Trump redirects over $200 million in U.S. aid for West Bank, Gaza

[mikebike]

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

But this isn't about a person, rather a government. And it's not charity, but aid funds.

 

Synonymous IMHO.

[farcanell]

34 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Yes and to get North Korea on friendly and agreeable terms , the U.S.A had to "starve" them into it .

By putting sanctions on NK forced them to become "friendly" , taking away money from the Palestinians may have the same effect

 

 

Starve them into it? .... or NK, after 65 years, has developed the capacity to defend itself and pose counter threats against the US, forcing the US to accommodate them with agreeable terms.

 

kim should get this years peace prize for stopping US aggression against his country, and pursuing an end to a decades long war.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Synonymous IMHO.

 

You're welcome to your opinion. Most governments provide aid that's often accompanied by an implicit expectation that this will improve its position with the recipient (in one way or another), contribute to its international prestige, etc.

 

Bottom line, I doubt it is often the case that such things are free of interests (commercial or political).

 

Countries are not persons. When they are...well, trouble.

[bristolboy]

23 minutes ago, BestB said:

 When was the decision made to allocate this money for Palestinians?

The notice did not give an exact amount of the funds to be cut, but said they had been approved in 2017 as part of a $230.1 million package in economic support funds for the Palestinians.

http://www.hearst.com/newspapers/midland-reporter-telegram

[bristolboy]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Unless mistaken this was in the works for at least a year now. Certainly there were demonstration by UNRWA workers etc. months ago, when cuts were announced. I'm not sure if there are different budgets involved (as far as I'm aware, that's almost always the case though) so both reporting and communicating these matters is often lacking.

Maybe. But it wasn't long ago that Trump said this:

"The decision comes just days after President Trump said that the Palestinians will "get something very good" as part of the peace process, in return for his decision to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem."

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/palestinians/trump-administration-to-cut-200-million-from-palestinian-aid-1.6412298

Which makes the case for the US explaining the reversal even stronger.

 

[BestB]

15 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The notice did not give an exact amount of the funds to be cut, but said they had been approved in 2017 as part of a $230.1 million package in economic support funds for the Palestinians.

http://www.hearst.com/newspapers/midland-reporter-telegram

So safe to assume 1 year ago? So not a last min decision it would appear 

[BestB]

39 minutes ago, farcanell said:

LIne one.... aid was not given to Gaza... your words, no?

 

It took four letters on the search bar to demonstrate your wrong

 

Beyond ridiculous... either they give to Gaza and the West Bank, or they don’t. The state department might be wrong ( wouldn’t surprise me given the usual Sarah suckerbee bs), or you might be wrong.

 

 

Yes bad trump , what a surprise ?

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

 

Which makes the case for the US explaining the reversal even stronger.

 

From what I gather, these cuts are reprisals against Hamas withdrawing from peace talks, following the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem,

 

hamas declared that the US was unfit to be the mediator, following this inflammatory action  ( and I kind of agree)

 

similarly, trump wanted to cut aid to any recipient country that did not support US initiatives in the UN.

 

Also similarly, trump tried to cut aid to African s hole countries, but congress responsibly stopped that

 

The PLO has rightly accused trump (administration) of weoponising economics.... which has been demonstrated as being largely ineffectual, such as in Pakistan, where the US tried leveraging aid against stopping their nuke program... Pakistan told them to stick their aid and threats, and is now nuclear aware.

 

similarly, sanctions failed to stop North Korea from attaining nuclear awareness.

 

these reductions in aid or imposition of sanctions, rarely hurt those it means to hurt, but rather they harm those most in need of help and protection.... those that the UN are bound to assist per their charter.... a charter designed largely by the US

 

so finally bestb is right, in his last post above... or partially so, by admitting “bad trump”..... ok... he got two words right ?.... but that’s progress, albeit slow ?

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, BestB said:

So safe to assume 1 year ago? So not a last min decision it would appear 

What are you on about? The decision to allocate was made in 2017. The decision to withhold was just announced. Seems last minute to me. What make it worse is what Trump said just a few weeks ago:

 

WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday night that Israel will pay a "higher price" in peace negotiations with the Palestinians after his decision to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Trump, speaking at a political rally in West Virginia, said that the Palestinians will "get something very good" in return for the embassy move, "because it's their turn next." Trump didn't offer any details on what the Palestinians will "get" in return

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-trump-israel-will-pay-a-price-for-jerusalem-decision-1.6408354

Turns out it was the Palestinians' turn. Maybe the good news is that Trump didn't authorize something worse?

[simple1]

11 hours ago, Morch said:

 

If you wish to claim rejecting the current definition of refugee status (as they apply to Palestinians) is "politically motivated", you'll need to address the formation and maintenance of this definition being "politically motivated" as well.

I responded to a member's attempts to denigrate the status of Palestinian refugees. My response  referred to official UN policy concerning refugee status, often being rejected for political purposes by some governments. Contrary to the member, for me it is logical to include the new generations of extended families for those families whose refugee status has not been resolved for decades which places them in a deplorable status for their futures. My POV informs me Palestinians, with UN affirmed refugee status, are fully entitled to direct support via UN agencies and others, not vilification.

 

You have a significant understanding of the Israeli / Palestinian positions, perhaps you would like to summarise the political positions of the respective parties concerning Palestinian refugee status.

 

Again, as yet I yet to read the Trump Administration justification of the claim the UN Agency named in the OP is diverting funds to HAMAS or the families of killed terrorists. 

Edited August 25, 2018 by simple1

[dexterm]

As I wrote earlier in the thread, Trump's witholding of funds had nothing to do with "high priority projects elsewhere". The real reason is beginning to appear in the media.

 

It is all about an attempt to make Palestinian refugees seem to disappear.

Israeli media have now picked up the news.

 

US set to announce it rejects Palestinian ‘right of return’ — TV report
Israel's Hadashot News says Trump Administration will also declare it opposes UN criteria for determining Palestinian refugees, and will move to further weaken UNRWA refugee agency
https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-set-to-announce-it-rejects-palestinian-right-of-return-tv-report/

 

TRUMP TAKING PALESTINIAN RIGHT OF RETURN 'OFF THE TABLE,' REPORT CLAIMS

"I congratulate Donald Trump on his decision to retract his recognition of UNRWA and ipso facto cancel the recognition in the Palestinian right of return," said Katz. [an Israeli Member of the Knesset] "This measure joins the historic decision to transfer the US embassy to Jerusalem and as such annuls two UN resolutions. This is a great victory for the State of Israel."

 

https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Trump-taking-Palestinian-right-of-return-off-the-table-report-claims-565766

[simple1]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

As I wrote earlier in the thread, Trump's witholding of funds had nothing to do with "high priority projects elsewhere". The real reason is beginning to appear in the media.

 

It is all about an attempt to make Palestinian refugees seem to disappear.

Israeli media have now picked up the news.

 

US set to announce it rejects Palestinian ‘right of return’ — TV report
Israel's Hadashot News says Trump Administration will also declare it opposes UN criteria for determining Palestinian refugees, and will move to further weaken UNRWA refugee agency
https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-set-to-announce-it-rejects-palestinian-right-of-return-tv-report/

 

TRUMP TAKING PALESTINIAN RIGHT OF RETURN 'OFF THE TABLE,' REPORT CLAIMS

"I congratulate Donald Trump on his decision to retract his recognition of UNRWA and ipso facto cancel the recognition in the Palestinian right of return," said Katz. [an Israeli Member of the Knesset] "This measure joins the historic decision to transfer the US embassy to Jerusalem and as such annuls two UN resolutions. This is a great victory for the State of Israel."

 

https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Trump-taking-Palestinian-right-of-return-off-the-table-report-claims-565766

Guess one can kiss any glimmer of light for Palestinian cooperation with negotiations goodbye. So much for the Trump peace initiative...

[BestB]

6 hours ago, bristolboy said:

What are you on about? The decision to allocate was made in 2017. The decision to withhold was just announced. Seems last minute to me. What make it worse is what Trump said just a few weeks ago:

 

WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday night that Israel will pay a "higher price" in peace negotiations with the Palestinians after his decision to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Trump, speaking at a political rally in West Virginia, said that the Palestinians will "get something very good" in return for the embassy move, "because it's their turn next." Trump didn't offer any details on what the Palestinians will "get" in return

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-trump-israel-will-pay-a-price-for-jerusalem-decision-1.6408354

Turns out it was the Palestinians' turn. Maybe the good news is that Trump didn't authorize something worse?

What am I on about? Well last minute decision means decision was made in last min, which is not the case.

 

annoucement was made the other day that does not mean decision was made on the same day.

 

do try to keep up

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, BestB said:

What am I on about? Well last minute decision means decision was made in last min, which is not the case.

 

annoucement was made the other day that does not mean decision was made on the same day.

 

do try to keep up

Clearly you are unfamiliar with the concept of idiomatic expressions. Believe it or not, they are not used in a literal sense. At least by people with a reasonable command of English. What a nonsensical interpretation.

 

And you think it's significant that the decision may not have been made at the last minute? And insignificant that the decision was announced that way?

 

And this from a POTUS who had stated  not long ago that the Palestinians could expect good things from negotiations?

[BestB]

Just now, bristolboy said:

Clearly you are unfamiliar with the concept of idiomatic expressions. Believe it or not, they are not used in a literal sense. At least by people with a reasonable command of English. What a nonsensical interpretation.

 

And you think it's significant that the decision may not have been made at the last minute? And insignificant that the decision was announced that way?

 

And this from a POTUS who had stated  not long ago that the Palestinians could expect good things from negotiations?

Oh yet another anti trump rant 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, BestB said:

Oh yet another anti trump rant 

That's quite a rebuttal. All-purpose and no substance.

[BestB]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

That's quite a rebuttal. All-purpose and no substance.

No, I just can not be bothered nor have the patience reading the incoherent drivel over and over again.

 

other posters with greater patience already explained it for you but as usual, nothing got registered and incoherent drivel keeps on coming.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, BestB said:

No, I just can not be bothered nor have the patience reading the incoherent drivel over and over again.

 

other posters with greater patience already explained it for you but as usual, nothing got registered and incoherent drivel keeps on coming.

More of the same empty insults. 

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, BestB said:

No, I just can not be bothered nor have the patience reading the incoherent drivel over and over again.

 

other posters with greater patience already explained it for you but as usual, nothing got registered and incoherent drivel keeps on coming.

False. No poster before or after me has addressed the issue of Trump promising the Palestinians good things to come from negotiations with Israel thanks to the moving of the embassy to Jerusalem and then shortly afterwards his slashing of aid. Just one more reason to distrust his bona fides.

Edited August 26, 2018 by bristolboy

[OneMoreFarang]

I know what Trump should do with those 200 millions and with the over 3 billions which they pump into Israel every year and with all the rest of the money which they spend all around the world. They should take that money and use it in the USA for education, health care, all the homeless people, etc. Maybe if they do that for a decade or two that will make America great. Imagine if there wouldn't be so many idiots over there, wouldn't that be great? Most well educated people would never vote for a maniac like Trump.

Please Don Tangerine, use all that money where it is needed most - in your home country.

[underlordcthulhu]

Happy to hear it.

America first baby!

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

 

[farcanell]

46 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I know what Trump should do with those 200 millions and with the over 3 billions which they pump into Israel every year and with all the rest of the money which they spend all around the world. They should take that money and use it in the USA for education, health care, all the homeless people, etc. Maybe if they do that for a decade or two that will make America great. Imagine if there wouldn't be so many idiots over there, wouldn't that be great? Most well educated people would never vote for a maniac like Trump.

Please Don Tangerine, use all that money where it is needed most - in your home country.

Whilst you raise a valid point about the nessesity to educate the stupid out of people, the US already spends about 600 billion on education, so adding another 200million will achieve no reduction in stupidity

 

and with no reduction in stupidity, comes the budget forecast showing a 30% reduction in education spending.... that’ll fix the future.... reminds me of a Jim Cary movie.

[farcanell]

44 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

Happy to hear it.

America first baby!

Your mornings emoticon rant suggests your sad and confused, and whilst not surprising, I do hope your day improves, after all, it is your lords day.

( the other one... not Donald)

[underlordcthulhu]

5 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Your mornings emoticon rant suggests your sad and confused, and whilst not surprising, I do hope your day improves, after all, it is your lords day.

( the other one... not Donald)

Try not to let it get to you Ok? There's more to life than TV and antiTrump rants.

Yes I will enjoy my day, hope you do too ?

Edited August 26, 2018 by underlordcthulhu

[Morch]

15 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Maybe. But it wasn't long ago that Trump said this:

"The decision comes just days after President Trump said that the Palestinians will "get something very good" as part of the peace process, in return for his decision to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem."

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/palestinians/trump-administration-to-cut-200-million-from-palestinian-aid-1.6412298

Which makes the case for the US explaining the reversal even stronger.

 

 

It doesn't really "make the case" for anything. Trump making contradictory, off the cuff or nonsense comments is sadly pretty much the norm. Reading too much into it is a choice, which some posters seem to make whenever it suits the "point" they are pushing at a given time.

[Morch]

13 hours ago, farcanell said:

From what I gather, these cuts are reprisals against Hamas withdrawing from peace talks, following the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem,

 

hamas declared that the US was unfit to be the mediator, following this inflammatory action  ( and I kind of agree)

 

similarly, trump wanted to cut aid to any recipient country that did not support US initiatives in the UN.

 

Also similarly, trump tried to cut aid to African s hole countries, but congress responsibly stopped that

 

The PLO has rightly accused trump (administration) of weoponising economics.... which has been demonstrated as being largely ineffectual, such as in Pakistan, where the US tried leveraging aid against stopping their nuke program... Pakistan told them to stick their aid and threats, and is now nuclear aware.

 

similarly, sanctions failed to stop North Korea from attaining nuclear awareness.

 

these reductions in aid or imposition of sanctions, rarely hurt those it means to hurt, but rather they harm those most in need of help and protection.... those that the UN are bound to assist per their charter.... a charter designed largely by the US

 

so finally bestb is right, in his last post above... or partially so, by admitting “bad trump”..... ok... he got two words right ?.... but that’s progress, albeit slow ?

 

What "peace talks" was Hamas involved (and supposedly "withdrew from") in prior to the transfer of the US embassy? I think you're conflating between the PA and Hamas there. The following comments about the US's position as a mediator were aired by both PA and Hamas officials.

 

 

[Morch]

11 hours ago, bristolboy said:

What are you on about? The decision to allocate was made in 2017. The decision to withhold was just announced. Seems last minute to me. What make it worse is what Trump said just a few weeks ago:

 

WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday night that Israel will pay a "higher price" in peace negotiations with the Palestinians after his decision to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Trump, speaking at a political rally in West Virginia, said that the Palestinians will "get something very good" in return for the embassy move, "because it's their turn next." Trump didn't offer any details on what the Palestinians will "get" in return

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-trump-israel-will-pay-a-price-for-jerusalem-decision-1.6408354

Turns out it was the Palestinians' turn. Maybe the good news is that Trump didn't authorize something worse?

 

The decision to cut US funding for UNRWA was announced months ago. This was even discussed on TVF at the time. There were protests about the cuts, warnings from UNRWA officials that they wouldn't be able to maintain operations. It's no last minute thing. That Trump says this or that, in a manner incongruous with other statements or actions, is just how things are with this administration.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2018 by Morch

[Chomper Higgot]

17 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

"We have undertaken a review of U.S. assistance to the Palestinian Authority and in the West Bank and Gaza to ensure these funds are spent in accordance with U.S. national interests and provide value to the U.S. taxpayer," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

 

So publish the review sand let’s all see the rationale behind this decision.

 

17 hours ago, BestB said:

Why should it be published?

 

Since the US is a democracy, why not publish?

 

If there is nothing to hide, then publish.

[mikebike]

16 minutes ago, BestB said:

Have you sent a request and were refused?

Why would you have to ask in a transparent democracy?