Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: c.hinton who wrote (246718)	10/26/2007 8:40:12 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Arabs have managed to take in other refugees in other times. Where is all that arab hospitality talk. They knew what they were doing when the allowed the squalor in the camps to breed terrorism so they could scapegoat israel and deflect criticism from their corrupt regimes.

To: c.hinton who wrote (246718)	10/26/2007 9:06:56 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

jordan,syria and egypt could hardley be expected to welcome and intergrate large potentially destabilizing refugees from another country. Oh for heaven's sake--what are you talking about?! The number of Iraqi refugees today absolutely swamps the number of Arab refugees back then. Where are the camps for them? The number of Cambodian refugees back in the late 70s absolutely swamps the number of Arab refugees in '48. The number of Muslim refugees from India in '48 absolutely swamped the number of Arab refugees in '48. I could go on and on. Resettling a few hundred thousand refugees is, relatively speaking, nothing. Millions have been frequently resettled over the years. Without semi-permanent camps.

To: c.hinton who wrote (246718)	10/26/2007 1:01:18 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

as you say ,israel was already busy with its own influx of refugees...why ? because israel desperately needed more jews to form a state. Israels motive is clear. It's true that Israel had use for more population, but so did the Arab states, which were lightly populated, not like now after their vast population explosion of the last 60 years. Are you suggesting that Israel should have turned away the survivors of the Holocaust and left them in DP camps? Israel also had donations to finance the intergration of arriving jews. So did the Arabs. They had even more as it turned out, enough UN donations to have somebody else feed and house the refugees permanently. Money and housing WAS NOT the problem. Remember, the number of Jews kicked out of the Arab states were as much or more as the Arab refugees from Palestine. There was empty housing available...had they cared to use it. You're not even trying to make a serious argument now, you're just making stuff up.