Zobel said:

---

Callous indifference to the loss of human life is something you should repent of. Jesus Christ loves every single person, including Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews more than you can possibly imagine.

---

The Palestinians rejoice in the death of Jews. Throw them all in Libya. The land belongs to Israel. Palestinians started yet another war and lost. Now they reap what they sowed.

I have no issue saying that Hamas is a terrorist group, should be condemned and retaliated against with extreme prejudice and violence. Their terror attacks are wrong. Terrorism and targeting civilians is wrong and evil. I've said so multiple times. No big dude.

You can't grasp this because of the false binary worldview you've bought into.

If we accept the simplistic logic that "all Palestinians deserve suffering because they started a war," then by the same reasoning, Israelis "deserve" attacks because of Zionism which kicked off the whole conflict. I don't think the second is true, and I don't think the first is true. This is bad reasoning.

Zobel said:

---

If we accept the simplistic logic that "all Palestinians deserve suffering because they started a war," then by the same reasoning, Israelis "deserve" attacks because of Zionism which kicked off the whole conflict.

---

This is bad reasoning.

Zobel said:

---

If we accept the simplistic logic that "all Palestinians deserve suffering because they started a war," then by the same reasoning, Israelis "deserve" attacks because of Zionism which kicked off the whole conflict. I don't think the second is true, and I don't think the first is true. This is bad reasoning.

---

In war innocent people get hurt. That is just how this world is. The Palestinians as a group need to be moved. They as a group don't want peace with Israel they want to replace Israel. They should probably be dumped in Afghanistan but Libya is not a horrible option. No right to return to Gaza.

While I don't agree, it is remarkable progress that several of you have moved onto this versus openly calling for their wholesale destruction. I'll take that as a win.

Zobel said:

---

While I don't agree, it is remarkable progress that several of you have moved onto this versus openly calling for their wholesale destruction. I'll take that as a win.

---

We need more Pro-Palestinian engagement here. Contribute more.

SirDippinDots said:

---

Zobel said:

---

If we accept the simplistic logic that "all Palestinians deserve suffering because they started a war," then by the same reasoning, Israelis "deserve" attacks because of Zionism which kicked off the whole conflict. I don't think the second is true, and I don't think the first is true. This is bad reasoning.

---

In war innocent people get hurt. That is just how this world is. The Palestinians as a group need to be moved. They as a group don't want peace with Israel they want to replace Israel. They should probably be dumped in Afghanistan but Libya is not a horrible option. No right to return to Gaza.

---

Correct. They even put it on TV all the time. Arafat himself exclaimed that their greatest weapon would be the wombs of their women.

Libyan TV Show Host Afaf Abdel Mohsen Praises Palestinians for Having Many Children So They Can Push Them to Death, Martyrdom; Palestinian Journalist Muhammad Abd Al-Haqq: They Have Nuclear Bombs, We Have “Offspring Bombs”#Libya #Palestinian #martyrdom_culture pic.twitter.com/u2SSgW4TqH

— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) June 1, 2023

I'm just hopeful Trump's plan actually works.

REPORT: The Trump administration is working on a plan to permanently relocate up to 1 million Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to Libya- @NBCNews

They could've had a state. Instead, they chose terrorism and now, deservedly, will lose everything. pic.twitter.com/lreCxkbKxl

— Ari Hoffman 🎗 (@thehoffather) May 16, 2025

agaberto said:

---

How many Palestinians in Gaza would voluntarily leave to live in Libya is an open question. One idea administration officials have discussed is to provide Palestinians with financial incentives such as free housing and even a stipend, the former U.S. official said. The details of when or how any plan to relocate Palestinians to Libya could be implemented are murky, and an effort to resettle up to 1 million people there would likely face significant obstacles. Such an effort would likely be extremely expensive, and it's not clear how the Trump administration would seek to pay for it. In the past, the administration has said Arab nations would help with rebuilding Gaza after the war there ends, but they have been critical of Trump's idea of permanently relocating Palestinians. In recent weeks, the Trump administration has also looked at Libya as a place where it could send some immigrants it wants to deport from the U.S. However, plans to send one group of immigrants to Libya were stalled by a federal judge this month.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-administration-working-plan-move-1-million-palestinians-libya-rcna207224
A country with widespread crime and terrorism,...they will fit right in. Israel must pay for it, not the United States' taxpayer.

---

No other Arab country wants them.

stallion6 said:

---

No other Arab country wants them.

---

Money talks. This is where The Kingdom comes in.

not pro-palestinian. i'm in the 'everyone sucks here' camp.

Zobel said:

---

not pro-palestinian. i'm in the 'everyone sucks here' camp.

---

Even by that measure, it's pretty easy to see who the absolute worst between the 2 sides is, and it's not even close. Israel has been purposefully trying to save civilians from areas where they will be going after Hamas, whereas Hamas has been threatening the civilians if they leave. You tell me where the blame lies there.

There is no moral equivalence between the 2 sides, even if you point out that Israel has made mistakes. It is the moral equivalency crowd who allow the strategy of Hamas of using civilians as fodder to be successful at all.

why do you think you as an american need to pick a side?

what side has moral high ground in ukraine and russia, and which do you support?

Zobel said:

---

why do you think you as an american need to pick a side?

what side has moral high ground in ukraine and russia, and which do you support?

---

America obviously has interest in the region, and Israel is by far a better partner in the region than any other government. I would find it very difficult to find any good arguments against that. Not only that, but there is an ideological stand that is worth making that using your own civilian population in the way that Hamas is using them should never be allowed to work, in any way.

Moral high ground is not exactly what I would ascribe to either side in U v R, though I would say Russia is obviously the aggressor and is the more corrupt entity between the two.

Keyno said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Quote:

---

When did the Jews deliberately attack civilians during that revolt?

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Lehi_operations

are you really unaware of zionist terrorism against civilians during the run-up to the 1947 war??

edit to change "jewish" to "zionist" because I want to be clear that i don't think this is a jewish problem.

---

Yeah, the Jews killed some non-combatants during the revolt. So did the Arabs.

Only one side still mourns their failure to commit genocide as a national catastrophe ("Nakba").

---

It never ends with the absolute disregard for Israeli crimes

---

It never ends with Palestinian apologists pretending that Israeli crimes 80 years are go are anywhere near equivalent to Palestinian crimes since then.

---

80 years ago? Israel has killed tens of thousands of civilians in the last year and a half.

---

That number would drastically be reduced if the Palestinian cowards were not hiding in civilian locations, using their noncombatants as basically human shields against Israeli military operations.

I actually think American interest in the region is waning, which is why we are exiting as rapidly as possible. In a world where

- Russia is no longer a realistic threat to the US via conquering of the European mainland and access to the North Atlantic
- NATO is arguably no longer a strategic imperative to the US
- Therefore securing oil for European security is no longer strategically relevant to the US
- As a net oil exporter, oil price stability is no longer economically favorable for the US
- With our focus shifting to an increasingly hostile China - a massive importer of oil from the ME...

- A secure ME is no longer strategically relevant for us, and possibly a chaotic ME may actually be advantageous

Israel was a great partner using the tried-and-true divide and conquer method of supporting the minority to break a regional dynamic. That's a callous and imperial approach - the English were masters of it. I don't think it's necessary any more.

I agree with you that Hamas should never be legitimized or encouraged, and terrorism like they have done is absolutely justification for disproportionate response with extreme prejudice.

However -- all that being said, I will note you did not "choose a side" to support in the Ukranian conflict. You have every opportunity to do the same in Israel.

Picking in a side in a regional ethnic conflict to support for geopolitical advantage is hardly a position of moral high ground. Just so we're all clear.

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

I see that you edited your post while I was busy writing up a response to it, so here's the extra part.

Zobel said:

---

look the thing is, youve said before you are jewish or have jewish sympathies, that's fine and explains your feelings here.

you want israel to conquer the region and expel the arab population - ok. just say that.

you think the jews deserve a place to live because of the holocaust and you're willing to sacrifice the arab people who were living where they want to live? ok. just say that.

you think islam is a cancer and anyone who practices it forfeits their human rights? ok. just say that.

you don't need to come up with an excuse or pretend like this is similar to any other situation in the twentieth century.

---

No, I don't think that Islam is inherently evil. I've had Muslim classmates and co-workers who were pretty nice. I do recognize that Islamic cultures tend to produce a greater number of murderous holy-warrior movements (including Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Hamas) than any other major religion currently does.

---

That is just because you have never read about Islam and its early history and some things that it says. You have imbibed the woke sanitized "Religion of Peace" version and your exposure is limited to a few decent Muslim people.

Please read up.

A big big mistake people make is meet a handful of observing Muslim people who seem like normal people and mix with others well. These people are educated, hold modern jobs, and don't make pests of themselves. These people talk about how "all religions teach peace" and say nice reasonable logical things like this.

So then one makes the leap that "Islam is good" or "not inherently evil" like you did above. The reality is that your good friends are either bad Muslims, or are doing "Al Taqqiyya" on you as prescribed in their religion. This is a form of behavior which asks Muslims to change their behavior in the cause of Islam and to get more converts. Many whites are fooled and become Muslims as they are unhappy people to start with, parents divorced, empty lives and Islam seems to give them the structure they so crave.

Islam is evil. Its founder was a terrorist. Read up.

based

but i don't think anyone who practices it forfeits basic human rights. but you're right.

Except it isn't just geopolitical. There is an ideological risk involved, as well, and yes, it involves Islam. If you've paid attention, many of the Western nations have had large influxes of Muslims. One of the tenets of Islam is the permanence of the land belonging to Islam once conquered.

That is part of why the Muslim world tolerates the "Palistinians" even though they are a headache to everyone they deal with. Israel is several generations ahead of us in this problem, but I assure you, it makes our grandchildrens lives existentially more difficult in a Western Judeo-Christian values sense to not support them.

I don't agree with the fiction of so-called Judeo Christian values. I believe in Christian values.

And I don't see how a decision about allowing mass migration or invasion of Islam into the west is relevant to supporting Zionism. You can oppose the one without supporting the others. Neither are pro-Christian.

I disagree, I think it takes some mental gymnastics to separate those, in both cases. They may not be hand in hand equivalents, but they are closely related.

Why? Watch:

No immigration from non-Christian nations, like we were pre-1965 / Hart Cellar.

Any encroachment of US territories by military means (Islam or otherwise) is met with force.

Neither of those require supporting Zionism. Zionism is fundamentally anti-Christian.

Zobel said:

---

I don't agree with the fiction of so-called Judeo Christian values. I believe in Christian values.

And I don't see how a decision about allowing mass migration or invasion of Islam into the west is relevant to supporting Zionism. You can oppose the one without supporting the others. Neither are pro-Christian.

---

What do you mean by Zionism?

Quote:

---

Here's the thing….

They don't want to leave their home any more than you want to leave yours.

They shouldn't have to.

---

They shouldn't?

I didnt burn my neighbors babies in their ovens, rape their women, and murder the others.

If I did, I guarantee that I would be forced to leave my home, one way or another. I certainly wouldn't be given the courtesy of a new home nearby, at no cost to me.

There is a very very very obvious reason that no other country considers them refugees, and why no other country wants to take them. That was lost on this post, and the couple dozen people who starred it.

Is Libya the solution? I don't know. But this comment ignores reality.

Libya is an islamic paradise.

I think it's perfect for them, plus I don't think there are more than 1 or 2 jews in the country, so they won't be bothered by them there, or forced to dig tunnels like rats to store bombs/weapons/hostages etc.

Fragile Calm Returns to #Tripoli

After days of deadly clashes, Tripoli sees a cautious return to normality—flights resume, markets reopen, and armed groups withdraw as hopes for a ceasefire grow in #Libya’s divided capital. pic.twitter.com/yF83qD5zvA

— Daily Euro Times (@dailyeurotimes) May 17, 2025

Quote:

---

Neither of those require supporting Zionism. Zionism is fundamentally anti-Christian.

---

This is incorrect. It is not fundamentally anti-Christian. It is, however, standing against something that IS fundamentally anti-Christian

Israel's biggest mistake was not expelling the Palestinians from the land they won in 1967. By now, the world would have forgotten about Gaza just as it forgot about Königsberg.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Here's the thing….

They don't want to leave their home any more than you want to leave yours.

They shouldn't have to.

Those people have lived in that area for 4 times longer than we have mind existed in this country and none of us are giving up our homes.

It hasn't been majority Jewish in two millennia.

I personally do not give a **** about the Arabs and I don't really care with the Israelis are doing to them but don't think they're just up and ready to leave.

I'm just saying it's not a practical solution.

The UN, Brit's and Israelis have been offering that for the last 80 years to them.

---

except that you are just making up fake stories with no basis in ACTUAL REALITY.

Khan Yunis "Refugee Camp" in the 1950s.

Wow! Look at all the millions of Palestinians who had been living there for "4 times longer than we existed as a country"!!

That much is true

stallion6 said:

---

No other Arab country wants them.

---

Yep.

Very telling.

Every time they go somewhere, they prove to be trash people that start **** . They don't learn.

Judaism and Islam are equally anti-Christian. One is an explicit rejection of Jesus Christ as both Messiah and God, the other is a kind of Christian heresy which also rejects Jesus Christ as God.

Israel is formally by law a Jewish state, where national rights in Israel belong only to Jewish people and the right to exercise self-determination in Israel is unique to the Jewish people. It is founded in its essence by taking a place with a majority Arab population and changing it to one with a majority Jewish population where they and only they have a right to self-determination. The only way this can be done is through a kind of colonization, and obvious (both in hindsight and in history) transfer of the local population.

The idea of "transfer" of the local Arabs is not new, didn't start with the October attacks, and isn't because of some kind of moral culpability of Palestinian Arabs for terrorism. It is baked into Zionism from the beginning - from the 1890s. The idea is that the right of Jews to have a homeland in supersedes the rights of the Arabs who already lived there. This view was expressed by all of the major leaders of early Zionism - Theodor Herzl, David Ben-Gurion, Berl Katznelson, Moshe Sharett, Chaim Wiezmann, etc. Like Bonfire04 here, they pointed to (forced) population movements in the collapse of the Ottoman empire as justification. They said it was a pragmatic and humane solution - with the alternative to the "humane" solution being the inhumane one. The main challenge of Zionism was to solve this "Arab question". The formula of solving the "Arab question" comes from the 1920s - with some irony predating the "Jewish question" of the Nazi holocaust by a decade. One great quote from 1940 from Ze'ev Jabotinsky was "the world has become accustomed to the idea of mass migrations and has become fond of them. … Hitler - as odious as he is to us - has given this idea a good name in the world." (a recent article published in Haaretz here if you care to read).

This kind of ethnic tribalism is fundamentally anti-Christian.

Zobel said:

---

Judaism and Islam are equally anti-Christian. One is an explicit rejection of Jesus Christ as both Messiah and God, the other is a kind of Christian heresy which also rejects Jesus Christ as God.

Israel is formally by law a Jewish state, where national rights in Israel belong only to Jewish people and the right to exercise self-determination in Israel is unique to the Jewish people. It is founded in its essence by taking a place with a majority Arab population and changing it to one with a majority Jewish population where they and only they have a right to self-determination. The only way this can be done is through a kind of colonization, and obvious (both in hindsight and in history) transfer of the local population.

The idea of "transfer" of the local Arabs is not new, didn't start with the October attacks, and isn't because of some kind of moral culpability of Palestinian Arabs for terrorism. It is baked into Zionism from the beginning - from the 1890s. The idea is that the right of Jews to have a homeland in supersedes the rights of the Arabs who already lived there. This view was expressed by all of the major leaders of early Zionism - Theodor Herzl, David Ben-Gurion, Berl Katznelson, Moshe Sharett, Chaim Wiezmann, etc. Like Bonfire04 here, they pointed to (forced) population movements in the collapse of the Ottoman empire as justification. They said it was a pragmatic and humane solution - with the alternative to the "humane" solution being the inhumane one. The main challenge of Zionism was to solve this "Arab question". The formula of solving the "Arab question" comes from the 1920s - with some irony predating the "Jewish question" of the Nazi holocaust by a decade. One great quote from 1940 from Ze'ev Jabotinsky was "the world has become accustomed to the idea of mass migrations and has become fond of them. … Hitler - as odious as he is to us - has given this idea a good name in the world." (a recent article published in Haaretz here if you care to read).

This kind of ethnic tribalism is fundamentally anti-Christian.

---

Interestingly enough, Islam is actually extremely more charitable towards Jesus compared to Judaism. Islam considers Him a holy man and prophet. Judaic view of Him is...well it's too blasphemous to post as a Catholic.

Aggie95 said:

---

Quote:

---

The details of when or how any plan to relocate Palestinians to Libya could be implemented are murky, and an effort to resettle up to 1 million people there would likely face significant obstacles. Such an effort would likely be extremely expensive

---

Someone (Soros, et all) and the Roman Catholics - Jesuits-) didn't have much difficulty resettling 11 million people into the US over the last few years.

---

Exactly. No one left of DJT/Rand Paul objected to the illegal alien charter flights to promote child sex trafficking in the US under the Biden administration/Mayorkas.

The Darien Gap suffering, and murders/violent crime here, mean 'these people' can't be taken seriously as honest as to human smuggling/slavery/sex trade, let alone religious tenets of Christianity vs. Judaism etc. And that includes Lutheran and Jewish 'charities' as well fwiw.

Moving populations is a business to them, as shown for the past 4 years. Everything else is just negotiating the pricing/terms. Objections as to 'Zionism' etc. are just insincerity in the discussion.

At the end of the day, what price should the global community be willing to pay for peace in the middle east?

If that price is a nice, comfortable, well functioning piece of earth in Libya that they can call home, is that price too much?

For this to really stick, you open their eyes to the fact that this situation is better for everyone.