Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
Tue Dec 13, 2016, 09:50 PM Dec 2016

This message was self-deleted by its author

This message was self-deleted by its author (Little Tich) on Mon Mar 20, 2017, 10:22 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

rzemanfl

(30,274 posts)
1. Really, they have been kicking the can all this time? I was
Tue Dec 13, 2016, 10:34 PM
Dec 2016

not aware of this.

elleng

(135,803 posts)
2. 'create an uproar throughout the Middle East and the worlds 1.5 billion Muslims.'
Wed Dec 14, 2016, 03:21 AM
Dec 2016
Why not?
 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
4. Every Democrat in the Senate voted in favor (except Robert Byrd)
Wed Dec 14, 2016, 06:21 AM
Dec 2016

And most of the House.

grossproffit

(5,591 posts)
3. The embassy should be in Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, not Tel Aviv.
Wed Dec 14, 2016, 06:10 AM
Dec 2016

aranthus

(3,386 posts)
5. The real question is why have prior administrations pandered to Arab meanness for so many years?
Wed Dec 14, 2016, 12:23 PM
Dec 2016

How does that serve the US? There really is no question that Jerusalem is actually, morally and legally the capital of Israel, so it isn't as if the policy defends truth or any other higher principle. Accepting Jerusalem as the capital doesn't indicate support for the Israelis having sovereignty over the Old City, so it isn't as if the policy supports neutrality or negotiations. I doubt it is for reasons of security. So other than pandering to the Arab desire to hurt Jewish Israel, why has the US had this policy?

Response to aranthus (Reply #5)

aranthus

(3,386 posts)
7. So you're going with stupidity and bureaucratic inertia.
Thu Dec 15, 2016, 01:56 AM
Dec 2016

Maybe the US believed in an internationalized Jerusalem 70 years ago, but today that's an absolutely stupid policy that ignores reality, morality, and our own interests. The idea that the final status of West Jerusalem should be determined by negotiations is insane. And no, recognizing the fact that West Jerusalem is Israel's capital doesn't give up on the two state solution at all. Why is it intelligent to pander to Arab meanness? Do you think that they won't make peace with Israel unless Israel gives up all of Jerusalem? Then screw them. In fact, taking a strong stand on Jerusalem might just show the Arabs that there is a real power in Washington, and might just give that power some maneuvering room to pressure Israel in other areas like moving the settlements.

Response to aranthus (Reply #7)

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
9. Trump is a one-state solution guy, so this is rational
Thu Dec 15, 2016, 10:16 PM
Dec 2016

given his agenda.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
10. Long past time to move it
Fri Dec 16, 2016, 10:03 AM
Dec 2016

One cowardly administration has followed another.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»This message was self-del...