18
   

Trump's embassy move to Jerusalem 'self-destructive'

 
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Dec, 2017 09:59 pm
@Glennn,
Indeed. That was a rhetorical question, right? If you didn't actually know, you would have looked it up instead of waiting for an answer.
Glennn
 
  3  
Reply Thu 21 Dec, 2017 10:01 pm
@roger,
I'm wondering if you're familiar with international policy regarding occupied territory.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 01:17 am
@roger,
roger wrote:
Don't most countries get to determine where their capital is located? For better or worse, that does seem the natural prerogative of each country.

That's certainly my understanding.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 01:18 am
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
Sure, there's the "might makes right" approach to the conflict, but it's not conducive to the peace that the Zionists desire.

Since that peace is being denied to them no matter what they do, there isn't much that Israel can do except not give up any more land until people are finally willing to make peace with them.


InfraBlue wrote:
There's the reality that "one cannot have their cake and eat it too" that the Zionists obdurately ignore.

They don't ignore that. They'd love to exchange land for peace. The trouble is, that is pretty hard to do when the other side refuses to ever make peace.
InfraBlue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 01:44 am
@roger,
No, that's a simplistic take on the matter which would have one country, like the US deciding on what its capital might be, in a territory over which a dispute has yet to be resolved. Scratchass, Alaska isn't a disputed territory.
InfraBlue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 01:51 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
Sure, there's the "might makes right" approach to the conflict, but it's not conducive to the peace that the Zionists desire.

Since that peace is being denied to them no matter what they do, there isn't much that Israel can do except not give up any more land until people are finally willing to make peace with them.

InfraBlue wrote:
There's the reality that "one cannot have their cake and eat it too" that the Zionists obdurately ignore.

They don't ignore that. They'd love to exchange land for peace. The trouble is, that is pretty hard to do when the other side refuses to ever make peace.

No. Peace is being denied the Zionists because they demand it on their own terms in violation of the rights of the Palestinian peoples. Land is only one factor in the conflict.

izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 02:08 am
@roger,
roger wrote:


Don't most countries get to determine where their capital is located? For better or worse, that does seem the natural prerogative of each country.


Unless they're Palestinian, they don't even get to determine whether or not their children can go to school without being killed by the IDF.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 04:21 am
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
No. Peace is being denied the Zionists because they demand it on their own terms in violation of the rights of the Palestinian peoples. Land is only one factor in the conflict.

In other words, Israel is demanding that peace means accepting their existence and not murdering them.

The denial of peace to Israel means that Israel is free to keep all the land and use whatever force is necessary to crush Palestinian resistance.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 04:23 am
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
No, that's a simplistic take on the matter which would have one country, like the US deciding on what its capital might be, in a territory over which a dispute has yet to be resolved. Scratchass, Alaska isn't a disputed territory.

Jerusalem is resolved. The Palestinians deny peace to Israel, therefore Israel gets to keep all the land and shunt the Palestinians off to a little micro state.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 08:48 am
Jewish and evangelical Americans are divided over plan to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem
Quote:
[...]
Only 16 percent of Jewish Americans support moving the embassy to Jerusalem immediately, according to AJC’s 2017 Survey of American Jewish Opinion. Slightly more than a third — 36 percent — favor moving it “at a later date in conjunction with progress in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.” But a plurality — 44 percent — disagree with moving the embassy all together.

Nearly 170 Jewish studies scholars from American colleges and universities signed a statement expressing “dismay” at Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital:

“Jerusalem is of immense religious and thus emotional significance to Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike. It is the focus of national aspirations for both Israelis and Palestinians. We hope one day to see a world in which all inhabitants of the land enjoy equal access to the city’s cultural and material resources. Today, unfortunately, that is not the case.

[...]

A recent Brookings Institution poll said the majority — 53 percent — of American evangelicals supported Trump’s decision to move the embassy.

The support behind the decision may be because some evangelicals believe that God made a covenant with the Jewish people promising them Israel, including Jerusalem (and the Palestinian territories), Brandeis University Israel studies fellow Walker Robins wrote for The Post.

“But it’s not just about theology. Several less obvious historical geopolitical factors also play a role in their calculations. Many American Christian Zionists believe Israel to be an essential ally in a Judeo-Christian civilization struggle — or even holy war — against radical Islam.

For decades, evangelical supporters of Israel have argued that the United States and Israel are on the same side of fundamental global divides.”

White evangelicals are the religious group that supports Trump at the highest rate, and he won their support during the 2016 campaign in part by promoting pro-Israel policies.
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 09:01 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
“Jerusalem is of immense religious and thus emotional significance to Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike. It is the focus of national aspirations for both Israelis and Palestinians. We hope one day to see a world in which all inhabitants of the land enjoy equal access to the city’s cultural and material resources. Today, unfortunately, that is not the case.


Oralloy would/will just say they are self hating Jews and the evangelical Americans are anti-Semites.

I'm encouraged by the sentiments expressed by American Jews and wish they would speak out more forcefully on Israel/Palestinian issues.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 03:03 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
Oralloy would/will just say they are self hating Jews and the evangelical Americans are anti-Semites.

Well, I would if they had falsely accused Jews of some sort of horrible crime.

That quote merely seemed to be a bit whiny. I did not notice any outrageous untrue allegations.

I do find it a bit preposterous that Muslims expect us to accept their deliberate theft of another religion's most holy site, done with the deliberate goal of offending the practitioners of that religion, as somehow being legitimate.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2017 03:06 pm
@revelette1,
That's not easy with Trump in the Whitehouse; anti Semitic incidents have increased under Trump's tenure. This keeps the diaspora subdued just in case they need Israel as a bolt hole. If I was an American Jew I might think twice about criticising Israel, especially with the likes of David Duke spouting off against Israel.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:40 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:

I asked oralloy why the Zionists wait over a thousand years before deciding to "reclaim" their property--property on which Palestinians now live?

He answered that there was no deliberate decision to wait. They took the first opportunity they got.

So I said that there was of course a deliberate decision to wait over a thousand years. Otherwise, they wouldn't have waited.
__________________________________________________

Now what do you care to add to the discussion other than your kneejerk reaction which consists of the old tried and true anti-semite cry?



First I will say that your explanation of your comment only confirms my understanding of it.

Secondly, I will say that I don't find pointing out anti-Semitism, no matter how it's cloaked, to be knee-jerk or tried and true. If it was the latter, I wouldn't feel the need to continue.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:45 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

American politicians have no business interfering with what is going on in Israel - or in the Middle East as a whole. They seem to have no hand for diplomacy.


The sovereign state of Israel has declared its capital to be Jerusalem. If recognizing it as such is interference, how is refusing to do so not?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:47 pm
@Glennn,
I'm wondering why he should care?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 01:02 pm
What I am really wondering about is why we fail to see the same level of outrage from the anti-Zionists concerning all so-called occupied territories around the world?

Do a simple search and you will find that the Republic of China 's name fills every list of occupied territories and territorial disputes.

What the Chinese have done in Tibet makes what Isreal is accused of doing in Gaza and the West Bank pale in comparison.

When was the last time 128 UN members voted to condemn China? From what I can tell the UN gave up on Tibet in the 60's.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 01:22 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
I don't find pointing out anti-Semitism, no matter how it's cloaked, to be knee-jerk or tried and true.

That's not surprising, considering your position that bringing up the Israeli regime's violation of international law and Geneva Conventions is an anti-semitic act. So, yeah, kneejerk.
Quote:
Do a simple search and you will find that the Republic of China 's name fills every list of occupied territories and territorial disputes.

I guess your point here is that if the Chinese can be bastards, then so can the Zionists. That's a highly interesting point, but for all the wrong reasons.
Quote:

What the Chinese have done in Tibet makes what Isreal is accused of doing in Gaza and the West Bank pale in comparison.

So now y0u're stooping to using comparison to put lipstick on the pig you're petting.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 01:53 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
That's not surprising, considering your position that bringing up the Israeli regime's violation of international law and Geneva Conventions is an anti-semitic act. So, yeah, kneejerk.

Falsely accusing Jews of imaginary crimes is a common aspect of anti-Semitism. It is therefore reasonable for such untrue accusations to be denounced as such.


Glennn wrote:
I guess your point here is that if the Chinese can be bastards, then so can the Zionists. That's a highly interesting point, but for all the wrong reasons.

Actually I think the point was more about the people who object to supposed violations when Israel is accused of them, but have no such objections when other people commit the same violations.
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2017 02:10 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Falsely accusing Jews of imaginary crimes is a common aspect of anti-Semitism.

Having already shown you your predisposition to a bias in favor of the Israeli regime (remember your claim that misrepresenting one's nationality before having consensual sex is not a crime, and how you changed that common sense determination when Israelis entered the equation?) further discussion of this subject with you would be futile. However, I know you know that East Jerusalem is occupied territory. And I know you know international law and policy concerning occupied territory. I also know that you will deny these things because the equation includes Israel, and that anyone who points out these inconvenient facts to you is an anti-semite.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/27/2021 at 07:42:53