Jump to content

Menu

.


lewelma
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

At this point, what I hope is that Egypt lets in refugees. 

I would be a least a little relieved if they just let in the relief aid.  I can't figure out why those trucks are not allowed in. Does anyone know?

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, lewelma said:

I would be a least a little relieved if they just let in the relief aid.  I can't figure out why those trucks are not allowed in. Does anyone know?

I read something that said Egypt agreed to let out foreign refugees if aid trucks were allowed in, and Israel agreed to a brief window of a few hours free of bombing in the area while it happened, foreign citizens were told when to be there and lined up at the gate, and it never opened.  Personnel on Hamas’s side said they had never been given the go ahead to open at that time.

I’ll have to see if I can find where I saw that again.  I’ve read so many different news sources in the last few days.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa in Australia said:

News here said  Egypt was waiting for the opening but Israel stated there was never any negotiation to open. 

 

I don't want to get political, but why does Egypt need permission from Israel to open its border? When a border opens, do both sides have to agree to it? Are there fences controlled by each side? Will the crossing be bombed if Egypt opens unilaterally?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Meriwether said:

 

I hadn't read this before and would have said it is shocking how applicable it is now, years later. Except the point is that it isn't shocking. It is policy. SOP

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/israel-middle-east/articles/israel-insider-guide

Thanks for posting this.  I knew reporting about Israel v Hamas was very much against Israel back then but did not tealize how much was because of terriristic threats.

And I bet a lot of people haven't had enough good history to understand many references.  Like how ironic it is fir Belgians to say Israel is a colonizing country when thry colonized the Congo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TravelingChris said:

And I bet a lot of people haven't had enough good history to understand many references.  Like how ironic it is fir Belgians to say Israel is a colonizing country when thry colonized the Congo.

Not sure one needs a good history education to know about things like Belgium colonizing the Congo. These types of references also come up in fiction books, movies, etc. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frances said:

Not sure one needs a good history education to know about things like Belgium colonizing the Congo. These types of references also come up in fiction books, movies, 

Oh, I agree.  My entire family learns so much by reading inluding fiction and watching movies and shows. We are always lioking stuff up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, lewelma said:

I would be a least a little relieved if they just let in the relief aid.  I can't figure out why those trucks are not allowed in. Does anyone know?

Egypt says Israel will not allow them to open the border for aid without a detailed search of everything that enters, to ensure there is nothing that can benefit Hamas. They also say they want to open the border to allow those with foreign passports to leave, with the process managed by the UN, but so far Israel has not agreed. And of course Israel can prevent Egypt from unilaterally opening the border by bombing the Rafah side of the crossing.

Edited by Corraleno
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

500 Palestinians dead after an explosion at a hospital.   Each side blames the other.  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/10/17/world/gaza-news-israel-hamas-war

 

t least 500 people were killed by an explosion at a hospital in Gaza City on Tuesday that Palestinian authorities said was caused by an Israeli airstrike.

The Israeli military said in a statement that a misfired Palestinian militant rocket caused the explosion, and that a rocket barrage from Gaza was near the hospital when the building was struck. Islamic Jihad, an Islamist group aligned with Hamas in Gaza, was responsible, the Israeli military said.

Edited by Heartstrings
  • Sad 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Heartstrings said:

500 Palestinians dead after strike on hospital.   

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/10/17/world/gaza-news-israel-hamas-war

And a hospital in Rafah says they've been warned by Israel to evacuate as well, as bombardment of Rafah and Khan Younis continues. Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, was scheduled to meet with Biden, but he cancelled after the hospital was bombed. A million people are ordered to evacuate northern Gaza, and then the southern cities are bombed anyway, while the refugees starve and all aid is blocked from entering.

It seems like Israel is doing exactly what Hamas hoped they would do, destroying any chance of normalized relations between Israel and other Arab countries and likely diminishing the sympathy and support they have had from Europe and the US. It also puts Biden in an extremely difficult position when he visits Israel tomorrow, as any talk of unwavering support for Israel will be seen as condoning the bombing of hospitals and starvation of refugees.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa Louise said:

Listening to national broadcaster - source of hospital blast unknown as both sides blame each other.

It is not known whether it is a failed Hamas strike or an Israeli strike.

Terrible, horrible either way.

 

Each side gives the other plausible deniability.  It’s going to be a bunch of finger pointing and “wasn’t me” from here on out.  

  • Sad 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The water situation is a bigger problem. Even if they get water flowing and fuel in to run pumps by tomorrow, it has to get to the people. A population doubled in size, pipes broken, roads damaged. How do you transport and distribute it? People are starting to drink salinated or contaminated water. Water borne illnesses will be rampant.  I don't want to consider the death that is coming. 

  • Sad 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Whether or not it was Israel, it damages any prospect of a resolution.

I don't think there's much of a prospect of a resolution to begin with. As I said, I hope Egypt lets in refugees, because I don't see anything else good happening. (And arguably that would be bad for Egypt. But in terms of short term issues for the Palestinian civilians . . . ) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Corraleno said:

It seems like Israel is doing exactly what Hamas hoped they would do, destroying any chance of normalized relations between Israel and other Arab countries and likely diminishing the sympathy and support they have had from Europe and the US. It also puts Biden in an extremely difficult position when he visits Israel tomorrow, as any talk of unwavering support for Israel will be seen as condoning the bombing of hospitals and starvation of refugees.

I was about to type up a response, but it's too political. I think that might also make your comment too political . . . 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I don't think there's much of a prospect of a resolution to begin with. As I said, I hope Egypt lets in refugees, because I don't see anything else good happening. (And arguably that would be bad for Egypt. But in terms of short term issues for the Palestinian civilians . . . ) 

This is probably true. I think leaders of various countries are now cancelling meetings with Biden and protests outside of embassies etc are escalating. So, if there was any slim chance of anything it has gone. Anyway, again verging on political. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

This is probably true. I think leaders of various countries are now cancelling meetings with Biden and protests outside of embassies etc are escalating. So, if there was any slim chance of anything it has gone. Anyway, again verging on political. 

Yeah, let’s wind this up.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2023 at 11:22 AM, Amira said:


(My opinions about your final paragraph are likely too political for this main board, but as an underlying goal, I think Palestinians should leverage democratic norms to highlight their lack of rights.)

 

FWIW, I didn’t mean any kind of judgement of what Palestinians should do by that statement.  I was just trying to get a better idea of what the system does and doesn’t allow, to aid me in my personal judgement of that system.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Condessa said:

FWIW, I didn’t mean any kind of judgement of what Palestinians should do by that statement.  I was just trying to get a better idea of what the system does and doesn’t allow, to aid me in my personal judgement of that system.

I didn’t think you meant any judgment there, and it’s an important question.

I do think it would be a very interesting conversation to talk about nonviolent ways to move forward that actively promote peace building, because I believe there are solutions.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

500 Palestinians dead after an explosion at a hospital.   Each side blames the other.  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/10/17/world/gaza-news-israel-hamas-war

 

t least 500 people were killed by an explosion at a hospital in Gaza City on Tuesday that Palestinian authorities said was caused by an Israeli airstrike.

The Israeli military said in a statement that a misfired Palestinian militant rocket caused the explosion, and that a rocket barrage from Gaza was near the hospital when the building was struck. Islamic Jihad, an Islamist group aligned with Hamas in Gaza, was responsible, the Israeli military said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67144061

"So far the findings are inconclusive. BBC Verify has shown the evidence to a number of weapons experts, some of whom say it is not consistent with what you would expect from a typical Israeli airstrike.

J Andres Gannon, an assistant professor at Vanderbilt University, in the US, says the explosion appears to be small, meaning that the heat generated from the impact may have been caused by leftover rocket fuel rather than an explosion from a warhead.

Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) in the UK, agrees. While it is difficult to be sure at such an early stage, he says, the evidence looks like the explosion was caused by a failed rocket section hitting the car park and causing a fuel and propellant fire.

Mr Gannon says it is not possible to determine from the footage whether the projectile struck its intended target.

Several experts we spoke to were not willing to put forward a view on what happened."

 

 

It's looking more and more like it was a misfire by Islamic Jihad.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Images from the site seem to suggest the death toll should have been much lower than initially reported. I really wish we still had traditional media that verified before reporting or were at least circumspect in their language. I expect to have to fact check some sources and anything on twitter but not NY Times or BBC etc. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They announced after President Biden met with Netanyahu that 20 trucks of aid would be allowed through at Rafah, possibly as soon as Friday.  This article answered some of my questions about it.

 

“As we reported earlier, the US has said a first group of 20 lorries carrying aid supplies could cross into Gaza from Egypt tomorrow, after repairs to the road.

We've just heard from Abeer Etefa from the World Food programme in Cairo, who says 20 trucks would be "a good start" but "it is nowhere near enough". She believes the initial plan is "a way to test the system".”

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-middle-east-67141589
 

I assume that what they are testing is whether Hamas seizes the supplies for their people.  Or maybe whether they have issues with weapons being smuggled in with the supplies.  Hopefully all goes smoothly and they can quickly get regular supplies going through.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Images from the site seem to suggest the death toll should have been much lower than initially reported. I really wish we still had traditional media that verified before reporting or were at least circumspect in their language. I expect to have to fact check some sources and anything on twitter but not NY Times or BBC etc. 

The damage to the hospital wasn’t bad, but they’re saying that all of the hospitals are inundated with people who have evacuated their homes because they expect hospitals to be safe from bombing, and that the outer courtyard was completely packed with evacuees when the missile fell.

  • Sad 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Condessa said:

The damage to the hospital wasn’t bad, but they’re saying that all of the hospitals are inundated with people who have evacuated their homes because they expect hospitals to be safe from bombing, and that the outer courtyard was completely packed with evacuees when the missile fell.

Yes I can believe that and that even though the car park was hit not the building there were likely people sheltering there. For those who are interested themselves verified photos of the damage are on Twitter. I can’t see how the original story can be true from what I’ve seen. (The photos are not gory and are not being published by any mainstream media that I’ve seen:  NYtimes on the other hand posted images of a location that is nothing to do with the hospital and shows severe damage under their initial heading claiming that an Israeli missile strike had killed 500 people. This was incredibly irresponsible given the situation and has led to antisemitism attacks - and massive protests around the globe and Arab leaders cancelling meetings with Biden). There seems to be very little reporting of the repercussions on the ‘reputable’ news sites I’ve seen. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Scotland has said it will accept refugees 

Wow. That is a significant development--especially considering the king of Jordan's "red line" statements. Is it feasible for Scotland to do this? Just wondering aloud (in writing).

https://thehill.com/policy/international/4262981-scotlands-first-minister-says-country-willing-to-take-gaza-refugees/

Edited by popmom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Amira said:

One major question is whether refugees from Gaza would be allowed to return to their homes after this is finished.  After 75 or 56 years and multiple generations of trying to hang on to any kind of home in Palestine, it is a momentous thing to ask them to leave with no promise of return.  Refugees always know that returning might not happen, but the number one goal for refugees is to help them return home if possible.

I wish that more Western countries would step up to take in many more multi-generational refugees from other parts of the world.  The refugee crises that grab the headlines get so much more support.

This isn't getting headlines? I don't think that is why the effort isn't getting much support. Maybe I misunderstood.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue of who might let in refugees and why some countries may not wish to do so is also inherently political, I think.

As for returning to one’s home… I dunno. The world is a hard place. I have no idea if I’ll ever see the city I was born in again. And if I do, whether it’ll feel anything like home…

Edited by Not_a_Number
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Amira said:

One major question is whether refugees from Gaza would be allowed to return to their homes after this is finished.  After 75 or 56 years and multiple generations of trying to hang on to any kind of home in Palestine, it is a momentous thing to ask them to leave with no promise of return.  Refugees always know that returning might not happen, but the number one goal for refugees is to help them return home if possible.

I wish that more Western countries would step up to take in many more multi-generational refugees from other parts of the world (like from central or eastern Africa).  The refugee crises that grab the headlines (Ukraine, for example) get so much more support.  I am very glad for any refugee that gets support, but help is not equally offered.

Promising right of return seems like it would be so important (assuming no terrorism links which could be complicated).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Amira said:

One major question is whether refugees from Gaza would be allowed to return to their homes after this is finished.  After 75 or 56 years and multiple generations of trying to hang on to any kind of home in Palestine, it is a momentous thing to ask them to leave with no promise of return.  Refugees always know that returning might not happen, but the number one goal for refugees is to help them return home if possible.

I wish that more Western countries would step up to take in many more multi-generational refugees from other parts of the world (like from central or eastern Africa).  The refugee crises that grab the headlines (Ukraine, for example) get so much more support.  I am very glad for any refugee that gets support, but help is not equally offered.

I remember AU took Bosnian refugees who did return - and that was the plan all along.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m sure many of you know this, but if you’re not familiar with how fraught the concept of the right of return for Palestinian refugees has been for the last 75 years, this Wikipedia article is a reasonably good summary of the issue. Often the media focuses on questions about land and settlements, but the right of return specifically along with the broader question of what will happen to Palestinian refugees in a final negotiated agreement is in my opinion as difficult an issue as what will happen to Jerusalem.

This PBS article does a good job in my opinion of laying out why allowing/asking/forcing Palestinians to leave Gaza is so complicated, no matter where they go.

For what it’s worth, Jordan already hosts the second highest number of refugees per capita in the world (Lebanon hosts the most per capita). Egyptian claims that they host 9 million refugees and immigrants may technically be true (but honestly, that number seems high to me, although more people from sub-Saharan have been arriving in Egypt for better schooling and work opportunities), but fewer than a million are UN-registered refugees.

If the US hosted refugees at the same per capita rate as Lebanon, we’d have 40 million refugees here. At the Jordan rate, we’d have 23 million.  Currently, we accept 125,000/year and the number has been much lower in recent years.

Edited by Amira
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the article, Amira.  

I agree that we (the U.S. in particular and western nations in general) should be inviting in more refugees.  I know that there are worries about terrorists coming in with the refugees, but we already have federal laws and screening processes in place to exclude those who espouse terrorism and to deport any aliens who support terrorism.  I think we should absolutely welcome in any Palestinians who wish to come here and do not support terrorism.  That’s supposed to be part of America’s ideology, give us “your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”.  
 

While I completely agree that the Palestinians should not be pushed to leave, I personally think it is wrong to try to force them to stay in their war-torn land if they wish to leave.  Do they have a right to stay and stand for their rights to their homeland, absolutely!  But they should also have the right to leave if they wish and seek a better life for future generations elsewhere, like most of our (Americans’) ancestors chose to do.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Terabith said:

I’m so incredibly angry about how the US with the frigging Statue of Liberty treats immigrants, migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees.  It’s absolutely despicable and a huge stain on the country.  

I have felt for a long time that we should send the Statue of Liberty back to France. It is meaningless now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Terabith said:

I’m so incredibly angry about how the US with the frigging Statue of Liberty treats immigrants, migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees.  It’s absolutely despicable and a huge stain on the country.  

It's not just the US. There really aren't many nations who do a great job of the above. 

~

I've got to admit, the first thing I thought when thinking about AU taking Palestinian refugees is that women and children under 12, OK, with a right of return, but that it's going to be a hard sell to the public on teens and men.

It's not race, it's not religion, it's the (potential)  radicalisation. 

The second thing I thought is that we can't even  house all our citizens or current  asylum.seekers, so we are in no place to  to take in more people. 

It's complex. Morally simple, yes. But pragmatically extremely complex. And not just a US sin. 

  • Like 18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

It's not just the US. There really aren't many nations who do a great job of the above. 

~

I've got to admit, the first thing I thought when thinking about AU taking Palestinian refugees is that women and children under 12, OK, with a right of return, but that it's going to be a hard sell to the public on teens and men.

It's not race, it's not religion, it's the (potential)  radicalisation. 

The second thing I thought is that we can't even  house all our citizens or current  asylum.seekers, so we are in no place to  to take in more people. 

It's complex. Morally simple, yes. But pragmatically extremely complex. And not just a US sin. 

Oh, believe me, I know.  It’s not simple at all.  Immigration issues are just hard, and frankly the border states have legitimate complaints because here the rest of the country doesn’t help, and even with people who chose to leave their homes (often for the excellent reason of people trying to kill them), it’s very hard for the first couple of years.  Language issues, cultural issues, economic issues, housing issues… It is a lot, although as areas in which to do social work go, frankly immigration is very encouraging simply because there almost always IS (often very fast) improvement.  Frankly, being an immigrant or a refugee is very, very hard, and you don’t make it to a new country without resources of some kind (economic, social, intellectual, etc). And in this case, radicalization is a legitimate fear as well.  
 

But the US (and other western countries, but I speak about the US because it’s my country and because we have a whole entire mythology built around being a nation of immigrants/ colonizers) is especially egregious in how few people we allow in and how much we actively punish even the people we legally deem meet our almost impossible to meet standards of being in fear of their lives for religious or political reasons.  There’s no way to follow the law and survive without assistance or working for the length of time we require people to not work to maintain their eligibility.  (It’s years before they can get work permits and they can’t ever receive any government assistance.)

 It’s inhumane.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...