'Instead of Gaza' | How should we name the new city?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yes, they could and should. Though, I am not sure it was really possible while blockade of the Gaza Strip was in place, but nonetheless.

All that doesn't answer on what to do now. Ethnic cleansing? Go on.

Do you know why there was a blockade in place?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Bullshit Lisa. I have never seen it commonly used in any publications. I “picked it up” reading about war crimes, so stop lying.




Do you support pillaging Lisa?

There has been no pillaging, so why are you ranting about it?

 

[Lisa558]

There has been no pillaging, so why are you ranting about it?

She found a new way to attack the Joo country.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Yes, they could and should. Though, I am not sure it was really possible while blockade of the Gaza Strip was in place, but nonetheless.

All that doesn't answer on what to do now. Ethnic cleansing? Go on.

Yes, they could and should. Though, I am not sure it was really possible while blockade of the Gaza Strip was in place, but nonetheless.

All that doesn't answer on what to do now. Ethnic cleansing? Go on.

The blockade simply prevented weapons or too many dual use items from reaching Hamas, so there is no rational basis for claiming it interfered with economic development in Gaza.

 

[rylah]

More obfuscation.

Pillaging is a war crime. Yes or no Lisa?

… what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about …


Are you an advocate for ethnic cleansing?

Wow, now you have more one line blood libels and big bold fonts?

Such solid debating skills...now back to you Fatma,

do you support Arab imperialism?

 

[rylah]

All that land belongs to somebody already.

Really genius,

what is the definition of 'refugee'?

And excuse me for interrupting your Fatwa melt down trolling my thread...

 

[Coyote]

There has been no pillaging, so why are you ranting about it?

This entire thread is based on a “what if” future proposition that involves Israel annexing Gaza as part of Israel and a massive “land distribution program”. Most of the suggestions seem to involve dispossessing the native inhabitants (with some calling for ethnic cleansing).

So, to clarify, this is all a What If, not What Is.

pillaging

www.law.cornell.edu

Pillaging has a popular meaning where you imagine an invading hoard running amuck but also has a specific meaning in international

Pillaging, also known as plundering, is the forced seizure of another’s property, especially during wartime. Sometimes, pillaging refers to the property so seized or plundered during wartime.

Pillaging is classified as a war crime; a violation of the codified wartime laws and treaties. The most recognized codified wartime laws are the Geneva Conventions. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is also regarded as the most extensive source of wartime laws and war crimes.

 

[Coyote]

You may like or dislike the Arabs. I am not going to defend them, anyway. How they live, run their societies etc is their internal matters, I don't care at all.

But what should be noted is that a number of Arab ruling elites have grown up enough to make 'adult' decisions, such as recognition of Israel, or the Abraham Accords. And negotiations about the 'Palestinian issue' should be held with these elites, in the first turn.

The longer this war goes on in the way it does now, or, what be even worse, in the case of some 'ethnic cleansing' attempts in Gaza all that will make these Arab elites be less mindful about any peace negotiations, but more concerned about 'the Arab street' demands. And this may lead to bigger troubles in the region.

We are seeing those tensions building and threatening some old and important alliances such as Egypt.

 

[rylah]

Sounds good on paper, but to hold on to all the land the IDF has cleared would require a much larger army than Israel is willing to field or pay for. Petraeus has said the same thing and they are thinking of the success Petraeus' surge in Iraq, but the US had vast resources and allies among the Iraqi people to draw on and Israel has neither in Gaza, so Israel is going to have to invent another way to destroy Hamas.

The Ben-Gurion doctrine was based on 5 simple understandings, and proven correct -

1. Army presence alone, tanks at the border, signals uncertainty and invites aggression.

2. What deters the enemy is not loss of life, but only - loss of land.

3. In practice that means - presence of a thriving Jewish community,
i.e. the sight of a huge Menorah on a new shul at the very location
where the attack came from. And little Moisheh with Rivkah'le,
playing around it, there - specifically there.

4. Incentives to emigration.

5. Civil guard, armed citizens and first respondents are crucial
to quickly identifying and immediate reaction to threats,
than relying on heavy military units.

Ben-Gurion's doctrine is correct,
and on 7th Oct - proven finally.

 

[Lisa558]

Wow, now you have more one line blood libels and big bold fonts?

Such solid debating skills...now back to you Fatma,

do you support Arab imperialism?

She makes up a lie that Israel is “pillaging,” and then refuses to respond when it is brought that the Muslim savages did much worse than that.

Analogy:

A Jew breaks a clasp on a necklace, and an antisemite claims - to a different Jew - that the Jew destroyed the jewelry in the house (which he didn’t.) The Jew, in response, said that the Muslim next door poured gasoline in a neighbor’s house and then set the whole thing on fire.

Antisemite says to stop with the “whatabout” concerning the fire the Muslim set and focus only on the jewelry (she falsely claims) that the Jew destroyed

 

[rylah]

She makes up a lie that Israel is “pillaging,” and then refuses to respond when it is brought that the Muslim savages did much worse than that.

Analogy:

A Jew breaks a clasp on a necklace, and an antisemite claims - to a different Jew - that the Jew destroyed the jewelry in the house (which he didn’t.) The Jew, in response, said that the Muslim next door poured gasoline in a neighbor’s house and then set the whole thing on fire.

Antisemite says to stop with the “whatabout” concerning the fire the Muslim set and focus only on the jewelry (she falsely claims) that the Jew destroyed

What do you expect from a Fatma,

that posts a picture of a napkin,

in response to seeing the

Swastika on their flag?

 

[rylah]

The Ben-Gurion doctrine was based on 5 simple understandings, and proven correct -

1. Army presence alone, tanks at the border, signals uncertainty and invites aggression.

2. What deters the enemy is not loss of life, but only - loss of land.

3. In practice that means - presence of a thriving Jewish community,
i.e. the sight of a huge Menorah on a new shul at the very location
where the attack came from. And little Moisheh with Rivkah'le,
playing around it, there - specifically there.

4. Incentives to emigration.

5. Civil guard, armed citizens and first respondents are crucial
to quickly identifying and immediate reaction to threats,
than relying on heavy military units.

Ben-Gurion's doctrine is correct,
and on 7th Oct - proven finally.

Hamas HATES This The Case for a ONE STATE SOLUTION - Yishai Fleisher​

​

 

[toomuchtime_]

This entire thread is based on a “what if” future proposition that involves Israel annexing Gaza as part of Israel and a massive “land distribution program”. Most of the suggestions seem to involve dispossessing the native inhabitants (with some calling for ethnic cleansing).

So, to clarify, this is all a What If, not What Is.

pillaging

www.law.cornell.edu

Pillaging has a popular meaning where you imagine an invading hoard running amuck but also has a specific meaning in international

Pillaging, also known as plundering, is the forced seizure of another’s property, especially during wartime. Sometimes, pillaging refers to the property so seized or plundered during wartime.

Pillaging is classified as a war crime; a violation of the codified wartime laws and treaties. The most recognized codified wartime laws are the Geneva Conventions. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is also regarded as the most extensive source of wartime laws and war crimes.

Again, there is no pillaging going on and none is contemplated. Very little of the land of Gaza is privately owned, so it cannot be pillaged. It is very unlikely that Israel will annex Gaza, but if it did and redistributed public lands it would not be pillaging any more than urban renewal projects are.

Get over yourself; the fact that you have an emotion does not mean there is a law that justifies it.

 

[Coyote]

Again, there is no pillaging going on and none is contemplated. Very little of the land of Gaza is privately owned, so it cannot be pillaged. It is very unlikely that Israel will annex Gaza, but if it did and redistributed public lands it would not be pillaging any more than urban renewal projects are.

Get over yourself; the fact that you have an emotion does not mean there is a law that justifies it.

I'm sure all the land needed will be legitimately "confiscated" through variious legal mechanisms and some would actually be purchased. This has happened before and is whst the OP seemes to be implying.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I'm sure all the land needed will be legitimately "confiscated" through variious legal mechanisms and some would actually be purchased. This has happened before and is whst the OP seemes to be implying.

In the unlikely event Israel did annex Gaza, all public lands would naturally and quite legally fall to the new government, and if any privately owned lands were needed by the government they would be purchased, just as they are in other democracies.

 

[Coyote]

In the unlikely event Israel did annex Gaza, all public lands would naturally and quite legally fall to the new government, and if any privately owned lands were needed by the government they would be purchased, just as they are in other democracies.

That has not always been the case, keep white washing.

 

[toomuchtime_]

That has not always been the case, keep white washing.

Stop lying, that has always been the case. You are clearly driven to make up these lies to try to disguise your antisemitism as criticism of Israel

 

[Failzero]

A Two Snake Solution

 

[Shusha]

I'm sure all the land needed will be legitimately "confiscated" through variious legal mechanisms and some would actually be purchased. This has happened before and is whst the OP seemes to be implying.

Yes, through legal mechanisms. That's how the law works. We both know that land use and ownership in the mandate territories is ridiculously complicated due to inheriting former sovereign legal frameworks for land ownership. Near as I can figure, about 20% of the land in Gaza is under registered private ownership.

There is no "pillaging".

 

[Coyote]

Stop lying, that has always been the case. You are clearly driven to make up these lies to try to disguise your antisemitism as criticism of Israel

Yes…your typical fall back. They are either lying or antisemitic or both. It’s all you have.