gaza's reconstruction.

What say you?

on the verge....lol.

these guys are insisting they are winning.............

 

[Hog-train]

on the verge....lol.

these guys are insisting they are winning.............

So they're not actively talking about ethnically cleansing the Palestinians from Gaza? Then what are they talking about right now then?

You have consistently said Israel will not ethnically cleanse Gaza in the past. You said the goal was to destroy Hamas and not ethnically cleanse.

Well Hamas is not destroyed and Israel and Trump are now talking about displacing the Palestinians and taking the land. That is the TEXTBOOK DEFINITION of ethnic cleansing.

of course ethnic cleansing is the removal of one group from a society so that society is homogeneous and rid of the undesirables. Gaza is being cleansed of Hamas because they decided to wage war on their neighbors.

There have been plenty of legitimate examples of ethnic cleansing, but this obviously isn’t one. This is a war, and civilians are being displaced so Hamas can be eradicated.

Allowed back where? Creating a buffer zone is not ethnic cleansing, no. Moving Gazan’s out, annexing the land and replacing with Israeli settlers, yes. like i said, the latter will almost certainly not happen.

it's not ethnic cleansing. i know what the term means. you don't seem to.

ethnic cleansing has always referred to expelling one ethnic group from an existing society so the remaining ethnicities are rid of the undesirable ethnicity. Germany, Syria, Yugoslavia, Sudan etc. Never has it referred to displaced people from a war in their own territory with no other existing society in said territory.

 

[kflo]

So they're not actively talking about ethnically cleansing the Palestinians from Gaza? Then what are they talking about right now then?

You have consistently said Israel will not ethnically cleanse Gaza in the past. You said the goal was to destroy Hamas and not ethnically cleanse.

Well Hamas is not destroyed and Israel and Trump are now talking about displacing the Palestinians and taking the land. That is the TEXTBOOK DEFINITION of ethnic cleansing.

there is currently no plan to ethnically cleanse gaza.

hamas is not destroyed. maybe they should keep fighting them? or turn gaza back over to them. do you want them to do that?

again, no matter what happens, you'll be able to rage against israel, i am confident about that.

i'll ask you - would you be against giving gazan's the option to move to other nations who agree to take them in and give them citizenship?

and i'll leave this here for you as well.

Don’t Like Trump’s Gaza Plan? Offer an Alternative

America’s partners in Europe and the Middle East should develop a feasible alternative to US President Donald Trump’s Gaza plan. America’s partners in Europe and the Middle East should develop a feasible alternative to US President Donald Trump’s Gaza plan.

www.gmfus.org

 

[Hog-train]

there is currently no plan to ethnically cleanse gaza.

Trump literally talked about ethnically cleansing Gaza and Netanyahu approved.

US President Donald Trump has said the two million Palestinians who would be resettled in neighbouring countries under his plan to take over and rebuild the Gaza Strip would have no right of return.

"No, they wouldn't, because they're going to have much better housing," he told Fox News. "I'm talking about building a permanent place for them."

But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's proposal as "revolutionary and creative".

Trump says no right of return for Palestinians under Gaza takeover plan

He says his proposed US takeover of Gaza would involve "building a permanent place" for the population.

www.bbc.com

i'll ask you - would you be against giving gazan's the option to move to other nations who agree to take them in and give them citizenship?

The other countries do not want to take them in and displacing people against their will from their home is ETHNIC CLEANSING.

YOU said they wouldn't ethnically cleanse them.

Stop sidestepping and call it what it is. Have some intellectual honesty for once.

and i'll leave this here for you as well.

Don’t Like Trump’s Gaza Plan? Offer an Alternative

America’s partners in Europe and the Middle East should develop a feasible alternative to US President Donald Trump’s Gaza plan. America’s partners in Europe and the Middle East should develop a feasible alternative to US President Donald Trump’s Gaza plan.

www.gmfus.org

This article is basically saying there is no other alternative except to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians.

You've been saying for two years that there will be no ethnic cleansing - that they're only trying to destroy Hamas.