Hamas invaded Israel 2023

[brihard]

Assuming what he said is 'gospel", the US Military could come in and build a couple of camps in Gaza, place refugees in there, while they clear the roads of rubble and debris and set up aid stations. Then hire Gazans to construct new buildings to the specs supplied by Americans with them overseeing it. Those that work can earn money and perhaps even title to some of the places they build.
It's full of risks and things to go wrong. Done right you could undermine Hamas in the process, a bit like a Briggs Plan tailored for the region.

I don’t assume anything about what comes out of his mouth, but it’s serious enough that I’ll take it at partial face value.

Indulging your hypothetical, the U.S. military has no legal right to invade Gaza nor to force its occupants into camps. Were they to do so anyway, they would be right back into the sort of long term occupation of foreign places that a Trump has made noise about getting end of.

How many dead American soldiers and how much spent U.S. treasure do you think the U.S. population would tolerate for the sake of building apartments and schools and clinics in Gaza? Because it would cost a lot of both.

In any case, at this point it’s merely mouth noises from one of the world’s most accomplished bloviators. Hopefully adults in the room simmer this idea down.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I don’t assume anything about what comes out of his mouth, but it’s serious enough that I’ll take it at partial face value.

Indulging your hypothetical, the U.S. military has no legal right to invade Gaza nor to force its occupants into camps. Were they to do so anyway, they would be right back into the sort of long term occupation of foreign places that a Trump has made noise about getting end of.

How many dead American soldiers and how much spent U.S. treasure do you think the U.S. population would tolerate for the sake of building apartments and schools and clinics in Gaza? Because it would cost a lot of both.

In any case, at this point it’s merely mouth noises from one of the world’s most accomplished bloviators. Hopefully adults in the room simmer this idea down.

Oh wait, what's this?

• The Palestinian Territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip do not have any proved hydrocarbon reserves, but fields on the Israeli side of the boundaries may extend across the West Bank and Gaza borders. The discovery of the Gaza Marine field in the Mediterranean Sea in 2000 indicates the presence of hydrocarbons, although the resources are not yet commercially viable. The Gaza Marine field holds an estimated 1.6 trillion cubic feet in recoverable natural gas resources.

International - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

www.eia.gov

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I don’t assume anything about what comes out of his mouth, but it’s serious enough that I’ll take it at partial face value.

Indulging your hypothetical, the U.S. military has no legal right to invade Gaza nor to force its occupants into camps. Were they to do so anyway, they would be right back into the sort of long term occupation of foreign places that a Trump has made noise about getting end of.

How many dead American soldiers and how much spent U.S. treasure do you think the U.S. population would tolerate for the sake of building apartments and schools and clinics in Gaza? Because it would cost a lot of both.

In any case, at this point it’s merely mouth noises from one of the world’s most accomplished bloviators. Hopefully adults in the room simmer this idea down.

The same legal right that Turkey uses and several other countries as well.

Likely the Briggs plan is the only way forward, fortified camps with strict access control. Followed up with jobs and improved land rights, etc. Establish a armed force to police the newly built areas and counter Hamas.

 

[brihard]

The same legal right that Turkey uses and several other countries as well.

Likely the Briggs plan is the only way forward, fortified camps with strict access control. Followed up with jobs and improved land rights, etc. Establish an armed force to police the newly built areas and counter Hamas.

Invading a place illegally is invading a place illegally even if other people do it. Israel at least has an articulable case to be made given the direct impacts to their domestic security. America has none whatsoever. It would be no more legitimate, justifiable or righteous than Iraq going into Kuwait.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Invading a place illegally is invading a place illegally even if other people do it. Israel at least has an articulable case to be made given the direct impacts to their domestic security. America has none whatsoever. It would be no more legitimate, justifiable or righteous than Iraq going into Kuwait.

So what though.

Nobody is going to hold them accountable. I mean look what Russia did in Crimea and there they are smiling, waving and dying but still there. if they hadn't started war in the Donbass it would be very hard to dissuade Trump from the Gaza coast.

Turkey could also do it although Israel might fight that for a while.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Then hire Gazans to construct new buildings

And.......tunnels?

You know, for sewage and drainage.

 

[brihard]

So what though.

Nobody is going to hold them accountable. I mean look what Russia did in Crimea and there they are smiling, waving and dying but still there. if they hadn't started war in the Donbass it would be very hard to dissuade Trump from the Gaza coast.

Turkey could also do it although Israel might fight that for a while.

Right, like I said, a lot of Americans would die for something monumentally stupid and without the remotest shred of legitimacy or justification.

 

[lenaitch]

Assuming what he said is 'gospel", the US Military could come in and build a couple of camps in Gaza, place refugees in there, while they clear the roads of rubble and debris and set up aid stations. Then hire Gazans to construct new buildings to the specs supplied by Americans with them overseeing it. Those that work can earn money and perhaps even title to some of the places they build.
It's full of risks and things to go wrong. Done right you could undermine Hamas in the process, a bit like a Briggs Plan tailored for the region.

So, 'camps' of about a million people each. Who would be paying for all this?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So, 'camps' of about a million people each. Who would be paying for all this?

UNRWA........................

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Invading a place illegally is invading a place illegally even if other people do it. Israel at least has an articulable case to be made given the direct impacts to their domestic security. America has none whatsoever. It would be no more legitimate, justifiable or righteous than Iraq going into Kuwait.

Unlike Iraq, the US would have no plans to stay and likely the mission would not last past his term.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Unlike Iraq, the US would have no plans to stay and likely the mission would not last past his term.

Two causal factors here.
One this is going to be nasty I honestly don't think that by and large that the Americans do not have it in them to commit genocides and ethnic cleansing.
And that's what it would take.
And secondly,Donald Trump and has the attention span of a squirrel on meth.
So it probably won't even get off the ground.

 

[Haggis]

Two causal factors here.
One this is going to be nasty I honestly don't think that by and large that the Americans do not have it in them to commit genocides and ethnic cleansing.
And that's what it would take.
And secondly,Donald Trump and has the attention span of a squirrel on meth.
So it probably won't even get off the ground.

What have you got against squirrels? That's a pretty harsh comparison.

 

[brihard]

Unlike Iraq, the US would have no plans to stay and likely the mission would not last past his term.

Some friends and I are going to forcibly invade your house and tie you and your family up in the bathroom. Don’t worry, we’re only staying for a couple weeks.

 

[Infanteer]

Your house is occupied by a gangster who runs the show, and used the house to try and burn down the neighbourhood across the street.

The analogy could be spun back over decades of grievances.

Although Trump's proposal is right out in left field, I have to give the Administration credit for trying to break the mold by not simply falling back on "we remain committed to Oslo" which is clearly a dead letter right now and would just simply doom more innocent (and not-so-innocent) Arabs and Jews to a violent death down the road.

 

[KevinB]

Some friends and I are going to forcibly invade your house and tie you and your family up in the bathroom. Don’t worry, we’re only staying for a couple weeks.

As @Infanteer noted something dramatically different needs to be done in Gaza for any chance of a future that doesn’t see the current situation continuing for generations.

Personally I doubt President Trump wants (or would) put US forces into Gaza, but he’s doing his shock jock routine of kicking an anthill to attempt to get the Arab nations to come up with a solution (or solitions). Mainly as none of them would find the idea of a few hundred thousand US troops a few hundred miles from them very palatable either - as then we may just decide to roll on Syria and Iran etc. Once one gets toppled as we’ve seen from the Arab Spring, one never knows what else may happen - and KSA, Jordan, Qatar, the Emirates etc aren’t bastions of democracy…

 

[brihard]

Your house is occupied by a gangster who runs the show, and used the house to try and burn down the neighbourhood across the street.

The analogy could be spun back over decades of grievances.

Although Trump's proposal is right out in left field, I have to give the Administration credit for trying to break the mold by not simply falling back on "we remain committed to Oslo" which is clearly a dead letter right now and would just simply doom more innocent (and not-so-innocent) Arabs and Jews to a violent death down the road.

Bad analogy- nothing gives the US any legitimacy to play police in this case. I already dispensed with this by conceding that Israel at least has an articulable claim to be made for their own incursions, and they independently have both the demonstrated capability and the demonstrated will should they choose. U.S. occupation would be all the more suspect because of nakedly selfish claims and ideas that have been floated- the police don’t go clear out a gang house so they can repurpose it as a club for the Police Patrolman’s Association. The police also don’t get to throw any and all occupants indefinitely in jail while they do whatever they choose to do. You can do way better than to liken this to a gang takeover.

In such a hypothetical, the U.S. would not be going into Gaza out of any sort of benevolence or humanitarian intent, or they would have done it decades ago. Under really any of their recent administrations but particularly under the current one, they’re owed zero benefit of the doubt regarding their purpos and intentions.

If they want to set a new high (or low?) bar for “what’s the stupidest and wrongest thing we could do to get a bunch of American kids killed”, this would be the way to do it.

 

[Infanteer]

All analogies are suspect, that's why they are generally not very useful. Yours implies there is some sort of sovereign wall that should prevent outside intervention into the conflict.

I alluded to the fact that the US proposal out in left field, but "US legitimacy" is not a factor, anymore than "Iranian legitimacy" or "Turkish legitimacy" or "Saudi legitimacy" - this conflict is not local nor is it confined to two actors and it never has been. The solution for the last 30 years of ignoring it while shoveling arms to the region clearly isn't working for anyone, and having someone else "go into the house" is as good as a solution as any that currently exist.

 

[Quirky]

Making preparations:

Israel's defence minister has told its military to prepare a plan to "allow any resident of Gaza who wishes to leave to do so", in line with President Donald Trump's proposal for the US to take over the territory and resettle the 2.1 million Palestinians there.

Israel minister tells army to plan for Palestinians to leave Gaza

Defence Minister Israel Katz says Gazans should have freedom of movement and critics of the war should take them in.

www.bbc.com

 

[QV]

As @Infanteer noted something dramatically different needs to be done in Gaza for any chance of a future that doesn’t see the current situation continuing for generations.

Personally I doubt President Trump wants (or would) put US forces into Gaza, but he’s doing his shock jock routine of kicking an anthill to attempt to get the Arab nations to come up with a solution (or solitions). Mainly as none of them would find the idea of a few hundred thousand US troops a few hundred miles from them very palatable either - as then we may just decide to roll on Syria and Iran etc. Once one gets toppled as we’ve seen from the Arab Spring, one never knows what else may happen - and KSA, Jordan, Qatar, the Emirates etc aren’t bastions of democracy…

Agree with you there. Trump shakes the box really hard. And all of a sudden all the players who were inflexible become more flexible. With respect to the Gaza situation, watch for new and better ideas to now emerge thanks to Trump shaking the box.

If anyone is holding to "dumbest thing ever" or "ethnic cleansing", they are firmly incapable of understanding how Trump operates.

 

[FJAG]

If anyone is holding to "dumbest thing ever" or "ethnic cleansing", they are firmly incapable of understanding how Trump operates.

Understanding how Trump works and "dumbest thing ever" are not mutually exclusive.

Advocating for a plan to move an entire population out of lands that they have occupied for almost a century now is "ethnic cleansing." It is not necessary to tie that to a genocide. The forced expulsion is enough. And make no mistake, there is a large part of that group which will not move voluntarily. And of those that do move, there will be a significant number calling for a "return to the homeland" by any means.

I don't disagree that sometimes "shaking the box" is a viable course of action which can lead to a favourable result. I just do not see it in this case. What positive outcome do you (as Trump's alter ego who seems to perceive a plan) see from this suggestion that will lead to a permanent solution to the "Palestinian problem," considering that the vast majority of the world sees this as the "Israeli problem" in the first place?