Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 18:33:56 GMT -5
On your point "I know the Allies never formally recognized East Berlin as the capital, but that's just the US, England, and France. Got a source that shows everyone else? I can't find one." To be honest, because I'm still working my ass off and posting on the fly, I was going on memory of the issue from a long-ago class (that said, I have a good memory for this kind of thing). I hate citing Wikipedia for something like this, and will try to hunt down a better source when I have some time. (Sadly, I'm working tonight, with a break to listen to my arch nemesis do a podcast.) But for what it's worth, wikipedia says it and lists a source. The source in Footnote [29]: ETA: By the way, my sincere apologies to you and the forum in general for the somewhat on-the-fly (and possibly somewhat grumpy ) nature of my posts recently. I am trying to keep up a consistent presence on the board despite my time being pretty limited -- I have not been at my best, especially when it comes to citations. Feel free to kick me on that when I deserve it.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 14, 2017 20:09:09 GMT -5
You've offered nothing for why the U.S. needs to do this, other than as virtue signaling to the pro-Israel faction in the U.S. O, reason not the need! Our basest beggars Are in the poorest thing superfluous. Allow not nature more than nature needs, Man’s life’s as cheap as beast’s. --King Lear Yeah, I think one could certainly argue the US doesn't need to do this; after all, the US has had a very good relationship with Israel over the years, without the recognition of Jerusalem. I feel the same way about Galileo telling people the earth went around the sun. He probably didn't need to do it. And then on top of that, it pissed off a lot of people, too. Should've waited till people were more ready to accept reality. (/end sarcasm.) But on a more serious note, I'll try to offer something here. Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital is the right thing to do (in my opinion). It corrects (or attempts to correct) a serious imbalance in the way we treat Israel compared to other countries. Because, as I noted earlier, every other sovereign country in the world gets to decide where to put their capital. And I can assure you, I don't care about offering red meat for US evangelicals (or other pro-Israel demographics). That just doesn't factor in, for me. But I do think it's the case that Israel has been given short shrift by many in the international community--the UN, the Arab states, etc--for a long time, with regard to being treated as a legitimate state, one that should have no more and no fewer rights and privileges as any other state. I don't doubt that this move is ticking off a lot of people, but I'm willing to see where this goes. I don't think we can say for sure that it will mean it's the end of the US's role in the peace process, as some are claiming. We'll need some time for the smoke to clear, so to speak. If Trump's gambit doesn't work out, fair enough. The next president can always reverse the country's official stance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 21:47:04 GMT -5
Telling people the earth goes going around the sun isn't quite the same thing, since pushing that nugget of wisdom furthered a yuuuuuge amount of knowledge in a lot of areas...
Measuring what it will cost versus what is gained...well, I guess time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 14, 2017 21:54:33 GMT -5
Okay so after reading 8 pages of discussion on this topic:
I think it's clear that Jerusalem is legitimately Israel's capital; I think it's also clear that it is not the U.S's place to publicly declare this position.
I'm not sure these two thoughts are supposed to coexist.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 14, 2017 23:40:59 GMT -5
Measuring what it will cost versus what is gained...well, I guess time will tell. Yes. I can offer a couple more thoughts related to cost/benefit analysis. It seems to me that there's been a much heavier focus on the potential downside. But I think the Palestinian leadership doesn't have much choice in terms of what they can say about this move publicly. In private, who knows? I'm sure they're not happy, but this might actually bring them back to the negotiating table sooner rather than later, if they can see that their negotiating position is only going to deteriorate over time. And for the Israelis, it could be similar. I'm sure Netanyahu is happy, but this could put him in a position where he can't say no as easily, if the US tries to influence Israeli policy in the future (say, on the issue of West Bank settlements, for example, where Obama had very little clout with the Netanyahu government). That might seem too rosy an outlook, but one should always keep in mind that the history of this conflict has been little more than a series of failures, diplomatically speaking. It would not be unfair to ask, where are the successful negotiations from the US's policy of not recognizing Jerusalem? What was gained from that? This is a policy that departs significantly from a stale, unpromising past. It might not lead anywhere, but it probably has a better chance than maintaining a status quo that definitely wasn't going anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 15, 2017 5:45:38 GMT -5
Okay so after reading 8 pages of discussion on this topic: I think it's clear that Jerusalem is legitimately Israel's capital; I think it's also clear that it is not the U.S's place to publicly declare this position. I'm not sure these two thoughts are supposed to coexist. Okay, after reading 8 pages of discussion on this topic, I'm still trying to figure out how rob can claim that acknowledging reality has anything to do whatsoever with politics. I mean, seriously. Politicians freely ignore or distort reality every single time they open their mouths. They refuse to acknowledge any reality other than their own fevered dreams of the perfect society they'll create if only we buy the bullshit they're selling. We could have an ongoing thread with daily posts of stories filled with politicians ignoring reality when it suits their purposes. If we're really acknowledging reality, laying the smack on one particular political position because it ignores reality is like laying the smack on a lake because it has water in it.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Dec 15, 2017 7:49:50 GMT -5
2) You've brought up China and Taiwan several times now, but it's not on point. China isn't in control of Taiwan. China could claim it's capital is now Taipei if it so desired, but that wouldn't be functionally true, at all, which is exactly opposite the situation with Israel and Jerusalem. Okay, so turning that around - why don't we formally recognize Taiwan as an independent nation, since that is the reality, and since we operate as if it were true, and since we have a lot more at stake in Taiwan than we do in Israel?
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 15, 2017 8:02:41 GMT -5
Well, Taiwan hasn't actually declared themselves to be an independent state, correct? I guess if they did, and China then invaded, and the US wanted to go to war to defend Taiwan and did that successfully, then recognition at that point might make sense. If, on the other hand, Taiwan declared independence, and China then invaded, but the US stayed out, there wouldn't be much of a functionally sovereign state left to recognize, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 15, 2017 8:46:21 GMT -5
You've offered nothing for why the U.S. needs to do this, other than as virtue signaling to the pro-Israel faction in the U.S. You claim it doesn't create any problems. I don't agree, since I think pissing off the Muslim world is a problem, but taking that aside, what exactly is gained? Well, it might create real problems. I can't say with absolute certainty, one way or the other. And I don't think the US needs to do this, at all. But Trump did promise that he would do it, no? And sure, that promise was intended to garner some brownie points from certain elements on the right, no doubt about it. But again, Jerusalem IS the capital of Israel. Diplomacy be damned, if one can't acknowledge actual facts because of fear over who might get upset, we're screwed imo. I feel the same way about the "Earth is 5000 year old" crowd, the flat earth crowd, and the Intelligent Design crowd. No one should stop speaking the plain truth, simply to pacify people with a bug up their collective asses (and in this case, that bug is anti-Semitism, which makes this whole thing extremely ugly, imo). Israel eats a lot of shit from us, from Europe, from the UN, and so forth. And it's been eating shit for a long time. Now, it's not doing everything right either, but the fact of the matter is that a good chunk of its biggest critics--other ME states--brutalize elements of their population on a routine basis and get away with it mostly scot-free, even as they get to jump on the bandwagon and hammer Israel over this issue or that issue, even as supposedly knowledgeable westerners tsk-tsk Isreal and imagine that they're somehow better than everyone else because they have empathy for the Palestinian cause. And imo, this happens mostly because of a diplomatic approach grounded in the idea that these other peoples lack the intelligence/sophistication to deal with reality and thus must be coddled to some extent, otherwise they'll get pissed off, blow shit up, and/or stop the oil from flowing. This is the approach that you and maxinquaye are defending, are recommending. Imo, that approach is not only deeply wrong (because it's actually a form of othering), it has also failed miserably. How long has this peace process been going with Israel, Palestine, and the rest of the Middle East? And is peace really any closer? Moreover, imo that approach has also emboldened radical Muslims in general and is contributory to all of the terrorist attacks by the same. So at the end of the day, the US should do this because it's time to deal with the reality of the here-and-now, as opposed to maintaining a series of illusions in order to pacify a bunch of raging anti-Semites.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Dec 15, 2017 9:47:33 GMT -5
There are two issues being conflated here:
1. The neverending debate over Israel and Palestine and who's right, who's wrong, who the U.S. should be supporting, whether or not anti-Israeli leftist sentiment is driven by anti-Semitism, etc. We're now rehashing everything from Israel's formation to the 1967 borders to the one-vs-two-state solution here, just like always.
2. Whether or not Trump making this particular move now was wise, provocative, useful, or calculated.
It is possible to be pro-Israel and still think Trump is a blundering fool. It is possible to believe that we should tell the Palestinians to go pound sand, and still think that telling them to go pound sand at this particular time, in this particular manner, was needless and pointless.
Am I motivated by my "anti-Trump hatred," as celaw claims? Well, I am biased by my priors - my priors say that Trump is an idiot who doesn't think about consequences, only about how he feels about whatever he's going to do. If Obama or someone else I am inclined to believe actually thinks about what he does had made this move, I might still question its wisdom and utility, but I'd be more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and think he had some reason that made sense to do this, and maybe we'd found out what his plan was. I am indeed much less inclined to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. I know his alt-Right supporters are constantly going on about how he's playing "4-Dimensional chess" but his alt-Right supporters measure the wisdom and utility of all political gestures by the simple metric "Duz it pis off liberulz?"
So, rob believes we should do this because it's time to deal with the reality. Okay, cool. Like I said, if some competent POTUS had decided that, I might question it but wait and see how it turns out. In Trump's case, yeah, I'm gonna criticize it because if it doesn't turn out to be a mistake, that will be purely Trump's good fortune, not because he actually thought it out as deeply as anyone on this board did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 11:33:02 GMT -5
There are two issues being conflated here: 1. The neverending debate over Israel and Palestine and who's right, who's wrong, who the U.S. should be supporting, whether or not anti-Israeli leftist sentiment is driven by anti-Semitism, etc. We're now rehashing everything from Israel's formation to the 1967 borders to the one-vs-two-state solution here, just like always. 2. Whether or not Trump making this particular move now was wise, provocative, useful, or calculated. It is possible to be pro-Israel and still think Trump is a blundering fool. It is possible to believe that we should tell the Palestinians to go pound sand, and still think that telling them to go pound sand at this particular time, in this particular manner, was needless and pointless. Am I motivated by my "anti-Trump hatred," as celaw claims? Well, I am biased by my priors - my priors say that Trump is an idiot who doesn't think about consequences, only about how he feels about whatever he's going to do. If Obama or someone else I am inclined to believe actually thinks about what he does had made this move, I might still question its wisdom and utility, but I'd be more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and think he had some reason that made sense to do this, and maybe we'd found out what his plan was. I am indeed much less inclined to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. I know his alt-Right supporters are constantly going on about how he's playing "4-Dimensional chess" but his alt-Right supporters measure the wisdom and utility of all political gestures by the simple metric "Duz it pis off liberulz?" So, rob believes we should do this because it's time to deal with the reality. Okay, cool. Like I said, if some competent POTUS had decided that, I might question it but wait and see how it turns out. In Trump's case, yeah, I'm gonna criticize it because if it doesn't turn out to be a mistake, that will be purely Trump's good fortune, not because he actually thought it out as deeply as anyone on this board did. *squints* *looks for something to argue with* *can't find anything* *goes back to drafting contract*
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 15, 2017 17:13:11 GMT -5
So, rob believes we should do this because it's time to deal with the reality. Okay, cool. Like I said, if some competent POTUS had decided that, I might question it but wait and see how it turns out. In Trump's case, yeah, I'm gonna criticize it because if it doesn't turn out to be a mistake, that will be purely Trump's good fortune, not because he actually thought it out as deeply as anyone on this board did. Yes, I think everyone here can agree we're all better at this stuff than the President.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 18, 2017 8:56:49 GMT -5
So, rob believes we should do this because it's time to deal with the reality. Okay, cool. Like I said, if some competent POTUS had decided that, I might question it but wait and see how it turns out. In Trump's case, yeah, I'm gonna criticize it because if it doesn't turn out to be a mistake, that will be purely Trump's good fortune, not because he actually thought it out as deeply as anyone on this board did. Here's where I am on this stuff, having been actively following the "diplomacy" since the days of Reagan, having concentrated on the Holocaust and the Jewish diaspora as a grad student, and being firmly in the "just because a lot of people are selling the same story, it doesn't mean they know what they're talking about" camp: As I said, I think Trump made this move as a means of getting some brownie points with elements on the right. But as I also said, he actually did promise to do this in his campaign, so I can't see why anyone is surprised/aghast at it. People who are such must have been living under a rock. And that's no less true--imo--of people who pay lip service to the lie of Jerusalem not being Israel's capital, whatever their reasoning. Jerusalem IS the capital of Israel, just as East Berlin WAS the capital of East Germany. But you know, the reasoning behind maintaining the first of the two above illusions is very different than the reasoning behind maintaining the second. To whit: the Allies didn't refuse to acknowledge East Berlin as the capital over fears of offending anyone, they did it out of spite, plain and simple, to stick it to the Russians (now, I happen to think that this was probably one of lamest acts of spite, ever, but it was what it was). In contrast, not recognizing Jerusalem is wound up in supposed diplomacy (though I think there's a little spite in it as well, though no one at State will admit it), in trying to placate a bunch of knuckle-draggers (kinda funny, if you think about it: our knuckle-dragger is pissing off their knuckle-draggers). BUT... where has that supposed diplomacy actually gotten us? It's 2017. The Six Day War was 50 years ago. 50. Half a century. And we're still listening to the crowd of experts at State, who supposedly know how to do diplomacy, who are clued in to everything, who know how to say "pass the sweet and sour shrimp" in twelve different languages, two of which are no longer spoken anywhere in the current world. Remember, these are the same turkeys who ignorantly put out an apology for a YouTube video--that they had nothing to do with--on their twitter feed, based on some convoluted logic where this was going to be a Good Thing. And State did that without checking with the Obama admin, because after all, they know what's best, right? So of all things Trump, acknowledging the simple reality of Jerusalem-as-actual-capital (which again, Congress has already done with legislation in 1995, so it was already official US policy, regardless of what anyone at State might say) is one my acceptable moments, to be sure. Because I don't actually thing it's much of a moment, or at least it needn't be. I admit I'm also thrilled to death with Tillerson cleaning out the State Department, because I think a good chunk of the senior figures there are no longer up to snuff. Most probably never were. Because again, imo they have been operating from a "white man's burden" perspective for far too long, wherein non-western leaders and states are coddled to some extent under the ludicrous notion that they are not intelligent/sophisticated enough to deal in realities (until, of course, it's too late). Imo, people responsible for this kind of bullshit don't need to be coddled; they need to be called out. And if their leaders won't do it, those leaders need to be called out, as well. From the link:
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Dec 21, 2017 12:01:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2017 12:31:39 GMT -5
How very absurd and outrageous of all these nations to disagree with the United States. Do they not understand that their role is merely to bow in obeisance to us?
|
|