|
|
| Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. (1479691) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1479868) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 09:52:51 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Dec 6 09:49:26 2017. I think his opinion is more founded in the belief that Jews keeping a low profile and making nice on their enemies is the key to survival. |
|
|
| (1479870) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 09:56:42 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 09:52:12 2017. And how would you resolve that situation? |
|
|
| (1479871) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Dec 6 10:04:44 2017, in response to The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by SLRT on Tue Dec 5 15:16:05 2017. For me, #1 and #2 is most important. With what other country do we say that their capital is not the recognized capital? Appeasing the "Palestinians" has not resulted in a workable solution, so why should we continue repeating past errors by thinking now will be any different? |
|
|
| (1479872) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 10:14:33 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 09:56:42 2017. I made it very clear that I do not have appropriate expertise. However, I don't trust our president to have it either. I trust professional diplomats more, though I realize they can screw up royally too. |
|
|
| (1479873) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Dec 6 10:23:35 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 09:52:51 2017. I hope not. We know how showing your belly to a predator works out. It seems that's one lesson that's not included in Liberal 101. |
|
|
| (1479875) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 6 10:53:56 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 09:52:12 2017. The problem is that it may well be that the longer we wait, the worse any potential conflagration will be. North Korea is an obvious example. If we assume that a Second Korean War is inevitable, then the consequences for both sides just get worse, and it may well be better to take care of it now, even at the cost of lives. There is the major damage that North Korea can do by shelling Seoul, and the much worse damage that North Korea can do by nuking Seoul and possibly Japanese cities, or even American cities.The fact that 30 years of diplomats have suggested keeping the status quo might just be a case of procrastination. If it does come to war, whoever is in charge now will get blamed for war, and there's no way of knowing if avoiding war would have been preferable. As for Israel, I don't think the hostage metaphor works. Palestinian militants are currently as militant as they are able to be and pose little threat to Israel and the US. Meanwhile, Muslim terrorists all over the world are about as angry as they could be. It is unlikely that people susceptible to ISIS propaganda are going to be affected one way or another by the placement of the US Embassy. Most of them probably don't know that the embassies are all in Tel Aviv and if they know what an embassy is, probably would assume they are all in Jerusalem as it is because that is the de jure and de facto capital of Israel. |
|
|
| (1479876) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 6 10:53:57 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 09:52:12 2017. The problem is that it may well be that the longer we wait, the worse any potential conflagration will be. North Korea is an obvious example. If we assume that a Second Korean War is inevitable, then the consequences for both sides just get worse, and it may well be better to take care of it now, even at the cost of lives. There is the major damage that North Korea can do by shelling Seoul, and the much worse damage that North Korea can do by nuking Seoul and possibly Japanese cities, or even American cities.The fact that 30 years of diplomats have suggested keeping the status quo might just be a case of procrastination. If it does come to war, whoever is in charge now will get blamed for war, and there's no way of knowing if avoiding war would have been preferable. As for Israel, I don't think the hostage metaphor works. Palestinian militants are currently as militant as they are able to be and pose little threat to Israel and the US. Meanwhile, Muslim terrorists all over the world are about as angry as they could be. It is unlikely that people susceptible to ISIS propaganda are going to be affected one way or another by the placement of the US Embassy. Most of them probably don't know that the embassies are all in Tel Aviv and if they know what an embassy is, probably would assume they are all in Jerusalem as it is because that is the de jure and de facto capital of Israel. |
|
|
| (1479878) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 6 11:08:39 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 07:40:27 2017. Excellent post.Another issue, however, is that foreign policy is the prerogative of the President, including where the embassy should be. Thus Clinton, Bush, Obama and initially Trump were well within their rights to decide to keep the embassy in Tel Aviv, and Trump is well within his rights to decide to move it to Jerusalem. There is no other law specifying that the embassy of the United States must be in the capital of the country. There is no law specifying that we need to move our embassy in Sri Lanka, Burma, Tanzania or Nigeria to their current capitals from their former capitals. |
|
|
| (1479879) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 11:10:53 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 6 10:53:56 2017. I agree North Korea and the Palestinians are fully analogous. It's also quite possible that diplomats are overly cautious because they can't be blamed if the status quo wasn't changed on their recommendation.I do think that on North Korea, there is a very good chance of never having another Korean War, just like we backed away from the brink with the Soviet Union. Basically, I don't trust Trump with having any better judgment on these matters than I have, and i know my judgment on them is very poor. I don't think he's doing this move to enhance the prospects of peace in the Middle East by making a statement of resolve; I think he's doing it to wave red meat to his political base. |
|
|
| (1479880) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 11:11:31 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 11:10:53 2017. I agree North Korea and the Palestinians are not fully analogous. |
|
|
| (1479900) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 13:52:57 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by AlM on Wed Dec 6 10:14:33 2017. So you just know what you don't like. |
|
|
| (1479901) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Dec 6 13:55:37 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 6 10:53:57 2017. It's called "The Chickens Have Come to Roost." |
|
|
| (1480022) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Dec 6 23:12:31 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 6 01:34:19 2017. It will make reaching a peace agreement more difficult IMO. Trump will arguably have the blood of anyone who dies, Israeli or Palestinian, as a result of this move on his hands. |
|
|
| (1480024) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Dec 6 23:56:11 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Dec 6 23:12:31 2017. And the blood shed over the past quarter century? Who's hands is all that blood. |
|
|
| (1480025) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Chicagomotorman on Wed Dec 6 23:56:41 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Dec 6 23:12:31 2017. FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| (1480050) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 01:29:16 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Dec 6 23:12:31 2017. Any peace agreement that does not recognize Jerusalem as the legitimate capital of Israel is completely worthless. I’d rather die than have Israel accept the loss of its capital. |
|
|
| (1480062) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Chicagomotorman on Thu Dec 7 03:15:47 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 01:29:16 2017. Peace agreement? |
|
|
| (1480086) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 08:21:32 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Chicagomotorman on Thu Dec 7 03:15:47 2017. What is your question? |
|
|
| (1480100) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by chicagomotorman on Thu Dec 7 09:14:15 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 08:21:32 2017. Peace agreement for what? |
|
|
| (1480198) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Thu Dec 7 13:57:55 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 01:29:16 2017. Who said they are mutually exclusive? Why do this on December 6, 2017 as opposed to when an actual peace accord is being signed? Everyone on both sides knows Jerusalem will continue to be Israel's capital as part of an agreement. |
|
|
| (1480228) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 14:59:54 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Thu Dec 7 13:57:55 2017. Why do this on December 6, 2017 as opposed to when an actual peace accord is being signed?Because perhaps Trump wanted it done in the Hebrew year 5778 and not in the Gregorian year 5778. If everyone knows that Jerusalem will continue to be Israel's capital as part of an agreement, then siting embassies there is a non-issue and can be done immediately. The Arabs only want the embassies kept in Tel Aviv because they figure that they can still wrest Jerusalem from Israel. |
|
|
| (1480230) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Thu Dec 7 15:01:16 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 14:59:54 2017. Youve been nothing more then terrible talking points this entire thread. |
|
|
| (1480238) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Dec 7 15:05:08 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by ClearAspect on Thu Dec 7 15:01:16 2017. I think he has very good talking points. My main reason for not agreeing with him is that most professional diplomats in the United States on both political sides disagree with him. |
|
|
| (1480242) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Thu Dec 7 15:09:12 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by AlM on Thu Dec 7 15:05:08 2017. His talking points are insanely “black and white” in an otherwise colorful and complex situationS |
|
|
| (1480246) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 7 15:11:04 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by ClearAspect on Thu Dec 7 15:09:12 2017. Some things are black and white. |
|
|
| (1480278) | |
Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved. |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Thu Dec 7 17:32:46 2017, in response to Re: The U.S. Legal Position on Why the Embassy Should be Moved., posted by ClearAspect on Thu Dec 7 15:09:12 2017. Do you recognize Israeli/Jewish claims to the city of Jerusalem dating back to any time over the past 3000 years? Saying yes does not necessarily negate any Palestinian or other claims to Jerusalem. Saying no indicates you shouldn't be lecturing other people about gray areas WRT this issue. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||