was obviously never going to happen

death to 🇮🇱 death to 🇺🇸

This is how Trump works though. He doesn't say what he actually wants

It's bargaining. You go for an extreme offer first, and negotiate down to what you actually wanted. This has been (somehow) effective with other nations because his outrageous comments catch headlines, make other foreign nations freak out, and jump starts negotiations. Every foreign issue in the last month has started this way

Panama threats led to Panama making concessions to U.S navy and leaving Chinese BRI, Gaza threats led to Arab states scheduling a summit to come up with its own Gaza plan (finally), and tarrifs/51st state stuff on Canada and Mexico forced them both to the table. Even with Ukraine U.S is gonna get the resource deal it wants and Europe will be forced to beef up its defenses (which it laughed at Trump for suggesting in 2017)

Not saying its a great move, but there is a more predictable strategy to Trump than people think

As a Palestinian I told yall

My post from the 5th:

None of this is going to happen—it’s just political posturing.

Israeli Zionist intelligence, along with U.S., Egyptian, and Jordanian intelligence agencies, all know that trying to relocate two million people—many of whom include militant groups—into Egypt would be a disaster. Even within Israeli Zionist military and political circles, the idea of mass displacement into Egypt has been floated, but it’s not realistic. Egypt is already unstable, and President Sisi’s government depends heavily on U.S. financial and military aid to stay in power. The U.S. pours billions into Egypt’s security forces, especially its secret police, to keep the country from unraveling. Dumping two million people into that situation, including tens of thousands of militants with existing contacts in Egypt, would create massive unrest.

Israeli Zionists have historically looked at the Sinai as a possible relocation zone for Palestinians, but Egypt’s economy is already hanging by a thread. The country is dealing with a massive debt crisis, inflation, and high unemployment—taking in two million people would push it over the edge. Security experts have repeatedly warned about militant groups operating in Sinai, especially Wilayat Sinai (the local ISIS affiliate), which regularly attacks Egyptian security forces. Throwing more people into that mix, especially militants who already have networks in Egypt, would almost guarantee chaos. If Egypt collapses into internal conflict, it wouldn’t stop at its borders—the country has a population of over 100 million, and a refugee crisis on that scale would spill into Europe, Canada, and the U.S. Iran and others would see this as an opportunity to further enforce their positioning and axis of resistance. The risk of a coup against Sisi’s government in this scenario is something U.S. and Israeli Zionist intelligence have long been aware of. This is the backstop of why Palestinians haven’t already been displaced into Egypt in mass.

Jordan was never even a serious consideration Jordan is a long term U.S. and Israeli Zionist ally, with strong military and intelligence ties. The Jordanian security forces, backed by the U.S., Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, are ruthless in cracking down on political dissent, especially from pro-Palestinian groups. The idea that the U.S. or Israel would push over a million refugees and 50,000 militants into Jordan—a country that has already normalized ties with Israel and serves as a key buffer state—is completely detached from reality. Jordan is already struggling with the economic impact of Syrian refugees, and intelligence reports have consistently pointed out that any further destabilization would be a direct threat to Western interests. This is why Jordan was never part of any serious displacement plan.

This isn’t just about Trump—Biden and the Democrats have also quietly considered using Egypt as a way to contain Palestinian displacement. U.S. policy in the region has long treated Egypt as a tool for keeping instability in check, but never in a way that would actually push the country to collapse. The difference between Trump’s approach and Biden’s is mostly in how they talk about it. The reality remains the same: U.S. and Israeli Zionist intelligence know this plan isn’t viable, and it isn’t happening.
Trump’s statements should be seen for what they are—political theater. His advisors, including those in the intelligence community, are almost certainly telling him this plan is a dead end. Even Netanyahu’s body language when addressing the issue made it clear that this isn’t a serious policy. Destabilizing Egypt and Jordan goes against everything American and Israeli Zionist security strategy is built around. This whole discussion is just a distraction, not something that will ever actually happen.

If you really want to know what the Israeli expansion priorities are you need to take a look at the West Bank, which has fallen out of the news cycle completely

You’re extending him a lot more strategic acumen than warranted with this

It was pure rhetoric to placate his base — nothing more. He didn’t take it serious nor did anyone in his administration/state department/even Israel themselves because a plan like that is against everyones interest it’s not even about the Palestinians

Folks on here were gleefully hoping he would do it when the news broke too

Do some self reflection and do better next time bud @twinkletoez

99.99% of people involved with this discourse don’t even realize a hypothetical US takeover is something Israeli Zionist vehemently oppose including Bibi himself.

9/10 people that attempt to talk about this with me get exposed within 3-4 lines of dialogue because they have zero contextual foundational knowledge related to Gaza/US strategy/or Israel’s approach. Reading an occasional news article doesn’t qualify anyone.

I genuinely don’t think most are qualified to even have a view on this let alone try to debate anything.

its not really a complex strategy at all tho. Its predictable behavior that states keep falling for.

He says something wild, people/countries predictably freak out, they rush to action, and then the result never ends up going as far as he initially threatened. If you do that repeatedly then that does indeed become your administrations tool for engagement. I'd argue its worked more times than not so far.

Clearly the comments were striking enough to prompt Arab states into an entire summit over it....but that's what he wanted tho, the Arab states to figure it out or else he would (which no one wants). Israel cosigned Trump's plan too to make it worse

Read my post above.

The Arab summit was happening independent of this — you’re still falling for the US peddled false narrative.

The summit was commenced to talk about how they’re basically gonna use US funding and resources to have the Egyptians and Jordanian militaries to train the PA security forces(Fatah and others) to eventually oust Hamas. Six months ago they already had settled on the specific exiled PA leaders who will be the main power brokers upon their return to Gaza. This is evidenced by the massive amounts of media material and think tank publishers recommending someone like Mohammad Dahlan. (I also have family members who are high-level in the Palestinian Authority who heard about this plan already over a year ago) These ex PA leaders are corrupt pieces of s*** and collaborated with the Israelis during the conflict in 2008 between Hamas and Fatah.

The Gulf states were involved because they’re going to be the ones footing the bill for real estate development and reconstruction — they already agreed to back in December 2023.

Again what Trump proposed is directly against both US and Israeli interest for a multitude of reasons and realities on the ground. It was never a real negotiation or bargaining tool, the US wouldn’t propose something that is against its interests. The problem with the discussion around this is 99% of people don’t understand why it’s actually against US interest what Trump “proposed “

Notice how both people on either side either against or for this who fall for US’s false narrative end up neglecting to address what’s actually happening on the ground — The US is preparing to use the Egyptians and Jordanians to fund proxies against Hamas against the will of the Palestinian people.

This is what successful political rhetoric and diversion of public attention from reality looks like

You're describing a plan tho. An actual cemented plan did not exist prior. Arab League always makes "agreements," but the mapped plan did not exist. Trump would be in full agreement with what you're describing if that's their deliverable and will just flaunt it as a "win" to his base.

There was an "unofficial fraternity meeting" yesterday to grind out the details of the rebuild plan, but March 4th is the emergency Arab League meeting that Egypt called which will put it in motion. Confused how this was already on schedule when Egypt called it directly after Trump's comments. This is all related to Trump

This was already planned well over a year ago. I think you missed where I mentioned that my family has direct connections to the Palestinian Authority, including leaders who collaborate with Israel.

This didn’t happen because Trump made an announcement and the Arab states reacted to it.

This is an example of manufacturing consent. The narrative successfully convinces Americans and others that Trump forced the hands of Egypt and Jordan in their participation in Gaza’s reconstruction. In reality:

1. The U.S., Egypt, and Jordan have been in agreement on this plan for well over a year.

2 This false narrative appeases Trump’s American supporters while shielding Egypt and Jordan from accountability for their role in supporting the U.S. and Israel in arming, training, and collaborating with corrupt PA leaders and security forces against Hamas—despite the majority of Palestinians opposing it.

You’re also still missing the key point that what Trump proposed is directly against U.S. interests and was never a real policy to begin with.

The U.S. was fully aware of the plan within a month of October 7. A Trump administration wouldn’t change this. The strategy was always to reinstate ex-Fatah leaders to target a weakened Hamas post-October 7, and Egypt and Jordan were always essential to making this plan viable.

The fact you’re attributing this all to Trump is just a testament that you’re falling for the US narrative and that’s exactly what Trump wants. He wants this to be attributed to him this as a successful implementation policy of forcing ”the Arab leaders” hand. The reality is the Egyptians and Jordanians are both friendly regimes to the United States and Israel, and both governments are in place precisely because of the United States and indirectly Israel. It is within both their interests to go about the reconstruction of Gqza and ousting of Hamas in this specific manner. They were in full agreement with Washington prior to Trump being elected on this.

You need to dig deeper than surface level and understand all of this is called statecraft

Biden: We will work with our regional partners to rebuild Gaza and help the Palestinians

Trump: I will buy Gaza and Egypt and Jordan will help us whether they like it or not

Reality: United States, regardless of administration has its best interest in having its US backed Arab nation allies of Egypt and Jordan conduct training and arms support of corrupt and exiled ex Palestinian authority leaders and their security forces; so that they may eventually return to Gaza and fight against Hamas, which they label as a terrorist organization.

You see how it’s all rhetoric and how what Trump said doesn’t make a difference? It’s only purpose is to mask the planning and execution of another proxy conflict that the US is building up currently to the benefit of Israel and with complete support of Jordanian and Egyptian leaderships. These plans were already in motion by late 2023 in didn’t change under a Trump administration

You're skirting around the fact Egypt literally called an emergency League meeting for March 4th in response to Trump. That was my point. He got the affect he wanted. If they had this well developed thing then why are they holding meetings to draft a plan? You're putting a lot of words in mouth and reaching conclusions i never even said.

This is international relations. What you "agree" or "plan" matters less than what you are actively doing. Recent comments prompted action or altered implementation whether we like it or not.

Like i get what you're trying to say with the narratives and consent, i'm just not the audience for you fam. you're trying to lecture me on statecraft which i have a masters degree in

All i said was Trump uses threats as a tool and he uses bargaining tactics. You're not explaining how that is false

Respectfully, flexing a formal education in international relations doesn’t mean anything to me as a person who has debated front of 100s of people against opposing individuals that have been involved/influencial with both US and Israeli ‘diplomatic’ affairs. If someone from the CSIS and former state department was here like say J. Alterman (who despite being a Zionist I consider the best political US a***yst on this)— I promise you he’d be telling you the same exact things as I am right now albeit with a pro-US POV and less charged language .. point is I’ve been in positions to publicly debate people with real power/influence on this subject matter as a Palestinian with certain family members..

Anyway

You’re still stuck on the idea that because Egypt called an Arab League meeting after Trump’s comments, he must have triggered it. That’s a post hoc fallacy—just because one event follows another doesn’t mean the first caused the second. The reality is that the U.S., Egypt, and Jordan were already aligned on Gaza’s post-war governance well before Trump said anything.

The U.S. was working on this plan within a month after October 7—not as a reaction to Trump but because it serves long-term U.S. and Israeli interests.
Egypt and Jordan had already agreed to train and arm PA security forces to take control over Gaza post-Hamas. This wasn’t a last-minute pivot; it was part of a coordinated effort that’s been taking shape for over a year—long before Trump’s comments.

The Gulf states were already set to fund Gaza’s reconstruction since December 2023, and the specific exiled PA leaders who would return were already chosen six months ago.

Mohammed Dahlan’s name has been floated in policy circles for over a year, and multiple media sources and think tanks have been positioning him as a key figure in a post-Hamas Gaza.

So when you ask, “If this was so well developed, why are they holding meetings to draft a plan?” you’re misreading how diplomacy works. Diplomatic agreements don’t happen in one step. There are preliminary agreements, backchannel coordination, and then public-facing summits to formalize them. Just because Egypt scheduled a meeting doesn’t mean the actual policy was suddenly created in response to Trump. The March 4 Arab League meeting is about solidifying the execution of a plan that was already in motion, not reacting to a new idea.
And you contradict yourself. You say international relations are about what states actively do, not just what they agree on. Exactly. So what are Egypt and Jordan actually doing? They’re following through on a strategy that was planned well in advance, which proves my point. They’re not shifting direction because of Trump—they’re publicly convening to formalize something that was decided long ago.

Now again to talk about Trump’s rhetoric. You’re still arguing that Trump forced Egypt and Jordan’s hand, when in reality, they were always aligned with Washington on this. His comments may have accelerated public discussion, but they didn’t create the policy.

You’re falling for the same manufactured consent narrative that he wants people to believe—where his words supposedly drive real geopolitical outcomes. They don’t.

Biden’s administration was backing this same U.S.-led effort to train PA forces and rebuild Gaza. Trump’s rhetoric just repackages it in a way that sells to his base.
The U.S. and Israel have been planning to push ex-Fatah leaders into Gaza since shortly after October 7—this doesn’t change under Trump, Biden, or anyone else because it’s part of a long-term strategic goal.

The real play here is that Egypt and Jordan needed diplomatic cover to justify what they were always going to do anyway. Trump’s comments may have conveniently given them a political shield, but they weren’t the reason this is happening.
So again, what actually changed? Nothing. The strategy to remove Hamas, put the PA back in power, and use Gulf money to rebuild Gaza has been in motion for over a year. The March 4 meeting doesn’t prove Trump made this happen; it proves that long-term U.S. policy remains the same regardless of administration. You’re mistaking diplomatic optics for actual statecraft. That’s the part you’re missing.

Rent free, bro

Not really a clever response when you voluntarily choose to post in the politics section - you’re just as much a loser as everyone else on here

It’s not like you made a passing comment in public, you voluntarily chose to look silly.. and yeah people remember that because it’s only like 20 people who post in here max

“Wow politik sxn debaters remember their opposing poster’s opinions!!1 Rent free, check mate 😏”

youre a ghoul

he got ur dumb lib ass lol

nah you’re just an idiot who posts out their depth 90% of the time

Dude you really need to get to the point.

You’re still just throwing a lot of large replies out hoping it floods out a very simple serious of events what led to the emergency summit and supercharge of taking action. And also just jumbling more of what I said.

My IR point was about acting on policy. You still admit that they are following through on some plan they agreed to….AFTER dramatic comments unfolded. And then you say the comments could have given Egypt and Jordan diplomatic cover to move on a plan….neither of these points detracts from the comments being impactful to the series of events and how they unfolded

Would the March 4th meeting be happening without the comments? If the answer is no then that’s my point. If your 2nd thought is to explain how to would have happened anyway if XYZ then that’s still my point cus something shifted after the remarks

I don’t know a single serious IR expert who engages with arguments this lazily. And trust me, I’m taking it easy on you—despite the fact that you’ve contradicted yourself multiple times, misrepresented my argument (strawmanning), and repeatedly moved the goalposts. On top of that, you threw in a weak appeal to authority, as if flashing an MSc suddenly makes an argument stronger. Let’s be real—that just means you took the GRE and wrote some essays. If anything, that attempted flex makes your poor reasoning even more tepid and glaring to anyone reading through this.

It’ also obvious you’re avoiding addressing any of parts of substantive evidence which 1) you likely had no familiarity with 2) completely refute your notion that’s only based post-hoc fallacy not backed by any geopolitical realities

Now that I’ve addressed you with the same pettiness .. (would have appreciated you approaching this with more intellectual rigor and genuineness btw given your ‘masters’

Back to the actual argument

You’re still misreading the distinction between a preexisting strategic plan and the public-facing optics of diplomacy.

You’re conflating “impact” with “causation.” Yes, Trump’s comments might have shifted the optics or timing of the March 4th meeting, but they did not create or fundamentally alter the underlying policy. The U.S., Egypt, and Jordan were already aligned on this for over a year. Your argument assumes that without Trump’s remarks, nothing would have moved forward—when in reality, the process was already in motion.

Would the March 4th meeting be happening without Trump’s comments? Possibly not on that exact date, but that doesn’t mean the broader policy wouldn’t be unfolding the same way. The meeting is a formalization of a long-standing initiative, not proof that Trump forced the region into action. You’re mistaking a diplomatic event for a policy shift.

Even if Trump’s rhetoric provided a justification for action, that’s not the same as him causing the strategy. You’re arguing that because an event happened after his remarks, he must have dictated the outcome—when really, his comments may have been used as convenient political cover for something that was already happening. That’s exactly what manufactured consent looks like.

Bottom line: Trump’s words shaped the narrative, not the policy. You’re mistaking performative rhetoric for strategic decision-making. The real factors driving this plan were in motion long before he said anything.

I never said Trump was that strategic and even told you in my second reply here what he does is fairly basic.

Whether his comments specifically created cover to pursue XYZ or causing strategy was never my point. It was that he uses his comments as a tool to facilitate movement, which you admit to even in cases where other states needed the diplomatic cover. Its not really strategic decision-making and i never said that. Nothing i said in my initial reply said he causes the creation of new policy. Canada, Mexico, Ukraine examples are not new policy ideas.

Your final paragraphs are exactly what i was looking for. No further comment on your wider point i understand where you're coming from and respect your insight and grip on the situation

Glad you finally got to where I was coming from. But let’s be clear—you initially framed this as Trump causing the Arab League meeting and driving the decision-making process, which is why I pushed back. Now you’re shifting it to just saying he “facilitates movement,” which is a much softer stance than where you started. If that was your point all along, we could’ve skipped the unnecessary back-and-forth. Either way, I appreciate you actually engaging instead of deflecting, and I respect that you took the time to see where I was coming from.

Somebody really needs to stomp your neck into a curb. You’re a really vile, misanthropic freak. Wish nothing but the worst for you and your ilk

You all are awful at generalizing a person. I hate humanity? Get the hell out of here.