It's not someplace they might be bombed.

I assume you knew that when you posted this, so I am not quite sure what you’re saying.

Anyway, a plan to depopulate a city is an act of genocide.

I expect I'm no more desirous than you of seeing more people killed and maimed.

Personally, I'd rather my family and I were alive and intact, elsewhere if that was necessary for remaining so. Others may place greater value on other things, I suppose, but I'm a hard case to sell on any of those I've seen on offer.


"I don't make the rules. I just draw up the lists."

https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

I do not disagree that what is happening is far from ideal, but the scope of genocide vastly exceeds that of a single city. I also would think the Egyptian position is preferable to the alternative as it helps to save lives. This suggests Egypt is preparing to back down on their current hard line of *no* refugees. This has resulting in the movement of tens of thousands of refugees northward into an area which is already well overcrowded.

Egypt's primary concern, which has been stated many times in the news, is they do *NOT* want an exodus of Palestinians from Rafah into Egypt. However, they are pragmatists and what you are seeing is likely a contingency to make sure that this does not destabilize the Sinai and Egypt itself. Egypt is "broke" and is unable to support a significant influx of refugees.

To help ease the burden of caring for the refugees. The Egyptians don't want them because they'll cause trouble.

In both countries, refugees have been a huge destabilizer in their countries.

However, Egypt has a long, violent, history with the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt is where the hard core Islamic ideology was developed and where it first took root. From there, it spread to other areas including Gaza where it is known today as Hamas. One of the Egyptian offshoots, Tanzim al-Jihad, were responsible for the assassination of Sadat. The Muslim Brotherhood almost created a Muslim Theocracy in 2013, but fell after the military stepped in following a significant uprising of the populace. At this point Egypt remains a pluralistic society, but the threat still remains. Given this, and given the destabilization of refugees, it only makes sense for Egypt to want to avoid anything which might break the stalemate in Egypt.


L-

The long version of "causing trouble."

Because they're not the Israelis.

And the truth is that the Palestinians have burned every bridge there is to burn, so it's kinda hard to work up a lot of sympathy, imo.

I was partially listening to the broadcast of the Munich security conference today. The Egyptian representative said twice that "there would be consequences" if they tried to relocate the Palestinians into Egyptian territory. Twice. They could help to resolve the issue by allowing the Gazans to move into the Sinai. Or, absorbing Gaza into Egypt and making them all Egyptian citizens. But they don't want the Gazans because Hamas will try to bring in a Fundamentalist Islamic government that will drive all of the tourists away.

Why the neighboring countries have not given citizenship to Palestinians that left Israel during the war of independence. They remain in refugee camps for generations.