Humanitarian Relocation?

[Boston1]

Trail of tears ? really ?

The Native American experience has ZERO parallels with that of the Arab Muslims.

Having some experience in that realm maybe I should start a thread on it but Humanitarian Relocation is on the one hand only a fantasy, and on the other nothing like the Native American experience.

Another grand false equivalence.

PS
I wouldn't support a humanitarian relocation.

It would violate international law and make Israel look bad.

I would however support the strict application of the Geneva Conventions and put an end to this nonsense pretty quick.

I disagree, I think there are a lot of parallels, whether the ruling ideology was Zionism or Manifest Destiny.

The thing is - how are you going to sort through 4+ million people?

Switch and bait. We're not talking about the US government policies vs the Israeli policies. You claimed similarities between the pali's and the Native Americans.

And I'm against a general humanitarian relocation. I'd stick it only to Arab Muslim combatants.

Sorry dude. It's not switch and bait. Save that claim for another argument.

We're talking about population transfers.

Yes we are, but you brought up that same old tired false equivalency between Native Americans and Arab Muslims in Israel.

It's accurate.

When called on it you switched the groups you were talking about to the Israeli gov. and the US gov.

It's relevant.

Major bait and switch.

Nope. Like the Partition of India, and other population transfers - it's relevant.

And yes we were discussing humanitarian relocation. Which I think we can agree is a bad idea. I don't think its reasonable to forcefully evict a peaceful inhabitant vs a combatant who I think can and should be forcefully removed.

I think it's difficult to determine who is a peaceful inhabitant and who is a combatant and the means to doing so is open to abuse. Of course, that's assuming Israel keeps all the territory it currently holds under occupation.

You must be confused.

Are now denying that you made a comparison between Native Americans and palestinains ?

Are you denying that you then switched that comparison to the Israeli gov policies and the US gov policies ?

Two different subjects. Two different false equivalencies

I thought we were talking about humanitarian relocation. In which case I think the implication is for a general forced movement of population. Can't condone it. But a strict application of Geneva Conventions I would fully support

 

[Boston1]

Oh and of course children can be combatants. Which also places their parents in a very precarious position. Are they assisting a combatant. How responsible for the actions of their children are they ? Around here parents are completely responsible for the actions of their children. Also the Geneva Conventions make it clear that whenever possible families are to be kept together. Ergo if a child is a combatant and their parents are responsible for them, they could be held responsible for a terrorist act and expelled along with the children or even the entire household. Depends on if they encouraged rock throwing or are suspected of encouraging rock throwing.

The Geneva Conventions are beautifully detailed

So...do Israeli settler children who throw stones get expelled or do they get the free pass they always get, being children of the occupying power?

Of course not. That would be like saying the Israeli solders would also be expelled.

There's huge legal differences between the defending party and the aggressive party. Particularly when members of a foreign force remain as a defeated enemy within territory controlled by the defending party. They may stil be combatants and as such may be expelled.

The "aggressive party" is also under occupaton. They are not members of a foreign force but local residents.

You don't know that. What we do know is we have a large number of Arab Muslims who have never been vetted for status. Civilians, refugees, combatants. Until that vetting process takes place, nothing constructive can occur regarding a peaceful resolution to this conflict.

Also given that we don't know who among the Arab Muslims of Israel are Jordanian fighters remaining in Israel its not reasonable to say Israel is occupying their land.

There is also a strong argument to say that since all land west of the Jordan was available for the creation of an national Jewish homeland that its really not possible for Israel to be illegally occupying land intended for it in the first place.

The Mandate was never law.

Actually it was for the time it existed. Its also an interesting point in contract law. The last legally binding treaty was the British mandate. Nothing after that was ever ratified.

So can we at least agree that a general expulsion of a population is not the solution ?

 

[wrathbone]

why so much palestinian sympathizing?

 

[Coyote]

I disagree, I think there are a lot of parallels, whether the ruling ideology was Zionism or Manifest Destiny.

The thing is - how are you going to sort through 4+ million people?

Switch and bait. We're not talking about the US government policies vs the Israeli policies. You claimed similarities between the pali's and the Native Americans.

And I'm against a general humanitarian relocation. I'd stick it only to Arab Muslim combatants.

Sorry dude. It's not switch and bait. Save that claim for another argument.

We're talking about population transfers.

Yes we are, but you brought up that same old tired false equivalency between Native Americans and Arab Muslims in Israel.

It's accurate.

When called on it you switched the groups you were talking about to the Israeli gov. and the US gov.

It's relevant.

Major bait and switch.

Nope. Like the Partition of India, and other population transfers - it's relevant.

And yes we were discussing humanitarian relocation. Which I think we can agree is a bad idea. I don't think its reasonable to forcefully evict a peaceful inhabitant vs a combatant who I think can and should be forcefully removed.

I think it's difficult to determine who is a peaceful inhabitant and who is a combatant and the means to doing so is open to abuse. Of course, that's assuming Israel keeps all the territory it currently holds under occupation.

You must be confused.

Are now denying that you made a comparison between Native Americans and palestinains ?

???? No. I don't think it's me that's confused here.

Are you denying that you then switched that comparison to the Israeli gov policies and the US gov policies ?

Of course I did - we're talking about Population Transfers...you know, like the Partition of India, Trail of Tears, Russia's transfer of ethnic minorities and whether it would work or not work and whether it is a crime (it is). What are you confused about?

Two different subjects. Two different false equivalencies

That sure is your buzzword isn't it when confronted with an inconvenient truth?

I thought we were talking about humanitarian relocation. In which case I think the implication is for a general forced movement of population. Can't condone it. But a strict application of Geneva Conventions I would fully support

"humanitarian relocation" is a euphanism for "forced population transfer". That is indeed what we are talking about. What a

So...do Israeli settler children who throw stones get expelled or do they get the free pass they always get, being children of the occupying power?

Of course not. That would be like saying the Israeli solders would also be expelled.

There's huge legal differences between the defending party and the aggressive party. Particularly when members of a foreign force remain as a defeated enemy within territory controlled by the defending party. They may stil be combatants and as such may be expelled.

The "aggressive party" is also under occupaton. They are not members of a foreign force but local residents.

You don't know that. What we do know is we have a large number of Arab Muslims who have never been vetted for status. Civilians, refugees, combatants. Until that vetting process takes place, nothing constructive can occur regarding a peaceful resolution to this conflict.

Also given that we don't know who among the Arab Muslims of Israel are Jordanian fighters remaining in Israel its not reasonable to say Israel is occupying their land.

There is also a strong argument to say that since all land west of the Jordan was available for the creation of an national Jewish homeland that its really not possible for Israel to be illegally occupying land intended for it in the first place.

The Mandate was never law.

Actually it was for the time it existed. Its also an interesting point in contract law. The last legally binding treaty was the British mandate. Nothing after that was ever ratified.

So can we at least agree that a general expulsion of a population is not the solution ?

Yes, we can agree on that.

 

[Coyote]

why so much palestinian sympathizing?

Because, like the Jews, they are people deserving of rights. Thought that was obvious.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Oh and of course children can be combatants. Which also places their parents in a very precarious position. Are they assisting a combatant. How responsible for the actions of their children are they ? Around here parents are completely responsible for the actions of their children. Also the Geneva Conventions make it clear that whenever possible families are to be kept together. Ergo if a child is a combatant and their parents are responsible for them, they could be held responsible for a terrorist act and expelled along with the children or even the entire household. Depends on if they encouraged rock throwing or are suspected of encouraging rock throwing.

The Geneva Conventions are beautifully detailed

So...do Israeli settler children who throw stones get expelled or do they get the free pass they always get, being children of the occupying power?

Of course not. That would be like saying the Israeli solders would also be expelled.

There's huge legal differences between the defending party and the aggressive party. Particularly when members of a foreign force remain as a defeated enemy within territory controlled by the defending party. They may stil be combatants and as such may be expelled.

The "aggressive party" is also under occupaton. They are not members of a foreign force but local residents.

Local residents with short and medium range missiles they fire at cities with the explicit intent to murder as many civilians as they can.
They should be exterminated.

 

[Coyote]

Oh and of course children can be combatants. Which also places their parents in a very precarious position. Are they assisting a combatant. How responsible for the actions of their children are they ? Around here parents are completely responsible for the actions of their children. Also the Geneva Conventions make it clear that whenever possible families are to be kept together. Ergo if a child is a combatant and their parents are responsible for them, they could be held responsible for a terrorist act and expelled along with the children or even the entire household. Depends on if they encouraged rock throwing or are suspected of encouraging rock throwing.

The Geneva Conventions are beautifully detailed

So...do Israeli settler children who throw stones get expelled or do they get the free pass they always get, being children of the occupying power?

Of course not. That would be like saying the Israeli solders would also be expelled.

There's huge legal differences between the defending party and the aggressive party. Particularly when members of a foreign force remain as a defeated enemy within territory controlled by the defending party. They may stil be combatants and as such may be expelled.

The "aggressive party" is also under occupaton. They are not members of a foreign force but local residents.

Local residents with short and medium range missiles they fire at cities with the explicit intent to murder as many civilians as they can.
They should be exterminated.

Nice. Genocide.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Oh and of course children can be combatants. Which also places their parents in a very precarious position. Are they assisting a combatant. How responsible for the actions of their children are they ? Around here parents are completely responsible for the actions of their children. Also the Geneva Conventions make it clear that whenever possible families are to be kept together. Ergo if a child is a combatant and their parents are responsible for them, they could be held responsible for a terrorist act and expelled along with the children or even the entire household. Depends on if they encouraged rock throwing or are suspected of encouraging rock throwing.

The Geneva Conventions are beautifully detailed

So...do Israeli settler children who throw stones get expelled or do they get the free pass they always get, being children of the occupying power?

Of course not. That would be like saying the Israeli solders would also be expelled.

There's huge legal differences between the defending party and the aggressive party. Particularly when members of a foreign force remain as a defeated enemy within territory controlled by the defending party. They may stil be combatants and as such may be expelled.

The "aggressive party" is also under occupaton. They are not members of a foreign force but local residents.

Local residents with short and medium range missiles they fire at cities with the explicit intent to murder as many civilians as they can.
They should be exterminated.

Nice. Genocide.

Funny, don't hear you worried about the Palestinians call for genocide and ethnic cleansing an issue.

 

[Coyote]

So...do Israeli settler children who throw stones get expelled or do they get the free pass they always get, being children of the occupying power?

Of course not. That would be like saying the Israeli solders would also be expelled.

There's huge legal differences between the defending party and the aggressive party. Particularly when members of a foreign force remain as a defeated enemy within territory controlled by the defending party. They may stil be combatants and as such may be expelled.

The "aggressive party" is also under occupaton. They are not members of a foreign force but local residents.

Local residents with short and medium range missiles they fire at cities with the explicit intent to murder as many civilians as they can.
They should be exterminated.

Nice. Genocide.

Funny, don't hear you worried about the Palestinians call for genocide and ethnic cleansing an issue.

When Palestinians call for genocide, I'd say the same thing. Two peoples have rights to the same property and they need to work it out with out mutual extermination.

You....just seem to favor extermination.

 

[Boston1]

I'd like to think he was just making a point. That we keep hearing all about Israel's efforts to ensure a safe and prosperous environment are synonymous to genocide when in fact the pali population has what ? Quadrupled ?

But the openly stated goal of genocide against the Israeli people from the Arab Muslims on multiple fronts are ignored.

I thought it rather well done. I just busted Billy in a similar fashion, although it took him much much longer to catch on.

Regardless a more specific set of criteria, for instance those set forward in international law, concerning conflict. Say the Geneva Conventions, and the UNs own regulations and recommendations.

Segregating civilians from refugees and combatants is standard procedure in any conflict. Repatriation of combatants is also standard procedure. Israel is well within its rights to segregate and repatriate ALL combatants and those who forfeit their protected persons status.

 

[Shusha]

They should be exterminated.

I'll say it. Calls for the other side to be exterminated are immoral. And hate speech. And make us equivalent to Hamas and ISIS in our ideology. Be the good guys.

 

[Phoenall]

There are over 4 million Palestinians - WB/Jeruselum/Gaza. Are you saying that Israel would annex all those territories and sort through all of those people? I imagine every kid who threw a stone wold be labeled a combatant, families would be broken up or forced to flee together. All so Israel could confiscate their property.

Remeniscent of the Trail of Tears.

According to international law the land is Jewish and the arab muslims should be forced to move to arab Palestine. If it was international law that the Jews had to move the comments on here from team Palestine would be that Israel is once again ignoring international law.

 

[Boston1]

There are over 4 million Palestinians - WB/Jeruselum/Gaza. Are you saying that Israel would annex all those territories and sort through all of those people? I imagine every kid who threw a stone wold be labeled a combatant, families would be broken up or forced to flee together. All so Israel could confiscate their property.

Remeniscent of the Trail of Tears.

According to international law the land is Jewish and the arab muslims should be forced to move to arab Palestine. If it was international law that the Jews had to move the comments on here from team Palestine would be that Israel is once again ignoring international law.

I'd defer to Rocco on the international law part. But according to contract law, the last legally binding contract holds precedence. In which case we are looking at the Mandate plus the Jordan Memorandum.

That document clearly states that EVERYTHING west of the Jordan River is available for the a national Jewish homeland.

Realizing that the UN was willing to negotiate additional lands one must also realize that those negotiations were never successful, that the Arab Muslims rejected every offer made during the mandate period. There is no additional legally binding agreement other than the Jordan Memorandum to the Mandate.

From a contractual law point of view, its cut and dried. Israel is entitled to EVERYTHING west of the Jordan River.

Leaving war out of it for the moment and just considering contract law, something I'm quite familiar with. The last legally binding agreement has precedence.

In which case its the Arabs once again who are OCCUPYING Israeli land. So I can understand how this concept of humanitarian relocation gets brought into the conversation.

The Arab Muslims in this area are hopelessly violent, and something does need to be done.

 

[Billo_Really]

I'm not discussing whether or not Israel should be allowed to keep those "settlements". I'm discussing the hypocrisy of those who claim that forcibly relocating people is inhumane while demanding that Jews be forcibly relocated.

I'm not talking about Jews, so why do you constantly insist on dragging religion into a political issue? I'm talking about Israeli insurgents. White trash, psycho settlers. Low income, bottom of the barrel, looking for handout Israeli's, trying to get a free ride off government grants.

 

[RoccoR]

Coyote, et al,

Let's clear one thing up first. The Palestinian-American community is not in the same population of "people" as the Arab-Palestinian. And the threat the American-Palestinian communities presents is no greater a threat than does the Irish Community in Boston, or any of the so-called "self-radicalization" faces on the domestic terrorist scene.

The Arab-Palestinian Movements have established political parties it is seriously fragmented, chaotic and without direction. This generates frustration (political and Paramilitary) with no unified voice and the failure in achieving any real progress for peace. Although it is generally believed that the Peace would represent progress in the Middle East Process, that is not exactly true. If a Generalize and Working Peace Accord were struck between the Israel and the Arab-Palestinian, there would be some adverse ripples:

• It would spell the beginning of the end for the UNRWA, and many other income generators on the economy. and the vast number of employees of the UNRWA are Arab-Palestinian and there livelihood is dependent on the continuation of the UNRWA. Many Palestinians have never known a time when the UNRWA was not around. Remember, nearly 90% of UNRWA-designated refugees have never actually been displaced.

∆ UNHCR is present in 116 countries, has 262 offices worldwide with 6,260 staff members – 5,400 of whom are in the field.

∆ UNRWA has a workforce of some 28,000 locally-recruited staff, many of whom have spent decades in the service of their fellow Palestinian refugees.
​

• The Palestinian people, according to a recent study by the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, have received per capita, adjusted for inflation, 25 times more aid than did Europeans to rebuild war-torn Western Europe under the Marshall plan after the Second World War.

• If the entire Palestinian Authority leadership lives off an international welfare check that arrives only because the conflict still exists, there isn't much incentive for ending the conflict.​

From the political and economic standpoint, where would you - practically speaking - expel the belligerent Hostile Arab Palestinians. No country, not even the Arab League countries would accept such transfers. These people are volatile and dangerous for a whole host of reasons; as well as an economic burden with no real prospect of making a productive contribution.

What do you base that on Rocco? Palestinian immigrants to America have done well - the Palestinian-American community is economically thriving and certainly making a productive contribution as do Palestinian immigrants around the world.

(COMMENT)

The environment shapes the people; and, the people that shape productivity. If there is no one to shape the environment in a positive direction (everyone concentrating on the continuation of conflict) then that fundamentally shapes the environment negatively --- which (like a rebreather) has an influence on the people.

Remember, the majority of any threat assessment comes from the study and close examination of the past. A similar effort to that of the Arab-Palestinian is the Sinn Féin; founded on 28 November 1905, just a little older then the first embryonic Hostile Palestinians efforts. And just as the goal of the Sinn Féin is to fight for the unification of Ireland and the abandonment of the Partition, so it is with the Arab-Palestinian and their goal of unification the the elimination of Partition. The similarities are many. yet the end development may be so different. The people of Ireland have learned that the armed campaigns of paramilitary groups becomes too costly for the people and their development. This diverges from the Hostile Arab Palestinian that have determined and reaffirmed several times that Jihadism is the proper method of negotiation.

NOTE:

I was quite surprised when General John de Chastelain (Retired), formerly the Chief of the Defense Staff, Canadian Armed Forces, and former Ambassador to the US, announced (2005) the completed decommissioning of the arms (much of it bought with American donations) in the hands of the Irish Republican Army, and the more generalized disarmament of paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland. But that threat is dwindling to near nothing.

Can you even imagine the Palestinians ever coming to that negotiated end?
​

In 1950, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, established a new Parliament that was composed of 50% Palestinians of the West Bank --- and --- 50% of the Jordanians representing the Kingdom East of the Jordan River. It was then that the Arab-Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination and accepted Annexation. It is understood that there is the concepts of Articles 47 and 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prevents coercion of the West Bank from being coerced by the Jordanians. But in that effort, the Hostile Arab Palestinians (PLO Fedayeen and insurgents of the PFLP) formed an armed rebellion against the Jordanians that granted citizenship, and called for Regime Change -- and the establishment of Palestinian control in Jordan. While Syria, Yemen and Iraq may not now have all that much to lose today (each having been ravaged by war: Arab on Arab) Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt do not want to become another smoking wreckage of a nation, all because the Palestinians (solving every dispute by conflict), first began with an insurgency and gradually working up to a full blown insurrection against the very people that came to their aid. Certainly, none of these countries, being much higher on the Human Development Scale than Palestinians, want to suffer the economic loss and commercial setbacks that come with conflict.

Another aspect to making a positive contribution in the booklet: Making a positive contribution – being involved with the community and society, and not engaging in anti-social or offending behavour. What is different in the changes is found in the molding of the future: children. Example:

HAMAS Bashes UNRWA Human Rights Curriculum

Curriculum. First, he argued, the curriculum was “completely detached from the reality of an Arab Muslim Palestinian student.”

“The vast majority of examples [in the books] refer to [Mahatma] Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Helen Suzman, the Soweto Uprising, the Magna Carta and Apartheid, even though Islamic-Arab-Palestinian alternatives exist,” Al-Minawi said. “There are many models which could be used which are closer to the students’ understanding.”

The Palestinian narrative was also marginalized in the books, Al-Minawi complained; presented in a “superficial” and “distorted” way. For instance, the reason given for the Nakba, or Palestinian “catastrophe” of the inception of Israel, was the Ottoman alliance with the Germans in World War I rather than “the Zionist occupier.”

But perhaps worst of all, the books focused on “peaceful resistance as the only way of achieving freedom and independence.” The entire eighth grade curriculum, Al-Minawi lamented, is “not dedicated to human rights but to domesticate the psyche of the Palestinian pupil, fostering negative feelings toward armed resistance.”
​

This is the transmission of terrorism by succeeding generations: Article 15: It is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses). It is important that basic changes be made in the school curriculum, to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah el-Din (Saladin).

"Terror glorification is highly visible in Palestinian society. A Palestinian child can walk to school along a street named after the terrorist Abu Jihad, who planned a bus hijacking that killed 37, spend the day learning in a school named after Hamas founder Ahmad Yassin, in the afternoon play football in a tournament named after suicide terrorist Abd Al-Basset Odeh who killed 30, and end his day at a youth center named after terrorist Abu Iyad, responsible for killing the 11 Olympic athletes in Munich. A young woman can join a university women’s club named Sisters of Dalal, after Dalal Mughrabi, attend a week at Al-Quds University honoring suicide bomb builder Yahya Ayyash, and participate in university rallies named after numerous terrorists. Honoring terrorists envelops and plays a significant part in defining the Palestinian world."
Taken From Palestine Watch
​

In this thumbnail view, releasing the Hostile Arab Palestinians into the international community, only exacerbates the threat condition by spreading the virus of indoctrinated children into a generally uninfected group. This is a threat of the worst kind; because in the West Civilizations, it is almost insidious to target children for re-indoctrination. This is only considered as last resort measure in cases of (self-destruction) drug use detoxification and the breaking of Cult indoctrinations.

Most Respectfully,
R​

 

[Boston1]

Gaza is a lost cause. Eventually its going to be under international control because clearly the people of Gaza prefer a state of constant war. Independence has gotten them nowhere.

Arab Muslims in the disputed territories still have a chance but only after a strict application of the Geneva Conventions. IE segregate the trouble makers and repatriate them to their countries of origin.

The Arab Muslims in Israel proper who have not accepted Israeli citizenship should also undergo the same designation process described in the Geneva Conventions and again the trouble makers repatriated.

A general expulsion under the guise of a humanitarian relocation isn't the right thing to do. But a strict adherence to international law is. Use the Geneva Conventions to advantage and rid Israel of as many combatants as possible.

And the best part is, now where in the Conventions does it say segregating combatants from non combatants in war is a one shot deal.

Rinse and repeat as many times as necessary.

After every outbreak of Arab Muslim violence, there should be massive expulsions of all who participated, assisted those who participated or are suspected of either participating or assisting.

Its all spelled out in international law and the results would be spectacular.

 

[Phoenall]

I'm not discussing whether or not Israel should be allowed to keep those "settlements". I'm discussing the hypocrisy of those who claim that forcibly relocating people is inhumane while demanding that Jews be forcibly relocated.

I'm not talking about Jews, so why do you constantly insist on dragging religion into a political issue? I'm talking about Israeli insurgents. White trash, psycho settlers. Low income, bottom of the barrel, looking for handout Israeli's, trying to get a free ride off government grants.

ARE YOU, ISNT THAT HOW YOU SEE ALL JEWS AND DEMAND THAT THEY BE NUKED.


Those Jews have as much right to live there as you have in the US, no more white trash than you and your family, a lot less psycho that you and your family. Earning much more than you ever could, trailer park trash living on Obamacare and what you can beg. They own the land those settlements are built on as the records show, and the Palestinians resorted to underhand tricks to dispose them of their lands

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

Let's clear one thing up first. The Palestinian-American community is not in the same population of "people" as the Arab-Palestinian. And the threat the American-Palestinian communities presents is no greater a threat than does the Irish Community in Boston, or any of the so-called "self-radicalization" faces on the domestic terrorist scene.

The Arab-Palestinian Movements have established political parties it is seriously fragmented, chaotic and without direction. This generates frustration (political and Paramilitary) with no unified voice and the failure in achieving any real progress for peace. Although it is generally believed that the Peace would represent progress in the Middle East Process, that is not exactly true. If a Generalize and Working Peace Accord were struck between the Israel and the Arab-Palestinian, there would be some adverse ripples:

• It would spell the beginning of the end for the UNRWA, and many other income generators on the economy. and the vast number of employees of the UNRWA are Arab-Palestinian and there livelihood is dependent on the continuation of the UNRWA. Many Palestinians have never known a time when the UNRWA was not around. Remember, nearly 90% of UNRWA-designated refugees have never actually been displaced.

∆ UNHCR is present in 116 countries, has 262 offices worldwide with 6,260 staff members – 5,400 of whom are in the field.

∆ UNRWA has a workforce of some 28,000 locally-recruited staff, many of whom have spent decades in the service of their fellow Palestinian refugees.
​

• The Palestinian people, according to a recent study by the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, have received per capita, adjusted for inflation, 25 times more aid than did Europeans to rebuild war-torn Western Europe under the Marshall plan after the Second World War.

• If the entire Palestinian Authority leadership lives off an international welfare check that arrives only because the conflict still exists, there isn't much incentive for ending the conflict.​

Interesting and, I agree with the fragmented, chaotic, without direction aspect as well as the frustration generated and I can see the economic incentives towards perpetrating the conflict yet despite that, the Palestinians have sought representation and recognition in the UN. While I understand the arguments against their doing so, I also understand the reasons for it, including Israel's own lack of progress towards a two-state solution in recent years, a reflection of Netanyahu's personal beliefs and stated goal that there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. If the Palestinians are seeking that recognition, then it would seem that the economic incentives for maintaining the statis-quo aren't all that strong.

Comparing aid given to the Palestinians vs the Marshal Plan seems disengenius. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has gone on since 1948, that's going on 68 years of off and on fighting, the UNRWA has provided aid for 65 years. The Marshall Plan was in operation for only 4 years. This makes me question the validity and bias of the source, unless I am misreading the claim.

The other claim I question is that "90% of UNRWA-designated refugees have never actually been displaced" - where does that claim come from? For example, I can find this, in reference to Palestinian refugees in Lebanon:

The USCR’s 1999 report on Palestinian refugees in Lebanon estimates the number of internally displaced Palestinians at 20,000. It is reported that between 1972 – 1988, around 90% of Palestinian refugees have been displaced once, 66% displaced twice and 20% three times or more (Khalidi, 2001: 10, - See more at: Refugee Camps That is only for Lebenon.

Palestine refugees | UNRWA

Nearly one-third of the registered Palestine refugees, more than 1.5 million individuals, live in 58 recognized Palestine refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.​

If 1/3 of Palestinian refugees reside in refugee camps they or their parents were clearly displaced. I don't see how this "90%" figure comes out unless children of refugees are not counted as displaced (yet residing in a refugee camp is itself a displacement and in many of those countries there are restrictions on their ability to find work and no citizenship).

From the political and economic standpoint, where would you - practically speaking - expel the belligerent Hostile Arab Palestinians. No country, not even the Arab League countries would accept such transfers. These people are volatile and dangerous for a whole host of reasons; as well as an economic burden with no real prospect of making a productive contribution.

What do you base that on Rocco? Palestinian immigrants to America have done well - the Palestinian-American community is economically thriving and certainly making a productive contribution as do Palestinian immigrants around the world.

(COMMENT)

The environment shapes the people; and, the people that shape productivity. If there is no one to shape the environment in a positive direction (everyone concentrating on the continuation of conflict) then that fundamentally shapes the environment negatively --- which (like a rebreather) has an influence on the people.

Remember, the majority of any threat assessment comes from the study and close examination of the past. A similar effort to that of the Arab-Palestinian is the Sinn Féin; founded on 28 November 1905, just a little older then the first embryonic Hostile Palestinians efforts. And just as the goal of the Sinn Féin is to fight for the unification of Ireland and the abandonment of the Partition, so it is with the Arab-Palestinian and their goal of unification the the elimination of Partition. The similarities are many. yet the end development may be so different. The people of Ireland have learned that the armed campaigns of paramilitary groups becomes too costly for the people and their development. This diverges from the Hostile Arab Palestinian that have determined and reaffirmed several times that Jihadism is the proper method of negotiation.

NOTE:

I was quite surprised when General John de Chastelain (Retired), formerly the Chief of the Defense Staff, Canadian Armed Forces, and former Ambassador to the US, announced (2005) the completed decommissioning of the arms (much of it bought with American donations) in the hands of the Irish Republican Army, and the more generalized disarmament of paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland. But that threat is dwindling to near nothing.

Can you even imagine the Palestinians ever coming to that negotiated end?
​

I hadn't thought of comparisons to the Irish Troubles, but that is a good one.

Yes, I can imagine it - BUT - does Israel really want it (witness Netanyahu's statments and actions).

On the Palestinian side, you have groups working towards a negotiated solution and towards peace (you don't much about them, perhaps because they don't provide good propoganda platforms for Hamas or Israel's hardliners).
Combatants for Peace | There is another way!
Palestinians for Peace and Democracy
Israelis and Palestinians march for peace in Jerusalem - CNN.com
Seeds of Peace


Palestinian public opinion polls are interesting and contradictory on this (I can't find how questions were worded so it's hard to know the methodology) but there are some glimmers of hope despite the negatives. For the first time, non-violent approaches seem like they are gaining traction.

(1) Popular Palestinian-Israeli confrontations:

• 
  
• 67% support and 31% oppose use of knives in the current confrontations with Israel. But about three quarters (73%) oppose the participation of young school girls in the stabbing attacks and a quarter supports it.
  
• 37% believe that the current confrontations will develop into a new armed intifada, 18% believe they will develop into wide scale peaceful popular confrontations, and 13% believe they will develop in both directions. By contrast, 19% believe the confrontation will stay as they are now and 10% believe they will gradually dissipate.
  
• 66% of the public (71% in the Gaza Strip and 63% in the West Bank) believe that if the current confrontations develop into an armed intifada, such a development would serve Palestinian national interests in ways that negotiations could not.
  
• 50% of the public (61% in the Gaza Strip and 43% in the West Bank) believe that if the current confrontations develop into wide scale peaceful popular confrontations, such a development would serve Palestinian national interests in ways that negotiations could not.
  
• 51% of the public (62% in the Gaza Strip and 43% in the West Bank) believe that if the current confrontations stay as they are now, they would serve Palestinian national interests in ways that negotiations could not.
  
• 51% of the Palestinian public (67% in the Gaza Strip and 40% in the West Bank) believe that most of the Palestinians who fell after being shot by the Israeli army or settlers have in fact stabbed or were attempting to stab Israelis. But 47% believe that most of those who were shot have not stabbed or were not attempting to stab Israelis.
  
• We ask the public in an open-ended question what reason it believes behind the lack of large popular participation in the current confrontations. The largest percentage (43%) said that the reason might be fear of the PA or the occupation; 19% thought the reason is despair and the belief that the confrontations are likely to be in vain; 6% said that most people are busy providing for their families; 5% said it is due to lack of factional leadership for the current confrontations; and 4% said it has to do with the lack of friction points with the Israeli occupation forces.
  
• We also asked the public in an open-ended question about the motivation of the little school girls who participate in stabbing attacks: 41% said they believe they are driven by national motivation; 26% said the motivation was personal; and 16% said the motivation was religious. 11% said it was a combination of national and religious motivations.
  
• When comparing the level of support of various parties for the current confrontations, Hamas comes on top with 71% of the public believing that it supports them, followed by the PFLP, receiving 66%, Fatah (59%), and al Mubadara or the Initiative (53%). By contrast, only 33% say president Abbas supports the confrontations, 28% say Jordan supports them, and only 14% say Egypt supports them.
  
  

In 1950, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, established a new Parliament that was composed of 50% Palestinians of the West Bank --- and --- 50% of the Jordanians representing the Kingdom East of the Jordan River. It was then that the Arab-Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination and accepted Annexation. It is understood that there is the concepts of Articles 47 and 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prevents coercion of the West Bank from being coerced by the Jordanians. But in that effort, the Hostile Arab Palestinians (PLO Fedayeen and insurgents of the PFLP) formed an armed rebellion against the Jordanians that granted citizenship, and called for Regime Change -- and the establishment of Palestinian control in Jordan. While Syria, Yemen and Iraq may not now have all that much to lose today (each having been ravaged by war: Arab on Arab) Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt do not want to become another smoking wreckage of a nation, all because the Palestinians (solving every dispute by conflict), first began with an insurgency and gradually working up to a full blown insurrection against the very people that came to their aid. Certainly, none of these countries, being much higher on the Human Development Scale than Palestinians, want to suffer the economic loss and commercial setbacks that come with conflict.

I can see how they would be hesitant - their stability is a fragile thing in the current landscape.

Another aspect to making a positive contribution in the booklet: Making a positive contribution – being involved with the community and society, and not engaging in anti-social or offending behavour. What is different in the changes is found in the molding of the future: children. Example:

HAMAS Bashes UNRWA Human Rights Curriculum

Curriculum. First, he argued, the curriculum was “completely detached from the reality of an Arab Muslim Palestinian student.”

“The vast majority of examples [in the books] refer to [Mahatma] Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Helen Suzman, the Soweto Uprising, the Magna Carta and Apartheid, even though Islamic-Arab-Palestinian alternatives exist,” Al-Minawi said. “There are many models which could be used which are closer to the students’ understanding.”

The Palestinian narrative was also marginalized in the books, Al-Minawi complained; presented in a “superficial” and “distorted” way. For instance, the reason given for the Nakba, or Palestinian “catastrophe” of the inception of Israel, was the Ottoman alliance with the Germans in World War I rather than “the Zionist occupier.”

But perhaps worst of all, the books focused on “peaceful resistance as the only way of achieving freedom and independence.” The entire eighth grade curriculum, Al-Minawi lamented, is “not dedicated to human rights but to domesticate the psyche of the Palestinian pupil, fostering negative feelings toward armed resistance.”
​

I'm not understanding totally on how this is bad...and given it's source article, it sounds like there could be some interpretation being given on some of these comments. For example, There is an ongoing pro-Israeli narrative (that has become propoganda in my opinion) that the Palestinian textbooks are rife with intolerance, anti-semitism, violence. Several studies have indicated that is not the case when they did a comparison of Palestinian and Israeli textbooks. They found the largest number of negatives in text books used by the ultra orthodox schools, and Hamas. What they found was that both books tended to marginalize the other.

Israeli propoganda is trying very hard to erase Palestinian's indentity and history, by maintaining a pro-Israeli spin. A people have a right to their history whether Jewish or Palestinian, and Nakba is a part of the Palestinian history. Trying to deny it was a result of Zionist territorial aims and the conflict that produced Israel is deceptive. Hamas does have a point with that. (Probably, given the article I found, their only point since their particular textbooks are questionable).

This is the transmission of terrorism by succeeding generations: Article 15: It is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses). It is important that basic changes be made in the school curriculum, to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah el-Din (Saladin).

"Terror glorification is highly visible in Palestinian society. A Palestinian child can walk to school along a street named after the terrorist Abu Jihad, who planned a bus hijacking that killed 37, spend the day learning in a school named after Hamas founder Ahmad Yassin, in the afternoon play football in a tournament named after suicide terrorist Abd Al-Basset Odeh who killed 30, and end his day at a youth center named after terrorist Abu Iyad, responsible for killing the 11 Olympic athletes in Munich. A young woman can join a university women’s club named Sisters of Dalal, after Dalal Mughrabi, attend a week at Al-Quds University honoring suicide bomb builder Yahya Ayyash, and participate in university rallies named after numerous terrorists. Honoring terrorists envelops and plays a significant part in defining the Palestinian world."
Taken From Palestine Watch​

I disagree that it's - as a whole - a transmission of terrorism to succeeding generations. If you make that claim, it would seem that Israeli textbooks are questionable as well given what the study uncovered.

Second, the question of "honoring terrorists" comes up often yet there is an inherent hypocrisy there. The Israeli's honored their Irgun terrorists - naming public squares, yeshivas, building and streets after them - they are still honored and their actions have never been repudiated. I agree, it's not a good thing to do and perpetrates a toxic culture that can invision no future beyond conflict, but how do you untangle it from what is viewed as a legitimate conflict against an occupying power such as the Jews vs the Brits.

​

In this thumbnail view, releasing the Hostile Arab Palestinians into the international community, only exacerbates the threat condition by spreading the virus of indoctrinated children into a generally uninfected group. This is a threat of the worst kind; because in the West Civilizations, it is almost insidious to target children for re-indoctrination. This is only considered as last resort measure in cases of (self-destruction) drug use detoxification and the breaking of Cult indoctrinations.

Most Respectfully,
R​

You make good points - however, I offer the following.

Palestinian immigration has been and is occurring, often through highly risky channels because they see so little future for their children, no jobs, no hope.

Young Gazans risk lives to escape to Europe - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

According to economic analyst Maher al-Tabbah, “The main reasons pushing Gazans to consider emigration are high unemployment rates, low political stability and frequent wars, in addition to the intensification of the siege.” He noted, “If a foreign country expresses its willingness to receive Palestinians, thousands will leave the Gaza Strip.”​

The Palestinian diaspora around the world has produced some interesting results and viewpoints that I think could broaden perspectives and economic opportunities within the Palestinian territories, for example:

Interview: Latin America's dynamic Palestinian communities

What role can the Latin American Palestinian diaspora play in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?In my opinion, Palestinians in Latin America can play several roles. Politically, they can lobby their governments for stronger support to the Palestinians. They are already doing this. Their mobilization partly explains the wave of recognition of the Palestinian State by almost all Latin American countries. This kind of support is important for balancing the pro-Israeli bias of US foreign policy in multilateral organizations, like UNESCO, the UN General Assembly, etc. Economically, the wealthiest businessmen can bring their financial support to important projects and institutions. Some are already contributing to the development of the University of Bethlehem. This is good, but more could probably be done, not only in terms of charity but also in terms of productive investments.At the level of ideas, intellectuals and artists of Palestinian descent could play a greater role. We have not seen the emergence of a Latin American Edward Said yet, and I think it is a pity because their Latin American experience could certainly enrich the political debate in Palestine.​

 

[Boston1]

Erase palestinian identity ?

The term palaestina and its derivatives could only have referred to the Judaic peoples given that the Arab muslims didn't exist in the time of Hadrian who changed the name of Judea to palaestina.

So we can absolutely know that at some time the term was misapplied to the Arab Muslims who invaded in waves starting roughly 1000 years later and continuing to modern times. The majority arriving in the early to mid 20th century.

Redirect Notice

So when did the term palestinian change from referring to the Judaic people to the Arab Muslims.

I'd say right around 1968 when Assafat invented the PLO.

but I'm open to suggestions.

In the end humanitarian relocation isn't a fair option. But segregating combatants and non combatants and repatriating the combatants is well within international law.

 

[docmauser1]

This article was posted elsewhere but I think it deserves its own thread.

It opens:

Consideration should be given even to the heroic remedy of transfer of populations […] the hardship of moving is great, but it is less than the constant suffering of minorities and the constant recurrence of war – US president Herbert Hoover, 1943.

The relentless murder of Israeli Jews and the irreparable collapse of the peace process means that Israel and the international community must now consider the “heroic remedy” of population transfer. After decades of terrorism, it is clear that the majority of Arabs in Judea-Samaria and east Jerusalem are incapable of living alongside their Jewish neighbours. The failure of the Oslo Accords, the rampant criminality inside the Palestinian Authority, as well as decades of Islamic terrorism and anti-Semitic incitement, clearly demonstrate that Jews cannot afford the liberal luxury of uninhibited co-existence with an Arab population that clings to the fascistic and immoral ideology of Palestinianism.

Is there such a thing as "humanitarian relocation"? Should we consider this as a viable option to end the conflict? Do you think it would work? If you disagree with the details of the solution provided in the article, do you have other suggestions?

Relocation of palistanians should've been done yesterday, of course.