Mike Huckabee suggested any future Palestinian state should be carved out of ‘a Muslim country’

Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, has said that the US is no longer pursuing the goal of an independent Palestinian state, marking what analysts describe as the most explicit abandonment yet of a cornerstone of US Middle East diplomacy.

Asked during an interview with Bloomberg News if a Palestinian state remains a goal of US policy, he replied: “I don’t think so.”

The former Arkansas governor chosen by Donald Trump as his envoy to Israel went further by suggesting that any future Palestinian entity could be carved out of “a Muslim country” rather than requiring Israel to cede territory.

top 72 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 37 points 1 year ago

Fucking disgusting.

  • source
  • [–] 66 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I mean as disgusting as this is he is really just saying the quiet part loud. There was never any plan to give the Palestinians a state. Oslo was a con to legitimise land confiscation and to neutralise the Palestinian resistance of the time (the PLO).

    The US did literally nothing while the Zionists flooded the West Bank with settlements over the last 30 years but kept up the "2 state solution" as a rhetorical shield.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    People just like to pretend the quite part "aka Biden - Obama policies" was never been there.

    If at any given point, the US said "sanction for two state solution" it will take a few months before they come to a solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    So much to unpack here.

    First of all, when asked, he said "I don't think so." He should have a definitive answer to that question, not some weasely equivocation.

    The fact that we aren't supporting a PLACE for them to live as an independent nation, signals that America has embraced the genocide option.

    This is entirely about developing a Jewish Dubai, so they don't have to spend their money with Muslims. HitlerPig's Spiritual Advisor has already come out to say that Christians won't be able to enter heaven unless they make a pilgrimage to Israel, the way Muslims make their pilgrimage to Mecca. Of course, for the MAGA Nazis, it's not about spiritual fulfillment, it's about making Christians spend their money in their hotels and restaurants.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Israel has a very successful gamble in showing they are the white man's key to the Middle East. For as long as no one wills to find another ally in the region, Israel oversells itself as a one. And as any other bad example of putting all eggs in one basket, Israel felt the dependency other states have in it, and now tests it, tests it, tests it with no negative response.

    Palestine and Gaza are just them dipping their toes to know, if they can get scots-free from shooting weak HAMAS and civs and get into a real war Netanyahu's cabinet already planning. It's 2025 and in the coming years we'd see even more violence from that beloved partner if no one pulls the stop lever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    I can buy that. I fully believe that from their beginning, Israel has known that someday they will have to clear out the Palestinians, and Oct 7 provided the excuse for them to finally say "Today's the day."

    I also fully believe that they've had that same mindset toward the rest of the Middle East. They know that eventually they will have to settle their differences with their Muslim neighbors, and it won't be with good-faith negotiations. And the Muslim countries have the exact same mindset. It is only a matter of time before they go at each other full force, and this Gaza Genocide does look like a dress rehearsal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago

    "No longer".

    It is great that the Trump administration is dropping the fake pretenses.

  • source
  • [–] 57 points 1 year ago

    "No longer" they didn't pursue it from the start, just pretended to.

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (30 children)

    Why treat people with dignity when you can genocide them and grab all that real estate?

  • source
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (27 children)

    I vote this as the default slogan for all Western Civ history classes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (26 children)

    Yes and Eastern civilizations would do it too if they had the power. This is a human problem, not just a western problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (25 children)

    Maybe, but the theft of indigenous lands is a continuum from the western European empires of yore to what's on the news today, so what I'm talking about is a concrete reality that is unfolding (yet again) right in front of us, while you're talking about a probability that things might be the same if, if, if...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (23 children)

    So your argument is that it isn't a human thing and easterners are superior to westerners? Would that be a race thing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    No, making a parallel doesn't mean that's the only reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Can you expand your "Maybe" answer to my assertion that this is a human problem not just a western problem?

    If it isn't a human problem, what is it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Relax Jesus Christ, I made a parallel, you took it as absolute truth and challenged that it should apply to all humanity. That wasn't my point, it's yours, so I'm not trying to make it for you. Thanks

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    "How dare you try to inquire further when I say something vaguely racists. Good Day Sir!"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'm so sorry, i didn't realize you were developmentally mid-west American. Have a good day little fella

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ohhh a double good day! I must have hit a nerve. Buddy, if you are racist, you should consider not being racist, it makes people dumb.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (14 children)

    Not superior, but different. And yes, tribes are different, of course they are. Completely sober, a group of Germans/Finns and a group of Nigerians/Venezuelans/Algerians are completely different and we both know how. Western Europeans without ideology and morality turn into murderers. History proves it. They have fewer issues in dehumanising others, they sleep well at night in a house they robbed from people they killed (from the Native Americans to the Palestinians). No bs, can you say the same for other people in earnest?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

    So you're saying it's a cultural issue. Would you agree then that if easterners were to get culture that would allow them to justify colonization and murder, they would do the same things as westerners?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

    It's almost entirely cultural, of course, but I do think (I can't prove it, it's just travel and observation) that there are innate psychological differences to people of different tribes. The Congolese, the Austrian and the Nepali are different in a deeper way than nurture can account for, I think.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Okay well if it's cultural then culture can be changed. So if you're an easterner, you need to be careful that you don't end up like westerners. The ideological plague that hit westerners can get easterners as well.

    At the end there, It kind of seemed like you were heading back towards the race argument.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    What if it accounted for a little bit, the tiniest bit, of our psychological makeup? Would it be so terrible or dangerous of an idea? Not for clear minds and kind hearts, surely. I mean, everyone can swim and everyone can run but you know who's gotta have at least the smallest of edges everything else being equal, right? That's easy to accept, maybe this is just the next frontier, that we're not just tabula rasa, but we have some innate tendencies towards/eases and difficulties regarding A or B the more we have of this or another tribe in us. It's not something I will "die on a hill" for, simply because my evidence is all anecdotal, but 🤷.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Between person to person. Yeah that's fine. But comparing population to population is dangerous. Once you know, what do you do with that information?

    Historically, this line of thinking has never worked out very well. And as time goes on, who cares, we'll all breed together anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I don't take it personally that the further North I go, the more spaced out people are at bus stations and the further South I go, the louder people will talk, I guess.😅 But you're right, we aren't ready for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    No, I don't take it personally and I would agree with you if you're asserting these differences are cultural. Unless you're saying this is genetic?

    Edit: cultural or a result of societal pressure. I don't mean to imply that particular cultures are bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)

    I was replying with the "what would you do with the information?" with that "I don't take personally etc etc"! 😅 As in, I won't take offence to 'weird' and seemingly antisocial behaviour, because I understand there's some differences in personality between tribes (meaning whatever they're giving me I need to reprocess accordingly). Perhaps, they have the tiniest bit of a genetic component (and are even harder/impossible to fully change, and hence why some of these differences and characteristics have been there seemingly forever). I mean, would that be that bad? Or does it really seem that far fetched?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ah, sorry, I misunderstood.

    I mean if it's a fun hobby of yours, go for it. But you know the history of this stuff as well as I do. It comes with a lot of baggage and people are not going to respond well to it. The group of people that will respond well to it, let's just say, I don't think you want to keep their company. Unless of course you are racist, in which case, you'd be fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    God I hate this myth. The Eastern world had its fair share of absolute dehumanization, be it the extreme brutality in education systems (Pol Pot claimed to have been beaten senseless by teachers multiple times for minor infractions and he had seen this as normal), the Mongol Empire razing cities on a monthly basis or the countless bloody civil wars in Chinese history. Name me a culture and I will name you the ways in which they dehumanized others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Western Europeans (Americans are displaced Europeans just like apartheid South Africans and genocidal Israelis), for being such a small group of people in an even smaller land, have managed to cruelly oppress the world since at least the days of Jesus til this day. The consistency (the Romans, the Crusades, Francisco Pizarro and Hernan Cortez, King Leopold's Congo, the Dutch East India Company, the native Australian genocide by the Brits, every American conflict including proxy wars, etc.) is, at the very least, curious. Has chattle slavery even been a thing outside of the Western world?! The most destructive conflicts in recent history were just Western Europeans Vs Western Europeans with displaced Europeans joining in later and some extras! Believe what you wanna believe ("we're just better at it!", yeah because you're consistently heartless at times, lol), but if I were you, I'd take the history of my people a little more seriously and consider the suffering of others due to my ancestors' crimes, idk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Re: Chattel Slavery: Egypt after the 7th century, Subsaharan Africa and after the Trans-Atlantic trade was shut down, the trans-saharan and red sea trade continued to ship Chattel slaves to the Middle East. Mauretania abolished it's Chattel Slavery system legally in 1981, but the practice continues to this day.

    Everywhere, where humans established empires, they dehumanized and colonized. Claiming that somehow western Europeans specifically are inherently more prone to doing that.

    Even the claim "since Jesus' birth" false. In the meantime, especially in the early years, there were larger empires than the "western European" ones.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 35 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's not the handful, unfortunately.

    The handful has no real power.

    The problem is that 49% on each side flip-flop based on whoever's in power, because their values and opinions are a matter of convenience, and perfectly easy to change with their preferred nightly news broadcast.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    You're correct in the general sense. But it's not even 49%. It's basically 2-10% of the American electorate. They flip-flop based on their own myopic, selfish impulses, and whatever bullshit they've been fed by the media.

    In 2016 they swung it for Trump because unlike his opponent he's a white guy, they didn't like Clinton, and because Trump's promises of cheaper gas for their big trucks would save them a bit of money each month.

    In 2020 they swung for Biden because he's also a white guy, they had discovered Trump just caused chaos without really delivering any personal benefits to them, and Biden looked like the more stable option for their pocket book.

    In 2024 they swung for Trump again because unlike his opponent he's a white guy, and they apparently have fucking goldfish memories.

    Meanwhile, millions of other people in America and elsewhere in the world are being put through hell to a lesser or greater degree because of these people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    It's not 49%. The split in 2024 was 1/3 R, 1/3 D, 1/3 didn't vote, and ~1% 3rd party.

    As the other commenter said, it's a much fewer percentage of the population that sways those 1/3s either in the favor of R or D.

    And you'd think Democrats would have chased after the 1/3 that sat at home instead of Rs, but we all know what actually happened

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Believe it or not, authoritarian regimes are less stable than democracies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    This is seems like a false statement. What you mean by stable exactly ?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Able to hand power over without bloody civil wars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 47 points 1 year ago

    Americans: “We are still trash.”

    World: “We know.”

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    it was over the moment trump moved the embassy to jeruselum. oh and they never even planned to give palestine thier rightful state.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago

    The US was never pursuing such a thing, it was always to string Palestine along while israel goes in butchering the people and land to take for themselves completely.

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago

    Nothing new here, the US has always supported the genocidal state of Israel. The US is complicit in the massacre, genocide and war crimes committed by Israel.

  • source
  • [+] 33 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Decades of broken promises and bad-faith negotiations prove that the U.S. has never had a "peace process" for the Mideast. Our process has always been, "Israel always gets whatever it wants and fark everything else. "

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Idk, doesn't really fit with the timeline. Why commit a slow af 77 year genocide when you've got the backing of UN Veto power and their world's most powerful military? I think the Biden admin really did pursue peaceful coexistence, they just sucked ass at it and Netanyahu wanted Trump to win so he dragged the conflict out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Fact, Biden went on stand to say he is a Zionist. Fact, He did nothing to secure co-existince Fact, Based on UN veto records nothing changes through out the history of the United States when it comes to Palestinians rights.

    Let's not get Biden foreign policy any credit that never been there because you like the guy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I want there to be a distinction in the minds of voters as much as there is in reality between not doing enough and what the Trump admin is doing.

    We were always going to keep our strongest ally in this proxy war, but we did not promote killing or removing every palistinian. The latter IS what the Trump admin is pushing for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You seem not to be following the news. For someone who was reading news daily of how many killed, every time Blinken visit Israel next day at least 50 to 100 killed.

    Reality is the US was promoting killing and removing every Palestinian. They literally asked Egypt and Jordan to take them. It was not "not doing enough" vs " outright support" it is "laying about support" vs "not laying about support"

    The same happening with countries that says "we stop arm shipment" yet they are sending directly previous deals and re-routing new deals...

    Again if you like Biden domestic policy and prefer to be lied to when it comes to foreign policy it is okay. But lets not pretend that one is better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    The news talked about the administration withholding large bombs bought and paid for while still pushing through small armaments without congressional approval. The news talked about Biden swearing at Netanyahu over the phone. The news quoted Netanyahu's favorable opinion of Trump.

    The news later talked about Trump delivering those large bombs. The news talked about Tanks on the ground in West Bank for the first time in decades.

    Trump's Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth openly admits that death or mass exodus is the plan now when it wasn't before.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago

    From the river to the sea, fuck Israel.

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    no shit. lol.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›