Re: Trump planning to move US Embassy in Israel to
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:01 am
USN_Hokie wrote:
Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
https://uwsboard.com/
USN_Hokie wrote:
I'm still so confused by this. Nolan assured us that Trump was an anti-semite after he used a sheriff badge in a campaign add, but right now it looks like Trump is standing with Israel against Islamists/terrorist states and their leftist/democrat sympathizers.HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
The populace surrounds Tel Aviv. What's the benefit?133743Hokie wrote:Having been there as well, including activity at the consulate, there is certainly more to the city of Jerusalem than the old city. The embassy needs to be accessible to the populace, so the old city is not the place. Israel recognizes Jerusalem as their capitol so it makes sense that the US does as well. Last, relocating our embassy there has nothing to do with denying access to the old city and religious sites for anyone. In fact that was actually addressed. I personally see this as a positive to incentivizing the Arab world.TheH2 wrote:Given my posts it should be pretty obvious I'm pretty familiar with the old city. That's what people think of as Jerusalem and what is being fought over. It's also shared space. There really isn't that much outside of it either. The livelihood of Israel is in Tel Aviv and the surrounding area.133743Hokie wrote:DoS will swap out embassy and consulates, putting embassy in Jerusalem and consulate in current space in Tel Aviv. New Embassy will need to be built in Jerusalem as the main consulate there is not up to current security standards and not large enough to serve all of the embassy functions. Not sure what you mean by "outside the walls"? Do you mean the Old City? That is a small, historic area so would never go there to begin with. The current consulate is in the modern city where all of the ease of public access exists. Not sure if they will keep the satellite consulate in east Jerusalem as that's dangerous territory, but likely will to serve Arabs, etc.TheH2 wrote:The U.S. embassy is on a nice plot of land. That alone is a good reason not to move it to Jerusalem. It would be outside the walls and not in what people consider Jerusalem. If you work at the embassy you have to hoping it doesn't move. You can only walk the Via Delorosa so many times before you wish you could be back at the beach. Stay where the people are.HokieFanDC wrote:a war zone he is about to create?
Good move.
What do ppl think is going to happen here?
1) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
2) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and leave US Embassy in Tel Aviv.
3) Not recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
4) Option D?
What's the advantage of moving to Jerusalem? We have an embassy, fully functioning of course, not that far from Jerusalem.
TheH2 wrote:The populace surrounds Tel Aviv. What's the benefit?133743Hokie wrote:Having been there as well, including activity at the consulate, there is certainly more to the city of Jerusalem than the old city. The embassy needs to be accessible to the populace, so the old city is not the place. Israel recognizes Jerusalem as their capitol so it makes sense that the US does as well. Last, relocating our embassy there has nothing to do with denying access to the old city and religious sites for anyone. In fact that was actually addressed. I personally see this as a positive to incentivizing the Arab world.TheH2 wrote:Given my posts it should be pretty obvious I'm pretty familiar with the old city. That's what people think of as Jerusalem and what is being fought over. It's also shared space. There really isn't that much outside of it either. The livelihood of Israel is in Tel Aviv and the surrounding area.133743Hokie wrote:DoS will swap out embassy and consulates, putting embassy in Jerusalem and consulate in current space in Tel Aviv. New Embassy will need to be built in Jerusalem as the main consulate there is not up to current security standards and not large enough to serve all of the embassy functions. Not sure what you mean by "outside the walls"? Do you mean the Old City? That is a small, historic area so would never go there to begin with. The current consulate is in the modern city where all of the ease of public access exists. Not sure if they will keep the satellite consulate in east Jerusalem as that's dangerous territory, but likely will to serve Arabs, etc.TheH2 wrote:The U.S. embassy is on a nice plot of land. That alone is a good reason not to move it to Jerusalem. It would be outside the walls and not in what people consider Jerusalem. If you work at the embassy you have to hoping it doesn't move. You can only walk the Via Delorosa so many times before you wish you could be back at the beach. Stay where the people are.HokieFanDC wrote:a war zone he is about to create?
Good move.
What do ppl think is going to happen here?
1) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
2) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and leave US Embassy in Tel Aviv.
3) Not recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
4) Option D?
What's the advantage of moving to Jerusalem? We have an embassy, fully functioning of course, not that far from Jerusalem.
"The capital of Israel that I go to, sir, is Tel Aviv, sir, because that's where all their government people are," Mattis said.
Uh, Jerusalem- it's where the host country prefers it to be? A pretty important matter (especially given last week's thread on state dept issues). It's the capital.TheH2 wrote:The populace surrounds Tel Aviv. What's the benefit?133743Hokie wrote:Having been there as well, including activity at the consulate, there is certainly more to the city of Jerusalem than the old city. The embassy needs to be accessible to the populace, so the old city is not the place. Israel recognizes Jerusalem as their capitol so it makes sense that the US does as well. Last, relocating our embassy there has nothing to do with denying access to the old city and religious sites for anyone. In fact that was actually addressed. I personally see this as a positive to incentivizing the Arab world.TheH2 wrote:Given my posts it should be pretty obvious I'm pretty familiar with the old city. That's what people think of as Jerusalem and what is being fought over. It's also shared space. There really isn't that much outside of it either. The livelihood of Israel is in Tel Aviv and the surrounding area.133743Hokie wrote:DoS will swap out embassy and consulates, putting embassy in Jerusalem and consulate in current space in Tel Aviv. New Embassy will need to be built in Jerusalem as the main consulate there is not up to current security standards and not large enough to serve all of the embassy functions. Not sure what you mean by "outside the walls"? Do you mean the Old City? That is a small, historic area so would never go there to begin with. The current consulate is in the modern city where all of the ease of public access exists. Not sure if they will keep the satellite consulate in east Jerusalem as that's dangerous territory, but likely will to serve Arabs, etc.TheH2 wrote:The U.S. embassy is on a nice plot of land. That alone is a good reason not to move it to Jerusalem. It would be outside the walls and not in what people consider Jerusalem. If you work at the embassy you have to hoping it doesn't move. You can only walk the Via Delorosa so many times before you wish you could be back at the beach. Stay where the people are.HokieFanDC wrote:a war zone he is about to create?
Good move.
What do ppl think is going to happen here?
1) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
2) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and leave US Embassy in Tel Aviv.
3) Not recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
4) Option D?
What's the advantage of moving to Jerusalem? We have an embassy, fully functioning of course, not that far from Jerusalem.
To me the benefit is the US recognizing that Israel deems Jerusalem as its capital. The US places embassies in the capital cities of countries and consulates in other cities as necessary. It brings consistency to US policy in this regard and supports Israels right to determine its own capital city.TheH2 wrote:The populace surrounds Tel Aviv. What's the benefit?133743Hokie wrote:Having been there as well, including activity at the consulate, there is certainly more to the city of Jerusalem than the old city. The embassy needs to be accessible to the populace, so the old city is not the place. Israel recognizes Jerusalem as their capitol so it makes sense that the US does as well. Last, relocating our embassy there has nothing to do with denying access to the old city and religious sites for anyone. In fact that was actually addressed. I personally see this as a positive to incentivizing the Arab world.TheH2 wrote:Given my posts it should be pretty obvious I'm pretty familiar with the old city. That's what people think of as Jerusalem and what is being fought over. It's also shared space. There really isn't that much outside of it either. The livelihood of Israel is in Tel Aviv and the surrounding area.133743Hokie wrote:DoS will swap out embassy and consulates, putting embassy in Jerusalem and consulate in current space in Tel Aviv. New Embassy will need to be built in Jerusalem as the main consulate there is not up to current security standards and not large enough to serve all of the embassy functions. Not sure what you mean by "outside the walls"? Do you mean the Old City? That is a small, historic area so would never go there to begin with. The current consulate is in the modern city where all of the ease of public access exists. Not sure if they will keep the satellite consulate in east Jerusalem as that's dangerous territory, but likely will to serve Arabs, etc.TheH2 wrote:The U.S. embassy is on a nice plot of land. That alone is a good reason not to move it to Jerusalem. It would be outside the walls and not in what people consider Jerusalem. If you work at the embassy you have to hoping it doesn't move. You can only walk the Via Delorosa so many times before you wish you could be back at the beach. Stay where the people are.HokieFanDC wrote:a war zone he is about to create?
Good move.
What do ppl think is going to happen here?
1) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
2) Recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and leave US Embassy in Tel Aviv.
3) Not recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel and move US Embassy to Jerusalem.
4) Option D?
What's the advantage of moving to Jerusalem? We have an embassy, fully functioning of course, not that far from Jerusalem.
Being in the nicest location was a joke. See Mattis quote - seems like he knows where the people he needs to talk to are.RiverguyVT wrote: Uh, Jerusalem- it's where the host country prefers it to be? A pretty important matter (especially given last week's thread on state dept issues). It's the capital.
By your logic, why not put the French Embassy in Cannes, since it is really nice there? Why wouldn't (your logic) other countries put their US embassies at the Grand Canyon, Maui, or Lake Tahoe? You know, because it's nice in those places.
None should be in DC. If population is your criteria, then embassies should be in LA, Houston, Chicago, Phily, or NYC. But not D.C.
+1To me the benefit is the US recognizing that Israel deems Jerusalem as its capital. The US places embassies in the capital cities of countries and consulates in other cities as necessary. It brings consistency to US policy in this regard and supports Israels right to determine its own capital city.
Yeah, that was an Unusual time on UWS. Funny, but Unusual. That’s why I’m glad the little re-educator is around. Endless source of entertainment.USN_Hokie wrote:I'm still so confused by this. Nolan assured us that Trump was an anti-semite after he used a sheriff badge in a campaign add, but right now it looks like Trump is standing with Israel against Islamists/terrorist states and their leftist/democrat sympathizers.HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Read this column for some enlightenment.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
While generally true concerning Islam and Israel, that has nothing to do with Israel’s legal claim over Jerusalem.133743Hokie wrote:Read this column for some enlightenment.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... es-reality
The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
There is no country called "Palestine". It is a geographic region (compare to Appalachia- I can claim Appalachian heritage without that being a state).HokieFanDC wrote:The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
Not sure why you think Jerusalem is legally part of Jerusalem. It’s clearly not.
International law matters, and Israel is subject to it. They have agreed to that fact.
East Jerusalem is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory and as a part of Palestine. Israel itself doesn’t make the claim that it has annexed East Jerusalem.
Palestine has also signed into law that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. Does that make their claim true and valid?
Palestine is a sovereign state, with the ability and authority to rule and govern Gaza and the west strip.RiverguyVT wrote:There is no country called "Palestine". It is a geographic region (compare to Appalachia- I can claim Appalachian heritage without that being a state).HokieFanDC wrote:The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:
That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
Not sure why you think Jerusalem is legally part of Jerusalem. It’s clearly not.
International law matters, and Israel is subject to it. They have agreed to that fact.
East Jerusalem is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory and as a part of Palestine. Israel itself doesn’t make the claim that it has annexed East Jerusalem.
Palestine has also signed into law that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. Does that make their claim true and valid?
There is a country called "Israel". Jerusalem is its capital. And yeah, Jerusalem is a part of Israel. Where are you getting this stuff?!
This isn't about what I think..it is what it is.
Palestine is not a country. It's a fabrication. It has no status.HokieFanDC wrote:The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
Not sure why you think Jerusalem is legally part of Jerusalem. It’s clearly not.
International law matters, and Israel is subject to it. They have agreed to that fact.
East Jerusalem is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory and as a part of Palestine. Israel itself doesn’t make the claim that it has annexed East Jerusalem.
Palestine has also signed into law that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. Does that make their claim true and valid?
See above.133743Hokie wrote:Palestine is not a country. It's a fabrication. It has no status.HokieFanDC wrote:The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:
That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
Not sure why you think Jerusalem is legally part of Jerusalem. It’s clearly not.
International law matters, and Israel is subject to it. They have agreed to that fact.
East Jerusalem is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory and as a part of Palestine. Israel itself doesn’t make the claim that it has annexed East Jerusalem.
Palestine has also signed into law that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. Does that make their claim true and valid?
Jordan was established as the Palestinian stateHokieFanDC wrote:See above.133743Hokie wrote:Palestine is not a country. It's a fabrication. It has no status.HokieFanDC wrote:The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:
That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
Not sure why you think Jerusalem is legally part of Jerusalem. It’s clearly not.
International law matters, and Israel is subject to it. They have agreed to that fact.
East Jerusalem is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory and as a part of Palestine. Israel itself doesn’t make the claim that it has annexed East Jerusalem.
Palestine has also signed into law that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. Does that make their claim true and valid?
Key date. 11/29/12.
No. The UN recognized the State of Palestine as a separate state with it's own sovereign status. Again, 11/29/12. The UN is the international body with the authority to grant state/country status, and State status was granted to Palestine. You can argue that it is a silly status, but it still has that status, and the ability to act as a sovereign country with regard to intl law, agreements, courts, etc.133743Hokie wrote:Jordan was established as the Palestinian stateHokieFanDC wrote:See above.133743Hokie wrote:Palestine is not a country. It's a fabrication. It has no status.HokieFanDC wrote:The international community doesn’t control Israel, but Jerusalem is not part of Israel.RiverguyVT wrote:That same international community did not create Israel with the provsio that Israel would for evermore be controlled by the international community. What you are suggesting is that Israel is not a free and independent self governing state. They are.HokieFanDC wrote:
That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
Edited to add: Jerusalem is indeed legally part of Israel; not only that it is indeed the capital.
Not sure why you think Jerusalem is legally part of Jerusalem. It’s clearly not.
International law matters, and Israel is subject to it. They have agreed to that fact.
East Jerusalem is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory and as a part of Palestine. Israel itself doesn’t make the claim that it has annexed East Jerusalem.
Palestine has also signed into law that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. Does that make their claim true and valid?
Key date. 11/29/12.
RiverguyVT wrote:Palestine is a conceptual quasi state, with no borders. It is an idea. Not a place.
I could no more tell you where Appalachia begin and ends; Appalachia has no borders either.
wait wait wait wait, HokieDC is sooooo smart he knows more than you and definitely more than my dumb ass so we should all bow down to his incredible intellect, there is no debate on the subject the great one (hokiefandc) has spoken!!!!!!!!133743Hokie wrote:Read this column for some enlightenment.HokieFanDC wrote:That’s ignorant. Israel named Jerusalem it’s capital in 1980. They can proclaim anything they want.RiverguyVT wrote:+2HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:
Jerusalem has never been recognized by the international community as the capital because it’s not legally part of Israel.
This is the same international community that took Palestine, divided it, and created Israel as a nation for Jews. So, I think the same entity that created the country, has some say in what land they have rights to, and don’t have rights to.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... es-reality