President in effect endorses ethnic cleansing of territory before hosting meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu

Donald Trump has said that Palestinians have “no alternative” but to leave Gaza due to the devastation left by Israel’s war on Hamas, in effect endorsing ethnic cleansing of the territory over the opposition of Palestinians and the neighbouring countries.

Speaking as he prepared to host Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, on Tuesday, Trump repeated the suggestion that Gaza’s population should be relocated to Jordan and Egypt – something both countries have firmly rejected.

Trump claimed Palestinians would “love to leave Gaza”, telling reporters: “I would think that they would be thrilled.”

MBFC
Archive

  • auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    96·
    14 hours ago

    I’m an anarchist dumbass I can just see the reality. Yous are as gone as maga. Victims of propaganda and acting against your own (and the palestines interests).

    You aren’t anti-genocide. As we told you before the election, your outcome of your stance is pro genocide. And now the Palestinians have to pay the price for your stupidity.

    • TheFriar@lemm.eeEnglish
      21·
      9 hours ago

      That’s a depressingly binary outlook for an anarchist.

      Are you sure you’re an anarchist? Because thinking that there was either the choice to vote for one party or “you’re brainwashed” just doesn’t exactly scream anarchist to me.

      You’re overlooking my entire point to make a binary, deterministic point about only one decision being right in this scenario. You’re an anarchist telling people that f they didn’t vote for a political party complicit in a genocide, that they’re just as bad as the genocidal forces? There is legitimately no sense to be found in this.

      I’m more of a Chomsky-esque anarchist myself when it comes to voting. And even I don’t see how you could make this claim. Under normal circumstances, I would be with you between trump and Kamala. But there is a fucking genocide happening, in the US’s pocket, and there were two pro genocide candidates on the ticket. Faulting the people against the genocide for the scenario being our reality, and not the people who wouldn’t break with the idea that the genocide was something to support? You’re not an anarchist, you’re a bootlicker.

      You’re throwing the people who couldn’t stomach the fact that a genocide would’ve been done in their name had your candidate won under the bus? Not those who wouldn’t listen to the millions of people telling them they’re wrong and blindly kept supporting the slaughter? With historians and the world community and the activists screaming that we are witnessing a Nazi-esque ethnic cleansing, you’re not faulting the politicians who only see the opportunity for influence and government contracts?

      You’re faulting…activists and peacemongers. For not voting for your candidate?

      I just want to be sure I’m understanding your position here.

      Don’t come at me with some binary explanation that “well the other side is worse,” I want you to do your best to shed that two party mentality to think about this in the larger picture, and then reaffirm your point for me, here.

      • auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        2·
        9 hours ago

        Neo-proudhonian mutualist with a dash of agorist praxis via non-violent counter-economic ®evolution.

        Changing the system by voting is not possible. The best we can do is pick the one closest aligned with our values, that will allow us to effectively organise (vs Trump turning the military on protestors/leftists), buy the Palestinians some time (vs literal cheering for ethnic clensing).

        Faulting the people against the genocide for the scenario being our reality, and not the people who wouldn’t break with the idea that the genocide was something to support? You’re not an anarchist, you’re a bootlicker.

        They’re statists and authoritarians—I don’t expect them to listen to reason, and I can’t change that. My criticism is directed at those who actively pushed for a worsening of the genocide by enabling that screwball to take power, rather than supporting actual anti-genocide leftists who understand that, flawed as it is, liberalism is still preferable to outright fascism. You should know better. Instead, you keep shifting between shill gambit, baseless accusations and bad-faith comparisons.

        Chomsky also acknowledged pragmatic short-term engagement with existing structures (e.g., voting for the lesser evil) while aiming for long-term abolition of oppressive institutions, FYI.

        In the 2016 and 2020 U.S. elections, he argued that it was morally imperative to vote for the Democratic candidate because the alternative would be worse for marginalized communities, climate policy, and global stability.

        https://chomsky.info/an-eight-point-brief-for-lev-lesser-evil-voting

        Conclusion: by dismissing a “lesser evil” electoral logic and thereby increasing the potential for Clinton’s defeat the left will undermine what should be at the core of what it claims to be attempting to achieve.