Just a week or so ago Trump suggests the US will take over Gaza

[putnam6]

Just a week or so ago Trump suggested the US would take over Gaza, and the left and the world freaked out a little bit

in other news ...

[FlyersFan]

When Trump suggested it I was pissed off.
I don't want one American penny spent on that hole.
The so called Palestinians would just blow it up and try to kill people.
Total waste of money.

But then I saw that within a few days of making what looked like a serious suggestion that we take over Gaza and kick out the "Palestinians" ... suddenly Egypt comes up with a plan for EGYPT to take over reconstruction and for the "Palestinians" to stay where they are in Gaza with Egypt taking control of security.

So by Trump suggesting the ridiculous notion of kicking out the Palestinians and us taking over .. he really just kicked the Muslim countries in the butt and made them come forward to take control and pay for it and get the job done.  Won't cost us a penny, and it will be Muslims trying to control Muslims instead of Jews or Christians doing it.

Previous to his threat to take over Gaza, the Muslim countries were refusing to get off their asses and do the job.  Look at them now!

It was brilliant.  I didn't see it coming.  Well played.

[putnam6]

When Trump suggested it I was pissed off.
I don't want one American penny spent on that hole.
The so called Palestinians would just blow it up and try to kill people.
Total waste of money.

But then I saw that within a few days of making what looked like a serious suggestion that we take over Gaza and kick out the "Palestinians" ... suddenly Egypt comes up with a plan for EGYPT to take over reconstruction and for the "Palestinians" to stay where they are in Gaza with Egypt taking control of security.

So by Trump suggesting the ridiculous notion of kicking out the Palestinians and us taking over .. he really just kicked the Muslim countries in the butt and made them come forward to take control and pay for it and get the job done.  Won't cost us a penny, and it will be Muslims trying to control Muslims instead of Jews or Christians doing it.

Previous to his threat to take over Gaza, the Muslim countries were refusing to get off their asses and do the job.  Look at them now!

It was brilliant.  I didn't see it coming.  Well played.

I certainly was saying WTH when I first heard it myself but reading the comments on X.com, a few mentioned this was a classic Trump negotiations tactic. It made sense, now hopefully the arab world will deal with Hamas and take over security and government and give those caught up in this a chance at a different life., let's see what happens.

[putnam6]

[quintessentone]

Just a week or so ago Trump suggested the US would take over Gaza, and the left and the world freaked out a little bit

in other news ...

[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...51-736.jpg][Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...36-573.jpg]

Even if they are able to sideline Hamas with a deal because the Palestinian people want it, they still have the Iranian, Hezbollah and the Houthis to deal with because it looks to me like it's gone too far at this point in time.

[putnam6]

Even if they are able to sideline Hamas with a deal because the Palestinian people want it, they still have the Iranian, Hezbollah and the Houthis to deal with because it looks to me like it's gone too far at this point in time.

Yep 

Feels to me Iran will be leashed in by Russia at least temporarily, based on the Ukrainian peace talks. Russia can not afford to lose Iran as its sphere of influence shrinks in the region, but all of that may be by design as they pivot preparing troops weapons, and munitions from one theater to another. 

Here's the weird part for me, Ive always been a war/conflict news junkie we got so much news coverage from Vietnam, and the Gulf Wars were must-watch TV on CNN. It is totally different now, the US targets Yemen for days straight and we get bupkis. By design

[quintessentone]

Yep 

Feels to me Iran will be leashed in by Russia at least temporarily, based on the Ukrainian peace talks. Russia can not afford to lose Iran as its sphere of influence shrinks in the region, but all of that may be by design as they pivot preparing troops weapons, and munitions from one theater to another. 

Here's the weird part for me, Ive always been a war/conflict news junkie we got so much news coverage from Vietnam, and the Gulf Wars were must-watch TV on CNN. It is totally different now, the US targets Yemen for days straight and we get bupkis. By design

You should start looking for independent news from journalists in the thick of it.

https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-trac.../war-yemen

It looks like a sad situation for the people of Yemen, perhaps another Gaza in the making? The Saudis are involved as is Iran, and little progress has been made thus far.

[putnam6]

You should start looking for independent news from journalists in the thick of it.

https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-trac.../war-yemen

It looks like a sad situation for the people of Yemen, perhaps another Gaza in the making? The Saudis are involved as is Iran, and little progress has been made thus far.

The Council on Foreign Relations may be independent but it leans just a teeny tiny itsy bit left... just saying

I'm also aware that the Saudis were/are involved in Yemen still there is no justification for the attacks in international waters nor lobbing missiles at Israel again just saying
 

---

LEAST BIASEDThese sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes).  The reporting is factual and usually sourced.  These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased Sources.

• Overall, we rate the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Least Biased based on balanced story selection; however, editorial positions slightly lean left but still fall within least biased. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information, a clean fact check record, and being a resource for IFCN fact-checkers.
  

---

Detailed ReportBias Rating: LEAST BIASED (0.9)
Factual Reporting: HIGH (1.0)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

[quintessentone]

The Council on Foreign Relations may be independent but it leans just a teeny tiny itsy bit left... just saying

I'm also aware that the Saudis were/are involved in Yemen still there is no justification for the attacks in international waters nor lobbing missiles at Israel again just saying
 [Image: https://i0.wp.com/mediabiasfactcheck.com...2C67&ssl=1][Image: https://i0.wp.com/mediabiasfactcheck.com...C120&ssl=1]

---

LEAST BIASEDThese sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes).  The reporting is factual and usually sourced.  These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased Sources.

• Overall, we rate the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Least Biased based on balanced story selection; however, editorial positions slightly lean left but still fall within least biased. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information, a clean fact check record, and being a resource for IFCN fact-checkers.
  

---

Detailed ReportBias Rating: LEAST BIASED (0.9)
Factual Reporting: HIGH (1.0)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

So are you admitting that a slightly left leaning source has high credibility?

[putnam6]

So are you admitting that a slightly left leaning source has high credibility?

LOL don't be so sensitive, I was on Media Bias about another post, wanted to see how they rated out.

I was ONLY checking because somebody got pissy for me using X.com sources suggesting they were right-biased

like Maxmars suggested every site has its biases and slant regardless 

but let's not pretend CFR.org doesn't have Democrat ties and objectives

Leadership

David Rubenstein is the chairman of the CFR, and Michael Froman is the organization’s president. [sup]9[/sup] [sup]10[/sup] [sup]11[/sup]
Rubenstein is co-founder of the Carlyle Group, a regent at the Smithsonian Institution, co-chair of the board of the Brookings Institution, and president of the Economic Club of Washington. He is a trustee of the World Economic Forum and was a deputy assistant to the president during the Carter administration. [sup]12[/sup]
Previously, Froman was the vice chairman and president for strategic growth at Mastercard and the chairman of the Mastercard Center for Inclusive Growth. He was also the U.S. trade representative under President Barack Obama from June 2013 to January 2017. From 2009 to 2013 he was an assistant to the president and deputy national security advisor for international economic affairs focused on international trade and climate change. In the 1990s, Froman was a deputy assistant secretary at the Department of Treasury focused on Eurasia and the Middle East. [sup]13[/sup]
CFR’s board of directors includes former Health and Human Services Secretary under President Barack Obama  Sylvia Burwell, executive chairman of Morgan Stanely James Gorman, former U.S. Representative Will Hurd (R-TX), former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, business executive and philanthropist Laurene Powell Jobs, and CNN host Fareed Zakaria. [sup]14[/sup]
In addition, as of February 2025, Gina Raimondo, the former Secretary of Commerce for the Biden Administration, works for the CFR as a senior fellow as well as a co-chair for the CFR’s task force on “economic security.” [sup]15[/sup]

 
As of January 2025, CFR’s corporate members include Airbus, Amazon, Bank of America, Blackrock, Chevron, Citi, ExxonMobil, Goldman Sachs, Google, JP Morgan Chase, MasterCard, Meta, Morgan Stanley, Nasdaq and Visa. [sup]18[/sup]
In 2022, CFR reported $83,166,400 in expenses. This included expenses of $23,132,500 on the David Rockefeller Studies think tank, $13,151,600 on Foreign Affairs magazine, $4,112400 on CFR’s website, and $14,217,100 on other program activities. [sup]19[/sup]

 
FundingThe Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is funded by annual member dues, annual giving by members, corporate memberships, sales of and subscriptions to Foreign Affairs magazine, grants, and rental income [sup]22[/sup]
In 2025, Think Thank Funding Tracker reported that CRF received $2,095,000 from Pentagon contractors. Among American think tanks, CFR received the sixth-most money from Pentagon contractors. Other top recipients included the Atlantic Council ($10,270,001), Center for a New American Security ($6,665,0000), Center for Strategic and International Studies ($4,115,000), Brookings Institute ($3,475,000), and Hudson Institute ($2,240,000). [sup]23[/sup]
In 2023, CFR reported an annual revenue of $81,000,000. [sup]22[/sup] That same year, CFR reported receiving 31% of its funding from endowment drawings, 16% from unrestricted gifts, 14% from Foreign Affairs magazine, 11% from individual member dues, and less than 10% each from other sources including corporate grants, investment management drawings, and rental income. [sup]24[/sup]
In 2020, CFR programs received support from various foundations including the left-of-center Bloomberg Philanthropies, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Ford Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Kern Family Foundation, Koret Foundation, Henry Luce Foundation, Merow Foudnation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Paul E. Singer Foundation, Stanton Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, Compton Foundation, Marc Haas Foundation, Hurford Foundation, New York Community Trust, Smith Richardson Foundation, and others. [sup]25[/sup]
CFR has also received grants totaling $3,000,000 from Stanford University between 2017 and 2019; [sup]26[/sup] [sup]27[/sup] [sup]28[/sup] $1,450,000 from the Bessmer Giving Fund in 2015; [sup]29[/sup] $250,000 from the left-of-center New Venture Fund, a charitable pass-through entity managed by Arabella Advisors, in 2019; [sup]30[/sup] $250,000 from the San Francisco Foundation in 2018; [sup]31[/sup] $201,000 from the American Endowment Foundation in 2017; [sup]32[/sup] $131,000 from the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund in 2017; [sup]33[/sup] $70,000 from Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund in 2018; [sup]34[/sup] $52,000 from the left-of-center Silicon Valley Community Foundation in 2013; [sup]35[/sup] and $50,000 from Columbia University in 2018. [sup]36[/sup]