Gaza War, Part 3

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Btw, that also decreases the number of civilians killed. So maybe genocide might be a reach.


"Genocide" has always been a reach. But then again, it's not a reach to people who deny that 6 million Jews were systematically and deliberately killed by the Nazis.

Yes, the Holocaust happened unfortunately, but almost everyone responsible for this atrocity is dead today. Hopefully, as Americans anyway, we have learned from this and move on and try and realize that most American nonJews born after WWII, in my experience anyway, harbor no hatred or prejudice toward Jews, they’re indifferent, they don’t even realize who is jewish or not. It’s not a topic of conversation for most American non jewish people, it’s a nonissue. I have jewish friends who I didn’t even reaize were jewish initially, they live productive comfortable lives here in the US.


In case you missed it, there has been a huge increase in antisemitic incidents in the U.S.


There's a huge increase in all kinds of -isms in the US - Jews aren't special in the hatred they get.


There's an increase in pro-Palestinian sentiment and a backlash against Zionism. Neither of these is necessarily antisemitic in the sense of being anti-Jewish, but they are widely interpreted as the same thing. Sadly, there are increases in genuine antisemitic and Islamophobic incidents. Regarding the latter, there was the case of the 6yo Muslim boy stabbed to death and his mother injured, and the shooting of three Muslim students, one of whom is now paralyzed.

Was this in the US?


Yes. The 6yo Palestinian American boy was stabbed 26 times last October by his landlord in Plainfield, IL. He died. His mother was stabbed a dozen times and survived. Detectives determined the attack was predicated on their being Muslim. Three college students (one each from Haverford, Trinity, and Brown) of Palestinian descent were shot in Vermont last November. They were wearing keffiyeh scarves at the time and conversing in both English and Arabic. The 20yo student from Brown is now paralyzed from the chest down. American Muslims say the spike in Islamophobic incidents since October 7 is reminiscent of the post-9/11 period.


Is that anything to compare to the living hell Jewish people in the US are currently having to endure as they watch posters of their beloved hostages defaced and defiles by brutal, heartless pro-Hamas terrorists? As they hear the crazy left calling for their genocide through ceasefire? As they are persecuted in the halls of their universities as the leaders of their schools go in front of congress to spew hate towards Jews to rapturous applause?

Do not try to claim anti-Muslim sentiment is even slightly comparable to the anti-semi Tim’s faced by the Jewish people. Period.


Are you trying to be ironic? Yes, being stabbed to death when you are six years old or shot or shot and paralyzed when you're 20 is a heck of a lot worse than seeing pictures of hostages defaced. Given the choice, I think most of us would prefer to watch an image being defiled than to be stabbed to death or shot and paralyzed. I mean, that's a no-brainer.

Also, calls for a ceasefire are NOT calls for Jewish genocide. They are calls to PREVENT Palestinian genocide. Gaza is virtually uninhabitable, Palestinian children are being butchered in their thousands, and starvation and disease are killing innocent Palestinians. Why would anyone with an ounce of humanity NOT call for a ceasefire?

I also don't see anyone "spewing hate" towards Jews. The criticism is partly of Zionism, but more specifically of Israel's absolutely barbaric behavior in Gaza and in the West Bank.

Only a pathological narcissist with a master race complex would think the incidents you describe are worse than the brutal attacks I described. Have you absolutely no empathy or compassion for Palestinians or people of Palestinian descent? I am frankly shocked and disgusted by your Islamophobia and your astonishingly jaw-dropping sense of entitlement.


You listed two incidents in which Muslims were killed/injured. They may be tragic, but that does not even scratch the surface of the pain and suffering of the Jewish people.

To YOU watching hateful bigots who pray for the genocide of the Jewish people rip down the posters of our beloved hostages might not be traumatic, because you are clearly a Hamas supporter. But for Jewish Americans, watching people we once believed to be friends deface the images placed so carefully and thoughtfully to commemorate the beautiful Israelis stolen from us is deeply traumatic, and would constitute an act of pure, unadulterated terrorism against the Jewish people. For the Jewish people, it is like they were stolen again when we witness such unadulterated hatred towards their memory.

And yes, calling for a ceasefire is akin to calling for the genocide of all Jews. Hamas’ sole goal is the complete genocide of all Jews globally, they will never abide by any ceasefire. Calling for a ceasefire does nothing but strip Israel of its rights to self defense against the ongoing genocide of its people. Additionally, calling for a ceasefire is calling for the genocide of the Palestinian people, as should Israel remove their troops, they will also have to end their humanitarian mission to remove the genocidal Hamas from power in Gaza.

And yes, Jewish students are being brutalized on college campuses by pro-genocide/pro-Hamas protesters.

https://nypost.com/2023/12/15/news/jewish-mit-students-say-college-didnt-stop-yearlong-campaign-of-hate/amp/

https://nypost.com/2023/12/09/news/jewish-upenn-students-subjected-to-chants-of-we-are-hamas/amp/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/critics-say-us-colleges-double-standards-let-rabid-antisemitism-thrive-on-campus/amp/

Please stop trying to equate isolated anti-muslim crimes with the extreme levels of anti-Semitic hate all Jews are currently facing. It’s disgusting you would even compare the two.


You said that it was worse for Jewish people to see images of hostages being defaced than it was for a 6yo child to die in a particularly terrifying and painful way (stabbing) or for a 20yo college kid to be shot and paralyzed. That tells me everything that I need to know about your racism. You obviously think your feelings are more important than Muslim kids' survival or ability to walk.

Having just outed yourself as a self-absorbed, self-loving tender blossom who values your feelings above the life of a 6yo child, you then exhibit stunning irrationality by claiming I'm a "Hamas supporter" for pointing out Islamophobic cruelty. And you insist that good people protesting for a ceasefire to save lives in Gaza must want "Jewish genocide."

Do you seriously have so little humanity and compassion that you cannot see the good in people who want to stop horrific suffering in Gaza and are therefore calling for a ceasefire? And can you possibly be so extraordinarily narcissistic that the stabbing death of a real life child means less to you than your feelings about images (not human) being defaced (not stabbed)??? It's hard to understand, but you actually seem to feel insulted that anyone is talking about Islamophobia and these horrible attacks on young Muslims because it diverts attention from you and your issues. Like I said, pathological narcissism.


You gave two tragic examples of people being attacked and murdered. Of course they are tragic, and I wish they never happened, but my point that the sheer scale of the anti-semitism being displayed in the US currently is far greater than two isolated incidents of hate. All over the country Jews are absolutely terrified, are absolutely distraught as their friends, neighbors, and even neighbors turn against them and as their government refuses to protect them. I do not know a single Jew who currently feels safe, who feels like they are not targeted by people who would rather support Hamas than the brave men and women of the IDF.

If you want to play that, “which side has been brutally murdered more” game, which is highly inappropriate, here are just a few of the Jewish Americans who were murdered recently due to the current wave of anti-semitism, which you certainly ignored:

* Samantha Woll - Detroit Jewish Leader murdered in her own home: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12917901/amp/Detroit-Samantha-Woll-stabbed-EIGHT-times-face-neck.html

* Paul Kessler - Elderly Jewish counter protester brutally beaten at a Pro-Hamas protest in California: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/11/17/us/paul-kessler-death-arrest-court-appearance/index.html

You don’t have to take my word for it, the brutal rise in anti-demotion following October 7th is widely documented and accepted:

https://www.heritage.org/religious-liberty/commentary/the-inconvenient-facts-about-antisemitism-the-us

If you want to call for peace, call for Hamas to surrender unconditionally and for their leaders to immediately surrender themselves so Israel can try them for their crimes and execute those found guilty. It is not Israel’s duty to let Hamas commit genocide against both the Jewish people and innocent Palestinians.


The murder of Samantha Will in Detroit, while tragic, was not a hate crime. She was murdered by a low life criminal after she left her door unlocked. Please don’t spread misinformation.

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2024/01/04/preliminary-hearing-up-next-for-man-accused-in-samantha-woll-murder-what-that-means/
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Ukrainian refugees were never at risk of statelessness. Making someone stateless is a pretty big deal. There are UN conventions on it.

More than half of Gaza is under 18. Meaning you’re talking about a million refugees. Where does the money come to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for a million children? Lebanon is a financial mess and Egypt isn’t doing much better— so who pays?

Personally as a taxpayer I’d rather we stop funding the bombs. Then we don’t need to fund a new war crime either.


Doesn’t answer the question of why it’s better to let them stay in harms way. UN and the rest of the world was already spending billions of dollars on Gaza annually. That money can be rerouted to the actual refugee camps .


It’s better for them not to be in harms way. There is no doubt.

But there’s no option to evacuate them. Lebanon doesn’t share a border with Gaza, and Israel insists on vetting every single person out of Rafah. Israel could set up a refugee camp for them in Israel, as they are the sole beneficiaries of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but there’s no reason for Egypt or Lebanon to help commit a war crime.


There is no Israel at the Radha crossing. Egypt has actively participated in Gaza blockade. Egypt does not want Palestinians. Clearly Israel is not going to take them. Seems like the Muslim brothers could do more to help. They just don’t want to . Let’s call a spade what it is, a spade.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Ukrainian refugees were never at risk of statelessness. Making someone stateless is a pretty big deal. There are UN conventions on it.

More than half of Gaza is under 18. Meaning you’re talking about a million refugees. Where does the money come to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for a million children? Lebanon is a financial mess and Egypt isn’t doing much better— so who pays?

Personally as a taxpayer I’d rather we stop funding the bombs. Then we don’t need to fund a new war crime either.


Doesn’t answer the question of why it’s better to let them stay in harms way. UN and the rest of the world was already spending billions of dollars on Gaza annually. That money can be rerouted to the actual refugee camps .


It’s better for them not to be in harms way. There is no doubt.

But there’s no option to evacuate them. Lebanon doesn’t share a border with Gaza, and Israel insists on vetting every single person out of Rafah. Israel could set up a refugee camp for them in Israel, as they are the sole beneficiaries of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but there’s no reason for Egypt or Lebanon to help commit a war crime.


There is no Israel at the Radha crossing. Egypt has actively participated in Gaza blockade. Egypt does not want Palestinians. Clearly Israel is not going to take them. Seems like the Muslim brothers could do more to help. They just don’t want to . Let’s call a spade what it is, a spade.


Israel asked Egypt to open the Sinai to the refugees, Egypt said no.
Anonymous
The IDF is hitting targets in Damascus.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Ukrainian refugees were never at risk of statelessness. Making someone stateless is a pretty big deal. There are UN conventions on it.

More than half of Gaza is under 18. Meaning you’re talking about a million refugees. Where does the money come to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for a million children? Lebanon is a financial mess and Egypt isn’t doing much better— so who pays?

Personally as a taxpayer I’d rather we stop funding the bombs. Then we don’t need to fund a new war crime either.


Doesn’t answer the question of why it’s better to let them stay in harms way. UN and the rest of the world was already spending billions of dollars on Gaza annually. That money can be rerouted to the actual refugee camps .


It’s better for them not to be in harms way. There is no doubt.

But there’s no option to evacuate them. Lebanon doesn’t share a border with Gaza, and Israel insists on vetting every single person out of Rafah. Israel could set up a refugee camp for them in Israel, as they are the sole beneficiaries of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but there’s no reason for Egypt or Lebanon to help commit a war crime.


There is no Israel at the Radha crossing. Egypt has actively participated in Gaza blockade. Egypt does not want Palestinians. Clearly Israel is not going to take them. Seems like the Muslim brothers could do more to help. They just don’t want to . Let’s call a spade what it is, a spade.


Israel asked Egypt to open the Sinai to the refugees, Egypt said no.


Egypt has zero obligation to take in refugees. Plus, I highly doubt it wants to.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


The short answer is “because forcible transfer of a population is a war crime”.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The violence against Muslims in this country that was aforementioned… The 6 year old, his mother, and the 3 college friends is horrible. None of these acts were perpetrated by Jews, btw.

But please don’t say there has been no increase in antisemitism. The ugliness is everywhere. Including in Yonkers NY where a Jewish HS ( The Leffell School) basketball team was playing Roosevelt HS.

They had to stop the game because the players on Roosevelt’s team were roughing them up and playing violently. They also shouted antisemitic slurs.

It seems that one of the slurs they shouted was “Free Palestine” during the game, while another one was “I’m pro-Hamas you f%#^*ing Jew”. Let’s just see if they suffer any consequences.

https://twitter.com/tararosenblum/status/1744019690412777848?s=46&t=XhMk6KgBaubAd8DNh_wEeQ


“Free Palestine” is not a slur. The fact that you think so is a show of Zionist fragility. Because Palestine is not free, it’s occupied and that is a fact. Even if it hurts your feelings.


Gaza sure was not occupied. Hamas drove it into hell.


lol ok tell DoS please since they interpret occupation differently:

"The Occupied Territories, which include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, are subject to the jurisdiction of Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), with the division of responsibilities overlapping in much of the territory. "
https://www.state.gov/reports/2016-report-on-international-religious-freedom/israel-and-the-occupied-territories/israel-and-the-occupied-territories-the-occupied-territories/#:~:text=The%20Occupied%20Territories%2C%20which%20include,in%20much%20of%20the%20territory.

You think you can just go by what "feels occupied" and not by actual definition of occupation?


I mean, Israel withdrew from Gaza almost 20 years ago. Hamas was elected as Gazans' representative and drove Fatah away. So I am not sure what the reference to the PA is. Israel took measures regarding Gaza because, well, like, Hamas is Israel's sworn enemy and took terrorist actions to that effect. Hamas took Gaza and turned it into an autocratic hell scape.


I mean, there is an international definition of occupation and it may not coincide with stuff in your head.

Also, occupation is not only for the nice people. If you blockade/occupy folks you don't like, it still counts as blockade/occupation.


The definition was debatable and nuanced post the date of your linked document. What is in my head is reality and reason. Hamas wrecked Gaza.


Guess what? Occupying and blockading a piece of land ruled by people you disagree with also counts as occupation and siege. Occupation is not only for the nice people.

What you call "reality and reason" doesn't matter. There is an internationally agreed upon definition of occupation, and that's what matters.

In contrast, many prominent international institutions, organizations and bodies—including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, UN General Assembly (UNGA), European Union (EU), African Union, International Criminal Court (ICC) (both Pre-Trial Chamber I and the Office of the Prosecutor), Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch—as well as international legal experts and other organizations, argue that Israel has occupied Palestinian territories including Gaza since 1967.1 While they acknowledge that Israel no longer had the traditional marker of effective control after the disengagement—a military presence—they hold that with the help of technology, it has maintained the requisite control in other ways.

The status of Israel’s occupation is legally significant, as it determines the legal obligations Israel owes to Gaza. Occupying states have heightened responsibilities to protect local populations and have the basic health and safety supplies they need to survive. Given concerns about Israel’s actions in Gaza—such as possible war crimes, including starvation and the denial of humanitarian aid—Israel would likely be in breach of these obligations.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/gaza-israel-occupied-international-law/


Israel had been providing plenty to Gaza prior to the October 7 massacre. Even now, with its humanitarian corridors and allowing fuel and aid for Gazans and Hamas, it is dong more than any other attacked country would.


Other than the United States in Afghanistan you mean. I’m sure that was an oversight.


If the US fed and fueled the Taliban, ok then.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Or you can stop bombing. Just a thought.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Or you can stop bombing. Just a thought.


Obviously. But while there is bombing isn’t it better to move them out of harms way?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Ukrainian refugees were never at risk of statelessness. Making someone stateless is a pretty big deal. There are UN conventions on it.

More than half of Gaza is under 18. Meaning you’re talking about a million refugees. Where does the money come to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for a million children? Lebanon is a financial mess and Egypt isn’t doing much better— so who pays?

Personally as a taxpayer I’d rather we stop funding the bombs. Then we don’t need to fund a new war crime either.


Doesn’t answer the question of why it’s better to let them stay in harms way. UN and the rest of the world was already spending billions of dollars on Gaza annually. That money can be rerouted to the actual refugee camps .


It’s better for them not to be in harms way. There is no doubt.

But there’s no option to evacuate them. Lebanon doesn’t share a border with Gaza, and Israel insists on vetting every single person out of Rafah. Israel could set up a refugee camp for them in Israel, as they are the sole beneficiaries of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but there’s no reason for Egypt or Lebanon to help commit a war crime.


There is no Israel at the Radha crossing. Egypt has actively participated in Gaza blockade. Egypt does not want Palestinians. Clearly Israel is not going to take them. Seems like the Muslim brothers could do more to help. They just don’t want to . Let’s call a spade what it is, a spade.


Israel asked Egypt to open the Sinai to the refugees, Egypt said no.


Egypt has zero obligation to take in refugees. Plus, I highly doubt it wants to.


Exactly the point. No one wants them.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Or you can stop bombing. Just a thought.


Obviously. But while there is bombing isn’t it better to move them out of harms way?


See above, “war crime”.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Ukrainian refugees were never at risk of statelessness. Making someone stateless is a pretty big deal. There are UN conventions on it.

More than half of Gaza is under 18. Meaning you’re talking about a million refugees. Where does the money come to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for a million children? Lebanon is a financial mess and Egypt isn’t doing much better— so who pays?

Personally as a taxpayer I’d rather we stop funding the bombs. Then we don’t need to fund a new war crime either.


Doesn’t answer the question of why it’s better to let them stay in harms way. UN and the rest of the world was already spending billions of dollars on Gaza annually. That money can be rerouted to the actual refugee camps .


It’s better for them not to be in harms way. There is no doubt.

But there’s no option to evacuate them. Lebanon doesn’t share a border with Gaza, and Israel insists on vetting every single person out of Rafah. Israel could set up a refugee camp for them in Israel, as they are the sole beneficiaries of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but there’s no reason for Egypt or Lebanon to help commit a war crime.


There is no Israel at the Radha crossing. Egypt has actively participated in Gaza blockade. Egypt does not want Palestinians. Clearly Israel is not going to take them. Seems like the Muslim brothers could do more to help. They just don’t want to . Let’s call a spade what it is, a spade.


Israel asked Egypt to open the Sinai to the refugees, Egypt said no.


You break, you pay. It’s Israel’s problem. I hear they are asking Congo, all while asking people to sign up for prime beachfront real estate in Gaza. Something about gods promise or whatever.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Or you can stop bombing. Just a thought.


"Bombing" has largely been replaced by targeted drone strikes, it would appear. Maybe not all of it, but a whole lot. And of course, Hamas is fully capable of ending the conflict by stopping. Until then, the IDF will pursue its goals of dismantling Hamas.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


First, and unfortunately, we can’t all seem to agree that Palestinian children are innocent. That’s why theres so much vocal defense of the bombing of civilian infrastructure/indiscriminate killing.

But the reason they cannot all be “transported” to Egypt or Lebanon is because they would never be allowed to return to Gaza or the West Bank. They would become permanently stateless. Forcible deportation is a war crime (goes by the name of “ethnic cleansing”) and while the Israeli government is pushing hard for such cleansing to take place, the neighboring states are not willing to be party to a war crime.


So it’s best to leave them in harms way? Interestingly most countries offered Ukrainians a way out of Ukraine, knowing that most likely they will never return to the occupied areas. Such an idiotic argument, we would rather let them die …


Ukrainian refugees were never at risk of statelessness. Making someone stateless is a pretty big deal. There are UN conventions on it.

More than half of Gaza is under 18. Meaning you’re talking about a million refugees. Where does the money come to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for a million children? Lebanon is a financial mess and Egypt isn’t doing much better— so who pays?

Personally as a taxpayer I’d rather we stop funding the bombs. Then we don’t need to fund a new war crime either.


Doesn’t answer the question of why it’s better to let them stay in harms way. UN and the rest of the world was already spending billions of dollars on Gaza annually. That money can be rerouted to the actual refugee camps .


It’s better for them not to be in harms way. There is no doubt.

But there’s no option to evacuate them. Lebanon doesn’t share a border with Gaza, and Israel insists on vetting every single person out of Rafah. Israel could set up a refugee camp for them in Israel, as they are the sole beneficiaries of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, but there’s no reason for Egypt or Lebanon to help commit a war crime.


There is no Israel at the Radha crossing. Egypt has actively participated in Gaza blockade. Egypt does not want Palestinians. Clearly Israel is not going to take them. Seems like the Muslim brothers could do more to help. They just don’t want to . Let’s call a spade what it is, a spade.


Israel asked Egypt to open the Sinai to the refugees, Egypt said no.


You break, you pay. It’s Israel’s problem. I hear they are asking Congo, all while asking people to sign up for prime beachfront real estate in Gaza. Something about gods promise or whatever.


Nope. The EU, US, UN, some Arab states will pay The Bill.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hi all. I have a question but I don’t want to ask publicly because it might be dumb. I do not understand why the Palestinians - at a minimum the women and children - cannot be relocated to a refugee camp?

It seems to me we all can agree that Palestinian children are INNOCENT. Can the other countries not work together to create and transport them to a refugee camp, maybe in Egypt or Lebanon? It’s nuts that children are still in harms way.


The short answer is “because forcible transfer of a population is a war crime”.


Nope. Way more nuanced then that.
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: