Author Topic: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem  (Read 11579 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,736
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,092
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #50 on: December 25, 2017, 19:20:09 »
Just because you don't know/understand/like the strategy or long term goal doesn't make them or the decisions to get there any less viable.

Traditional appeasement of the Arabs/Palestinians hasn't provided anything in terms of a meaningful dialogue or solution, so its time to switch gears.

There is no "grand strategy", unless you've read something that I haven't, so I don't think it's a case of me not knowing/understanding/liking it. Therein, as there is no recognizable grand strategy (which to be clear isn't just a Trump failure- he's just markedly worse at it then his predecessors) the decisions aren't viable as they aren't connected to any sort of long term/medium term plan. The way Trump is approaching the world is seemingly under the assumption that US hegemony will continue regardless of their decisions, something that isn't as self-evident as he may believe.

So what exactly is the switching gears intended to do? You're not wrong that the past attempts at a peaceful resolution haven't succeeded. However, there needs to be some sort of plan of action when a nation, particularly one with the power of the US, makes a decision such as moving an embassy that will clearly disrupt any process in place aside from "f*&k it, we'll do it live". Do you believe that the US acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of Israel will cause the Palestinians will give up their claims in the west bank or Gaza because of the decision or dig in? Do you think that they'll just say, "oh well, so what if the Israeli's have continued to pour resources into west bank settlements.... check mate I guess"? 

In reality, the Palestinian-Israel conflict or the existence of either state has little strategic value for the US, particularly when one considers the weight it is given. However, if Trump wanted to get the US out of the mid-east peace game there were easier ways to do it then inflaming entire nations and aligning himself with a modicum of bottom of the barrel countries in the UN. Is the fate of Israel something that the US is willing to throw out it's international reputation and push nations away from it for? That's up to the US to decide, but I would suggest no. Neither the fate of Israel nor Palestine is worth the strategic risk that Trump (or any president since Clinton) has given it, particularly if it results in a loss of US prestige (which it arguably already has).

So, what of a post-US middle east outside of a presence in Israel? Even if US support is pulled, the Arabs will simply find a suitor who will continue their fight (and as the US only had 8 supporters in the vote I don't suspect it will be that hard). The US can only hope that it's not a suitor who is actively trying to destroy the Liberal US-led world hegemony.

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 908,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,920
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #51 on: December 25, 2017, 19:49:35 »
Are we not at "we'll do it live"? Every single political/diplomatic overture has been tried and failed. The Palestinians keep voting for Hamas (a terrorist group) to lead them and want no solution other than the destruction of the Israeli state. We've appeased them at every turn, and yet they just make more insane demands and send more suicide bombers. Is it not time we put all our weight behind the other horse and make them realize their conduct is not acceptable? I think you'll find the Israelis more than willing to reduce police checkpoints and SOF raids into the West Bank if they knew their citizens wouldn't be stabbed at a street corner or school buses bombed.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,736
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,092
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #52 on: December 25, 2017, 20:11:42 »
Are we not at "we'll do it live"? Every single political/diplomatic overture has been tried and failed. The Palestinians keep voting for Hamas (a terrorist group) to lead them and want no solution other than the destruction of the Israeli state. We've appeased them at every turn, and yet they just make more insane demands and send more suicide bombers. Is it not time we put all our weight behind the other horse and make them realize their conduct is not acceptable? I think you'll find the Israelis more than willing to reduce police checkpoints and SOF raids into the West Bank if they knew their citizens wouldn't be stabbed at a street corner or school buses bombed.

Neither side is innocent in the usurping of peace talks. Israeli support to the increasing number of settlements hasn't assisted, nor why would it?

I thnk you're being naive to the utmost extent of you think trump's decision will make anyone realize anythuig.  If nothing, couldn't the lack of international  support to the US be seen as a sign of weakness and embolden the Palestinians? Reducing US influence in the Arab world plays into Iranian and possibly Chinese/Russian hands. And for no real gain.

The peace talks are a fools errand that don't matter in the long run. Whether it's Israel,  palestine, or palsrael has only a minor influence on the US in the long run, aside from making rich donors in the US happy. But Trump's draining the swamp so I'm sure lobbyists don't have any influence.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #53 on: December 25, 2017, 21:11:05 »
I'm more with Puck Chaser than Bird Gunner on this subject.

angus555

  • Guest
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #54 on: December 26, 2017, 10:07:24 »
I suppose the rapture is an integral part of the ongoing "peace" strategy for this administration.

Quote
For many evangelicals, Jerusalem is about prophecy, not politics
By Diana Butler Bass
Updated 6:05 PM ET, Fri December 8, 2017
Diana Butler Bass (@dianabutlerbass) holds a Ph.D. in religious studies from Duke University and is the author of 10 books on American religion and culture, including "Grateful: The Transformative Power of Giving Thanks" (forthcoming, HarperOne: April 2018). The views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.(CNN)



As I watched Donald Trump announce that the United States would recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move our embassy to that city, I could only think of one thing: my high school youth group Bible study.

I know that sounds odd. Especially coming from a liberal Episcopalian like me. But there you have it. The President makes a world-important declaration about global politics, and an absurdly apocalyptic thought arises, "Jerusalem? The Last Days must be at hand!"

When I was a teenager in the 1970s, I attended a "Bible church," a nondenominational congregation that prided itself on a singular devotion to scripture. We read the Bible all the time: in personal Bible study and evening Bible classes. We listened to hourlong Sunday morning sermons. For us, the Bible was not just a guide to piety. It also revealed God's plan for history. Through it, we learned how God had worked in the past and what God would do in the future.

Central to that plan was Jerusalem, the city of peace, and the dwelling place of God. It was special to the Jews because it was the home of Abraham and David. It was special to us because it was where Jesus had died and risen. We believed that ultimately, Christ would return to Jerusalem to rule as its king. We longed for this outcome -- and we prayed that human history would help bring about this biblical conclusion.

Jerusalem was our prophetic bellwether. God's plan hung on its fate. Whenever Israel gained more political territory, whenever Israel extended its boundaries, it was God's will, the end-times unfolding on the evening news. Jerusalem, as the spiritual heart of Israel, mattered. Jerusalem was God's holy city, of the ancient past, in its conflicted present, and for the biblical future.

For many conservative evangelicals, Jerusalem is not about politics. It is not about peace plans or Palestinians or two-state solutions. It is about prophecy. About the Bible. And, most certainly, it is about the end-times.

When I was young, our pastor insisted that Jerusalem had an important role to play in these end-times events. When the Jews rejected Jesus as the messiah, he explained, God chose the church to accomplish his mission. Soon this "church age" would end with the rapture of true believers.

But God still loved the Jews, he told us, and wanted to redeem them. Thus, absent the church, the Jews would experience a great religious rebirth and rebuild their temple in Jerusalem. This would spark a series of cataclysmic events that would culminate in the Battle of Armageddon, the last war of humanity. But it would also cause the Jews to finally accept Jesus as their savior. After all this occurred, Jesus would return in glory and God's kingdom -- a thousand-year reign of peace. And it would begin in Jerusalem.

This theology -- a literal belief that all these things must happen before Jesus will return to reign on Earth -- is called "dispensational pre-millennialism" and it is not the quirky opinion of some isolated church. Although the majority of Christians do not share these views, versions of dispensational pre-millennialism dominate American evangelicalism.

It originated as a small movement in the 1840s, but by the 1970s, millions of evangelical and fundamentalist churchgoers had embraced some form of it. Dispensationalism was popularized in a best-selling book called "The Late, Great Planet Earth" by Hal Lindsey; and later, in the 1990s, it reached an even larger audience through the "Left Behind" novels by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. The theology spread via Bible camps and colleges, through theological seminaries and revival meetings, in films and videos, by Sunday school materials, and in daily devotional guides -- all teaching that the end of the world was near, and that Jerusalem was the physical place where this apocalyptic drama would unfold.

If you know evangelicals, chances are very good that you know this theology, whether you believe it or not. You cannot avoid it. And if you hear the President of the United States say something about Jerusalem, you take notice. Especially when that President won 81% of the white evangelical vote.

When the President issued his order, I was not the only person hearing echoes of dispensationalism. Robert Jeffress, one of Trump's evangelical advisers, declared: "Jerusalem has been the object of the affection of both Jews and Christians down through history and the touchstone of prophecy."

Other evangelical pastors and teachers also praised the action as "biblical" and likened it to a "fulfilled prophecy."

While that may sound benign (or perhaps nutty) to the theologically uninitiated, they are referring to the "prophecy" of the conversion of the Jews, the second coming of Jesus, the final judgment, and the end of the world -- the events referred to as the biblical apocalypse.

I doubt that President Trump could explain dispensational pre-millennialism. I doubt he knows the term. But his evangelical supporters know it. Some of his advisers are probably whispering these prophecies in his ears. Trump might not really care how they interpret the Bible, but he cares that white evangelicals continue to stand with him. Moving the embassy to Jerusalem is one way to affirm his commitment to these evangelicals -- reminding them that he, Donald J. Trump, is pressing biblical history forward to its conclusion and that he is God's man in the unfolding of these last days.

I may not believe it -- anymore, at least. You may not believe it. Donald Trump might not even truly believe it. But millions do. That matters. Not only for American politics, of course. For the peace of Jerusalem. And for peace for the rest of us as well.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/08/opinions/jerusalem-israel-evangelicals-end-times-butler-bass-opinion/index.html

Offline GR66

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 52,920
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 596
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #55 on: December 26, 2017, 10:57:06 »
I'm far from a Trump fan.  Very far.  But this is one decision that I'm not going to lose any sleep over.

The Palestinians are calling for a two-State solution with East Jerusalem as their capital.  Probably the Palestinians (or their leaders at least) will never agree to a settlement offering anything less.  I'm generally on line with that.  Frankly I think a two-State solution is the only viable way forward for any semblance of a lasting peace in the region. 

But who in their wildest dreams imagines any two-State solution where the Palestinians get to have their capital in East Jerusalem but Israel doesn't get their capital in Jerusalem???  I think you'd have to be either crazy or incredibly naive to imagine that possibility. 

If a two-State solution with East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital and Israel with Jerusalem as their capital as well is the only viable path forward how does recognizing Jerusalem as the Israeli capital in any way stand in the way of that possibility?  What it does do is anger those Arabs that don't want to accept Israel's existence at all, but there will never be peace with those people anyway.

Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is the de facto truth on the ground now and it is also the only logical/viable location of the Israeli capital in a two-State solution with the Palestinians.  As I said earlier, I'm not going to lose any sleep over Trump's declaration of this truth.

 

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 483,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,717
    • The job.
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #56 on: December 26, 2017, 11:07:26 »
Reply #54
"he cares that white evangelicals continue to stand with him."

81 per cent of White, born-again/Evangelical Christians voted for him.
His lowest percentage by religious affiliation were Jewish voters at 24 per cent.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/ft_16-11-09_relig_exitpoll_religrace/

« Last Edit: December 26, 2017, 11:23:47 by mariomike »

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 264,266
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,251
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #57 on: December 26, 2017, 11:23:47 »
Quote from: mariomike


His lowest percentage by religious affiliation were Jewish voters at 24 per cent.
I have a feeling he may have won some of the Jewish voters over recently.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 483,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,717
    • The job.
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #58 on: December 26, 2017, 11:35:29 »
I have a feeling he may have won some of the Jewish voters over recently.

Only 16 percent of Jewish Americans support moving the embassy to Jerusalem immediately, according to AJC’s 2017 Survey of American Jewish Opinion.
https://www.ajc.org/survey2017
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.


« Last Edit: December 26, 2017, 11:47:15 by mariomike »

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 264,266
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,251
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #59 on: December 26, 2017, 11:57:11 »
Whoops
There are no wolves on Fenris

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 908,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,920
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #60 on: December 26, 2017, 12:13:13 »
Moved this over to the Global Politics subforum, as despite the security implications of Palestinian riots, its more of a foreign policy/political debate especially when the current US president is involved.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,736
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,092
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #61 on: December 26, 2017, 12:53:46 »
I suppose the rapture is an integral part of the ongoing "peace" strategy for this administration.

From a religious standpoint, the religious tribalism of the region is the telling point, on both sides, that ensures that no real lasting peace is on the horizon. That's why Arab/Islamic states (since they're not the same thing) always seem to support Palestine (though many have low opinions of Palestinians, fun fact) and Jewish people in the various diaspora's support Israel. Neither side allows any criticism of their perspective Tribe.

From the Jewish side, zionism is absolutely tied to Judaism as dictated in Exodus 23:31-32, "I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the desert to the Euphrates River. I will give into your hands the people who live in the land, and you will drive them out before you. Do not make a covenant with them or with their gods". Deuteronomy 1:8 goes on to state, "See, I have given you this land. Go in and take possession of the land the Lord swore he would give to your fathers- to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - and to their descendents after them". Genesis 15:18-21 further goes on to state, "On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi[a] of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates— the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites,  Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.” Unsurprisingly, this land entitlement given by god includes all of modern day Israel (Canaanites, Perizzites) and large swathes of Iraq, Jordan/West Bank (Amorites), and Lebanon.

From the Arab side the Quran 5:51 states, "O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you- then indeed, he is of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing of people". The Hadith of the Gharqad, which is used by Hamas in their charter, explicitely states to kill Jews.

Religion is a key part of the problem- Many see the bible and Quran as the expression of god's will, which is a powerful thing.

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 908,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,920
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #62 on: December 26, 2017, 13:18:08 »
The problem with your logic is that Israel is currently ruled by moderates, who only seek the right to exist and to keep the borders they won after being invaded. Its not like they've taken away the rights of Muslims or Christians to vote, or seek to expand to the Euphrates as the scripture states. Syria, Iran, Lebanon and Palestine all seek the destruction of the Jews in the Middle East. The problem with religion is the one that declares other religions as enemies.

angus555

  • Guest
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #63 on: December 26, 2017, 13:32:49 »
Religion is a key part of the problem- Many see the bible and Quran as the expression of god's will, which is a powerful thing.

It's too bad that the Jewish religion and ethnicity are seen to be so entwined. Kind of like the silly way some regressive liberals equate criticism of Islam to racism. Islam is of course a multi-racial religion. As are the Jews throughout history as we can see now with DNA analysis.

Often times, I see many of the Jews in the US and Europe as the political and philosophical voice of reason.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2017, 14:26:58 by Til Valhall »

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services pai
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 266,372
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,198
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #64 on: December 26, 2017, 13:41:23 »
What I see is Trump reducing the jihadi muslim influence throughout the world.

Everyone is always acceding to them because they don't want to offend or become involved in their jihad. There isn't any doubt that the jihadists welcome the extra power.

Trump has simply told them there are other paths we can take, without orders from a caliphate. He's basically said that he'll do what he thinks is right for America, and he has others signing on to the strategy. He's taken some massive finances away from them, that they've used to embolden and finance their jihad. He's told the muslim heavy UN that the US isn't playing their globalist game and to ensure the message hits home, he dropped US contributions, this year by over 200 million. From what I can tell, it's simply a starting point, with more money about to be withheld in the future. Hopefully, those that back Trump will also start withholding funds.

And he's right in his decision, IMO. Why give money, through the UN, to people that want to hurt the US? Taking names and kicking *** is an apt description. We'll help you, directly from the US government, if you're on our side. If your plan is to destroy us, you get nothing.

I'm interested in seeing if starving the UN of funds has an effect.

 My opinion and :2c:
Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 122,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,753
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #65 on: January 12, 2018, 14:59:11 »
So why is the UN concerned about where Israel has it's embassy? Shouldn't they be busy solving the Yemen conflict, the Durand line issue, the Rohingya crisis, stopping the Syrian conflict, Sudan conflict, Kashmir, etc, etc.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 264,266
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,251
Re: UN Votes Against the US Moving Its Embassy to Jerusalem
« Reply #66 on: January 12, 2018, 16:40:32 »
Job security.
There are no wolves on Fenris