Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Sounds like things are about to go down. I have some theories, but going to wait until after the official announcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettie4sox Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 11:37 AM) Sounds like things are about to go down. I have some theories, but going to wait until after the official announcement. It has to be a hoax. Trump cannot be this dunce... I feel like we hear this a lot and yet the man never ceases to amaze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Recognized Jerusalem and will build a new embassy there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 More anti-US terrorist attacks gives Trump more authority to crack down on immigrants and Muslims and seize more control. It's pretty transparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:16 PM) More anti-US terrorist attacks gives Trump more authority to crack down on immigrants and Muslims and seize more control. It's pretty transparent. This is something that I was also thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Well, my friends in the IDF despise this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 This is not just on Trump. Chuck Schumer also supports this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:42 PM) This is not just on Trump. Chuck Schumer also supports this. And he's wrong. See how easy that is? People can be right about some things and wrong about others. What a concept. Jeff Flake: wrong on taxes, right on Roy Moore. Tired of whataboutism and it's my new crusade to call it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 ...that's not whataboutism though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:43 PM) ...that's not whataboutism though How do you figure? Taking one person's terrible position and going - yeah, but THIS person (who I have an agenda against) also supports it - is whataboutism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:50 PM) How do you figure? Taking one person's terrible position and going - yeah, but THIS person (who I have an agenda against) also supports it - is whataboutism. He dosen't just support the idea, he advised Trump to do it. He's as guilty as Trump when people start dying over this. I think that should be recognized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:55 PM) He dosen't just support the idea, he advised Trump to do it. He's as guilty as Trump when people start dying over this. I think that should be recognized. I think they have different motives, but Schumer should be held accountable for his support. Not sure he is as guilty as Trump, but that is a matter of perception. That being said I dont understand why you support a symbolic move like this. I dont know Schumer, but I have to imagine the ultimate endgame is for a unified Jerusalem under Israeli control. The only thing I can think from his perspective is that he thinks that if the Palestinians think that Trump is so anti-Muslim, that they will come to the table and take a deal where they get a state that doesnt include Jerusalem out of fear that if they dont they ultimately end up with nothing. Syria etc have shown that UN has no way of controlling any conflict if a security council member is against it. So US under Trump could basically end the idea of a separate Palestine and there is not much anyone could do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 02:05 PM) I think they have different motives, but Schumer should be held accountable for his support. Not sure he is as guilty as Trump, but that is a matter of perception. That being said I dont understand why you support a symbolic move like this. I dont know Schumer, but I have to imagine the ultimate endgame is for a unified Jerusalem under Israeli control. The only thing I can think from his perspective is that he thinks that if the Palestinians think that Trump is so anti-Muslim, that they will come to the table and take a deal where they get a state that doesnt include Jerusalem out of fear that if they dont they ultimately end up with nothing. Syria etc have shown that UN has no way of controlling any conflict if a security council member is against it. So US under Trump could basically end the idea of a separate Palestine and there is not much anyone could do about it. Schumer is historically incredibly pro-Israel and is from New York. That pretty much explains his perspective. I vehemently disagree with it, but I don't require my politicians to be perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettie4sox Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Time to boost the US economy with a plethora of orders for Iron Dome weaponry. Trump is a genius! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:12 PM) Schumer is historically incredibly pro-Israel and is from New York. That pretty much explains his perspective. I vehemently disagree with it, but I don't require my politicians to be perfect. I mean his perspective to support it right now. The safer political play was to say nothing and then leave Trump with the fall out. I think his perspective is better explained in the context of his religion, as opposed to being from New York. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 While if in that position I would have preferred the status quo and I expect some angry riots, I do wonder if the "This will drive so much more terrorism!" fears are overblown. Most terrorism isn't driven by these kind of issues outside of the occupied territories, most terrorism is directly driven by occupation and violence at the site, and this isn't going to change the nature of the occupation. It will shut down the peace process, but an appropriate reply is "What peace process" as we don't currently have a peace process, we have Israel gradually incorporating all of the occupied territories into its own land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:15 PM) While if in that position I would have preferred the status quo and I expect some angry riots, I do wonder if the "This will drive so much more terrorism!" fears are overblown. Most terrorism isn't driven by these kind of issues outside of the occupied territories, most terrorism is directly driven by occupation and violence at the site, and this isn't going to change the nature of the occupation. It will shut down the peace process, but an appropriate reply is "What peace process" as we don't currently have a peace process, we have Israel gradually incorporating all of the occupied territories into its own land. Balta, I disagree. It absolutely changes the nature of the occupation. Jerusalem is the prize. The country with the largest army in the world, who has an administration that has been antagonistic towards Muslims, just agreed to put the embassy for the "occupiers" in Jerusalem. Now this statement should not be taken in anyway as saying Israel is right or wrong about whether Jerusalem should be theirs. It is just that if I were a Palestinian or Muslim, I would see this as the first step to trying to unify Jerusalem under Israeli control. (edit) The reason being the idea of "Jerusalem as an international city" is off the table now. Edited December 6, 2017 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 02:22 PM) Balta, I disagree. It absolutely changes the nature of the occupation. Jerusalem is the prize. The country with the largest army in the world, who has an administration that has been antagonistic towards Muslims, just agreed to put the embassy for the "occupiers" in Jerusalem. Now this statement should not be taken in anyway as saying Israel is right or wrong about whether Jerusalem should be theirs. It is just that if I were a Palestinian or Muslim, I would see this as the first step to trying to unify Jerusalem under Israeli control. (edit) The reason being the idea of "Jerusalem as an international city" is off the table now. While that's off the table, it was never really honestly on the table in the first place. Like it or not, since the 2000 or whenever they ended talks collapsed, Israel has been gradually claiming larger slices of the occupied territories and undermining any chance at any agreement. There was no chance of an agreement. There was nothing on the table that could be done - Israel is an occupying power claiming all that territory. This takes off the table any concept of deals that were never on the table because Israel was more than happy with the status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Quin @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:23 PM) Well, my friends in the IDF despise this. Going to make their jobs more difficult that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:25 PM) While that's off the table, it was never really honestly on the table in the first place. Like it or not, since the 2000 or whenever they ended talks collapsed, Israel has been gradually claiming larger slices of the occupied territories and undermining any chance at any agreement. There was no chance of an agreement. There was nothing on the table that could be done - Israel is an occupying power claiming all that territory. This takes off the table any concept of deals that were never on the table because Israel was more than happy with the status quo. Balta, Actually its quite opposite. Without East Jerusalem Israelis have nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Pence and Haley supported, Tillerson and Mattis opposed this move https://twitter.com/mitchellreports/status/...477816366149632 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:55 PM) He dosen't just support the idea, he advised Trump to do it. He's as guilty as Trump when people start dying over this. I think that should be recognized. No it's all about putting blame on one person. Like the KW vs. Hahn blame. People have a natural desire to blame someone. When it's usually someone's decision, people rarely make a totally uninfluenced (if that's a word) decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 02:29 PM) Balta, Actually its quite opposite. Without East Jerusalem Israelis have nothing. What do you mean by "Have"? As of right now they have access to the temple but aren't allowed to pray there. They control the land and govern it, the people who live in that city only have whatever rights Israel grants them. They can't vote, they may not even be able to commute to areas where they work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:33 PM) What do you mean by "Have"? As of right now they have access to the temple but aren't allowed to pray there. They control the land and govern it, the people who live in that city only have whatever rights Israel grants them. They can't vote, they may not even be able to commute to areas where they work. Balta, Rebuilding that temple is fundamental to the religion. It is ingrained into their identity. As long as they are unable to do that, they have nothing. I dont like to bring religion into discussions because I like to base things on worldly views, but there is no way to avoid it when it comes to Jerusalem. Edited December 6, 2017 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 My guys in Tel Aviv seem to think this is a pretty big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts