Evacuation? or
Let the slaughter resume! ???
. . . that there's no place to take them to. But the whole planet is out there, oceans and land areas. Take them to any beach or shore and set up camp for them. Or even have them stay at sea on boats for a long period, and keep the boats supplied. There is much more room for them if they go onto boats at the coast and the boats go from there -- to anywhere on Planet Earth. There are more places to take them to than the space for them in Gaza.
That they are being killed is not Israel's fault, but the fault of all other countries, or at least all the richer countries, who could afford to evacuate thousands of them -- tens of thousands, or a million of them. Nothing prevents this, as an alternative to making them stay there as shields to protect Hamas.
Yes, it might be inconvenient. It might cost a few billion $$$. But to say it's impossible is a lie.
They could be evacuated to the new settlements Israel recently built in the West Bank. That would put them in much better living conditions and away from the fighting.
Maybe. As long as this doesn't displace someone already there or already moving in there.
Somebody already living in one of the settlements is there illegally.
I.e., all Jews living in Palestine-Israel are there illegally. No, this is just another way of saying "Let the slaughter resume!"
It's better to address the immediate practical challenge, or crisis, of saving Palestinians from getting slaughtered. I.e., by evacuating them, which is possible. But that doesn't mean kicking out any Jews who are in the way and putting those refugees there in place of them. No, there are places where Palestinian refugees could be evacuated. It's not true that the only place they could go would be into the homes of Israelis there who you judge are illegals.
Somebody moving there is about to move into illegal housing built on stolen land.
translation: Let the slaughter resume!
No, there are places to where refugees could be evacuated. Possibly some to a location in Israel, to Ashkelon or somewhere. But that's not "illegal" housing or "stolen" land just because there are Jews living there. Maybe there's room for some refugees there, but that doesn't mean Jews living there must first get the Hell out because they're illegal or the land there was stolen. To say that is just to say that it's time for the slaughter of the Palestinians to resume, or continue, because there's no other alternative.
Instead of demanding dogmatically that Israel must surrender to Hamas because they're illegal and stole everything, it's more productive to consider locations to where Palestinians could be evacuated, from their current location where they're threatened. If you don't care anything about saving some of them, then just say outright that it's time for the slaughter of them to resume.
Why should they be allowed to continue to inflame the situation while children remain in peril?
How is it being inflamed by just evacuating someone to safety so they don't get killed? You prefer the alternative of innocent people getting slaughtered?
Any location where they don't displace someone else. . . . Several countries have to provide aid, which is practical, even if costly. It's better than 50,000 more getting killed.
Maybe you're right that Israel should be required to accept a certain number, provided there are other evacuation locations also. What if the number is 1 million or 2 million?
Has the offer been made to Israel? -- I.e. Israel must accept a certain number, 10 or 20 or 30 thousand. And others will go to other locations -- 100,000 or whatever. Maybe Israel would agree to accept a certain number in such an agreement. . . .
I see Ashkelon's population is about 150,000. So maybe it's possible to put 10,000 refugees there? There are many nearby regions less densely populated. There are many coastal desert regions a few hundred miles away, suitable for temporary camps until Israel kills off Hamas.
Hamas is the cause of the problem, not Israel.
But it's true that Israel should make some sacrifice, accepting a percentage of the refugees if other countries will take care of the rest.
Any evacuations of children from families that were forced into Gaza should be back to where their family was living before they were forcibly removed.
But meanwhile, as the cases are being judged, to determine where everyone lived 10 or 20 or 30 years ago, and thousands of hearings are held, the war continues on and Palestinians will get slaughtered. Whereas it's possible to evacuate thousands of them right away, to other locations not presently occupied. There are plenty of unoccupied locations to which they could be evacuated, now, when there's an emergency, as Israel is going to continue its retaliation against Hamas, which it is entitled to do. And which is going to happen, in the real world, not just hypothetically. Whereas conjecture about where some family allegedly got forcibly removed from takes months or years of litigation to resolve. Those who make such judgments can't convene court in a day or 2 and resolve all those claims, so the refugees in danger can be evacuated to their new location which rightfully belongs to them.
The danger is now, as the retaliatory war against Hamas is now in progress and cannot wait years for all those ownership disputes to be resolved. To demand 100% justice for all claims of who owns what land is just another way of saying -- "Let the slaughter resume!"
A lot of them were from Ashkelon and the surrounding area, so that would be a good place to start.
Any place where they would not displace someone already there. There are plenty of locations. But the time to evacuate them is immediately, while there is time, before there is more killing. Anything else is just to say "Let the slaughter resume!"
Evacuations of children from families that were living in Gaza before the founding of Israel should be to where their closest relatives live, whether it be in Israel, the West Bank, Egypt, or wherever.
Again, this means "Let the slaughter resume!" because there's not time to resolve all that. Evacuate them now, without delay. To wherever there is unoccupied space. Resolve the past history disputes later. To say no evacuation is allowed until all the past history disputes are resolved is just another way of saying there is to be no evacuation at all = "Let the slaughter resume!"
The purpose of evacuating the children and mothers with young children is to protect them, not to compound their problems by making them refugees from refugee camps now living in countries where they have no relatives and no connections.
The purpose is to save their lives now, whatever that takes. Which means EVACUATION NOW, no matter what. Without giving any excuses for delaying this. I.e., get them away from the combat area, to any place where they can go that has some space for them.
