Donald Trump Says U.S. Will Recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital

[Vandalshandle]

I'm thrilled with this news! As soon as the US recognizes jerusalem as Israel's capitol, all of their neighbors will throw down their arms and give up the war that they have been conducting for 68 years!

 

[Kondor3]

Kondor3, et al,

This is easier said than done.

The US Embassy?
Next year, in Jerusalem.

(COMMENT)

There are just a huge number of variables that have to be taken into consideration. That is not going to happen in a year, or even three years.

Most Respectfully,
R

If-and-when it materializes, it will not be an output of analysis paralysis.

 

[Kondor3]

I'm thrilled with this news! As soon as the US recognizes jerusalem as Israel's capitol, all of their neighbors will throw down their arms and give up the war that they have been conducting for 68 years!

You mean the one that the Jews have been winning lopsidedly for 68 years?

 

[Eloy]

Eloy, et al,

This is a matter of cause and effect. As Arab Palestinian hostility and violence intensified and spread from the West Bank and Gaza Strip into Israel, various and more elaborate security countermeasures were employed to answer the issues. ...

Don't you ever get tired of blaming the Palestinian victims rather then the Israeli perpetrators, it must be asked.

The Pal'istanians are self-created victims. If you spend a bit of time and read the Hamas Charter, you will quickly discover that appeals to gee-had and statements about destroying Israel are core components of Arab-Moslem terrorist ideology.

It's comically tragic that you and others screech the "islamist victim" mantra when Arabs-Moslems wage acts of war in furtherance of their politico-religious ideology.

After 68 years, israel is still putting the had in gee-had.

You know a lot.

I know enough to understand that the Pal'istanians become a laughable joke when they wage gee-had in furtherance of their politico-religious ideology - are soundly defeated by a stronger, better equipped and trained defensive force, then whine like petulant children when their claims to victimhood are dismissed as fraudulent.

I certainly agree with you about the mismatch between the Palestinians who do not have an army equipped with artillary and tanks, nor an air force that can smash a hospital or school into smithereens with the latest precision rockets, nor a navy that can bombard a civilian neighborhood from a distance and the Israelis who do, thanks to the American taxpayers.

 

[Eloy]

It is noteworthy because it demonstrates that the presence of the Israeli occupation forces in Palestine and the beleaguered Gaza is illegal and they should go home and live in peace with their nearest neighbors..

Israel "occupation forces" abandoned Gaza in 2005. Not only that -- they ethnically cleansed Gaza of every Jewish community and every Jew. They went home to live in peace with their Gazan neighbors.

And yet there is no peace. Because the goal of the Gazans is NOT to live in peace with their neighbors.

Palestinians in Gaza are not allowed live in peace as they are massacred every once in a while, men women and children by the Israelis who control their air space, territorial waters, and their border, deciding what the people are allowed to export and import. The Israelis keep Gaza as a massive Konzentrationslager as they go about destroying ahe inhabitants who suffer extreme poverty and deprivation in the meantime.

 

[RoccoR]

Eloy, et al,

Yes, you are looking at this with a limited field of view.

Eloy, et al,

This is a matter of cause and effect. As Arab Palestinian hostility and violence intensified and spread from the West Bank and Gaza Strip into Israel, various and more elaborate security countermeasures were employed to answer the issues. ...

Don't you ever get tired of blaming the Palestinian victims rather then the Israeli perpetrators, it must be asked.

The Pal'istanians are self-created victims. If you spend a bit of time and read the Hamas Charter, you will quickly discover that appeals to gee-had and statements about destroying Israel are core components of Arab-Moslem terrorist ideology.

It's comically tragic that you and others screech the "islamist victim" mantra when Arabs-Moslems wage acts of war in furtherance of their politico-religious ideology.

After 68 years, israel is still putting the had in gee-had.

You know a lot.

I know enough to understand that the Pal'istanians become a laughable joke when they wage gee-had in furtherance of their politico-religious ideology - are soundly defeated by a stronger, better equipped and trained defensive force, then whine like petulant children when their claims to victimhood are dismissed as fraudulent.

I certainly agree with you about the mismatch between the Palestinians who do not have an army equipped with artillary and tanks, nor an air force that can smash a hospital or school into smithereens with the latest precision rockets, nor a navy that can bombard a civilian neighborhood from a distance and the Israelis who do, thanks to the American taxpayers.

(COMMENT)

First:
In the past history of the region. Israel usually has to confront the entire a substantial number of Arab League Forces.

Second:
No Military Force in the world grants any military advantage to its opponents. If a weaker opponent, like the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), purposely renews a conflict under a previously arranged Armistice Agreement (followed by Peace Treaties) and declares a Jihad, then that is the destiny they choose. This was, for the HoAP this was an "elective and optional" conflict contrary to the international policy of settling "disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered."

When a country goes to war, just like America, it bring the entire toolbox to the front. In most of the allied world, as opposed to the insurgent, terrorist and jihadist world, it is a US Policy to asserted that when it uses military force, it must do so in overwhelming fashion and seeking a decisive victory --- in the service of vital national interests. The law of commonality is that most other nations of the World will also seek a similar policy.

THUS, it is also reasonable to assume that this would be understood by other nations and that policy would be, in itself, a deterrent to insurgencies, terrorism and jihadism. Opponents enter into an optional conflict at their own peril. Any nations that brings-up the superior force issue as a valid claim is simply irrational.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[forkup]

forkup, et al,

I acknowledge and respect your opinion.

--- And he sure as hell is no typical politician.

View attachment 91153​

This breeds uncertainty and not a bit of fear. My point is, I might be wrong and Trump might be putting out an act to get elected, I don't know for sure, but Roccor neither do you. So I rather go by the devil I know, at least I can be pretty sure, Clinton will think before she acts.
On your second point, I'll ask the same question I've asked of the original poster. By what mechanism do you see this conflict getting resolved by giving full support to Israel without giving the Palestinians anything?

(COMMENT)

The concept of: "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know." --- is akin to the concept of: "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

The only way to break the cycle inbred party politics is to elect someone outside the mainstream. We've had men and women in harms way since 2003 (more than a decade, more than 4500 days continuously). I was in the North Wing of the Palace when the Administration repackaged the policy and published the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq."

View attachment 91155 ​

Do you think we are there yet? Less than a day ago, the news media published this:

View attachment 91156
In Iraq, battle for Mosul draws many forces with many motives · 15h
The tacit alliance — Iraqi troops alongside Shiite militiamen, Sunni Arab tribesmen, Kurdish fighters and U.S special forces— underscores the importance of this battle. Retaking Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, would effectively break the …
​

And of course, we don't know how the Coalition of Forces will get along. The Iraqi Army remnants are greatly dependent on the Iranian funded Shia Militia known as the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). Mosul is Sunni. The PMP has a reputation for capturing and torturing Sunnis after the liberation of a predominately Sunni region. And of course, the current administration has put the US Special Forces right there. And again, like we so often do, will take a shellacking for allowing it to happen. Even if the PMP fight, we will probably catch hell for fight along side the Iranian Proxy.

I am sure your "devil you know" argument has merit. And I believe that many people hold to that opinion. But I would rather see a dumb ass get the Presidency rather than one of the mainstream politicians that have we've seen seriously screw-up in the past.

BTW: During the Battle for Mosul (2004) one of the prominent US Military Commanders in the Area was David Petraeus.

Most Respectfully,
R

Sorry it took me a while to respond. During the debate, I believe we saw my point about Trump reiterated. Clinton referred to this Donald Trump declares he would shoot Iranian ships 'out of the water' if they bother American ships . You are making the point that the situation in Iraq hasn't been brought under control by mainstream politicians. I want to mention that the reason there is a situation in Iraq because another idiot ( Bush), figured that invading Iraq was a good idea even when most of the rest of the world didn't agree. And you are planning to support another guy, who by your own admission is equally stupid, and has quite a few more drawbacks that Bush didn't seem to have. A tendency to be underprepared, petty and impulsive to name a few. Now I can and do sympathise with the dissatisfaction a person can have with the way the political system in the US works, the sense of helplessness and disgust that it provokes. But electing Trump because of it, is like using chemotherapy to fight a cold, not only will it not work but it will surely create a whole list of bigger problems.

 

[forkup]

forkup, et al,

This is going to sound callous.

By what mechanism do you see this conflict getting resolved by giving full support to Israel without giving the Palestinians anything?

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians, that form the backbone of the Jihadist Insurgency - terrorist campaign, civil unrest, and the instigators of critical incidents, may not see it now - but at some point into the future they will want to upgrade from a failed parasitic state totally dependent on foreign donation, to something with the potential of achieving a standard of living and the human development level comparable to that of Israel. And when that happens, Israel must have the infrastructure ready to relocate Israeli Settlers (on a dime) and the utility infrastructure to immediately open commercial transportation avenues; as well as turn the spigots on huge volumes of desalinized water into the South East Israel and all of the West Bank.

There must be the where with all to crank-up the small, intermediate and light industry in the West Bank, such that the unemployment level drop from from 38% (62% for females), to virtually full employment (as near as practicable).

The US needs to help Israel to pre-position infrastructure to handle this, plus to develop some solutions to resolve the Beduin issues.

I know that many people would prefer to let the Arab Palestinians sink into oblivion; but at some point, once the generational transmission of jihadism subsides (probably two generations away). Israel will have to be the engine of success for the Arab Palestinians (none of the neighboring countries will be able to assume that role).

Most Respectfully,
R

How do you propose the Palestinians upgrade like you put it, when at the same time admitting that the usual things that stabilises a country aren't there (access to water, labor and trade) not to mention the single thing as recognition of said state? I see that you acknowledge that this is not something you solve in a single term of office, yet you fault politicians of not being able to, in your first comment. I think there is a certain disconnect here, between the intelligent, rational person you seem to be and the angry, disheartened other person that you seem to represent to. I know this might come of as condescending, I apologize, since I like your posts and I think our viewpoints aren't that dissimilar at least we both seem to realise these problems are complex and this brings me back to you favoring Trump who seems not to be able to grasp this simple fact.

 

[RoccoR]

forkup, et al,

I generally agree that we are not very far apart. I'll be frank, I don't care for Donald Trump as the Republican Party Presidential Candidate (in fact I think he is rather foolish), but I like Hillary Clinton (the Democratic Party Presidential Nominee) even less... And I don't think it would hurt America to have Jill Stein (Green Party Presidential Nominee) in the White House, or even Gary Johnson (a former Governor and the Libertarian Party Nominee) in the Oval Office.

I do think it is time for Armeica to STOP re-electing the same members to Congress, over and over again. And I think it is time to shake-up both the Republican and Democratic Parties by electing a Third Party. By doing that, we would not be forklifting candidates into office that owe more in favors to the power brokers than the size of the national debt. It is time to break those shackles, if only for one administration.

How do you propose the Palestinians upgrade like you put it, when at the same time admitting that the usual things that stabilises a country aren't there (access to water, labor and trade) not to mention the single thing as recognition of said state? I see that you acknowledge that this is not something you solve in a single term of office, yet you fault politicians of not being able to, in your first comment. I think there is a certain disconnect here, between the intelligent, rational person you seem to be and the angry, disheartened other person that you seem to represent to. I know this might come of as condescending, I apologize, since I like your posts and I think our viewpoints aren't that dissimilar at least we both seem to realise these problems are complex and this brings me back to you favoring Trump who seems not to be able to grasp this simple fact.

(COMMENT)

Yes, we agree that the forward planning and pre-position of critical and essential infrastructure in place to kick start the Palestinians as soon as they get a grip in reality.

I think the US should enlist the aid of Egypt (on an earmarked quid pro quo arrangement) by dramatically improving (mutually beneficial to Egypt and the Palestinians) the M40 and M67 from Rafah - straight into Cairo; as well as upgrading the Ports and Terminals in Rafah for container handling, bulk cargo lifting and LNG operations (For Levant Field Processing).

It would probably be best if a the M50, M55 (Eilat to Cairo) and M90 (Eilat to Newe Zohar) were modernized. Consideration should be given to building a Desalinization Plant; with a long range plan to construct Nuclear Power Plants be built in both Rafah and Eilat; with a greatly improved freight and cargo terminal in Eilat (coordinated with the Hashemite Kingdom - maybe as a Free Economic Zone). This type of infrastructure can be started now, so that they are in operation to feed the sub-Regional Area.

It should become the biggest construction and assembly project since the time of the Pharaoh (19 Dynasty) and the Temple of Abu Simbel.

The great obstacle will be finding leaders with vision and willingness of the peoples to engage in the project.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Vastator]

Eloy, et al,

This is a matter of cause and effect. As Arab Palestinian hostility and violence intensified and spread from the West Bank and Gaza Strip into Israel, various and more elaborate security countermeasures were employed to answer the issues. ...

Don't you ever get tired of blaming the Palestinian victims rather then the Israeli perpetrators, it must be asked.

The Pal'istanians are self-created victims. If you spend a bit of time and read the Hamas Charter, you will quickly discover that appeals to gee-had and statements about destroying Israel are core components of Arab-Moslem terrorist ideology.

It's comically tragic that you and others screech the "islamist victim" mantra when Arabs-Moslems wage acts of war in furtherance of their politico-religious ideology.

After 68 years, israel is still putting the had in gee-had.

You know a lot.

I know enough to understand that the Pal'istanians become a laughable joke when they wage gee-had in furtherance of their politico-religious ideology - are soundly defeated by a stronger, better equipped and trained defensive force, then whine like petulant children when their claims to victimhood are dismissed as fraudulent.

I certainly agree with you about the mismatch between the Palestinians who do not have an army equipped with artillary and tanks, nor an air force that can smash a hospital or school into smithereens with the latest precision rockets, nor a navy that can bombard a civilian neighborhood from a distance and the Israelis who do, thanks to the American taxpayers.

They are more than welcome!

 

[Shusha]

Palestinians in Gaza are not allowed live in peace as they are massacred every once in a while, men women and children by the Israelis who control their air space, territorial waters, and their border, deciding what the people are allowed to export and import. The Israelis keep Gaza as a massive Konzentrationslager as they go about destroying ahe inhabitants who suffer extreme poverty and deprivation in the meantime.

The conflict is never going to get resolved unless the Gazans, in this example, take some responsibility for their actions.

Cross border exports and imports are possible between peaceful countries. Nations do it all the time. But why would any nation want to have trade agreements with a hostile entity actively engaged in "armed resistance"?

What kind of government permits its citizens to suffer extreme poverty and deprivation by taking resources away from them and using them for "armed resistance"? Should that kind of government be accepted by the international community?

The Gazans most certainly would be "allowed" to live in peace if they gave up their "armed resistance". They already have a defined territory, a government, the freedom to choose peace. Why don't they do it?

 

[toomuchtime_]

toomuchtime, et al,

“Occupied” / “Occupation” is a concept. Imbedded in this concept is the essential component is the idea of “effective control.” You can use any word or phrase you want. But “control” is as good as any, as long as we both understand the intended usage. In this case, I interpret your usage of “control” as a concept, the same as “Occupied” / “Occupation;” except that it is absent the ridged criteria of the Hague Regulation.

Occupied is the wrong word. I should have said Israel controls only its border with Gaza and Israel's territorial waters, while Egypt controls a border with Gaza.

(COMMENT)

The reality is that the entire issue of the specific Permanent International Boundaries (PIB) in and around Israel is a philosophical, moral, legal, and ethical dilemma.

If you read Article II of the Egyptian Treaty, you will see that the PIB between Egypt and Israel incapsulates the entirety of the Gaza Strip falls within the Israeli side of the PIB.

If you examine the Treaty (Article 3) with Jordan, you will find that the PIB with Jordan and Israel, encapsulates the entire West Bank.

Most Respectfully,

R

Legally, Gaza may be part of Israel, but currently Israel is treating it as if it is not. Legal, philosophical, moral and ethical considerations always take a back seat to practical considerations such as security. When the legal reality and the practical reality are out of sync, it is always the practical reality that takes precedence.

 

[RoccoR]

toomuchtime, et al,

Well, ... This is interesting.

Occupied is the wrong word. I should have said Israel controls only its border with Gaza and Israel's territorial waters, while Egypt controls a border with Gaza.

(COMMENT)

The reality is that the entire issue of the specific Permanent International Boundaries (PIB) in and around Israel is a philosophical, moral, legal, and ethical dilemma.

If you read Article II of the Egyptian Treaty, you will see that the PIB between Egypt and Israel incapsulates the entirety of the Gaza Strip falls within the Israeli side of the PIB.

If you examine the Treaty (Article 3) with Jordan, you will find that the PIB with Jordan and Israel, encapsulates the entire West Bank.

Legally, Gaza may be part of Israel, but currently Israel is treating it as if it is not.

(COMMENT)

Well, there are a couple of things you want to keep in mind.

• In 1967: the territory of the Gaza Strip was an Egyptian Military Governorship.
• In 1967: the Egyptian Military Governorship became occupied by Israel.
• In 1979: the Treaty removed set the Permanent International Borders (PIB).
• In 1988: the Arab Palestinian declared Independence.
• In 1995: the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip (AKA: Oslo II Accord)
​

The Israelis actually took positive action to insure they were relieved of any territorial control directly over the Gaza Strip.

Israel, at no time, denied the Arab Palestinians self-determination --- nor did Israel put forth any objection to the Declaration of Independence.

Legal, philosophical, moral and ethical considerations always take a back seat to practical considerations such as security. When the legal reality and the practical reality are out of sync, it is always the practical reality that takes precedence

(COMMENT)

When the citizenry has no security protection from Islamic Militants, insurgents, resistance movements and other asymmetric radical Islamist, then the determination on matters of legal, philosophical, moral and ethical considerations swing as wide as the difference between the difference between Western Law and the laws of the Arab League states.

Reality is always moving, subject to changes without regard to practicality. The attempts by the Quartet to craft a working peace was practical; but, totally ineffective.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

Donald Trumptold Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that as president he would recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, his campaign said on Sunday.

The statement, which was made during a meeting that lasted over an hour at Trump Tower in New York, would mark a shift in American foreign policy as the U.S.— as well as almost every other country in the world— does not recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and maintains its embassy in Tel Aviv. The international community does not accept Jerusalem as Israel’s capital because its status has not been resolved since Israel established itself in West Jerusalem in 1948 and then effectively annexed East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War.

Trump told the leader that under his administration the U.S. will “recognize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the State of Israel,” the campaign statement read, repeating his promise to move the U.S. embassy to Tel Aviv.

Hillary Clinton also met Netanyahu for less than an hour in Manhattan,CBS reports. Reporters were barred from covering either event.

Donald Trump Says U.S. Will Recognize Jerusalem as Israel's Capital

Finally we may have a US president who is bold enough to take a fresh look at this conflict and smart enough to realize that US hedging on this issue only prolongs the conflict.

As it was meant to be under the terms of the LoN mandate of palestine that gave Jerusalem to the Jews as theirs. It was never to be arab muslim and capital of an arab muslim state. For once an American politician is accepting that Israel has the greater claim to the city and that the arab muslims should pack their bags and go

 

[Phoenall]

Yes he said that before. The ZOG owns the US Government. They bow to Israel, he will be wearing a skullcap pledging his allegiance to Israel at the western wall if elected. Hillary will do the same. Their kids are not married to Jews for naught.

This will for sure start WWIII. The jews will be the end of this earth, they destroy all they come in contact with.

You mean the muslims my dear as they far outnumber the Jews and still dont have enough bodies to fight a war

 

[Phoenall]

I read that and all I see is $$$$

They have a pill for that.

They have a pill for welfare leeches?

The best one going a 9mm lead pellet with greetting from God written on it. Then when the arab muslims have finally been sorted the world will have peace.

I wonder which hate site you read that from as it forgot to add that islam in the M.E. leeches 10 times more money from the US to line their Swiss bank accounts with than Israel will receive over the next 5 years

 

[Phoenall]

So Trump will move the US embassy to Jerusalem. Not the end of the world I guess.

Possibly the start of a new one that will have islam worried as to who will be next for the chop ?

 

[Phoenall]

Donald Trumptold Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that as president he would recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, his campaign said on Sunday.

The statement, which was made during a meeting that lasted over an hour at Trump Tower in New York, would mark a shift in American foreign policy as the U.S.— as well as almost every other country in the world— does not recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and maintains its embassy in Tel Aviv. The international community does not accept Jerusalem as Israel’s capital because its status has not been resolved since Israel established itself in West Jerusalem in 1948 and then effectively annexed East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War.

Trump told the leader that under his administration the U.S. will “recognize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the State of Israel,” the campaign statement read, repeating his promise to move the U.S. embassy to Tel Aviv.

Hillary Clinton also met Netanyahu for less than an hour in Manhattan,CBS reports. Reporters were barred from covering either event.

Donald Trump Says U.S. Will Recognize Jerusalem as Israel's Capital

Finally we may have a US president who is bold enough to take a fresh look at this conflict and smart enough to realize that US hedging on this issue only prolongs the conflict.

Well, that's nice. I'm sure he checked the feasibility and examined the possible backlash, from the Muslim world. He has a plan so it won't turn into another intifada, he has considered and talked about it with the European allies and was able to reassure them, that doing so won't turn more of the European Muslim community to extremism. My point is, this is why a Trump presidency is such a bad idea. He thinks his instincts are a substitute for informed decisions.

We have the means to stop that from happening in Europe, all it takes is the removal of all neo marxists from positions of power and then barriers built to stop them coming here. Those here that break any laws to be deported without recourse to appeal. Once they find that the only places left for them are islamonazi nations then they will soon stop coming

 

[TNHarley]

I read that and all I see is $$$$

They have a pill for that.

They have a pill for welfare leeches?

The best one going a 9mm lead pellet with greetting from God written on it. Then when the arab muslims have finally been sorted the world will have peace.

I wonder which hate site you read that from as it forgot to add that islam in the M.E. leeches 10 times more money from the US to line their Swiss bank accounts with than Israel will receive over the next 5 years

Israel just got granted their biggest welfare deal ever..
And I am aware other places get it too. But ISRAEL was the discussion. I am against all foreign aid. Well, pretty much

 

[Eloy]

Palestinians in Gaza are not allowed live in peace as they are massacred every once in a while, men women and children by the Israelis who control their air space, territorial waters, and their border, deciding what the people are allowed to export and import. The Israelis keep Gaza as a massive Konzentrationslager as they go about destroying ahe inhabitants who suffer extreme poverty and deprivation in the meantime.

The conflict is never going to get resolved unless the Gazans, in this example, take some responsibility for their actions.

Cross border exports and imports are possible between peaceful countries. Nations do it all the time. But why would any nation want to have trade agreements with a hostile entity actively engaged in "armed resistance"?

What kind of government permits its citizens to suffer extreme poverty and deprivation by taking resources away from them and using them for "armed resistance"? Should that kind of government be accepted by the international community?

The Gazans most certainly would be "allowed" to live in peace if they gave up their "armed resistance". They already have a defined territory, a government, the freedom to choose peace. Why don't they do it?

Your perspective is fundamentally false and no answers to your rhetorical questions will persuade you otherwise.