Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Conflict in the Middle East

Israeli minister calling for a state that includes many Middle Eastern countries

245 replies

Nads0622 · 10/10/2024 10:45

I've just seen a video of the Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich stating he wants a Jewish state, Greater Israel which includes Jordan, Saudi Arabia , Iraq , Syria and Lebanon. He’s basically calling for mass genocide !!!
why is no one talking about this .

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
havingmorekids · 09/07/2025 21:58

Blunderbussviking · 08/07/2025 07:34

But they do.
They all hate Israel and want it to be gone.
”From river to the sea….” What do you think it means?

They don't. They (almost all the Arab world) are calling for a 2 state solution. That is, a genuine one, not one being controlled by Israel, which we have seen does not work and never will. the fighting won't stop until there is a fair and equitable split.

havingmorekids · 09/07/2025 22:07

SharonEllis · 08/07/2025 10:16

Every word of this.

It isn't recognised as a state because there is no legal entitlement in existence - the likes of Melanie Phillips tells everyone that the Palestinian Mandate required the British to give the land known as Palestine exclusively to Israel - it didn't. It is a short agreement and it says nothing of the sort. There had been conflicting promises made by the British to the Arabs on the land during wwI (95 percent were Arabs) and then to a Rothschild and in the Balfour Agreement - which was losely worded, did not refer to a state, and required that all indigineous persons kept their rights to the land (this did not happen). So it was a mess when the UN took over control from the British in the 1940s. The UN required a 2 state solution. This has been contested for the reasons above. Palestinians were "rehoused" in Lebanon by Israel. Iran voted in favour well before the recent problems in Syria incidentally.

Moving on - we today in our modern political world with many wise world leaders wanting peace, we now have a situation where there is political will on the "Arab" side to agree a two state solution - and so with a two state solution their funding of Hamas, Hezbollah etc falls away. .

Perhaps the time has finally come for Israel to come to the table too? It would mean peace in our time and would be fair to all persons affected.

Blunderbussviking · 09/07/2025 22:16

havingmorekids · 09/07/2025 21:58

They don't. They (almost all the Arab world) are calling for a 2 state solution. That is, a genuine one, not one being controlled by Israel, which we have seen does not work and never will. the fighting won't stop until there is a fair and equitable split.

Arab state leaders and politicians might say they want a two-state solution during press conferences to the outside world, but most ordinary Muslims are vehemently against Israel and want the destruction of it. The leaders probably mean what they say for the sake of peace for their people but it always will be a very fragile peace.
There are various YouTube channels when they interview ordinary Muslims on the streets, Palestinians in the West Bank, or even in Gaza before this conflict etc…and they openly say they ideally want a Palestinian state and no Israel whatsoever. When they ask these people what would happen to the Jews then?…they either say they should go back to where they came from, such as Poland, Eastern Europe etc.. or they turn away from the camera and don’t want to answer. Some say they want a two-state solution, but in my opinion they are just being polite because they are on camera. It is really shocking. Have you never watched these?

Stirabout · 09/07/2025 22:26

havingmorekids · 09/07/2025 22:07

It isn't recognised as a state because there is no legal entitlement in existence - the likes of Melanie Phillips tells everyone that the Palestinian Mandate required the British to give the land known as Palestine exclusively to Israel - it didn't. It is a short agreement and it says nothing of the sort. There had been conflicting promises made by the British to the Arabs on the land during wwI (95 percent were Arabs) and then to a Rothschild and in the Balfour Agreement - which was losely worded, did not refer to a state, and required that all indigineous persons kept their rights to the land (this did not happen). So it was a mess when the UN took over control from the British in the 1940s. The UN required a 2 state solution. This has been contested for the reasons above. Palestinians were "rehoused" in Lebanon by Israel. Iran voted in favour well before the recent problems in Syria incidentally.

Moving on - we today in our modern political world with many wise world leaders wanting peace, we now have a situation where there is political will on the "Arab" side to agree a two state solution - and so with a two state solution their funding of Hamas, Hezbollah etc falls away. .

Perhaps the time has finally come for Israel to come to the table too? It would mean peace in our time and would be fair to all persons affected.

Excellent post and very succinctly put. In terms of your last paragraph we can but hope 🙏

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 00:33

havingmorekids · 09/07/2025 21:58

They don't. They (almost all the Arab world) are calling for a 2 state solution. That is, a genuine one, not one being controlled by Israel, which we have seen does not work and never will. the fighting won't stop until there is a fair and equitable split.

What much of the Arab world is actually calling for isn’t a genuine two-state solution - it’s the dismantling of Israel by stealth. On paper, it sounds like two states, but with one catch: Israel must absorb millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants - around 7 million people. That would tip the demographic balance, giving Palestinians a majority or close to it. At that point, it’s one election away from Hamas controlling Gaza, the West Bank, and Israel itself. That’s not coexistence. That’s a hostile takeover dressed up as diplomacy.

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 00:39

havingmorekids · 09/07/2025 22:07

It isn't recognised as a state because there is no legal entitlement in existence - the likes of Melanie Phillips tells everyone that the Palestinian Mandate required the British to give the land known as Palestine exclusively to Israel - it didn't. It is a short agreement and it says nothing of the sort. There had been conflicting promises made by the British to the Arabs on the land during wwI (95 percent were Arabs) and then to a Rothschild and in the Balfour Agreement - which was losely worded, did not refer to a state, and required that all indigineous persons kept their rights to the land (this did not happen). So it was a mess when the UN took over control from the British in the 1940s. The UN required a 2 state solution. This has been contested for the reasons above. Palestinians were "rehoused" in Lebanon by Israel. Iran voted in favour well before the recent problems in Syria incidentally.

Moving on - we today in our modern political world with many wise world leaders wanting peace, we now have a situation where there is political will on the "Arab" side to agree a two state solution - and so with a two state solution their funding of Hamas, Hezbollah etc falls away. .

Perhaps the time has finally come for Israel to come to the table too? It would mean peace in our time and would be fair to all persons affected.

Moving on - we today in our modern political world with many wise world leaders wanting peace, we now have a situation where there is political will on the "Arab" side to agree a two state solution - and so with a two state solution their funding of Hamas, Hezbollah etc falls away.

This unfortunately isn't the case.

There are no Arab states that support a two-state solution without the right of return.

This is outlines in the Arab Peace initiative and hasn't been renounced even by the UAE or other places which have normalised with Israel.

So in effect, all Arab states still insist on the right of return as part of a two-state framework and what many Arab leaders call a “two-state solution” is, in reality, a slow-motion plan to erase Israel. It looks reasonable on the surface - two countries side by side - but comes with a loaded condition: Israel must take in millions of Palestinian refugees (many of whom who have been living elsewhere for decades!) and their descendants, roughly 7 million people. That would flip the population balance, handing a likely majority to Palestinians. From there, it's a short step to a single election that puts Hamas in charge of not just Gaza and the West Bank, but Israel too.

If that occurred, the result is identical to Iran / Hamas winning the war so it cannot ever and will never happen.

havingmorekids · 10/07/2025 10:03

Blunderbussviking · 09/07/2025 22:16

Arab state leaders and politicians might say they want a two-state solution during press conferences to the outside world, but most ordinary Muslims are vehemently against Israel and want the destruction of it. The leaders probably mean what they say for the sake of peace for their people but it always will be a very fragile peace.
There are various YouTube channels when they interview ordinary Muslims on the streets, Palestinians in the West Bank, or even in Gaza before this conflict etc…and they openly say they ideally want a Palestinian state and no Israel whatsoever. When they ask these people what would happen to the Jews then?…they either say they should go back to where they came from, such as Poland, Eastern Europe etc.. or they turn away from the camera and don’t want to answer. Some say they want a two-state solution, but in my opinion they are just being polite because they are on camera. It is really shocking. Have you never watched these?

I have watched quite a few which all include a myriad of views - and pretty much all the normal, educated palestinians will say they want to live in peace with normal Israeli people, some will favour a one state which is not apartheid or a religious state, some realise that this is currently impossible and so favour a 2 state. The videos will sometimes show extreme views first so you have to keep watching to hear the many moderate views. Or they will only show extreme views if they want their video to be manipulative and cause problems.

In the interviews with Israelis you get a lot of extreme views but you also get Israelis understanding issues, wanting to live in peace with Muslim neighbours and people.

Muslims and Jews should be living in peace. Both have amazing rich historical cultures. This is a manmade, cynical war which has caused people to hate eachother. It is not innate.

havingmorekids · 10/07/2025 10:09

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 00:39

Moving on - we today in our modern political world with many wise world leaders wanting peace, we now have a situation where there is political will on the "Arab" side to agree a two state solution - and so with a two state solution their funding of Hamas, Hezbollah etc falls away.

This unfortunately isn't the case.

There are no Arab states that support a two-state solution without the right of return.

This is outlines in the Arab Peace initiative and hasn't been renounced even by the UAE or other places which have normalised with Israel.

So in effect, all Arab states still insist on the right of return as part of a two-state framework and what many Arab leaders call a “two-state solution” is, in reality, a slow-motion plan to erase Israel. It looks reasonable on the surface - two countries side by side - but comes with a loaded condition: Israel must take in millions of Palestinian refugees (many of whom who have been living elsewhere for decades!) and their descendants, roughly 7 million people. That would flip the population balance, handing a likely majority to Palestinians. From there, it's a short step to a single election that puts Hamas in charge of not just Gaza and the West Bank, but Israel too.

If that occurred, the result is identical to Iran / Hamas winning the war so it cannot ever and will never happen.

You have been taken in by extreme propaganda. The right of return does not equate to getting rid of Israel, and this is not the intention of the Arab world.

If you think about it, Israel has taken more and more land as time has gone on. If an equal two state solution is agreed, some of the land taken by Israel will be returned to Palestine. This would effectively be a right to return.

If you think about splitting the land equally, with minerals and resources fairly split, and equal land size enjoyed by both, etc, it will be a tough negotiation but the outcome would be seen as fair.

The only alternative to this is continued fighting. In the 1920s, Israel was the superior in terms of money and strength - the Arabs on the land were mostly farmers. Today you are looking at modern sophisticated Arab states who want peace but also a fair solution. I think from every pespective, to go with the UN requirement of a 2 state solution which is genuine with each state fully in control of its land is the only way to go.

havingmorekids · 10/07/2025 10:12

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 00:33

What much of the Arab world is actually calling for isn’t a genuine two-state solution - it’s the dismantling of Israel by stealth. On paper, it sounds like two states, but with one catch: Israel must absorb millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants - around 7 million people. That would tip the demographic balance, giving Palestinians a majority or close to it. At that point, it’s one election away from Hamas controlling Gaza, the West Bank, and Israel itself. That’s not coexistence. That’s a hostile takeover dressed up as diplomacy.

What you say is not true for reasons given in my post above.

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 11:07

havingmorekids · 10/07/2025 10:12

What you say is not true for reasons given in my post above.

Agree and it’s also worth noting that Palestinian refugees Right to Return to their homes and land taken as a result of the 1948 Nakba need not necessarily mean actual right to return. It also means right to compensation for loss. ie Restitution. Which others have a right to. When the Right to Return is tabled in the many meetings over many years since the 50s compensation has always been an alternative for the current 5.9million refugees and descendants

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 11:31

havingmorekids · 10/07/2025 10:09

You have been taken in by extreme propaganda. The right of return does not equate to getting rid of Israel, and this is not the intention of the Arab world.

If you think about it, Israel has taken more and more land as time has gone on. If an equal two state solution is agreed, some of the land taken by Israel will be returned to Palestine. This would effectively be a right to return.

If you think about splitting the land equally, with minerals and resources fairly split, and equal land size enjoyed by both, etc, it will be a tough negotiation but the outcome would be seen as fair.

The only alternative to this is continued fighting. In the 1920s, Israel was the superior in terms of money and strength - the Arabs on the land were mostly farmers. Today you are looking at modern sophisticated Arab states who want peace but also a fair solution. I think from every pespective, to go with the UN requirement of a 2 state solution which is genuine with each state fully in control of its land is the only way to go.

I'm an Arab

I can absolutely assure you the vast majority of Arabs do not want equity for Jewish people. Not all, but certainly most. Our leaders have to be very careful not to say anything that might even seem they are not on board with the concept of "throw them in the sea".

75% of us, according to global studies hold antisemitic views. It is completely normal in our societies and not in any way stigmatised to be openly racist to Jews, and indeed actually to other groups. Similarly homophobia is also rife, normalised as is misogyny. It's really important to understand this.

There are several Arab nations who are making moves towards general modernisation - such as the UAE - but there are several more who support and fund the murder of Jewish civilians and who do not want to modernise anything.

Of those 22 countries who advocate for a two state solution where everyone lives together in one big happy family, all of them subscribe to a human rights charter that lauds the right of self determination for all peoples, but explicitly excludes Jews. It implies they are European and don't belong in the middle east at all - so this is the level of what you are dealing with.

Most of them participated in the purge of Jews from their lands - 850,000 in 1945 has now fallen to only 4,000 at most - a staggering decline of 99%. All of them, incidentally, have sat silently whilst minorities were persecuted and ethnically cleansed around the region.

The only human rights they are really interested in is the right of Palestinians to live in Israel, which is not a human right actually. But you are highly naive if you think their motivations are noble here.

I am not talking about Arab people - I am talking about governments. But yes, sadly these views are also held by a lot of the general population. Finding an Arab who genuinely believes in Jewish self determination, and that they have a right to be in Israel is actually quite hard and I have lost a lot of friends and family over it!

If not fully on board with groups like Hamas as states like Qatar are, the remainder pander to their more extreme populations, which are Muslim nationalist in ideology and deeply antisemitic due to decades of open indoctrination to this. On a smaller scale you see this here where our government panders to extremists - the same occurs there.

They walk a line between going along with that, and ensuring they keep their own positions are safe. Hamas, Iran, and others pose a direct threat to the monarchies and various leaders - these extremists are waiting in the wings to take hold of countries like Egypt or Jordan and these people are well aware of it which is why they brutally quash the ideas of groups like Hamas whilst simultaneously supporting them.

So in terms of Israel, honestly, I think you are seriously mislead if you think the Arab states want anything other than their own security.

The right of return is documented clearly by the The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, endorsed by all 22 members of the Arab League as a strict condition for any two state solution and none has ever made any statement to change this. In most cases their populations would not accept it being removed.

In 1979, Egypt's president Sadat signed the Camp David Accords, making Egypt the first Arab country to officially recognise Israel.

He was assassinated for it.

That is the environment here and nobody is going to really stick out their neck for Israel.

The facts of reality on this are as follows:

The Palestinian Authority figures estimate 7.4 million Palestinians would be eligible for this right of return. There are roughly 10.03 million people in Israel, 7.1 million of which are Jews and 2 million of which are Arab Muslims. So you would be would be looking at a 60% Muslim and 40% Jewish population if this were to occur.

Thankfully, having experienced and been raised in secular democracy, the Muslims in Israel prefer it. Polls have been taken which show this, but polls show the Muslims who are not Israeli feel the opposite way.

So really think about it.

What you are talking about here is giving the rights of 7 million people - and we do not know how many support Hamas and this kind of ideology - although we do know polls initially said 70% or more supported October 7 so this is a problematic situation.

Many of these people are coming from a life where murdering Jewish people was not just okay, but celebrated in a very big way.

Most of these people would be coming from an Islamic theocracy - which they voted for - and polls show their residents have very highly conservative Islamic views on par with Pakistan or Afghanistan. For example almost all believe homosexuality should be illegal.

Most would be coming from a culture where they have spent their entire life hearing their government or school teachers or even their parents promising to toss Jews into the sea rather than working through ideas about living as friends beside them.

They are simply not prepared to share a secular democracy with Jews, and quickly, if not immediately, they would have a majority in the population. When they vote at their first election, what do you think they will be voting for? A liberal inclusive society? Or to criminalise homosexuality? Or to deport Jews to Europe?

I mean these are not concocted fantasies really are they?

They do not currently have, nor do they have the framework for, a viable political representation that isn't Hamas-style. It doesn't exist. Partly because when you have an Islamic theocracy it is absolute. You are taught from birth it is the only permissible way to live - I lived in a much milder version and it took me literally years to feel comfortable letting those things go. It is a huge leap for people psychologically and generally happens gradually over decades if not generations.

Add to that, over the last 20 years, if any Palestinian in Gaza or the West bank showed the slightest sign of wanting to live peacefully with Jews or advocated for that in any political sense - they have been killed. So those people don't exist. There is no Palestinian group marching for peace with Jews.

Over here in Britain, you will hear very educated people from western democracies with a fairly unbiased education system tell you they think Jews should go back to Poland. Try and imagine how those sorts of sentiments are in Palestinian territories.

Add to that, it is practically ridiculous.

7 million people would suddenly have a right to live there - with no explanation or where they would live or work or what school places they would have or what doctors or hospital beds they would have. It is a tiny place. There is no room for this or plan for this.

I think your suggestion makes great sense, and that would be fantastic. But the "effective right of return" by giving back some land won in the various wars is exactly what Israel has offered already.

This isn't "propaganda" this is documented fact:

At the 2000 Camp David Summit, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians a state comprising 100% of Gaza and 92–94% of the West Bank, with additional land swaps to compensate. The deal included East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, with control over Arab neighbourhoods, and proposed joint or limited sovereignty over the Temple Mount. It also included a symbolic return or financial compensation for Palestinian refugees, but not a full right of return to Israel. At the follow-up talks in Taba, Barak offered up to 97% of the West Bank and nearly 100% of pre-1967 territory through swaps.

Yasser Arafat rejected the offer outright without making a counterproposal.

His primary objections centred on two demands: full right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants, which Israel deemed a demographic threat exactly as I have described, and total Palestinian sovereignty over all of East Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount.

So while what you have suggested is completely reasonable, and I agree with that, it is not what the Arab League or Palestinians have suggested and they have refused already what you are suggesting.

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 11:52

The 2002 Arab peace agreement was not and still is not accepted by the Israeli Government because it requires Israel to pull out of areas it has migrated to. ie the borders would be set as pre June 1967.

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 11:58

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 11:52

The 2002 Arab peace agreement was not and still is not accepted by the Israeli Government because it requires Israel to pull out of areas it has migrated to. ie the borders would be set as pre June 1967.

True, although Israel has agreed to almost go back to that - 99% was the last offer.

But the Peace Initiative includes a demand for a "just solution" to the refugee issue "in accordance with UN Resolution 194," which has long been used by Arab leaders and the Palestinian Authority to argue for a full right of return to homes within Israel’s current borders.

When discussions have occurred around this, no Arab state has backed down from this demand, and none have modified the initiative to reflect a compromise.

This issue remains one of the key reasons why Israel has never accepted the plan and for the reasons I have given why I agree they should not.

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 12:03

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 11:58

True, although Israel has agreed to almost go back to that - 99% was the last offer.

But the Peace Initiative includes a demand for a "just solution" to the refugee issue "in accordance with UN Resolution 194," which has long been used by Arab leaders and the Palestinian Authority to argue for a full right of return to homes within Israel’s current borders.

When discussions have occurred around this, no Arab state has backed down from this demand, and none have modified the initiative to reflect a compromise.

This issue remains one of the key reasons why Israel has never accepted the plan and for the reasons I have given why I agree they should not.

There is a caveat for Restitution if physically moving back to land and property once there’s isn’t possible. This has been used before, as I’m sure we all know, and Palestinians should have the same right to compensation as others.

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 12:04

The number of Palestinian refugees as of 2023 registered by the UN stands at 5.9million.

Israeli minister calling for a state that includes many Middle Eastern countries
dairydebris · 10/07/2025 12:05

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 11:31

I'm an Arab

I can absolutely assure you the vast majority of Arabs do not want equity for Jewish people. Not all, but certainly most. Our leaders have to be very careful not to say anything that might even seem they are not on board with the concept of "throw them in the sea".

75% of us, according to global studies hold antisemitic views. It is completely normal in our societies and not in any way stigmatised to be openly racist to Jews, and indeed actually to other groups. Similarly homophobia is also rife, normalised as is misogyny. It's really important to understand this.

There are several Arab nations who are making moves towards general modernisation - such as the UAE - but there are several more who support and fund the murder of Jewish civilians and who do not want to modernise anything.

Of those 22 countries who advocate for a two state solution where everyone lives together in one big happy family, all of them subscribe to a human rights charter that lauds the right of self determination for all peoples, but explicitly excludes Jews. It implies they are European and don't belong in the middle east at all - so this is the level of what you are dealing with.

Most of them participated in the purge of Jews from their lands - 850,000 in 1945 has now fallen to only 4,000 at most - a staggering decline of 99%. All of them, incidentally, have sat silently whilst minorities were persecuted and ethnically cleansed around the region.

The only human rights they are really interested in is the right of Palestinians to live in Israel, which is not a human right actually. But you are highly naive if you think their motivations are noble here.

I am not talking about Arab people - I am talking about governments. But yes, sadly these views are also held by a lot of the general population. Finding an Arab who genuinely believes in Jewish self determination, and that they have a right to be in Israel is actually quite hard and I have lost a lot of friends and family over it!

If not fully on board with groups like Hamas as states like Qatar are, the remainder pander to their more extreme populations, which are Muslim nationalist in ideology and deeply antisemitic due to decades of open indoctrination to this. On a smaller scale you see this here where our government panders to extremists - the same occurs there.

They walk a line between going along with that, and ensuring they keep their own positions are safe. Hamas, Iran, and others pose a direct threat to the monarchies and various leaders - these extremists are waiting in the wings to take hold of countries like Egypt or Jordan and these people are well aware of it which is why they brutally quash the ideas of groups like Hamas whilst simultaneously supporting them.

So in terms of Israel, honestly, I think you are seriously mislead if you think the Arab states want anything other than their own security.

The right of return is documented clearly by the The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, endorsed by all 22 members of the Arab League as a strict condition for any two state solution and none has ever made any statement to change this. In most cases their populations would not accept it being removed.

In 1979, Egypt's president Sadat signed the Camp David Accords, making Egypt the first Arab country to officially recognise Israel.

He was assassinated for it.

That is the environment here and nobody is going to really stick out their neck for Israel.

The facts of reality on this are as follows:

The Palestinian Authority figures estimate 7.4 million Palestinians would be eligible for this right of return. There are roughly 10.03 million people in Israel, 7.1 million of which are Jews and 2 million of which are Arab Muslims. So you would be would be looking at a 60% Muslim and 40% Jewish population if this were to occur.

Thankfully, having experienced and been raised in secular democracy, the Muslims in Israel prefer it. Polls have been taken which show this, but polls show the Muslims who are not Israeli feel the opposite way.

So really think about it.

What you are talking about here is giving the rights of 7 million people - and we do not know how many support Hamas and this kind of ideology - although we do know polls initially said 70% or more supported October 7 so this is a problematic situation.

Many of these people are coming from a life where murdering Jewish people was not just okay, but celebrated in a very big way.

Most of these people would be coming from an Islamic theocracy - which they voted for - and polls show their residents have very highly conservative Islamic views on par with Pakistan or Afghanistan. For example almost all believe homosexuality should be illegal.

Most would be coming from a culture where they have spent their entire life hearing their government or school teachers or even their parents promising to toss Jews into the sea rather than working through ideas about living as friends beside them.

They are simply not prepared to share a secular democracy with Jews, and quickly, if not immediately, they would have a majority in the population. When they vote at their first election, what do you think they will be voting for? A liberal inclusive society? Or to criminalise homosexuality? Or to deport Jews to Europe?

I mean these are not concocted fantasies really are they?

They do not currently have, nor do they have the framework for, a viable political representation that isn't Hamas-style. It doesn't exist. Partly because when you have an Islamic theocracy it is absolute. You are taught from birth it is the only permissible way to live - I lived in a much milder version and it took me literally years to feel comfortable letting those things go. It is a huge leap for people psychologically and generally happens gradually over decades if not generations.

Add to that, over the last 20 years, if any Palestinian in Gaza or the West bank showed the slightest sign of wanting to live peacefully with Jews or advocated for that in any political sense - they have been killed. So those people don't exist. There is no Palestinian group marching for peace with Jews.

Over here in Britain, you will hear very educated people from western democracies with a fairly unbiased education system tell you they think Jews should go back to Poland. Try and imagine how those sorts of sentiments are in Palestinian territories.

Add to that, it is practically ridiculous.

7 million people would suddenly have a right to live there - with no explanation or where they would live or work or what school places they would have or what doctors or hospital beds they would have. It is a tiny place. There is no room for this or plan for this.

I think your suggestion makes great sense, and that would be fantastic. But the "effective right of return" by giving back some land won in the various wars is exactly what Israel has offered already.

This isn't "propaganda" this is documented fact:

At the 2000 Camp David Summit, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians a state comprising 100% of Gaza and 92–94% of the West Bank, with additional land swaps to compensate. The deal included East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, with control over Arab neighbourhoods, and proposed joint or limited sovereignty over the Temple Mount. It also included a symbolic return or financial compensation for Palestinian refugees, but not a full right of return to Israel. At the follow-up talks in Taba, Barak offered up to 97% of the West Bank and nearly 100% of pre-1967 territory through swaps.

Yasser Arafat rejected the offer outright without making a counterproposal.

His primary objections centred on two demands: full right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants, which Israel deemed a demographic threat exactly as I have described, and total Palestinian sovereignty over all of East Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount.

So while what you have suggested is completely reasonable, and I agree with that, it is not what the Arab League or Palestinians have suggested and they have refused already what you are suggesting.

Edited

Another post that should be required reading and pinned at the top of the thread.
In particular this-

"At the 2000 Camp David Summit, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians a state comprising 100% of Gaza and 92–94% of the West Bank, with additional land swaps to compensate. The deal included East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, with control over Arab neighbourhoods, and proposed joint or limited sovereignty over the Temple Mount. It also included a symbolic return or financial compensation for Palestinian refugees, but not a full right of return to Israel. At the follow-up talks in Taba, Barak offered up to 97% of the West Bank and nearly 100% of pre-1967 territory through swaps.

Yasser Arafat rejected the offer outright without making a counterproposal."

60k+ and 2k+ people would still be alive right now if different choices had been made.

The constant posts from people determined to remove all agency from Palestinian leadership is just odd / possibly rooted in paternalistic racism.

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 12:16

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 12:04

The number of Palestinian refugees as of 2023 registered by the UN stands at 5.9million.

As I said in my post, "The Palestinian Authority figures estimate 7.4 million Palestinians would be eligible for this right of return".

I am quoting the number of by the Palestinian Authority, not the UN. I don't think the UN would get a say in two state solution negotiations

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 12:19

dairydebris · 10/07/2025 12:05

Another post that should be required reading and pinned at the top of the thread.
In particular this-

"At the 2000 Camp David Summit, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians a state comprising 100% of Gaza and 92–94% of the West Bank, with additional land swaps to compensate. The deal included East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, with control over Arab neighbourhoods, and proposed joint or limited sovereignty over the Temple Mount. It also included a symbolic return or financial compensation for Palestinian refugees, but not a full right of return to Israel. At the follow-up talks in Taba, Barak offered up to 97% of the West Bank and nearly 100% of pre-1967 territory through swaps.

Yasser Arafat rejected the offer outright without making a counterproposal."

60k+ and 2k+ people would still be alive right now if different choices had been made.

The constant posts from people determined to remove all agency from Palestinian leadership is just odd / possibly rooted in paternalistic racism.

Arafat rejected it because of the issue of Temple Mount. There are anlso agreements that the Israeli Government have declined to accept ( and more so in number ) so the issue goes on and on.

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 12:20

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 12:16

As I said in my post, "The Palestinian Authority figures estimate 7.4 million Palestinians would be eligible for this right of return".

I am quoting the number of by the Palestinian Authority, not the UN. I don't think the UN would get a say in two state solution negotiations

The UN are the registration body which is why I have quoted it.

ForgesOfEmpires · 10/07/2025 12:39

Stirabout · 10/07/2025 12:20

The UN are the registration body which is why I have quoted it.

No worries, I thought you were correcting my post - we just used different sources who measure in different ways.

BelleHathor · 10/07/2025 13:16

I'm always reminded of when Zbigniew Brezinski appeared on Morning Joe and berated the presenter (His son in law) as having "a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on, that it's almost embarrassing to listen to you" afterJoe tried to claim that Bill Clinton gave Arafat and the Palestinians everything they wanted in the Camp David negotiations.

Brezinski went on talk about the provisions and catches in the proposal,
"And it wasn't rejected and the negotiations went on in Taba. And then there were elections in Israel and Sharon came in and everything got aborted"

As Joe continues he us accused of "repeating slogans. He (Arafat) didn't walk away, what he said was I'm going to take the proposals to the Arab capitals"
https://x.com/Submission2T/status/1943252467841384474

https://x.com/Submission2T/status/1943252467841384474

Blunderbussviking · 10/07/2025 14:35

Also, what nobody seems to mention (or even be aware of) is that when Israel was created, a lot of neighbouring Arab countries expelled their Jews, who all fled and settled down is Israel, or other democratic countries such as Canada or the U.S. So it is the unbelievable hypocrisy of Arabs to want Israel to take in all the Palestinians, whereas they don’t want Jews in their own countries. The effing greed and blind antisemitism of it. Makes me sick! 😣
A large amount of Palestinian supporters simply never dwelled deep into that region’s history, and generally didn’t excel in history and have no idea who and what they are supporting. They see the conflict from the comfort of their cushiony, peaceful lives, residing in some democratic country with freedom and equal rights for everyone, where everybody is kindhearted and supportive, and naively believe that all people in the world think like them. I just want to shake these people up and scream at them.

Jumpupjumphigh · 10/07/2025 16:22

Blunderbussviking · 09/07/2025 22:16

Arab state leaders and politicians might say they want a two-state solution during press conferences to the outside world, but most ordinary Muslims are vehemently against Israel and want the destruction of it. The leaders probably mean what they say for the sake of peace for their people but it always will be a very fragile peace.
There are various YouTube channels when they interview ordinary Muslims on the streets, Palestinians in the West Bank, or even in Gaza before this conflict etc…and they openly say they ideally want a Palestinian state and no Israel whatsoever. When they ask these people what would happen to the Jews then?…they either say they should go back to where they came from, such as Poland, Eastern Europe etc.. or they turn away from the camera and don’t want to answer. Some say they want a two-state solution, but in my opinion they are just being polite because they are on camera. It is really shocking. Have you never watched these?

Have you never considered that whichever particularly individuals somebody chooses to show in a youtube video is not a scientifically robust sample of majority opinion?

thethingthatshouldnotbee · 10/07/2025 16:47

Jumpupjumphigh · 10/07/2025 16:22

Have you never considered that whichever particularly individuals somebody chooses to show in a youtube video is not a scientifically robust sample of majority opinion?

Trying telling that to all the posters who love to post "compilation of random Israeli saying offensive things" videos on here.

havingmorekids · 10/07/2025 19:45

Blunderbussviking · 10/07/2025 14:35

Also, what nobody seems to mention (or even be aware of) is that when Israel was created, a lot of neighbouring Arab countries expelled their Jews, who all fled and settled down is Israel, or other democratic countries such as Canada or the U.S. So it is the unbelievable hypocrisy of Arabs to want Israel to take in all the Palestinians, whereas they don’t want Jews in their own countries. The effing greed and blind antisemitism of it. Makes me sick! 😣
A large amount of Palestinian supporters simply never dwelled deep into that region’s history, and generally didn’t excel in history and have no idea who and what they are supporting. They see the conflict from the comfort of their cushiony, peaceful lives, residing in some democratic country with freedom and equal rights for everyone, where everybody is kindhearted and supportive, and naively believe that all people in the world think like them. I just want to shake these people up and scream at them.

This is a contested issue - and is only one out of hundreds in the period so not entirely sure why you raise it - and it happened after 30 years or so of hard conflict so didn't happen in a vacuum. What percentages left of their own accord, what percentage were pushed?

According to wiki:

"The reasons for the exoduses include: pull factors such as the desire to fulfill Zionism, better economic prospects and security, and the Israeli government's "One Million Plan" to accommodate Jewish immigrants from Arab- and Muslim-majority countries; and push factors such as violent and other forms of antisemitism in the Arab world, political instability, poverty, and expulsion. The history of the exodus has been politicized, given its proposed relevance to the historical narrative of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Those who view the Jewish exodus as analogous to the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight generally emphasize the push factors and consider those who left to have been refugees, while those who oppose that view generally emphasize the pull factors and consider the Jews to have been willing immigrants."