President Announces Moving Embassy to Jerusalem

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, jayjayj said:

Israel is not the only country in the world that had a controversial beginning.  The beginning of Israel has nothing to do with that fact that it is a sovereign and valid nation, and has subsequently designated Jerusalem as the capital.  Again, this is the only country in the world where the U.S. Embassy is not located in the designated capital of a country, period.  

Is there any other country in the world that has a "Designated" capitol that is also claimed by another state/government? 

 

I can't think of any, but there might be. Maybe even historical examples we can use? (Ideally post-war so it is at least reasonably comparable)

 

I realize Palestine is recognised by everyone as a state, but I think that is part of why it rings false for America to claim to want a "two state solution" but only actively recognise one state (and state created by military force, no less).

 

This decision only further highlights our clear and obvious preference. It makes us even more ineffectual as a negotiator or middle man. If we even ever were (we werent really).

Edited December 9, 2017 by bcking

[-Trinity- 513]

9 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

You are mistaking my unemotional, rational, and logical posts for something entirely different.  Why is that?

 

I'm not putting any words in your mouth.  You brought up that the beginning of Israel was controversial, which has nothing to do with Israel having the right to designate their own capital and the fact that the U.S. Embassy in Israel is the only U.S. Embassy not located in a country's designated capital.  You also brought up your opinion that Israel is different from any other country.  

Because they don't read like they are unemotional, rational and logical? Quite the opposite....

 

The beginning of Israel was controversial, so obviously ( if you are logic and rational) you would understand that every action will cause controversy.

We are talking about years of controversy. My personal opinion is based on the logical and rational facts just mentioned, cause and effect.

 

Do you truly believe that both parties will finally have peace after this?

 

Edit after your edit:  about the Temple Mount, my personal opinion is that it should be open to anyone, regardless their religion.

But I thought the same when I wasn't allowed to enter a synagogue in Marrakech because the person working there assumed I was Muslim.
 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Beachlover

[jayjayj 571]

2 minutes ago, Beachlover said:

Because they don't read like they are unemotional, rational and logical? Quite the opposite....

 

The beginning of Israel was controversial, so obviously ( if you are logic and rational) you would understand that every action will cause controversy.

We are talking about years of controversy. My personal opinion is based on the logical and rational facts just mentioned, cause and effect.

 

Do you truly believe that both parties will finally have peace after this?

That is your opinionated reading of them.  They aren't intended to be anything other than what I stated.  

 

I haven't disagreed with you that the beginning of Israel was controversial.  However, that has nothing to do with the fact that Israel is a valid and sovereign country and has designated Jerusalem as the capital.  The U.S. shouldn't discriminate against Israel by making an exception to embassy locations.  

 

I do truly believe that peace can be achieved in the next few years.        

[jayjayj 571]

10 minutes ago, bcking said:

Is there any other country in the world that has a "Designated" capitol that is also claimed by another state/government?

 

I can't think of any, but there might be. Maybe even historical examples we can use? (Ideally post-war so it is at least reasonably comparable)

Berlin?  Sort of similar.

 

 

 

 

[-Trinity- 513]

1 minute ago, jayjayj said:

 

I do truly believe that peace can be achieved in the next few years.        

 

I hope you are correct.

[bcking 3,157]

7 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

Berlin?  Sort of similar.

 

 

 

 

So I didn't know the history so I looked it up -

 

Apparently we didn't keep an embassy in West Berlin. The "capitol" of West Germany was moved to Bonn. We had "Mission Berlin" but not our official embassy.

 

West Germany chose to move it (though I'm sure we had significant input). So technically we still had an embassy in the city that was the capitol.

 

Not sure what would have happened if WG tried to keep Berlin as their capitol. Then again the USSR then was obviously a much bigger threat than a Palestinian State, so we wouldn't have been able to bully the USSR nearly as much.

 

(My source is the venerable Wikipedia)

Edited December 9, 2017 by bcking

[jayjayj 571]

Just now, bcking said:

So I didn't know the history so I looked it up -

 

Apparently we didn't keep an embassy in West Berlin. The "capitol" of WG was moved to Bonn. We had "Mission Berlin" but not our official embassy.

 

(My source is the venerable Wikipedia)

I doubt there are any other examples then.  I can't think of any.  

 

I do think Jerusalem should and will be split in a final peace agreement, even though Saudi Arabia has offered to build a brand new Palestinian capital in a city near Jerusalem.  I don't have any inside knowledge to why SA would make that offer now.  I suspect the Arab states are also tired of the status quo or have realized their interests better align with the interests of Israel now.      

[jayjayj 571]

10 minutes ago, bcking said:

So I didn't know the history so I looked it up -

 

Apparently we didn't keep an embassy in West Berlin. The "capitol" of WG was moved to Bonn. We had "Mission Berlin" but not our official embassy.

 

(My source is the venerable Wikipedia)

In addition to splitting Jerusalem, they will need to establish some sort of unimpeded safe passage between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip - maybe an 8 lane highway with mass transit such as a rail link and also a utilities corridor for water, electricity, and telecom links. 

[-Trinity- 513]

22 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

 I suspect the Arab states are also tired of the status quo or have realized their interests better align with the interests of Israel now.      

 

You live in the UAE, how did they react to this news?

 

I also wonder what the motivations of SA are, however it aligns up with the recent developments in that area. It seems like the new to be king wants to go a different direction.

 

[jayjayj 571]

34 minutes ago, Beachlover said:

You live in the UAE, how did they react to this news?

 

I also wonder what the motivations of SA are, however it aligns up with the recent developments in that area. It seems like the new to be king wants to go a different direction.

 

The UAE is locked in step with Saudi Arabia right now - mainly due to the GCC's current boycott/conflict with Qatar pertaining Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and some other topics.  The Arab Gulf states, minus Qatar, appear to be at the point where they want a final peace resolution, no matter how difficult or how much it costs them financially to get there.  The media in this part of the world is tightly controlled by the government, so you don't see many if any articles going against the current political policies of the rulers.  I used to see frequent anti-Israel articles in national newspapers, especially op-eds, but they are becoming less and less frequent now.  There is no such thing here as public protests.  Most westerners have limited interactions with locals and even when they do, it is normally just pleasantries.  So, it is difficult to gauge how the populace feels about pretty much anything.  Of course, they don't have much to complain about, as life doesn't get much better than that of a UAE citizen.  They enjoy a very high standard of living, even compared to other Arab countries, and they have caring and benevolent leaders.

 

I suspect Saudi Arabia is motivated by the ongoing proxy war between Iran and the Gulf states in Yemen.  That could escalate and get out of control quickly.  As I said earlier, it appears Saudi Arabia's interests are much more aligned now with Israel's then they have ever been.  The thought of military cooperation between Israel and the Gulf states, even just a few years ago, was unthinkable.  Now though, it has become reality.  That in and of itself is a major shift in policy.  

        

Edited December 9, 2017 by jayjayj

[-Trinity- 513]

24 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

The UAE is locked in step with Saudi Arabia right now - mainly due to the GCC's current boycott/conflict with Qatar pertaining Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and some other topics.  The Arab Gulf states, minus Qatar, appear to be at the point where they want a final peace resolution, no matter how difficult or how much it costs them financially to get there.  The media in this part of the world is tightly controlled by the government, so you don't see many if any articles going against the current political policies of the rulers.  I used to see frequent anti-Israel articles in national newspapers, especially op-eds, but they are becoming less and less frequent now.  There is no such thing here as public protests.  Most westerners have limited interactions with locals and even when they do, it is normally just pleasantries.  So, it is difficult to gauge how the populace feels about pretty much anything.  Of course, they don't have much to complain about, as life doesn't get much better than that of a UAE citizen.  They enjoy a very high standard of living, even compared to other Arab countries, and they have caring and benevolent leaders.

 

I suspect Saudi Arabia is motivated by the ongoing proxy war between Iran and the Gulf states in Yemen.  That could escalate and get out of control quickly.  As I said earlier, it appears Saudi Arabia's interests are much more aligned now with Israel's then they have ever been.  The thought of military cooperation between Israel and the Gulf states, even just a few years ago, was unthinkable.  Now though, it has become reality.  That in and of itself is a major shift in policy.  

        

From what I've observed is that after the so-called Arab spring a lot of Arab countries realized how quickly it can escalate ( Syria).I've seen it in Morocco ( although it's not the Middle East, its influenced by it) where they working hard to keep fundamentalists out and quickly end protests. Probably SA and the UAE realize they have to wisely choose their battles? As well who their allies will be, so yeah you might be right about SA/Israel. SA has much bigger problems, not "just" keeping ISIS out, but as well not letting Iran taking over control in that area. I heard from International students from SA that there is no such thing as public protests in SA, so yes its hard to really know what the public thinks.

 

However, SA is an orthodox Muslim country, and orthodox Muslims believe basically the same as orthodox Jews and Christians about the end of the word.The outcome is different for each one of them, but the events are almost the same: natural disasters, wars, corruption, dishonesty and of course Jerusalem. I wonder whether the SA government,  whose reign traditionally is based on religion, is actually very pragmatic instead and just uses religion as a tool. Whatever the motivations might be, SA is going a completely different direction compared to the last decades. I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually open Mecca to non-believers or other religions. But that's a different topic.

 

[yuna628 9,680]

6 hours ago, jayjayj said:

Bull cocky!  Let's not exaggerate now.  These people are a very tiny subset of the U.S. population and the rest of the population don't take them seriously.    

Have you been heavily involved in Southern Baptist doctrine, and evangelical churches for years? Have you done ministry and outreach and followed various influential movements and online entities that help populate these ideas out of the 'tiny subsets' into the larger subsets? I've been around these circles a long time.. they are more common than the average 'believer' thinks. The church as a whole has done nothing to cast them out - they either don't take them seriously (when they should because they have literally infiltrated all aspects of Southern Baptist doctrine since even before I was around), or they turn a blind eye and let these ideas spread. They don't teach truth or responsible doctrine, they offer no direction to the lost within their ranks. They simply don't care because they sold out long ago. Spend some time in some of these churches, homeschool groups, and other sects.. sit yourself in front of the tv and watch the big mega preachers of the day and the big networks of note connected to these groups... and you'll come to see what we're talking about.

Edited December 9, 2017 by yuna628

[-Trinity- 513]

29 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Have you been heavily involved in Southern Baptist doctrine, and evangelical churches for years? Have you done ministry and outreach and followed various influential movements and online entities that help populate these ideas out of the 'tiny subsets' into the larger subsets? I've been around these circles a long time.. they are more common than the average 'believer' thinks. The church as a whole has done nothing to cast them out - they either don't take them seriously (when they should because they have literally infiltrated all aspects of Southern Baptist doctrine since even before I was around), or they turn a blind eye and let these ideas spread. They don't teach truth or responsible doctrine, they offer no direction to the lost within their ranks. They simply don't care because they sold out long ago. Spend some time in some of these churches, homeschool groups, and other sects.. sit yourself in front of the tv and watch the big mega preachers of the day and the big networks of note connected to these groups... and you'll come to see what we're talking about.

Agreed, I see this a lot in the state I'm living right now. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

52 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Have you been heavily involved in Southern Baptist doctrine, and evangelical churches for years? Have you done ministry and outreach and followed various influential movements and online entities that help populate these ideas out of the 'tiny subsets' into the larger subsets? I've been around these circles a long time.. they are more common than the average 'believer' thinks. The church as a whole has done nothing to cast them out - they either don't take them seriously (when they should because they have literally infiltrated all aspects of Southern Baptist doctrine since even before I was around), or they turn a blind eye and let these ideas spread. They don't teach truth or responsible doctrine, they offer no direction to the lost within their ranks. They simply don't care because they sold out long ago. Spend some time in some of these churches, homeschool groups, and other sects.. sit yourself in front of the tv and watch the big mega preachers of the day and the big networks of note connected to these groups... and you'll come to see what we're talking about.

Modern Day Witches Call Theirs ‘A Beautiful Way Of Life’

NEW PALTZ, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) — At a time when participation in traditional religions is declining among Americans, the practice of witchcraft is said to be on the rise.

 

Snip

 

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2017/12/08/modrn-day-witchcraft/

 

 

 

 

 

[yuna628 9,680]

2 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Modern Day Witches Call Theirs ‘A Beautiful Way Of Life’

NEW PALTZ, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) — At a time when participation in traditional religions is declining among Americans, the practice of witchcraft is said to be on the rise.

 

Snip

 

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2017/12/08/modrn-day-witchcraft/

 

 

 

 

 

Congrats. I did not know you had taken an interest in covens on your swerving journey.