|
Post by michaelw on Dec 7, 2017 9:37:36 GMT -5
What's even sadder: this would only be the second-most irrational genesis for an intifada. Remember the last one started because Ariel Sharon (who wasn't even the PM at the time) made a visit to the Temple Mount.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Dec 7, 2017 9:46:38 GMT -5
The reality is that it's been a creative fiction that the sides in the conflict have lived with for decades now. The reality is that Jerusalem's status has a symbolic value to lots of groups. The reality is that "don't talk about the status of Jerusalem" has been a working principle for a very long time. The reality is that Trump doesn't give a fuck about Israelis or Palestinians or anyone else. The reality is that for purely domestic reasons he's walking into a gunpowder storage with a light match - because that will please some headbangers in Akron, Ohio that might vote for him.
That's contemptible.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 7, 2017 9:53:12 GMT -5
Other people should have to own their actions, every bit as much as Trump, imo. It's bullshit to suppose that they don't. So if a bunch of hardliners starting blowing shit up and killing people over this, that's on them, not on Trump.
And if recognizing a simple reality--that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel--is contemptible, how do we characterize threatening war and/or killing people because of a few words?
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 7, 2017 10:00:31 GMT -5
The reality is that it's been a creative fiction that the sides in the conflict have lived with for decades now. The reality is that Jerusalem's status has a symbolic value to lots of groups. The reality is that "don't talk about the status of Jerusalem" has been a working principle for a very long time. Sorry, but this is not much more than an argumentum ad antiquitatem. Fictions of such a nature don't deserve perpetual deference. Now excuse me, I have a tooth to put under my pillow.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Dec 7, 2017 10:06:28 GMT -5
Sorry, but this is not much more than an argumentum ad antiquitatem. Fictions of such a nature don't deserve perpetual deference. Now excuse me, I have a tooth to put under my pillow. I agree, but it's not for us far away to get on our high horse and pop the delusions that people hold onto so that their kids aren't blown up going to school. Israelis and Palestinians must come to an agreement between them - that's the only way. It's not helped by France, Britain, or indeed the United States wading in to establish a new working system without consulting anyone in the area. Particularly if the reason someone wades in has nothing to do with anything that goes on in that area. It's not for us to go there and say "Look, your relationship with each other is stupid" even if it actually is stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Dec 7, 2017 10:29:49 GMT -5
It is, like with most things Donald Trump does, a rather contemptible thing to do. To curry favour with the religious zealots in Akron, OH, he risks Ekron, Israel being blown up. Or for that matter Bethlehem in the West Bank. Don't you think this is overstating the case? Like, if the Palestinians could blow up Ekron or Bethelehem, they would have done so already. I get that you didn't mean it literally, and there is the potential to set off riots and a new wave of violence with this gesture. But I'm kind of done with "Don't piss off the Muslims, they might get violent!" as diplomatic policy. Not saying Trump's move was in any way diplomatic, thoughtful, or wise. But just as I wish we could just recognize Taiwan and tell China to go pound sand (except for, you know, nuclear weapons), I am really not finding myself all that outraged over Trump telling the Palestinians (and the rest of the Arab world that's been cynically using them for generations) to go pound sand.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Dec 7, 2017 11:04:20 GMT -5
I get that you didn't mean it literally, and there is the potential to set off riots and a new wave of violence with this gesture. But I'm kind of done with "Don't piss off the Muslims, they might get violent!" as diplomatic policy. The PLO, which runs the West Bank, is a secular organization. Just because someone is brown doesn't mean they're a religious jihadist fanatic. I didn't even mention religion. But this idiocy will inflame the heads of many more groups than the usual suspects. Including elements of PLO who don't do things because of religious reasons. The peace process has been good because it has brought the PLO to the diplomatic table. And now the orange idiot wants to bring an end to that. So, I contend that it is contemptible.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 7, 2017 12:30:09 GMT -5
Just because someone is brown, it also doesn't mean that they should get special dispensation to blame their violent actions on someone else. The PLO leadership is made up adults, no? Why treat them like children? They should be able to process a meaningless gesture by Trump (again, Congress already officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital in 1995) for what it is, without losing their shit and threatening war.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Dec 7, 2017 16:02:20 GMT -5
You are the ones who wants to follow a child-like foreign policy where the orange tit gets to tee off because he pleased some demographic in Ohio. The adult foreign policy is to let sleeping dogs lie where they lie. The adult foreign policy is to inch this powder-keg closer and closer to a solution without setting it off.
It's not Fatah or PLO that's stirring this up, it's that idiot that occupies the White House. He's the one digging. He's the one throwing flammables. He's the one who does things here. He's the one that's accountable. Fatah and the PLO have been walking a tight-rope to preserve peace as best they can, despite groups eyeing Hamas and Hezbollah and what they're doing.
It makes it much more difficult for Fatah to keep those groups reigned in. Because someone not remotely attached to that mess that is Jerusalem wants fifteen seconds of talking points on Fox News so that the religious zealots of Akron, Ohio can get down on their knees and pray that the apocalypse is nigh.
And then people far far away can play "Principles" all day because it's not their kids getting blown up or bulldozed over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2017 18:15:19 GMT -5
I was discussing this on Twitter the other day: there's a certain group of doomsday Evangelicals who cannot freaking WAIT for the apocalypse. They are genuinely excited about anything that might hasten the events in Revelations and bring about the Rapture and the second coming of Christ. Anyway. One of those things, apparently, is Jerusalem rising again as the capital of Israel. Anyway, I suspect that some of these doomsday Evangelicals are gung-ho about Trump and his doings not because they think he's such a godly man or an awesome leader or any of that, but rather because they think he is an agent who will help bring about the end of days. I can't prove it, of course, but I suspect it just the same.
I don't mean all Evangelicals are like this -- I know that's not true. But there is definitely a faction. I was on an all-day tour with a group of them a few years back, visiting some of the Christian sites around the Sea of Galilee. (By the way, did you know it's not a sea at all, but rather a freshwater lake, and not a very big one, at least from the perspective of a Great Lakes girl like me?) Holy crap, were they scary, practically foaming at the mouth with their rabid expectation of an imminent apocalypse. Heh. I was the only American on the bus who was not part of the tour. In addition to me and the group, there were half a dozen or so of assorted Europeans. They were wary of me at first until they figured out that I was not part of the doomsday crew, and indeed, found them just as scary as the Europeans did. We sat at our own table at lunch and giggled quietly at the crazies.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 7, 2017 18:15:35 GMT -5
Disagree. Your entire argument is predicated on accepting an infantilized view of Middle Eastern people in general and Palestinians (and their allies) in particular. Again, Jerusalem is the official capital of Israel. It's been such since 1948. Yet, you think people should pretend that it's not--when they know that it is--because by doing so, a bunch of hardline anti-semites won't get violent? At what point in time will these people actually be responsible for their own actions, in your mind?
And I also disagree that the PLO and Fatah are trying to preserve the peace. Perhaps Fatah isn't as bad as Hamas in some ways, but their leaders are not really looking for peace, unless it helps them line their own pockets in the moment.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 7, 2017 18:23:09 GMT -5
If Hassan Nasrallah can take a position on the status of Jerusalem, so can a US president.
Regardless, there's no substantive peace process being derailed here. But look, we can even pretend otherwise, if you want. There's still no having it both ways. If Israelis and Palestinians need to deal with each other without other parties butting in, then fine. The US should stop funding the PA then. If, on the the hand, there's going to be a role for the US here, as Abbas seemed to believe there had been before this announcement, the Palestinian leadership doesn't need (and shouldn't reasonably expect) the US to side with them on the Jerusalem question. Because again, Jerusalem is always going to be the capital of Israel. If the Palestinian leadership--and the rest of the world's political leaders who are still having a hard time with this--could just accept that reality, that would provide a much better footing for a real peace process than continuing to indulge a fantasy where Israel is not a sovereign country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2017 18:33:43 GMT -5
Yeah. I'm with Max. There is a reason the rest of the world indulges itself in the "fantasy" that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel. When Israel was created in 1948, Jerusalem was not supposed to be its capital. In recognition of its supreme importance to three religions (not just Judaism), it was supposed to be under international control. Israel captured east Jerusalem in 1967 and laid claim to the whole damn city, but that's not recognized as legitimate by most of the world. time.com/4604739/david-friedman-jerusalem-jewish-israel/ Recognizing Israel as a sovereign nation (which I do and most of the world does) does not require accepting Jerusalem as its capital. And do not even with the "but 3000 years ago..." argument, because that was 3000 years ago. ETA: I think Trump's move was a knee-jerk attempt to please evangelicals and look pro-Israel, and to thumb his nose at those damn Moooslims and Europeans. As with the Taiwan thing, as with his exchanges with Kim Jong Un, he doesn't know or give a shit what he might be provoking, nor stop to consider whether it is worthwhile.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 7, 2017 18:42:04 GMT -5
I was discussing this on Twitter the other day: there's a certain group of doomsday Evangelicals who cannot freaking WAIT for the apocalypse. They are genuinely excited about anything that might hasten the events in Revelations and bring about the Rapture and the second coming of Christ. Anyway. One of those things, apparently, is Jerusalem rising again as the capital of Israel. Anyway, I suspect that some of these doomsday Evangelicals are gung-ho about Trump and his doings not because they think he's such a godly man or an awesome leader or any of that, but rather because they think he is an agent who will help bring about the end of days. I can't prove it, of course, but I suspect it just the same. I don't mean all Evangelicals are like this -- I know that's not true. But there is definitely a faction. I was on an all-day tour with a group of them a few years back, visiting some of the Christian sites around the Sea of Galilee. (By the way, did you know it's not a sea at all, but rather a freshwater lake, and not a very big one, at least from the perspective of a Great Lakes girl like me?) Holy crap, were they scary, practically foaming at the mouth with their rabid expectation of an imminent apocalypse. Heh. I was the only American on the bus who was not part of the tour. In addition to me and the group, there were half a dozen or so of assorted Europeans. They were wary of me at first until they figured out that I was not part of the doomsday crew, and indeed, found them just as scary as the Europeans did. We sat at our own table at lunch and giggled quietly at the crazies. Next you're going to tell me the Dead Sea is also a lake. But really. Is there any position one can take on Israel that wouldn't find agreement with at least one faction of religious fanatics?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2017 18:43:58 GMT -5
But really. Is there any position one can take on Israel that wouldn't find agreement with at least one faction of religious fanatics? Well, yeah, you've probably got a point there. But the Doomsday crew is still scary. Anything that makes them happy worries hell out of me. ETA: At least the Dead Sea is salty (very very very very salty), so it doesn't feel quite so bizarre to me to call it a sea. Also, the Dead Sea is really neat-o.
|
|