One must wonder how many decades people will cling to the vision of a two-state solution for the Israelis and the Palestinians while the facts on the ground move continually in the other direction. Nor is a one-state solution any more plausible. Time for a new idea.
The fundamental problem for Israel and the Palestinians is that there are 5 million stateless Palestinians and Israel will never accept them as citizens because they are not Jewish. Historically no Arabic country has welcomed them either.
>>For the past month, both Jordan and Egypt have repeatedly declared that their borders would not be opened to receive even one Palestinian—not as a way to deny humanitarian assistance to Palestinians under attack but rather as a countermove to deny Israel the opportunity to empty the West Bank and Gaza of as many Palestinians as possible. Jordan’s fears are not unfounded, and its redline of refusing to admit Palestinians remains unlikely to change for several reasons.<<
Without a country, the Palestinians will never be free. I see one possible solution: the world should buy a country for the Palestinians.
It would not be cheap. Rebuilding Gaza after Israel destroys it will also not be cheap, but the world will pay for it. Here is my proposal.
The idea when first proposed was to buy a less-developed part of Sudan bordering Egypt with a size close to that of Israel. A refinement is to negotiate a deal with the micronation self-proclaimed as the "Islamic Republic of Hala’ib Triangle". This entity covers 7,950 square miles (20,580 sq km), comparable to the size of Israel (8,630 sq mi).
Set aside the claims of Sudan and Egypt for this area, and focus on justice for the current inhabitants which number about 1500. I'm proposing a payment of $1 million US per resident, infants included. The nominal cost would be $1.5 billion, about the cost of 2 to 3 weeks of bombs to be dropped on the Gazans. Also a grant of ten acres of their choosing per resident.
Hala'ib lies between Sudan and Egypt and borders the Red Sea to the east. I believe the best approach is that the current residents, mostly Bedouins, would have citizenship in the new country along with the Palestinians. They would be suddenly rich, of course, which would not be a new phenomenom for Bedouins.
The 1500 rich Bedouins and the five million not-rich Palestinians would be the citizens of the new country which might be called the Hala'ib-Palestine Alliance.
Hala'ib-Palestine would be far enough away from Israel that continued hostilities would be unlikely in addition to being pointless.
Many persons claim that the Palestinians would never accept the idea of moving away from the birthplace of Islam. Not living in the birthplace of Islam does not seem to be a problem for the rest of the nearly 2 billion Muslims. A quick poll of the Palestinans in between bombardments and sniper attacks could resolve that question.
There would need to be a threshold for final approval on both the Hala'ib and the Palestinian sides. Of course a proposal which looks very good to those directly involved will probably be repugnant to Sudan and Egypt, so those countries must be dealt with. One possibility: offer to redirect the aid that the US gives Israel (approximately $4 billion per year) for ten years: $2 billion per year to Sudan, and the same for Egypt. Set a one-year deadline for agreement: if either country does not agree, all of the money goes to the other country. Regardless, the establishment of the new country would proceed under UN and US protection.
The new country should include a nature preserve for the Nubian wild ass.
It should also include a large interior area which is reserved for nomadic occupation only. In addition a strip of land one mile thick along the Red Sea plus land for an airport and various parcels for government installations should be under permanent government control. The oceanfront area could be leased for resort development. The land remaining after the grants to the original Hala'ib residents would be divied up among the Palestinians.
Enlist a coalition of nations to build a new Palestine in the new country. The US can contribute the money it would otherwise spend replacing the buildings and infrastructure in Gaza that Israel has turned into rubble. Israel can rebuild what it has destroyed in Gaza.
The Palestinians already had a perfectly fine country with lots of culture, big cities, agriculture, education until the British came along and decided it was an empty land that they could have and give away to a group of their choosing. They need to give it back to the Palestinians.
The British have invaded at one time 171 of the 193 countries in the world. What a damaging legacy for the human race. There is no better monoment to their shamelessness and malign influence than the continued existence of the British Museum, the largest warehouse of stolen goods in the world.
The British Empire does indeed have a poor track record in the history books ( to say the very least ) and they mostly left the colonised countries they cut loose, to deal with the Empires' mess. But it is history. Now the problem is the Amerikan Empire.
History can provide context but I don't think it offers any solutions to our current problems.
I agree, but note I was replying to Susan T who noted the role of the British in the present quagmire that is the ME. I was simply providing more context.
Agree, George. I always wondered what gave the Bastard Brits the right to dig up the tombs of the ancient Kings of Egypt. Who the fuck thinks they can desecrate the deceased?
The territory of Palestine was never a "country". The Zionists & the UK fought a war contesting the territory. The Zionists won both the war & the territory. The proverb "To the Victor Go the Spoils" applies here. The British no longer control the former (or present) territory of Palestine, so they can't "give it back to the Palestinians". If the Israelis were willing to reject Israel's being a Jewish ethnostate, they could give Gaza & the West Bank back to the Palestinians, but they won't. They would argue that without a country of their own, the Jews of the world would never be safe, & someone argued in one of these comments exactly the same for the Palestinians. Perhaps both arguments are true. I don't know. But it seems patently clear that there cannot & will not exist two ethnostates in the old Palestinian territory. Too many entities are against it. It's not even a stalemate. It's a "This is the way things are, mate. It ain't Cyprus."
For all warriors (I'm not a warrior) might is right, & what's justified is what one can get away with. Lots of Holocaust deniers believe the Holocaust never happened, but some are just trolls. Lots of neo-Nazis believe the Holocaust was justified & are angry bc the Nazis didn't achieve their goals. I don't fit in any of those categories. "Judge not lest ye be judged" is how I suppose some Christians would respond. You do you. It don't matter to me what others think, believe, or say. Sticks & stones etc.
No, I'm just not engaging in any "If pigs could fly" discussions. There's no pseudo-intellectual activity I dislike more than Michael Sandel philosophy of ethics trolley questions. I'm not the Walrus & I don't like oysters.
I would support giving Palestine back to the Palestinians or anything that Palestinians wanted. I think what people really want though, is their country, culture, agriculture, and freedom back. I watched this documentary last night https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUCeQt8zg5o and felt sad and angry that all that was taken away by colonizers and made worse when Israel came into being.
I guess. But I think your proposal is kind of wimpy. What people really want is the opportunity to build back up what was stolen. I don't think people anywhere would really want to be relocated to somewhere that was being given to them to get them out of the way. Your proposal would make more sense if the Israelis went to live in "less-developed part of Sudan bordering Egypt with a size close to that of Israel". They are the ones living on stolen land, not the Palestinians.
Completely agree - though with the US and European powers backing Israel, I fear that this situation is going to be harder to resolve in some ways than Nazi Germany where the European powers were aligned against Germany.
As I said to Feral Finster earlier: ".... I'm .... not engaging in any 'If pigs could fly' discussions. There's no pseudo-intellectual activity I dislike more than Michael Sandel philosophy of ethics trolley questions. I'm not the Walrus & I don't like oysters."
First of all many thanks to Caitlin for highlighting the hypocrisy, double standards and hegemonic machinations of empire. It is time that the US be condemned by world civil society for crimes against humanity. The world has witnessed how complicit they are with Israel for the genocide of the Palestinian people. US should be standing in the dock with Israel. Their rules based world disorder has created the dystopia humanity is living through. They can with impunity designate countries and groups as terrorists; sanction countries and steal their assets, stunting their growth. Shamelessly weaponise food and other essential prerequisites for survival. Consumed with power, start wars which they never want to stop.
To Susan T, Chang Chokaski and Jon Carver, It's been interesting following your arguments regarding Peter Rodes Robinson's hairbrained scheme for the Palestinians. Won't Sudan have something to say about it? What gobsmacked me is his assertion that " the establishment of the new country would proceed under UN and US protection". US protection!!!!
But first you need to understand what getting out of hell would be for Palestinian people. You seem to be thinking you (or some other outside source) can tell the people of Palestine how they should resolve the issues. But the issues are more complex than you appear to be seeing and, as well, the people of Palestine may very well not appreciate your "help". It is often a dilemma when we try to help others. The dilemma is to not impose your help. To not be doing it so that YOU will feel better, but trying to really understand how you can facilitate a solution.
The Israel / Palestine conflict is a result of Europe and the US decided they needed somewhere to put all the jews (they didn't want them) and Britain agreed to the use of Palestine for that purpose. You propose to do the same thing with the Palestinians to fix this? Sudan is an inhabited country - they just had their own civil war.
I believe Einstein said "You can't solve a problem using the same thinking that caused it."
I think you came up with your proposal for humane and caring reasons, but it has a colonial tone. The whole part about relocating people is the first thing that comes to mind. The best would be for you to read a bit about helping others and what a complex thing that really is. I worked with people living in poverty for quite a few years. We talked about that thing of making ourselves feel good first and helping others just happened to be part of it. That was not considered the best way to do things. I learned more from that work than I have ever learned anywhere about relating to people in difficult situations. I also stopped thinking of "those less fortunate" and started thinking more about "those more ripped off". Helping others is not the simple do gooder thing we might like it to be when we are in that position of helping.
Peter. In my humble opinion if you start moving a race of people to another place (country) we would be doing exactly the same thing the British did with Israel.
If it's similar to the creation of Israel, the problem is not for the people moving, but for the people that were there in the first place. Do you think I have not taken care of the people that were there in the first place in my proposal? What would you do differently?
I appreciate the thought that went into this. However, the problem is the racist authoritarian apartheid government of Israel. If democracy and human rights are truly a real thing, we should be holding them accountable with overwhelming support from all "liberal democracies ". Buying another state to effectively ethnicity cleanse gaza is just sanitizing the dirty work of a horribly fascist state, essentially giving it and all of its "allies " a blank check for future "solutions". How about the citizens of Gaza decide.. after all democracy right?
Considering the mindset of the Zionists I'd suspect them of digging shallow tunnels underneath major cities (NYC, for example?) to install primed & ready to go nuclear weapons for an immediate existential reaction without the need for cumbersome ICBMs that can be intercepted. No need for despondency though as I'm pretty sure we can defeat that approach once we get our collective heads round that one.
Considering the mindset of the Zionists I'd suspect them of digging shallow tunnels underneath major cities (NYC, for example?) to install primed & ready to go nuclear weapons for an immediate existential reaction without the need for cumbersome ICBMs that can be intercepted. No need for despondency though as I'm pretty sure we can defeat that approach once we get our collective heads round that one.
Agreed that this tunnel affair in NYC underneath the Chabad Lubavitch synagogue was probably intended for individual human abuse purposes but I'm deeply suspicious that the israelis have already planted nukes in major cities everywhere under the banner of "The Samson Option". This explains why the nations of the world toady up to the Zionist entity of israel at all times. Otherwise I feel israel would already have been vaporised by now.
Utterly ridiculous. The Palestinians already HAVE a land.
Now let’s reverse your ignorant proposal and ban all the Zionazis to your proposed “homeland”. Any Jew wishing to live in peace in Palestine would be welcome to stay.
Palestine was a real, actual place. IsraHell is a quasination that exists only because of Amerikkkan taxpayer handouts.
First, you assume facts not in evidence. Second, why would a "supermajority" of Palestinians agree to be ethnically cleansed? What on earth makes you think such an agreement would be in any way "voluntary"?
if a supermajority of Palestinians voted to reject this proposal out of hand, would you finally start thinking about how to hold the perpetrators of the genocide responsible?
If only 50% of Palestinans supported the proposal, I would immediately abandon it.
As for holding Israel responsible, the first step is for the ICJ to recognize plausible genocide and impose measures. I am optimistic that will happen soon. If it doesn't happen, the world is screwed.
But even a victory for SA will be only a small step. Israel will certainly ignore the court.
If a (so far nonexistent) supermajority of Palestinians agreed to this harebrained idea because Israel and its American thug held literal and metaphorical guns to theirs and their children's heads, would you call that a voluntary decision?
Does anyone ask the people who are getting a bunch of Palestinian refugees? Ever heard of Black September?
New idea.
One must wonder how many decades people will cling to the vision of a two-state solution for the Israelis and the Palestinians while the facts on the ground move continually in the other direction. Nor is a one-state solution any more plausible. Time for a new idea.
The fundamental problem for Israel and the Palestinians is that there are 5 million stateless Palestinians and Israel will never accept them as citizens because they are not Jewish. Historically no Arabic country has welcomed them either.
>>For the past month, both Jordan and Egypt have repeatedly declared that their borders would not be opened to receive even one Palestinian—not as a way to deny humanitarian assistance to Palestinians under attack but rather as a countermove to deny Israel the opportunity to empty the West Bank and Gaza of as many Palestinians as possible. Jordan’s fears are not unfounded, and its redline of refusing to admit Palestinians remains unlikely to change for several reasons.<<
https://carnegieendowment.org/2023/11/21/jordan-s-redline-on-admitting-palestinians-is-unlikely-to-change-pub-91077
Without a country, the Palestinians will never be free. I see one possible solution: the world should buy a country for the Palestinians.
It would not be cheap. Rebuilding Gaza after Israel destroys it will also not be cheap, but the world will pay for it. Here is my proposal.
The idea when first proposed was to buy a less-developed part of Sudan bordering Egypt with a size close to that of Israel. A refinement is to negotiate a deal with the micronation self-proclaimed as the "Islamic Republic of Hala’ib Triangle". This entity covers 7,950 square miles (20,580 sq km), comparable to the size of Israel (8,630 sq mi).
https://micronations.wiki/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Hala%27ib_Triangle
Set aside the claims of Sudan and Egypt for this area, and focus on justice for the current inhabitants which number about 1500. I'm proposing a payment of $1 million US per resident, infants included. The nominal cost would be $1.5 billion, about the cost of 2 to 3 weeks of bombs to be dropped on the Gazans. Also a grant of ten acres of their choosing per resident.
Hala'ib lies between Sudan and Egypt and borders the Red Sea to the east. I believe the best approach is that the current residents, mostly Bedouins, would have citizenship in the new country along with the Palestinians. They would be suddenly rich, of course, which would not be a new phenomenom for Bedouins.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/entertainment/books/1982/01/31/saudi-arabiafrom-bedouins-to-oil-barons/bef09597-7dd2-481c-9a85-1041320e0a63/
The 1500 rich Bedouins and the five million not-rich Palestinians would be the citizens of the new country which might be called the Hala'ib-Palestine Alliance.
Hala'ib-Palestine would be far enough away from Israel that continued hostilities would be unlikely in addition to being pointless.
Many persons claim that the Palestinians would never accept the idea of moving away from the birthplace of Islam. Not living in the birthplace of Islam does not seem to be a problem for the rest of the nearly 2 billion Muslims. A quick poll of the Palestinans in between bombardments and sniper attacks could resolve that question.
There would need to be a threshold for final approval on both the Hala'ib and the Palestinian sides. Of course a proposal which looks very good to those directly involved will probably be repugnant to Sudan and Egypt, so those countries must be dealt with. One possibility: offer to redirect the aid that the US gives Israel (approximately $4 billion per year) for ten years: $2 billion per year to Sudan, and the same for Egypt. Set a one-year deadline for agreement: if either country does not agree, all of the money goes to the other country. Regardless, the establishment of the new country would proceed under UN and US protection.
The new country should include a nature preserve for the Nubian wild ass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nubian_wild_ass
It should also include a large interior area which is reserved for nomadic occupation only. In addition a strip of land one mile thick along the Red Sea plus land for an airport and various parcels for government installations should be under permanent government control. The oceanfront area could be leased for resort development. The land remaining after the grants to the original Hala'ib residents would be divied up among the Palestinians.
Enlist a coalition of nations to build a new Palestine in the new country. The US can contribute the money it would otherwise spend replacing the buildings and infrastructure in Gaza that Israel has turned into rubble. Israel can rebuild what it has destroyed in Gaza.
The Palestinians already had a perfectly fine country with lots of culture, big cities, agriculture, education until the British came along and decided it was an empty land that they could have and give away to a group of their choosing. They need to give it back to the Palestinians.
The British have invaded at one time 171 of the 193 countries in the world. What a damaging legacy for the human race. There is no better monoment to their shamelessness and malign influence than the continued existence of the British Museum, the largest warehouse of stolen goods in the world.
The British Empire does indeed have a poor track record in the history books ( to say the very least ) and they mostly left the colonised countries they cut loose, to deal with the Empires' mess. But it is history. Now the problem is the Amerikan Empire.
History can provide context but I don't think it offers any solutions to our current problems.
I agree, but note I was replying to Susan T who noted the role of the British in the present quagmire that is the ME. I was simply providing more context.
Agree, George. I always wondered what gave the Bastard Brits the right to dig up the tombs of the ancient Kings of Egypt. Who the fuck thinks they can desecrate the deceased?
In my Ninth edition of Encyclopedia Britannica ~ 1890, it is not really accepted that blacks are human. See entry under Negro.
The territory of Palestine was never a "country". The Zionists & the UK fought a war contesting the territory. The Zionists won both the war & the territory. The proverb "To the Victor Go the Spoils" applies here. The British no longer control the former (or present) territory of Palestine, so they can't "give it back to the Palestinians". If the Israelis were willing to reject Israel's being a Jewish ethnostate, they could give Gaza & the West Bank back to the Palestinians, but they won't. They would argue that without a country of their own, the Jews of the world would never be safe, & someone argued in one of these comments exactly the same for the Palestinians. Perhaps both arguments are true. I don't know. But it seems patently clear that there cannot & will not exist two ethnostates in the old Palestinian territory. Too many entities are against it. It's not even a stalemate. It's a "This is the way things are, mate. It ain't Cyprus."
So if might is right, that would mean that the Holocaust was justified.
For all warriors (I'm not a warrior) might is right, & what's justified is what one can get away with. Lots of Holocaust deniers believe the Holocaust never happened, but some are just trolls. Lots of neo-Nazis believe the Holocaust was justified & are angry bc the Nazis didn't achieve their goals. I don't fit in any of those categories. "Judge not lest ye be judged" is how I suppose some Christians would respond. You do you. It don't matter to me what others think, believe, or say. Sticks & stones etc.
You are trying to change the subject.
No, I'm just not engaging in any "If pigs could fly" discussions. There's no pseudo-intellectual activity I dislike more than Michael Sandel philosophy of ethics trolley questions. I'm not the Walrus & I don't like oysters.
Sez you. IsraHell won’t exist in another ten years. The world has finally seen them for who they are.
Correct.
Everything you say is true. Would you oppose my proposal, if a super majority of the Palestinians agreed with it?
I would support giving Palestine back to the Palestinians or anything that Palestinians wanted. I think what people really want though, is their country, culture, agriculture, and freedom back. I watched this documentary last night https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUCeQt8zg5o and felt sad and angry that all that was taken away by colonizers and made worse when Israel came into being.
>>anything that Palestinians wanted<<
Including my proposal I assume.
I guess. But I think your proposal is kind of wimpy. What people really want is the opportunity to build back up what was stolen. I don't think people anywhere would really want to be relocated to somewhere that was being given to them to get them out of the way. Your proposal would make more sense if the Israelis went to live in "less-developed part of Sudan bordering Egypt with a size close to that of Israel". They are the ones living on stolen land, not the Palestinians.
Well said Susan T! My sentiments exactly!
Completely agree - though with the US and European powers backing Israel, I fear that this situation is going to be harder to resolve in some ways than Nazi Germany where the European powers were aligned against Germany.
As I said to Feral Finster earlier: ".... I'm .... not engaging in any 'If pigs could fly' discussions. There's no pseudo-intellectual activity I dislike more than Michael Sandel philosophy of ethics trolley questions. I'm not the Walrus & I don't like oysters."
it reminds me very distinctly of another frequent poster.
First of all many thanks to Caitlin for highlighting the hypocrisy, double standards and hegemonic machinations of empire. It is time that the US be condemned by world civil society for crimes against humanity. The world has witnessed how complicit they are with Israel for the genocide of the Palestinian people. US should be standing in the dock with Israel. Their rules based world disorder has created the dystopia humanity is living through. They can with impunity designate countries and groups as terrorists; sanction countries and steal their assets, stunting their growth. Shamelessly weaponise food and other essential prerequisites for survival. Consumed with power, start wars which they never want to stop.
To Susan T, Chang Chokaski and Jon Carver, It's been interesting following your arguments regarding Peter Rodes Robinson's hairbrained scheme for the Palestinians. Won't Sudan have something to say about it? What gobsmacked me is his assertion that " the establishment of the new country would proceed under UN and US protection". US protection!!!!
RIGHT. ON. JON!
I hate the idea of Israel getting what it wants - the whole enchilada sans those pesky Palestinians.
Regardless of how this conflict is resolved, Israel is 100% responsible for making Gaza habitable again, and cleaning up the bombing mess.
I hate the idea of Israel getting what it wants, also, but I love the idea of getting the Palestinians out of hell more.
But first you need to understand what getting out of hell would be for Palestinian people. You seem to be thinking you (or some other outside source) can tell the people of Palestine how they should resolve the issues. But the issues are more complex than you appear to be seeing and, as well, the people of Palestine may very well not appreciate your "help". It is often a dilemma when we try to help others. The dilemma is to not impose your help. To not be doing it so that YOU will feel better, but trying to really understand how you can facilitate a solution.
Do you see anything in my proposal about imposing help? Point it out and I will remove it.
The Israel / Palestine conflict is a result of Europe and the US decided they needed somewhere to put all the jews (they didn't want them) and Britain agreed to the use of Palestine for that purpose. You propose to do the same thing with the Palestinians to fix this? Sudan is an inhabited country - they just had their own civil war.
I believe Einstein said "You can't solve a problem using the same thinking that caused it."
>>I believe Einstein said "You can't solve a problem using the same thinking that caused it."
So very well said dave.jumanji!
This is a pop quiz. Where did I say they would go?
I think you came up with your proposal for humane and caring reasons, but it has a colonial tone. The whole part about relocating people is the first thing that comes to mind. The best would be for you to read a bit about helping others and what a complex thing that really is. I worked with people living in poverty for quite a few years. We talked about that thing of making ourselves feel good first and helping others just happened to be part of it. That was not considered the best way to do things. I learned more from that work than I have ever learned anywhere about relating to people in difficult situations. I also stopped thinking of "those less fortunate" and started thinking more about "those more ripped off". Helping others is not the simple do gooder thing we might like it to be when we are in that position of helping.
I live in the Dominican Republic and I don't know any Palestinians. Do you think I should abandon my project?
You can speak honestly because I'm not going to abandon it.
Now if you know any Palestinians, I would be delighted if you relayed information.
It's like saying that giving up your wallet in response to "Your money or your life!" is both voluntary and a good deal, considering.
Peter. In my humble opinion if you start moving a race of people to another place (country) we would be doing exactly the same thing the British did with Israel.
I wish we could have a conversation.
If it's similar to the creation of Israel, the problem is not for the people moving, but for the people that were there in the first place. Do you think I have not taken care of the people that were there in the first place in my proposal? What would you do differently?
I appreciate the thought that went into this. However, the problem is the racist authoritarian apartheid government of Israel. If democracy and human rights are truly a real thing, we should be holding them accountable with overwhelming support from all "liberal democracies ". Buying another state to effectively ethnicity cleanse gaza is just sanitizing the dirty work of a horribly fascist state, essentially giving it and all of its "allies " a blank check for future "solutions". How about the citizens of Gaza decide.. after all democracy right?
I added the word "supermajority" to this sentence in my draft:
There would need to be a threshold (supermajority) for final approval on both the Hala'ib and the Palestinian sides.
A supermajority of all of the Palestinians would have to approve. That's in the proposal. Would you oppose what most of the Palestinians wanted to do?
*most
Someone always gets screwed
I vote for making the Jews leave Palestine.
And if the Israelis threaten to respond to any attack by a NATO member with a nuclear missile, or missiles?
How committed are you?
Return fire.
Considering the mindset of the Zionists I'd suspect them of digging shallow tunnels underneath major cities (NYC, for example?) to install primed & ready to go nuclear weapons for an immediate existential reaction without the need for cumbersome ICBMs that can be intercepted. No need for despondency though as I'm pretty sure we can defeat that approach once we get our collective heads round that one.
Considering the mindset of the Zionists I'd suspect them of digging shallow tunnels underneath major cities (NYC, for example?) to install primed & ready to go nuclear weapons for an immediate existential reaction without the need for cumbersome ICBMs that can be intercepted. No need for despondency though as I'm pretty sure we can defeat that approach once we get our collective heads round that one.
Just watched, Che.
Horrifying but not particularly surprising.
Agreed that this tunnel affair in NYC underneath the Chabad Lubavitch synagogue was probably intended for individual human abuse purposes but I'm deeply suspicious that the israelis have already planted nukes in major cities everywhere under the banner of "The Samson Option". This explains why the nations of the world toady up to the Zionist entity of israel at all times. Otherwise I feel israel would already have been vaporised by now.
Utterly ridiculous. The Palestinians already HAVE a land.
Now let’s reverse your ignorant proposal and ban all the Zionazis to your proposed “homeland”. Any Jew wishing to live in peace in Palestine would be welcome to stay.
Palestine was a real, actual place. IsraHell is a quasination that exists only because of Amerikkkan taxpayer handouts.
So you're basically arguing for ethnic cleansing.
Ethnic-Cleansing
"Historically no Arabic country has welcomed them either." - why would they?
Same language, same religion, similar culture. But the immediate reason is that they refuse to assist Israel in its ethnic cleansing.
Really?
Lebanon?
Yemen?
Iran (Not Arab, but very helpful nonetheless.)
You are only accepting the Zionist idea of “transfer” going back to the late 19th century. Imagination has gotten the better of humanity and justice.
I will ask you the same question: if a super majority of Palestinians approved this proposal, would you still oppose it?
First, you assume facts not in evidence. Second, why would a "supermajority" of Palestinians agree to be ethnically cleansed? What on earth makes you think such an agreement would be in any way "voluntary"?
When do you think Israel is going to stop killing Palestinians?
When it is forced to do so.
When do you think that will happen? Be realistic.
if a supermajority of Palestinians voted to reject this proposal out of hand, would you finally start thinking about how to hold the perpetrators of the genocide responsible?
If only 50% of Palestinans supported the proposal, I would immediately abandon it.
As for holding Israel responsible, the first step is for the ICJ to recognize plausible genocide and impose measures. I am optimistic that will happen soon. If it doesn't happen, the world is screwed.
But even a victory for SA will be only a small step. Israel will certainly ignore the court.
If a (so far nonexistent) supermajority of Palestinians agreed to this harebrained idea because Israel and its American thug held literal and metaphorical guns to theirs and their children's heads, would you call that a voluntary decision?
Does anyone ask the people who are getting a bunch of Palestinian refugees? Ever heard of Black September?