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

Except in practical day-to-day English, anti-Semite has nothing to do with Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, and some Ethiopians. Arguing technical definitions to avoid the label is the kind of thing little children do. If you were presenting a paper at a conference on Levantine languages, you would have a serious point. Not here.

I remember when I was like 8 years old I thought I could get away with substituting "ship" for s**t, and nobody would be able to have a problem with me calling all the other children ship-heads. My 2nd grade teacher disabused me of that notion pretty quickly.

 

Well, you never agree with someone 100%-- You don't even agree with your wife 100% of the time.

But you have to give props to someone that does what they say they would do, in the political world, that does take courage. It also means a lot, because for once you know what you are getting. That is great if you like the ideas. It would have been great if previous presidents, like Obama and Bush Sr. kept their promises instead of re-negging. Bush Jr and Clinton, I didn't like their promises to begin with.

Anyways, it'd be very ignorant to say it doesn't take courage. Society in a whole at one time deemed it 'so wrong' to be gay, and no matter 'how wrong' they were- the ones who publicly came out- it took courage.

While I may not agree with everything Trump does, I don't believe the things I disagree with are detrimental. I like that he is keeping his promises.

To go further on your 'no matter how wrong' remark. I don't even believe recognizing Jerusalem as capitol is 'ohhhh so wrong' to begin with. He really hasn't done anything yet where I said to myself 'Wow, that is just so wrong'.

 

Not that what I'm about to describe is in any way intended by the parties involved, but there is some thought that something major and disruptive needs to be done to shake up the parties involved if you want to restart peace. Unfortunately, the party that really needs to be shaken up is the side with all the power. I.E. the Israelis, not the Palestinians. There was a time when shaking up the Palestinians would have been a good plan, but not in the last 20+ years. The Israelis currently see no issue with maintaining the status quo. They are the ones who need to feel more disquiet at standing still. Maybe there is some minimal gain from inducing concern in the Palestinians, but things like the settlements already are doing that.

 

you could just stop with "Pease will never be achieved" one side one wants the other to die. The only move that will create peace is if the side that wants the other to die will change their hearts and accept Israel as a nation.

 

This might by an appropriate place to assert Godwin's Law. There is so much different between Israel of today and the Third Reich that I don't think it is right to compare either of the parties to Nazis. The comparison that makes more sense to me would be the US subjugation of the Navajo. Should we say Manuelito was a nazi?

 

The US Congress made this decision already some 23 years ago, and it is mandated by law. The President is simply announcing that he will stop waiving it in the future.

 

Because Muslims in the middle east had so much warmth toward Israel and the US before the move to Juerselum.


Also, I wouldn't be surprised if this photo was taken in Berkely California.

 

It wasn't good before, so let's make it worse, great logic.

 

Link to source so you and other know that it wasn't taken at Berkely
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5081488/donald-trump-jerusalem-israel-capital-war-muslims-palestine/

 

It actually is but you wouldn't understand it. Leverage along with brinksmanship, bogeys, decision depth, etc...are all part of negotiating. I would not be surprised if this move (not at all important to US) is just resetting the playing field. Not sure it will work but at least they would be trying something. So making it worse can in fact be better.

 

Is that the goal? I thought the goal was to get the Palestinian people to stop being terrorists and stop supporting terrorism. Until that happens, they not only don't deserve to call themselves a state, doing so would only lead to those they attack having a more legitimate reason to seize even more land from them.

Part of the Palestinians growing up enough to have a claim for sovereignty is acknowledging their neighbors as legitimate, and not only condemning terrorism but actively and successfully preventing it. Till they can do those things, why even talk about a "two state solution"? It's like talking about getting a toddler a driver's license.

 

Sure, we will see.

 

Yes we will. Just like we've been waiting to see something by doing nothing and getting nothing for the last 20+ years.

 

So if more bombings, kidnappings etc happens because of this or this, would that be fine with you as well?

 

that would be on the bombers and kidnappers........

BTW Isreal has been getting bombed for a couple decades now.

The middle east has been trying destroy Iseal for decades, but the US moving its embassy to Jerusalem will be the final straw.......

 

Then it would be just more proof that a 2 state solution was impossible to begin with and that perhaps other solutions such as forcibly removing the Palestinians from that area should be strongly considered. If they aren't there to continue to wage war, then you'll have peace.

 

I have no idea what would happen, if the rate of violence doubles, is that a good thing for Israel?

 

That is what the Israelis really want, except where would they put these people? How about in Alabama?