Jerusalem: to be recognized as the capitol of Israel

[_Kevin Graham]

Someone who doesn't know Jerusalem is in the Middle East has no business putting an Embassy there.

[_Jersey Girl]

So is Trump the anti-Christ or what's going on or is it Pence?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

So is Trump the anti-Christ or what's going on or is it Pence?

Sure. Why not? The M.E. is currently spasming with yet another "Day of Rage TM" and the fact of the matter is this thing the President is doing was unnecessary and meant to inflame tensions. How could it not?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

American foreign policy on Isreal is disproportionately influenced, arguably dominated, by evangelicals who pursue hardcore zionism because they think it brings the world closer to an apocalypse they welcome. This never ceases to be sublimely disturbing.

[_Res Ipsa]

Which historical examples lead you to conclude it would be a smart thing to do?

Depends on the context in which you mean. Six day war demonstrated that Israel cannot strategically maintain the green line borders without controlling other territory like Sinai and Golan. By simply looking at a map the reasons for this are quite obvious.

So how many Palestinians are there and how exactly do you drive them out. I mean, physically, how does Israel remove them from their homes? And where does it drive them to?

[_Chap]

Well, at least all participants in this thread do acknowledge that there actually is a group of people who may legitimately be described as 'Palestinians', i.e. people who have good reason for identifying Palestine as the place where their ancestors lived over many past centuries.

In the past, I have seen people online who argued fiercely that there were in reality no such people at all - that they were some kind of arbitrary creation of Israel's enemies, cobbled together from various groups who were in different ways affected by military disturbances in the Middle East over the last century, and who really belonged in an assortment of other places. I am glad to see signs that this may no longer be seen as a legitimate tactic in debate.

[_Maksutov]

Well, at least all participants in this thread do acknowledge that there actually is a group of people who may legitimately be described as 'Palestinians', i.e. people who have good reason for identifying Palestine as the place where their ancestors lived over many past centuries.

In the past, I have seen people online who argued fiercely that there were in reality no such people at all - that they were some kind of arbitrary creation of Israel's enemies, cobbled together from various groups who were in different ways affected by military disturbances in the Middle East over the last century, and who really belonged in an assortment of other places. I am glad to see signs that this may no longer be seen as a legitimate tactic in debate.

Frank Gaffney was/is famous for that kind of nonsense. It's still bandied about, legitimacy be damned. Most Trumpians have never heard of the Ottoman Empire, its collapse or the colonialish clusterf that ensued right up to the present day. And they aren't about to crack a book written by some liberal elitist godless lying teechur. History is born anew in the mouth of Fox News fantasists. In perfectly partisan soundbites.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I find it a bit odd Americans, or Southerners, or New Yorkers, or Atlantans might take exception to the idea that a group of people might form a regional or state or ethnic identity based in geography or culture or ideology.

- Doc

[_Choyo Chagas]

..

[_subgenius]

Well, at least all participants in this thread do acknowledge that there actually is a group of people who may legitimately be described as 'Palestinians', i.e. people who have good reason for identifying Palestine as the place where their ancestors lived over many past centuries.

In the past, I have seen people online who argued fiercely that there were in reality no such people at all - that they were some kind of arbitrary creation of Israel's enemies, cobbled together from various groups who were in different ways affected by military disturbances in the Middle East over the last century, and who really belonged in an assortment of other places. I am glad to see signs that this may no longer be seen as a legitimate tactic in debate.

This idea that people "belong" anywhere is founded only by violence. For example, the so-called "native Americans" could argue that they belong in the Tennessee Valley, and perhaps during a time they did, but alas they lost that battle and to the victor belongs the spoils.
In other words, they now "belong" where we tell them they belong because we belong here now. Justice is might, plain and simple. This notion that "history" entitles a group of people to pitch a tent is more liberal propaganda and this sort of entitlement has never been, nor will ever be, manifest except by the sword.