Israel - Hamas peace process

[wetwillie]

Trump sounds like he thinks this is totally doable. Lmao.

Hegseth has convinced him it is

[sonofdaxjones]

I want to see #blueanongE explain why Egypt has built an absolutely incredible wall and a defense in depth posture on the other side of that wall - to keep the Palestinians out of Egypt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LickNeckey]

Trump suggested that Egypt would accept the Palestinians

[michigancat]

I want to see #blueanongE explain why Egypt has built an absolutely incredible wall and a defense in depth posture on the other side of that wall - to keep the Palestinians out of Egypt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would like to see you explain it!

[michigancat]

Trump suggested that Egypt would accept the Palestinians

Trump will find them some nice land lol

[wetwillie]

Wait were are the gazans now if they aren't already in Egypt?

[michigancat]

They spent 18 months getting 2,000 pound bombs made in the United States dropped on them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was really bad!

I was thinking about it and as outlandish, impossible, and illegal Trump's idea is, it's probably way better than bombing the crap out of people's homes and turning them into refugees and then bombing the refugee camps.

[Dugout DickStone]

Another bold plan he will no doubt quickly deliver on

[sonofdaxjones]

I want to see #blueanongE explain why Egypt has built an absolutely incredible wall and a defense in depth posture on the other side of that wall - to keep the Palestinians out of Egypt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would like to see you explain it!

They clearly hate the Palestinians.

Are there Muslim Brotherhood elements in the Palestinian ranks? Not rhetorical. (Remember when Barry and John tried to install the MB in Egypt? And were completely mushed. I digress).

I’ll have to go and find it. But a retired general was on a most favored #blueanon media outlet talking about how he proposed a similar plan a few years back. 

 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LickNeckey]

So Trump's idea to move the Gazans to Egypt isn't great?

[Pete]

The US occupying Gaza and taking on that cost sounds like one of the worst ideas in the history of geopolitics. Every “victory” the DOGE claims will be Pennie’s compared to the cost of the “you break it, you buy it” occupation of Gaza. What a rough ridin' disaster this could be.

Grok AI said the following:

The idea of the U.S. occupying Gaza has sparked significant debate, especially regarding funding. Based on the information available:

- **U.S. Government Statements**: Recent posts on X suggest that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed that the U.S. would take over and redevelop Gaza, but there are conflicting statements about who would bear the financial burden. One post claims Trump said the U.S. would not pay for anything related to Gaza, suggesting that other "rich countries" should handle the costs.

- **Historical Context and Aid**: Historically, the U.S. has been one of the largest donors to aid efforts in Gaza, with over $674 million announced in humanitarian aid for Palestinians since the conflict began, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). However, this aid is separate from the costs associated with occupation and reconstruction.

- **Estimates of Reconstruction Costs**: Various sources, including a UNCTAD official, estimate the cost of rebuilding Gaza could be around $20 billion, given the current damage. This figure would likely increase if occupation costs were factored in.

- **Potential Funding Sources**:
  - **International Aid**: There's mention in web articles of countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and European nations potentially contributing to reconstruction, although political implications make this complex.
  - **U.S. Taxpayers**: The U.S. has historically funded military and humanitarian aid to Israel, and if there were an occupation, U.S. taxpayers might be expected to contribute significantly, though this would be politically controversial given current sentiments on X about U.S. involvement.

- **Business and Investment**: There's also speculation on X that multinational corporations might benefit from any reconstruction, possibly influencing where funding comes from or how it's directed.

Given these points, no definitive answer can be provided on who will pay for a U.S. occupation of Gaza since the proposal itself seems to be in a speculative stage. The U.S. might leverage international support or use its own resources, but both scenarios would be fraught with political, economic, and humanitarian considerations. The situation remains fluid, with funding likely to be a contentious issue based on public and international reactions.

 

[michigancat]

The US occupying Gaza and taking on that cost sounds like one of the worst ideas in the history of geopolitics. Every “victory” the DOGE claims will be Pennie’s compared to the cost of the “you break it, you buy it” occupation of Gaza. What a rough ridin' disaster this could be.

Grok AI said the following:

The idea of the U.S. occupying Gaza has sparked significant debate, especially regarding funding. Based on the information available:

- **U.S. Government Statements**: Recent posts on X suggest that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed that the U.S. would take over and redevelop Gaza, but there are conflicting statements about who would bear the financial burden. One post claims Trump said the U.S. would not pay for anything related to Gaza, suggesting that other "rich countries" should handle the costs.

- **Historical Context and Aid**: Historically, the U.S. has been one of the largest donors to aid efforts in Gaza, with over $674 million announced in humanitarian aid for Palestinians since the conflict began, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). However, this aid is separate from the costs associated with occupation and reconstruction.

- **Estimates of Reconstruction Costs**: Various sources, including a UNCTAD official, estimate the cost of rebuilding Gaza could be around $20 billion, given the current damage. This figure would likely increase if occupation costs were factored in.

- **Potential Funding Sources**:
  - **International Aid**: There's mention in web articles of countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and European nations potentially contributing to reconstruction, although political implications make this complex.
  - **U.S. Taxpayers**: The U.S. has historically funded military and humanitarian aid to Israel, and if there were an occupation, U.S. taxpayers might be expected to contribute significantly, though this would be politically controversial given current sentiments on X about U.S. involvement.

- **Business and Investment**: There's also speculation on X that multinational corporations might benefit from any reconstruction, possibly influencing where funding comes from or how it's directed.

Given these points, no definitive answer can be provided on who will pay for a U.S. occupation of Gaza since the proposal itself seems to be in a speculative stage. The U.S. might leverage international support or use its own resources, but both scenarios would be fraught with political, economic, and humanitarian considerations. The situation remains fluid, with funding likely to be a contentious issue based on public and international reactions.

It's almost like "the ends justify the means" can go off the rails when the "means" are guided by morons with questionable motives

[Pete]

The US occupying Gaza and taking on that cost sounds like one of the worst ideas in the history of geopolitics. Every “victory” the DOGE claims will be Pennie’s compared to the cost of the “you break it, you buy it” occupation of Gaza. What a rough ridin' disaster this could be.

Grok AI said the following:

The idea of the U.S. occupying Gaza has sparked significant debate, especially regarding funding. Based on the information available:

- **U.S. Government Statements**: Recent posts on X suggest that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed that the U.S. would take over and redevelop Gaza, but there are conflicting statements about who would bear the financial burden. One post claims Trump said the U.S. would not pay for anything related to Gaza, suggesting that other "rich countries" should handle the costs.

- **Historical Context and Aid**: Historically, the U.S. has been one of the largest donors to aid efforts in Gaza, with over $674 million announced in humanitarian aid for Palestinians since the conflict began, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). However, this aid is separate from the costs associated with occupation and reconstruction.

- **Estimates of Reconstruction Costs**: Various sources, including a UNCTAD official, estimate the cost of rebuilding Gaza could be around $20 billion, given the current damage. This figure would likely increase if occupation costs were factored in.

- **Potential Funding Sources**:
  - **International Aid**: There's mention in web articles of countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and European nations potentially contributing to reconstruction, although political implications make this complex.
  - **U.S. Taxpayers**: The U.S. has historically funded military and humanitarian aid to Israel, and if there were an occupation, U.S. taxpayers might be expected to contribute significantly, though this would be politically controversial given current sentiments on X about U.S. involvement.

- **Business and Investment**: There's also speculation on X that multinational corporations might benefit from any reconstruction, possibly influencing where funding comes from or how it's directed.

Given these points, no definitive answer can be provided on who will pay for a U.S. occupation of Gaza since the proposal itself seems to be in a speculative stage. The U.S. might leverage international support or use its own resources, but both scenarios would be fraught with political, economic, and humanitarian considerations. The situation remains fluid, with funding likely to be a contentious issue based on public and international reactions.

It's almost like "the ends justify the means" can go off the rails when the "means" are guided by morons with questionable motives

Sometimes the way you phrase things make it seem like you are angry and combative.

I got a lot of spiritual and emotional benefit from attempting to take a break from 24/7/365 snark and sarcasm. It’s not good for me.  So, when others do that to me, I have a difficult time understanding whether they mean to attack me. If it’s all the same to you and you don’t care either way, I’d appreciate it if you reworded stuff to take my delicate sensitivity into account. 

Also, I agree that this Gaza stuff is horrible. Let a player in the region or Switzerland do this crap if there is merit to it. Not the USA. That’s my view.

[sonofdaxjones]

So Trump 1.0 culminates with the Abraham Accords and a completely neutered Iran.

The sock puppet presidents term ends with a wrecked Gaza, fighting in Lebanon, a US designated terrorist in charge of Syria, Israel taking over parts of Syria, Yemen launching missiles into the Red Sea at ships and Iran feeling stronger than ever.

But #blueanongE is all angst laden by hyper partisan thoughts about “bad ideas”.

LMAO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sandstone Outcropping]

The US occupying Gaza and taking on that cost sounds like one of the worst ideas in the history of geopolitics. Every “victory” the DOGE claims will be Pennie’s compared to the cost of the “you break it, you buy it” occupation of Gaza. What a rough ridin' disaster this could be.

Grok AI said the following:

The idea of the U.S. occupying Gaza has sparked significant debate, especially regarding funding. Based on the information available:

- **U.S. Government Statements**: Recent posts on X suggest that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed that the U.S. would take over and redevelop Gaza, but there are conflicting statements about who would bear the financial burden. One post claims Trump said the U.S. would not pay for anything related to Gaza, suggesting that other "rich countries" should handle the costs.

- **Historical Context and Aid**: Historically, the U.S. has been one of the largest donors to aid efforts in Gaza, with over $674 million announced in humanitarian aid for Palestinians since the conflict began, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). However, this aid is separate from the costs associated with occupation and reconstruction.

- **Estimates of Reconstruction Costs**: Various sources, including a UNCTAD official, estimate the cost of rebuilding Gaza could be around $20 billion, given the current damage. This figure would likely increase if occupation costs were factored in.

- **Potential Funding Sources**:
  - **International Aid**: There's mention in web articles of countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and European nations potentially contributing to reconstruction, although political implications make this complex.
  - **U.S. Taxpayers**: The U.S. has historically funded military and humanitarian aid to Israel, and if there were an occupation, U.S. taxpayers might be expected to contribute significantly, though this would be politically controversial given current sentiments on X about U.S. involvement.

- **Business and Investment**: There's also speculation on X that multinational corporations might benefit from any reconstruction, possibly influencing where funding comes from or how it's directed.

Given these points, no definitive answer can be provided on who will pay for a U.S. occupation of Gaza since the proposal itself seems to be in a speculative stage. The U.S. might leverage international support or use its own resources, but both scenarios would be fraught with political, economic, and humanitarian considerations. The situation remains fluid, with funding likely to be a contentious issue based on public and international reactions.

This plan seems to be sharply at odds with the adminstration's previously stated goal to "get the US out of forever wars"

[michigancat]

The US occupying Gaza and taking on that cost sounds like one of the worst ideas in the history of geopolitics. Every “victory” the DOGE claims will be Pennie’s compared to the cost of the “you break it, you buy it” occupation of Gaza. What a rough ridin' disaster this could be.

Grok AI said the following:

The idea of the U.S. occupying Gaza has sparked significant debate, especially regarding funding. Based on the information available:

- **U.S. Government Statements**: Recent posts on X suggest that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed that the U.S. would take over and redevelop Gaza, but there are conflicting statements about who would bear the financial burden. One post claims Trump said the U.S. would not pay for anything related to Gaza, suggesting that other "rich countries" should handle the costs.

- **Historical Context and Aid**: Historically, the U.S. has been one of the largest donors to aid efforts in Gaza, with over $674 million announced in humanitarian aid for Palestinians since the conflict began, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). However, this aid is separate from the costs associated with occupation and reconstruction.

- **Estimates of Reconstruction Costs**: Various sources, including a UNCTAD official, estimate the cost of rebuilding Gaza could be around $20 billion, given the current damage. This figure would likely increase if occupation costs were factored in.

- **Potential Funding Sources**:
  - **International Aid**: There's mention in web articles of countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and European nations potentially contributing to reconstruction, although political implications make this complex.
  - **U.S. Taxpayers**: The U.S. has historically funded military and humanitarian aid to Israel, and if there were an occupation, U.S. taxpayers might be expected to contribute significantly, though this would be politically controversial given current sentiments on X about U.S. involvement.

- **Business and Investment**: There's also speculation on X that multinational corporations might benefit from any reconstruction, possibly influencing where funding comes from or how it's directed.

Given these points, no definitive answer can be provided on who will pay for a U.S. occupation of Gaza since the proposal itself seems to be in a speculative stage. The U.S. might leverage international support or use its own resources, but both scenarios would be fraught with political, economic, and humanitarian considerations. The situation remains fluid, with funding likely to be a contentious issue based on public and international reactions.

It's almost like "the ends justify the means" can go off the rails when the "means" are guided by morons with questionable motives

Sometimes the way you phrase things make it seem like you are angry and combative.

I got a lot of spiritual and emotional benefit from attempting to take a break from 24/7/365 snark and sarcasm. It’s not good for me.  So, when others do that to me, I have a difficult time understanding whether they mean to attack me. If it’s all the same to you and you don’t care either way, I’d appreciate it if you reworded stuff to take my delicate sensitivity into account. 

Also, I agree that this Gaza stuff is horrible. Let a player in the region or Switzerland do this crap if there is merit to it. Not the USA. That’s my view.

Yeah that is 100% fair. Didn't need to be snarky.

But in all seriousness, I think you should consider the morals and beliefs of your leaders as part of your evaluation of them and not just if they will help your most important causes. Because in general, lying/immoral people will turn on a dime if it benefits them. People with good morals will too! But I'd rather start with the good morals.

Again, I'd encourage you to think deeply about whether someone who doesn't care about trans rights or Palestinian rights and winks at Nazis really cares about keeping people in this country safe or financially secure.

[sonofdaxjones]

I just want to make sure I have this straight. The US stabilizing Gaza is akin to forever wars? 

We spent a half a billion on a dock that the sea wrecked in 7.7 minutes but now we’re gonna start polishing penny’s about a true long term solution?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stupid Fitz]

"I could stand in the middle of the gaza strip............"

[sonofdaxjones]

The past 24 hours #blueanongE talked more about Gaza - then they did the entire time that the United States was arming Israel so Israel could bomb the crap out of Gaza.

You guys are pinnacle hyper partisans.

It’s just fascinating


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sandstone Outcropping]

Incredible bullshitting here:

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1886927694924845340

[michigancat]

The past 24 hours #blueanongE talked more about Gaza - then they did the entire time that the United States was arming Israel so Israel could bomb the crap out of Gaza.

You guys are pinnacle hyper partisans.

It’s just fascinating


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure if this is the point you're making but it's 100% right that people suddenly take notice to what is going on in Palestine because Trump said something dumb and outlandish, when the actual bombing the US enabled did far more harm.

[sonofdaxjones]

The past 24 hours #blueanongE talked more about Gaza - then they did the entire time that the United States was arming Israel so Israel could bomb the crap out of Gaza.

You guys are pinnacle hyper partisans.

It’s just fascinating


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure if this is the point you're making but it's 100% right that people suddenly take notice to what is going on in Palestine because Trump said something dumb and outlandish, when the actual bombing the US enabled did far more harm.

Read the entire article, get past the headline and the expected criticism from a usual mockingbird mouthpiece . . . Don’t be a typical #blueanongE dimwit, for once

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/05/nx-s1-5287576/trump-gaza-takeover


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sonofdaxjones]

A reminder to all viewers of this blog - within days of Don Trump’s envoy arriving on the scene the fighting in Gaza ended and hostages were being exchanged.

Something the previous war mongering ghoul administration could not get accomplished in over a year and half. A year and a half of fighting that nearly exploded into an all out regional and potentially global war - replete with a US designated terrorist being installed in Syria, who summarily suspended all elections until further notice.

Now #blueanon/#blueanongE decides to lose their mind (again) cus . . . Trump

#onbrand


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BIG APPLE CAT]

dax telling anyone to read past the headline is pinnacle gE.c'ing and i'm here for it, king

[sonofdaxjones]

dax telling anyone to read past the headline is pinnacle gE.c'ing and i'm here for it, king

Viewers are reminded that BAC is part of the #blueanon/#blueanongE movement that declares that everything they don't like is mis/disinformation

They can't really tell you why it is, it just is . . . and/or one of their mockingbird go to media entities will go find someone(s) in the blob and have those someone(s) dictate a story to them, that the go to media dictation reader will run with. It will center around how we really "just don't understand".   A classic deflection employed by those that have been caught/exposed.

There's a fantastic thread on X right now, specific to the NYT's and how it all works. I"ll be posting it sometime today.