This has to be one of the most racist prejudiced threads I have read on Mumsnet in a long time and that's saying something. There is also a complete lack of understanding about the difference between asylum seekers, migrants and programme refugees and each countries legal responsibility in this.
If, and it is a big if, Palestinians were able and needed to flee an active conflict zone as in Gaza they would in all likelihood be considered programme refugees. Countries would get a quota as to how many they can take in, similar to Ukrainian refugees, similar to Syrian refugees and Bosnians back in the 90s. The majority of refugees generally get housed in neighbouring countries but not all so Britain may be required to take some. So it's a not a case of why us because most European countries will be required to take some.
Someone questioned the safety of taking in traumatised people, I'm unsure why? Most asylum seekers are. You have taken in Syrians, Iraqis, afghans and so on. If it is done properly the right psychological supports should be put in place
Someone suggested it wouldn't be temporary. I would argue it would I doubt Palestinians want to leave Gaza for good they have never demonstrated that wish.
The tone of what's being said is so dehumanising to people living in a war zone and your resistance to provide them with a safe place to live pretty horrible especially when the likelihood of it happening is so remote yet you can't help yourself kicking the boot in.