20,000 muslims demonstrate against Islamic extremism in Cologne, Germany

you do realize there is more that goes into 'supporting' refugees than just land right?

economically how can you seriously expect jordan to support palestinians? if 200 million latin americans came into america tomorrow we'd have a bloody hell of a time supporting them. now imagine an economy much weaker with similar levels of political development.

 

holy crap. i didn't realize there were 200 million palestinians. yes i understand there is more than land involved. letting them become productive in the economy would certainly help more than leaving them in a camp that has to be supported, right? how is it that their fellow muslims don't want to do that? oh right, for their own good - to preserve their claim to Israel , they've kept them in refugee camps for half a century. That's rich. That's why we put indians on reservations too, to preserve their claim to north america.

 

You think that Syria, Egypt, and Jordan could not suport the Palestinians, when they have a combined population of about 100 million people, but Israel could absorb the Palestinians when their population totals just over 6 million?

Countries in the region that are much better equipped than Israel to manage a large population influx would be Saudi Arabia and Egypt. A better solution would be to have each of the nations that attacked Israel take a million Palestinian refugees and integrate them into their societies, they could all receive some amount of aid from Europe and the US.

None of this is going to happen though because the Arab nations don't give two ****s about the Palestinian people, they just like to deflect internal dissent off onto Israel. If the people were no longer distracted by the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, they would have a chance to realize how crappy their own governments are and start demandong change.

 

its lovely how yall can play statisticians and demographers....but pray tell what the population of jordan is and how many palestinians are residing there?

its similar to if america had to absorb 200 million isn't it?

 

Jordan has a population of 5 million plus, while Israel has a population of 6 million plus. Actually, if Jordan had to absorb all of the Palestinians, it would be like America absorbing about 450 million. If my plan was followed, it would be like America absorbing 4-8 million, which is much more doable. Right now there are estimated to be over 7 million illegal immigrants in the US, which we have obviously amsorbed without our economy self destructing. That doesn't account for any legal immigration, so yes, I think that a group of Arab nations could definitely survive the influx of about 8 million Palestinians, and that would be if every Palestinian in the world (even those not born in the region at all) wanted to move. Heck, Egypt alone could probably handle all of them with some difficulty. The problems are not and have never been the Arab nations inability to absorb the Palestinian population.

 

The whole idea of other Arab nations having to absorb the Palestinians at all is ridiculous. They should get their own sovereign nation. Canadians shouldn't have to be absorbed by the U.S. nor should England have to absorb all the Spanish or anything silly like that.

 

That's not actually the point. It merely serves as a way to measure these claims of 'arab brotherhood' blah blah blah. I'm not actually saying it would be bad for the palestinians to have their own sovereignty.

 

Egypt? Egypt has insane unemployment and the official rates are much higher. Half of the employed work force is proped up by artificial government jobs that keep the masses in check. Egypt couldn't handle an influx of people. Mubarak is aleady perfroming an amazing juggling feet. Their economy is extremely fragile. Along with tourism, most of the Egyptian economy is base on expatriate work, predominantly in Saudi.

 

What does land mass have to do with anything? It's about water, food and economic ability to sustain an enormous increase in population.

What's up with these analogies of the US taking in Mexico? First we have the strongest economy in the world. Secondly we produce more food than any other country. Thirdly most all of the country does not have shortages of water.

How hard is it to comprehend that the economies of the Arab countries can not support more people? If a Palestinian state was formed, Palestinians would be able to take care of themselves much much better than a neighboring country could.

The anti-semitic card? Classy. There were plenty of Arab Jews living all across the Middle East prior to 1948. Jews, Christians and Muslims got along in relative peace. This is a territorial problem with religious overtones. While many Muslims are able to seperate hate for the Israeli government from Jews in general, there wouldn't be this relgious distain if Israel was not created. To clarify, I'm not saying that there was not justification of the creation of Israel. It's simply that Israel is far from devoid of responsibility and playing the anti-semitic card is lame.

 

The point is that if they take in the Palestinians, ignoring political ramifications, the Palestinians would be in little to no better shape than they were before. Additionally, it would put strain on the absorbing Arab coutnries. All but Egypt would not have the infastructure to support them. None of the bordering countries would have the financial power to support them. Jordan would not have the water to support them.

I say that we should take the Palestinians in since we have shown such a concern for the wellfare of the people in the area. That would be much more practical.

 

This is just silly. None of the Muslim countries claiming 'brotherhood' with the palestinians could economically support their integration? Uh, what about Iraq? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Kuwait? Oil rich but none to spare? Pleeease.

Sure. I got no problem with that. In fact, we are fairly underpopulated in Alaska. I say we give them two mules and 40 acres and let them get to work.

 

Handled above. Just not true that they couldn't do it. And they've been 'supporting' the Palestinian population in refugee camps for 50 years. You argument that they 'can't support' the population is empirically FALSE. Whether the WANT to integrate them is the question, and the answer is obviously a resounding NO.

You don't make any compelling arguments about this. You can continue to restate it if you want but doing so doesn't make it true.

First off let me say that if you think this conflict is devoid of anti-semitism then you are just lost. Turn Al Jazeera back on and forget we're even having this argument. Second, what do you mean, 'classy?' There is a huge body of work on the topic and almost NONE of it claims the conflict has nothing to do with anti-semitism. Third, if it was a territorial problem then it would concern the border states primarily, but it DOES NOT. Look at the involvement of non-border states, like Saudi, Iran, Iraq et al. Its a RELIGIOUS conflict first and foremost.

 

P.S. I completely agree with you that the treatment the Lebanese have given Palestinians is dispicable. But for some reason you have equated that instance as being the norm of the actions of the neighboring countries. Lebanon is an isolated case. It's anybody's guess on why they mistreat the Palestinians to the extent they do. Many believe that since the Christians have most of the power in the country, they would not want an increase of Muslim influence in the area. Then there is the economic question. Then there's the political belief that absorbing the refugees would be conceding to the state of Israel. And maybe the most salient point is that a large percentage of the Lebanese population does not consider themselves as Arabs. No dount the Lebanese actions towards the refugees should receive more international attention.

In contract, over 50% of Jordan's population is Palestinian. Those Palestinians have full rights and citizenship. Jordan has been integral in easing the suffering of Palestinians and they have been key players in the peace process. Without the proactive approach of Jordan and Egypt, there would be much more unrest in the area. You can't equate Lebanese treatment of Palestinian refugees to any other country.

You mock the unity of the Arab world. Of course they are not unified. The Middle East is a huge area geographically. Arabs share a common racial and cultural background in addition to a common language. They are predominately Sunni Muslim. They watch the same movies, read the same literature, eat similar foods and share countless customs. There is a bond and it is very real but they're not a single country for a reason. They are different. They are autonomous.

Look at Iraq. The Sunnis lost power so they are the insugents fighting against the US. The police force fighting them is predominately ****e and Kurdish. If a single country can not unify then I don't see how one could expect unity across 2 continents and 20 countries. Arab Nationalism was tried in the post Ottoman world and it died in the '60s.

 

It is no more anti-semetic than it is anti-muslim from the other end. There was no broad Arab hatred of Jews prior to 1948. The territorial conflict has made it a religious conflict. There is an Arab unity and why wouldn't Saudi be pissed with the creation of Israel. How would Europeans feel if Luxemburg was taken over by the Chinese?

 

They probably wouldn't care as long as the Chinese didn't nationalize the banks ...

 

If that were true then why let the PLO set up camp and openly engage in shelling Israel?

If 50% of the Jordanian population is Palestinian then this goes away. The economic capability of other muslim countries also denies this. The fact that they've been supporting the palestinians for 50 years also denies this.

Getting stomped in several wars conceeded this.

Uh, Egypt is not the same as Iran. Yet Iran is anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian. Why? Not territory but anti-semitism (religion).

 

so plo would be successful get a palestinian state and they could move em all back to a palestinian state. isn't that common sense?

iran/saudi/iraq/syria have anything but great economies. iran and egypt are suffereing the largest brain drains in the world becuase they cannot provide employment. saudi's economy has been decreasing for 30 years. the small gulf countries which have enormous money per capita also have only hundreds of thousands of people. they can luxemberg handle millions of people?

oh right we only care about UN resolutions when they're about saddam.

so anyone who disagrees with the treatment of israel and refuses to recognize it is anti-semitic? what about people who refuse to grant palestinians a state...are they anti-muslim?

 

no. the plo was based originally in jordan, but they tried to overthrow the government and got kicked out. lebanon didn't have to let them in.

the saudi, iraqi and iranian governments, among others, could have provided millions to integrate palestinians. they didn't. claiming they COULDN'T is just silly.

i don't know what this means.

its not about territory. its about religion. and its irrelevant whether or not israelis are anti-islamic. i'm sure there are plenty of them that are but that's not germane to determining the reason for arab support.

 

I think that the poster is referring to the fact that there are more UN resolutions than there were against Iraq, but we as Americans don't care.

 

Saudi Arabia 's GDP grew 5.3% in 2003. For comparison, the United States had a GDP real growth rate of 3.1%. An economy growing faster than the US is not decreasing at all. Maybe they just pulled out of this 30 year depression, or maybe you are just making stuff up as you go along.

You are kidding yourself if you don't believe that a coalition of Arab nations could absorb the ~3 million Palestinians currently living in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, especially since the same aid that is being sent to the Palestinians now could be continued in their new homelands.