this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2025
224 points (96.7% liked)

News

36000 readers
2215 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

President Donald Trump says he’d like to see Arab nations increase the number of Palestinian refugees they are accepting from the Gaza Strip — potentially moving out enough of the population to “clean out” the area to create a virtual clean slate.

“Something has to happen,” Trump said. “But it’s literally a demolition site right now. Almost everything’s demolished, and people are dying there.” He added: “So, I’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations, and build housing in a different location, where they can maybe live in peace for a change.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Jordan already has a majority Palestinian population. I don’t think intent to destroy fits, so it’s not genocide.

Forced displacement and ethnic cleansing can be crimes against humanity though.

Giving Gazans the option to relocate to Jordan voluntarily is not a crime.

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I didn't want to touch on the intent question, because to some degree it's not knowable from the outside and to some degree there is a multitude of intents out there. And since the resettlement already doesn't fit the "method" criteria I thought I didn't have to.

For what it's worth I think Trump is more likely just trying to quiet the situation in a heavy handed way, for a political win, and to satisfy Israeli interests and maybe also to satisfy some interest groups local to him. I don't think he has a reason to want to destroy Palestine as a nation or identity. On the other hand he also wouldn't give much of a shit about their interests. And of course he spouts this stuff quickly, without careful analysis beforehand, as always.

In contrast I think some of the Israeli parties, the extreme settler ones, probably would like the Palestinian Identity gone, so they can "finally" claim all the land they want to call Israel.

As for Netanyahu, I don't know. Sometimes I felt like what he wanted most was a continued frozen conflict because it stabilizes him in domestic politics. But when the conflict heated up he changed to strongman tactics. What's next I don't understand well. Does he want to re-freeze, or find some sort of lasting resolution...

[–] bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I didn’t want to touch on the intent question

Intent is essential for genocide. Dolus specialis, look it up.

Trump

Reportedly Trump has been already influential in bringing about the current ceasefire and hostage exchange. There’s potential for the situation to change significantly. Annexation of parts of the West Bank is a possibility.

Netanyahu wants to stay in power and out of prison. At the moment that means appeasing the extremists. He will likely not survive the upcoming Knesset investigation into October 7th politically.

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

Intent is essential for genocide. Dolus specialis, look it up.

Well yes, it was in the part I copied in the top comment, I didn't overlook it.

If you read the next sentence after your quote I gave the reasoning why I think we don't have to get into it for the analysis of these hypothetical circumstances: Article 2 already doesn't apply for other reasons.