[Middle East] US embassy in Israel to be moved from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem

I probably expected too much but honestly I was hoping to hear some kind of justification for why he believes the US should treat Israel differently than they would anyone else. I have yet to hear a satisfactory justification for it.....and I do understand that the reason most are against this is because it's something Trump did. I don't doubt for a second if Obama had done this the vast majority of the people now pretending to be against it would support it.

Basically you have an odd alliance at the moment between the Trump Derangement Syndrome types and those who are anti-Israeli for either religious or bigoted reasons. I've yet to hear from someone against this for any other core reason.

 

The US should hold Israel to the same international standards as every other country.

The issue here is obviously not about moving an embassy to a county’s capital. It is the de facto annexation of East Jerusalem that is legitimized by this move. Some people think Israel has a right to annex any territory it wishes to from the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. The rest of us do not think they have this right. I do recognize that the US has long defended Israel’s right to annex territories from the West Bank without repercussions, so this move by the Trump administration isn’t a major departure from that tradition.

 

Go Israel!

 

I'm arguing for the US using the same standard for Israel as they do for every other country, thus why they should have a US embassy in their capital. That was my point.

When you talk about East Jerusalem, it has been under their control since Jordan abandoned their claim to it and no other country claims that territory....so I don't see the issue. I mean, even Obama called Jerusalem the capital of Israel and said that it must remain undivided.....this is an issue that had broad bipartisan support until Trump came into the picture. Before that the only people that thought this was controversial were those that were anti-Israeli either due to religious reasons or bigoted reasons.

I suppose what is good about this is that there is finally common ground between extremist Muslims, the Alt Right, and mainstream Democrats.

 

obviously you care a bit too much of my likes...maybe cohe and atw should just join Haley's dinner party to eat crow instead

 

The US has been leading the peace process ( commendably so ) since the Oslo Accords. It's a very delicate maneuvering, like walking on a tightrope propped up on thin ice.

Then, trump comes along and throw a very yuge rock.

 

I know that’s your point. I’m trying to explain to you that your point is irrelevant, because what is under dispute is whether Jerusalem can be legitimately claimed by Israel as its capital city.

No prior administration has officially declared Jerusalem as part of Israel, as far as I’m aware. Obama’s statement about Israel, which you are referencing, was in front of APAIC before he was elected as president. He quickly corrected his position to be in line with prior administrations and the international community at large.

A good rundown of the Jerusalem status issue, from the US perspective, is given here (starting page 35):

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33476.pdf

E.g. GWB administration:

The Foreign Relations Authorization Act for FY2003 (P.L. 107-228) urged the President to begin relocating the U.S. embassy “immediately.” The act also sought to (1) prohibit the use of appropriated funds for the operation of U.S. diplomatic facilities in Jerusalem unless such facilities were overseen by the U.S. ambassador to Israel; and (2) allow Israel to be recorded as the place of birth of U.S. citizens born in Jerusalem. When signing the act into law, President George W. Bush wrote in an accompanying “signing statement” that the various provisions on Jerusalem would, “if construed as mandatory … impermissibly interfere with the president’s constitutional authority to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs.” The State Department declared, “our view of Jerusalem is unchanged. Jerusalem is a permanent status issue to be negotiated between the parties.”
​

So even W recognized the danger in moving the embassy and how it could legitimize full annexation of Jerusalem by Israel and interfere with negotiations. That is the real issue here.

 

You keep saying that it is in dispute....what country is claiming East Jersusalem? The last country to claim that territory was Jordan and they renounced their claim on the land. Israel has controlled the territory ever since then and no other country has stepped in to claim the territory. You have to have 2 parties in order to have a dispute.....there isn't 2 parties when it comes to this issue.

On top of that, even if that weren't the case, and say Jordan was claiming that East Jerusalem was still theirs, that doesn't mean that Israel couldn't have Jerusalem as their capital. Countries have complete control over what city is their capital.

Again, there's no country stepping up to claim East Jerusalem and Israel has governed there for the last 50 years after Jordan renounced their claim to the territory.....let's face it, the Jerusalem issue is settled.

 

Small Pacific island nations agree with you.

The rest of the world, not so much.

 

Your response means less than zero. King Abdullah who has grown up and rules a neighboring nation and is far more versed on the issues of the area than the VP so is in the exact right position to lecture the VP. That is especially true with such a large number of Palestinian residents. You included it as if that was somehow a negative thing. In doing so, not only did you show you have no legitimate beef, but you exposed your own bias.

What Abdullah's nephews did or didn't do, or the reasons they did they did things don't really reflect on King Abdullah.

It shows that your position is weak when you have to try and tack on perceived grievances of others in the past.

 

And his country would be caught up in the destabilizing action. He has more to lose than you, you won’t be putting your life on the line.

It’s easy being a coward and supporting things that will put other people in harms way.

 

Everyone who supports moving the capital will enlist right?

 

Go pick up a rifle and fight for Israel.

 

I do, and the fact that he is a monarch has no bearing on his knowledge of the region and situation at all. If you mean not wanting to prematurely decide to cede Jerusalem to the Israelis rather than use it as part of the negotiating position, then yes that is accurate, and King Abdullah's position is better informed than yours or the VP's

 

Subterfuge of the weak. Sit back and support policies that cause tremendous loss of life while not being burdened. The weak are why we are entangled in such messes. The weak may get stronger if the pain was more reciprocated.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/25/tru...or-peace-between-israel-and-palestinians.html

Trump was an unspecified proposal for peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Prepare for the next intifada.