It accelerates the Palestinian expulsion? Where will they go?
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
They'll find a way. Egypt and Jordan most likely and the international community supporting the refugees economically. Obviously I am talking more through fear and anger of how everything is going. I am aware that it seems crazy, but for whatever reason I think Israel is pressing the gas pedal to the finish line now that the mask had fallen for everyone to see
Saudi Arabia have their own agenda like every other country on this planet. Whatever the answer is and I don't know specifically, it doesn't actually matter all that much unless you consider that Arab countries hosting 6 millions palestinians is an indication that they don't want to take refugees, as if the 6m didn't exist.
I didn't tell you that there was no point in symbolic actions, I asked you what they can do beyond that since you are the one who criticized them for only using rhetoric and I added symbolism because it's in the same realm, neither are actions that actually affect the palestinian cause. I will insist on it but you made that point, I don't have any issue with them doing that, I don't think that they can do much beyond that since Arab countries already host half of the palestinian population, unless the point is that they should host the other half.
At some point, this is starting to point toward another country attacking Israel to try and get it to stop. Wouldn't be surprised if this was part of the plan to draw Iran in etc. The escalation will be unstoppable at that point.
I'm actually not particularly concerned with criticizing them. Because for me the main responsibility lies with Israel and its Western backers.
You jumped on the Politico article and as far as I'm concerned you haven't totally disproven the premise that Palestinians are given the cold shoulder. You keep saying they "can't do anything" and now you're saying Saudi Arabia have their own agenda. No shit, that's kinda the point.
And I have answered your question. They could have not engaged in a normalization deal. They could have not bought Israeli defence products. You then answer with the question how that helps Palestinians. I find that to be an odd response. Symbolic actions don't always affect the ground situation, it's what it is. Should therefore nobody do symbolic actions?
My fecking heart man.
I didn't jump I asked you a question based on something that you suggested. How is it odd to ask what these countries can do beyond rhetoric or symbolism when the answer that you quoted suggest that Arab countries aren't viscerally concerned, what reaction would point to a visceral concern outside of taking millions of refugees, which they have done?
And I didn't try to disprove a thing, I asked you what they can actually do to help the palestinian cause beyond but you already stated that it doesn't matter.
Don't change the question. This isn't about arguing that Arab countries should for example use military force against Israel to prove how concerned they are.
If you are trying to say that other Arab countries leaders care more about themselves than Palestinians, then of course that is true. They will first pursue deals that are useful to them personally. It is not that they dislike Palestinians, they would do the same to Israelis if the situation was reversed.
Yes, this is the main point of discussion indeed.
It should be simple, the remaining member states recognise Palestine and send a UN peacekeeping force in.
I agree that if nothing is done there's going to be an escalation that will end up pulling in major states into a war. It's also the best way for Netanyahu to extend the conflict and keep allies on side.
My question remain the same what are they supposed to do beyond rhetoric? You answered with symbolism which in my opinion is in the realm of rhetoric both are for appearance and neither address the issue. And don't give that deflection nonsense when you are the one that has done it with you what about Ukraine and what about Saudi Arabia?
I think he is right in that they can avoid normalizing relations with Israel and stop buying their products. But most of the Arab leaders are too morally bankrupt to do that.
I have already answered your question on potential options for going beyond rhetoric support.
No, symbolic policy decisions and rhetoric are not the same for me.
Of course they can avoid normalizing relations with Israel. But the question is how does it serves palestinians? Surely we all understand that such actions do not demonstrate any visceral reactions and are only PR measures?
Effectively what is the difference? What is the goal of both symbolic or rhetorical actions?
There are 2 questions.
1. How much do they care about Palestinians?
2. If they care, what options do they have for showing support?
For the 2nd question, there are options for symbolic support.
What's the answer to the first question? You say they "can't do anything". Can they not, or do they not want to? Again, this doesn't apply for all of them (Jordan for example).
When Russia invaded Ukraine, the West opened out their arms to Ukrainians fleeing the country. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians took refuge in Europe. What is the difference here?
There is no difference. No one has volunteered to take Gazans in. Because either they don't really care or they don't want them.
I suggested that they can't do anything beyond rhetoric and symbolism. I didn't suggest that they literally can't do anything.
Now I like where you are going with that. The first question depends entirely on which country you are talking about Arab countries aren't a monolith, some care and have hosted a lot of refugees others don't. Some may care but aren't in a position to actually do something either because they rely on allies of Israel in various domain or when it comes to refugees because they don't have the means to host them adequately or worry about the future of Palestinian state if you depopulate Palestine.
As for the second question, outside of send financial aid, physical aid and taking willing refugees there isn't much that they can do to actually support.
So you're comparing Israel to Putin's Russia then?
6 million Palestinian refugees already exist in Arab nations because of prior ethnic cleansing. Would you rather all remaining Palestinians also leave without a right of return?
and how about the millions of Jewish Arabs that were expelled from Yemen, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Syria? Israel took them in. Have they ever been allowed back to their homes in those Arab countries? Where is their right of return?
Isn't this thread about the Israeli-Palestine conflict? Some very odd whataboutism and diversionary blame going on here.
The mods hated that in the Rusisa thread so I'm sure they'll be along all angered very shortly......
The mods hated that in the Rusisa thread so I'm sure they'll be along all angered very shortly......
So instead of answering questions you persist with your whataboutisms.
One of my biggest regrets is seeing the Arab Jewry leave their native lands, but they at least had a nation they were pulled into. The choices the Palestinians have is miserable subjugation or indefinite refugee status. Its hardly the same. And for all your talk about Arab treatment of Jews, they were still immensely better off historically in Arab/Ottoman territories than they were in Europe, who still wanted nothing to do with them after the horrors of the holocaust.
Do not feed the troll.
Meanwhile Israel have more or less just confirmed their intended full occupation of Gaza and the West Bank going forward.
I eat Hasbara trolls for breakfast my guy.
I do not doubt that, but this one is not interested in having a conversation.
One Rabbi Shmuley is enough for this world.
What do you think will happen if Israel behaves the same way in Rafah like it did in the rest of the Strip?
Beyond the appalling number of civilian victims, surpassing by far the Nakba's in 1948, the thoroughly documented and numerous war crimes, mass starvation and accusations of genocide, all of which seemingly insufficient to trigger the West's proverbial outrage at any unlawful behavior that isn't theirs, there's not enough emphasis put on destruction of the Gazan infrastructures. That's the most concerning point.
All administrative buildings and universities have been deliberately blown up. There's no working sewage system. There's no hospital that still functions bar one, the European Hospital. 75% of the housing units are badly damaged or destroyed. Nothing else has been spared, not schools, not religious buildings, not historic monuments, not even cemetaries. The North is already unhabitable, and the psychopaths on the other side of the wall are planning a "buffer zone" which will further reduce an already tiny open-air prison. And it will go through without anyone doing or saying anything.
The Israeli government wasn't joking when it talked about reducing Gaza to "a city of tents". They are doing their utmost to make a possible life after their "act of self-defense" so unbearable that the inhabitants will be left with little choice but to leave. They've hammered it, time and time again. Some of the most prominent elected officials and members of the Netanyahu cabinet would've rightly been qualified as Nazis if it were any other country. You can add the daily TikTok videos from the IDF soldiers.
Since you brought Ukraine to the table, just imagine for second the outrage and consequences, if it was Russian officials saying that and acting on it. Or their soldiers posting it on the net. We'd never hear the end of it.
If the planned offensive on Rafah indeed goes through, there will be only two choices: either the West grows a pair and stops the psychopaths before it's too late or act the ethnic cleansing and force Egypt to open its border with the absolute certainty that every Palestinian crossing the bridge will never be allowed to go back.
You seem to to think that Arab countries constitute some kind of monolithic block when it really isn't the case. We're not talking about an empire here, each of those countries acts depending on its on geographic situation, and economic as well as strategic interests. The second point is that there's a massive discrepancy between the
There's nothing Arab countries can do. It ended in 1973 and the fall of the Soviet Union buried that idea for good. Yeah, they can call back their ambassador and boycott Israeli products, but they'd be just pissing in the sand whilst shooting themselves in the foot. There's one international rule that never changed throughout the millenia, the one who has the biggest stick wins. Arabs don't have it for centuries. Too weak militarily, too economically dependent of the US and the West since the fall of the Soviet Union. Some of them have every interest to see Israel win because a "victory" of the Hamas would give bad ideas to the islamist movements within their own countries. Egypt and Saudi Arabia in particular which had massive problems with the Muslim Brotherhood that gave birth to Hamas.
There are currently three main Arab players that matter in the region: SA, Qatar and Egypt. Jordan, which took in most of the Palestinian refugees in 1948, had more than its fair share and is highly depending on the US. Irak, Syria and Lebanon have been destroyed. Egypt is on the US' and Israel's payrolls since 1973, there's nothing to be expected and they don't want more people they're not able to integrate, and among whom some could be sympathetic to the Brotherhood which Sisi worked so hard to overthrow. Qatar for all its wealth, is a very small country and very happy to pose as the "Switzerland of the Middle-East". The other Arab countries in North Africa are simply too weak and too far away to have any kind of pull. Algeria's UNSC proposition is nothing more than symbolic, given the utterly predictable US veto and that's as far as they can go.
SA under MBS has other plans. Although a long-time ally of the US in the Middle-East, they've understood that the over-reliance on oil is a death warrant in the long-term and are keen on diversifying their income, based on the Dubai model. A normalization with Israel would've had massive economic benefits alongside the acquisition of much needed technologie, including a civil nuclear one, hence the Abraham Accords. I also predict a gradual and massive change of the absolutely appalling state of women's rights in their kingdom, for PR reasons. They're also ideologically Iran's archenemies and will do all they can to limit the latter's influence in the region, even if it means allying themselves with Israel and ditch the Palestinian cause, which was before 10/7 effectively dead and buried. On the other side, Israel went so far that they now legitimately can't endorse the Abraham Accords without having an insurrection on their hands.
At the end of the day, even if their goverments led by selfish assholes who can't do anything or most likely don't care about Palestine's fate, the Arab populations are absolutely seething and massively concerned by what's happening in Gaza right now. There's always been among the Arab populations an undeniable solidarity with the Palestinian cause that will never stop until the latter get their legitimate right to self-determination and own country. The amount of resentment, if not hate, the West's daily generating by its double standards, willful blindness and unwillingness to stop what clearly has the marks of a genocide all over it, is really difficult to fathom for a western observer. I guarantee you that the next US administrations and the Western governments, will be dealing with the consequences of the last four months for decades. I dare say that it extends to the whole Global South which major actors are duly taking notes.
It is not a bipolar or unipolar world anymore, people must understand this. The "West vs the Rest" road taken by the US and its allies is a very dangerous one and I don't know if the latter are prepared for what's coming their way.
Last edited:
The bolded part: that's not how your posts came across (to me anyway).
As for the rest of your post, you seem to acknowledge the argument that some don't care and will follow their own agenda which the ambassador from the Politico article kinda suggested in the first place so it's not like his premise was completely wrong.
"You seem to to think that Arab countries constitute some kind of monolithic block when it really isn't the case. "
No, just no. I don't think that. Let's get that straight.
As for the rest of your post...eh? Lots of stuff that most, including myself, already agree with but I don't quite see the relevance of it towards the discussion between me and JPRouve. I mean, would you like for me to engage with the rest of your post or...?
Last edited:
This is the only thing stopping a regional war, always has been.
Alright, I'll make it short then. Those were your questions, if I'm right.
1. How much do they care about Palestinians?
2. If they care, what options do they have for showing support?
1. The current Arab governments? They don't give a shit and even if some of them did, they've got no economic or military means to weigh in.
2. None. They can symbolically protest, even push the case to the UNSC and that's about it. Taking in more permanent refugees is out of the question, for the reasons I've mentioned above. They can act as local fixers though.
I don't understand why you're making a mountain out of a molehill. The center of decisions lies in the West, anything else is a red herring.
Last edited:
The premise is nonsensical. First because it acts as if Arab countries haven't taken refugees. And it's nonsensical because there is no symbolic or rhetorical actions that translate to a visceral concern, that's why they are defined as symbolic or rhetorical.
It also acts as if Arab countries are a monolith, if the point was that some are willing to make bigger sacrifices than others than there would be no issue but it's not what was done because the point was to villify Arab countries as aw hole and pretend that they actually have a meaningful say in that situation outside of supporting deportation. Also people should question the idea of deportation whether it concerns palestinians or israelis.
Why do you accuse me of making a mountain out of a molehill? You yourself say some governments don't care. That's what me and JPRouve were discussing about. That's literally it, nothing more or less.
I only engaged with JPRouve because based on his posts, I concluded he disagreed with the mere observation that some governments aren't really invested in the Palestinian cause. An observation that I've heard Palestinians themselves make.
And his arguments weren't convincing enough for me, that's why I engaged him.
You continuously defend the slaughter of innocents simply because their limp bodies aren't wrapped in the correct flag. It's genuinely pitiful to watch the gradual deterioration in a persons morality without them even being able to notice. Here you are calling for Israel to be aided and abetted in committing ethnic cleansing. A crime against humanity.
Israel is currently destroying the open air prison they keep 2.5 million in. The other 3 million are herded between ever shrinking Bantustans as increasingly intolerable conditions are imposed upon them and you have the brass neck to try and smuggle responsibility for these outrages out of Israeli hands.
Meanwhile, laughably and genuinely without logic, you would confer responsibility for a small group of people being mean to a man holding a sign onto the entire 100k present and make it proof positive of an all encompassing antisemitism.
How easily you blame others, how impossible to fault Israelis. Surely you must see the moral and intellectual poverty of your own position. Are you really so far gone?
Last edited:
It wasn't a mere observation and it wasn't about some countries. It was an attempt to demonize Arab countries by claiming that they don't want to take refugees even though they have millions of them and it's also a way to deflect blame away from the nations that actually hold any power in that matter.
If the point was state that some countries care and others there wouldn't be any issues but it's not what the quote was about. Also the resettlement of palestinians isn't a sign of caring for palestinians not when it is exactly what Israel wants.
This is a well written response and acutely hammers home the trivialisation by many of the plight of Palestinians.
A trivialisation that were it reversed would be considered anti-semitic.