Taxi from Suwannaphum to Pattaya

[Nyezhov]

4 minutes ago, dexterm said:

I don't think Trump will be winning many friends with this overtly anti Palestinian policy. It appears to be more like inhumane collective punishment  against a whole population of refugees as payback for some perceived slight.

 

 

I doubt he really cares. I don't.

[bristolboy]

9 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

One is a thug when one takes from another by force, violence or threats.

 

A person who decides not to give you money anymore cuz hes not getting value for it is a realist.

In this case, the threat of the withdrawal of aid because of words.

[Nyezhov]

1 minute ago, Elfin said:

They test them on the Palestinians, those in Gaza especially every 2-3 years. Watch a video called "The Lab".

555555

 

Got to test them somewhere. Until the baddies on this earth are gone, somewhere something is going to be tested.

 

As I used to tell my students.....dont want to get shot by a cop? Dont reach for your pocket.  And if you shoot first, get ready for what will come next.

[dexterm]

11 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

I doubt he really cares. I don't.

Well, I don't think that reflects well on the so called leaders of the free world.

 

I would much rather the USA were exerting its influence to effect change for the good of all people in the Middle East, rather than play favorites and allow Russia and China to fill the vacuum. What goes around comes around I suppose. Trump's decision is not  in the interests of the USA in the long run.

 

When you pressurize a whole population needlesslesy in this way, it could have unexpected consequences. 

 

Edited September 1, 2018 by dexterm

[Nyezhov]

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

In this case, the threat of the withdrawal of aid because of words.

555, so you feel that because someone gave you something in the past, you are entitled forever?

 

You mean I have to keep paying that bar girl who is cheating on me with a young Swede and calling me fatboy and needledick? Why you no send money, you thug!

[Elfin]

3 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Got to test them somewhere. Until the baddies on this earth are gone, somewhere something is going to be tested.

But the "baddies" are the zionists comrade Nyezhov

 

5 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Does that matter?

 

[Elfin]

To me, yes

[Nyezhov]

Just now, dexterm said:

Well, I don't think that reflects well on the so called leaders of the free world.

 

I would much rather the USA were exerting its influence to effect change for the good of all people in the Middle East, rather than play favorites and allow Russia and China to fill the vacuum. What goes around comes around I suppose, but not very smart in the long run.

 

When you pressurize a whole population needlesslesy in this way, it could have unexpected consequences. 

 

Yep, but it could work, especially when you have been trying the old ways for 70 years.

[Nyezhov]

1 minute ago, Elfin said:

But the "baddies" are the zionists comrade Nyezhov

 

 

Not really knowing who you are refeering to by the word Zionist...but... the baddies are who the USA decides are baddies. Most of the time the world agrees, if not, ce la vie.

 

We say the Israelis are the good guys. Hence they are. 

[Nyezhov]

3 minutes ago, Elfin said:

To me, yes

Why? 

[Elfin]

4 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

We say the Israelis are the good guys. Hence they are. 

They are the cowboys who wear the white hats-right comrade?

 

[candide]

42 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Really. 555555

 

If thats your chosen analogy. I prefer not to look at the world in purely Manichaen terms in the result phase, but as an overall simplistic philosophy, that works.

"that works", lol.

[Nyezhov]

4 minutes ago, candide said:

"that works", lol.

oops sorry..

 

that works, Dude.......

[candide]

4 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

oops sorry..

 

that works, Dude.......

Evidence?

[Morch]

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Which means free weaponry is valueless?

 

Perhaps in your warped imagination. There wasn't anything of the sort implied. The point made was that the nowadays, most of the aid provided directly benefits US firms and workers. It's not quite the same case as the OP deals with, nor is it much on topic anyway.

[Nyezhov]

1 hour ago, candide said:

Evidence?

Empirical evidence for an overall Manichaen weltanshauung? Surely you jest......

[Scott]

Troll posts removed. 

 

[Morch]

2 hours ago, dexterm said:

I don't think Trump will be winning many friends with this overtly anti Palestinian policy. It appears to be more like inhumane collective punishment  against a whole population of refugees as payback for some perceived slight by their (long time since elected and useby date) leaders. Simply playing political games with millions of people's lives.

 

"Gunness, the agency's spokesman, told Al Jazeera that if UNRWA didn't receive emergency funding in the next 30 days, when its funds are expected to run dry, a "doomsday scenario" could unfold.

"Let there be no mistake; this decision is likely to have a devastating impact on the lives of 526,000 children who receive a daily education from UNRWA, 3.5 million sick people who come to our clinics for medical care, 1.7 million food insecure people who receive assistance from us, and tens of thousands of vulnerable women, children and disabled refugees who come to us.

"If we don't fill a funding gap of $217m very quickly, they are all likely to suffer"."

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/09/unrwa-funding-cut-deeply-regrettable-shocking-180901071620633.html

 

There isn't much in Trump foreign policy moves to indicate "winning friends" is a priority. Considering he pretty much got away with more significant moves (like the US embassy transfer), and without much of an effective backlash, it is somehow doubtful that the current issue will result in worse.

 

As for painting this to be a "payback for some perceived slight" by Palestinian leaders - that's fine, if one ignores that the issue was on the back burner for quite some time now. In effect, the Trump administration does seem to have a strategy of sorts on this (not saying it's a good, or wise one). At this time, it is mostly focused on applying pressure on the Palestinian side - enough pressure to earn credibility, but not so much as push the Palestinians over the edge (or have nothing to lose...whatever). Same thing as the embassy move - broadcasts strongly, but in effect doesn't commit to anything that would be unacceptable in the endgame.

 

In this context, it is worth bearing in mind that the US did not halt all support for the Palestinians. And even the funds withheld in the current case do not amount to the total relevant budget. It will hurt, sure - but not to the point that the shortfall can't be overcome.

 

From someone habitually going on about "easy" solutions involving both people - going on about "playing political games with millions of people's lives" is hypocritical. Obviously, no such complaints raised when Palestinian leaders do the very same.

 

Regarding doomsday predictions from UNRWA officials - yeah, well....what would one expect them to say? Again, they may want to coordinate their comments, because different, less hyperbolic comments were also made. If taken at face value, the quoted bit might raise some doubts as to UNRWA viability and management.

 

 

 

[Morch]

2 hours ago, dexterm said:

Well, I don't think that reflects well on the so called leaders of the free world.

 

I would much rather the USA were exerting its influence to effect change for the good of all people in the Middle East, rather than play favorites and allow Russia and China to fill the vacuum. What goes around comes around I suppose. Trump's decision is not  in the interests of the USA in the long run.

 

When you pressurize a whole population needlesslesy in this way, it could have unexpected consequences. 

 

 

I doubt Trump is much invested in the "leader of the free world" label. That people don't like that doesn't change how things are at the moment.

 

What you might consider "the good of all people in the Middle East" is probably not quite what's advertised, at least with regard to some groups.

 

And hypocrisy, yet again - many of your posts advocate applying pressure on a whole population. And that you might consider it "needful" is a dubious premise.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Elfin said:

Don't fall off your bar stool, comrade. The US contribution is about a third of the total funding for the Palestinian relief fund. The UN will lobby other wealthy nations to make up the deficit.

 

If the US contribution is so easily substituted, perhaps there's no need to get overly agitated about it.

Several countries did state they will increase contributions, although the whole deficit wasn't covered (or more correctly, pledged to be covered) yet. Regardless, even if all promised funds do materialize, it is quite likely to be messy for a while. Also, I'm not sure that the additional contributions are one-offs or permanent. If the former, it means that the whole circus will start again in a few months.

[GinBoy2]

The problem with all of this is that nobodies hands are clean.

The British kicked it off with the Balfour Declaration, and continued to basically screw things up until their ignominious withdrawal in 1948.
Often forgotten is that the 6 day war was fought by the Israelis, not with American weapons, but with French. At the time France was the big supporter of the Israeli State, not America.

[The manic]

22 hours ago, dexterm said:

The usual way of ending a refugee problem in time of war is to allow people who want to return back to their homes when the fighting ends.

 

Seems somewhat hypocritical of both USA and Israel when many of these Palestinians still have the keys to their homes 15 minutes away across the separation barrier in Israel where they were born. 

 

There would be no need for UNWRA if Israel and USA allowed Palestinian refugees to return to their land and homes.

How about actually asking the refugees what they would like.

They want the destruction of Israel and destruction of Amrakia! There is no such place as Palestine and no such people.

[The manic]

9 hours ago, dexterm said:

I don't think Trump will be winning many friends with this overtly anti Palestinian policy. It appears to be more like inhumane collective punishment  against a whole population of refugees as payback for some perceived slight by their (long time since elected and useby date) leaders. Simply playing political games with millions of people's lives.

 

"Gunness, the agency's spokesman, told Al Jazeera that if UNRWA didn't receive emergency funding in the next 30 days, when its funds are expected to run dry, a "doomsday scenario" could unfold.

"Let there be no mistake; this decision is likely to have a devastating impact on the lives of 526,000 children who receive a daily education from UNRWA, 3.5 million sick people who come to our clinics for medical care, 1.7 million food insecure people who receive assistance from us, and tens of thousands of vulnerable women, children and disabled refugees who come to us.

"If we don't fill a funding gap of $217m very quickly, they are all likely to suffer"."

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/09/unrwa-funding-cut-deeply-regrettable-shocking-180901071620633.html

The oil rich Muslim countries can pay...and give full citizenship to the Pals. But they don't.  The pals have waged a war of terror against the USA and it's allies. The USA should not be giving any money to these vicious parasites.

[Ahab]

12 hours ago, Spidey said:

The US has given aid to Israel amounting to $38 billion over the last 10 years. It's the only country not to have been hit by the current cuts in aid. Team Trump have just asked for the annual budget for aid to Israel to be increased by a further $200 million for 2019.

 

Is Israel now considered as part of the US? Might as well be as Trump pays more lip service to them than he does to Putin.

Money spent on Israel is money well spent on a democratic ally (the only democracy in the middle east by the way) that supports the US. Money spent on Palestinians is money thrown down a bottomless hole of people that are not are allies and celebrate American defeats. Bottom line is that we get to decide where we want to spend US foreign aid, and it has been decided to no longer send it to a country that works against peace (Palestine) and support the country that is willing to have peace (Israel).

[Chomper Higgot]

8 hours ago, Morch said:

 

There isn't much in Trump foreign policy moves to indicate "winning friends" is a priority. Considering he pretty much got away with more significant moves (like the US embassy transfer), and without much of an effective backlash, it is somehow doubtful that the current issue will result in worse.

 

As for painting this to be a "payback for some perceived slight" by Palestinian leaders - that's fine, if one ignores that the issue was on the back burner for quite some time now. In effect, the Trump administration does seem to have a strategy of sorts on this (not saying it's a good, or wise one). At this time, it is mostly focused on applying pressure on the Palestinian side - enough pressure to earn credibility, but not so much as push the Palestinians over the edge (or have nothing to lose...whatever). Same thing as the embassy move - broadcasts strongly, but in effect doesn't commit to anything that would be unacceptable in the endgame.

 

In this context, it is worth bearing in mind that the US did not halt all support for the Palestinians. And even the funds withheld in the current case do not amount to the total relevant budget. It will hurt, sure - but not to the point that the shortfall can't be overcome.

 

From someone habitually going on about "easy" solutions involving both people - going on about "playing political games with millions of people's lives" is hypocritical. Obviously, no such complaints raised when Palestinian leaders do the very same.

 

Regarding doomsday predictions from UNRWA officials - yeah, well....what would one expect them to say? Again, they may want to coordinate their comments, because different, less hyperbolic comments were also made. If taken at face value, the quoted bit might raise some doubts as to UNRWA viability and management.

 

 

 

Without access to the review and associated report upon which the WH claims to have made this decision, you and everyone else is guessing what the motives are.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Money spent on Israel is money well spent on a democratic ally (the only democracy in the middle east by the way) that supports the US. Money spent on Palestinians is money thrown down a bottomless hole of people that are not are allies and celebrate American defeats. Bottom line is that we get to decide where we want to spend US foreign aid, and it has been decided to no longer send it to a country that works against peace (Palestine) and support the country that is willing to have peace (Israel).

The leadership of all players  have failed to develop acceptable peace plans, it is not a one way street. IMO the Israelis and the USA being the most powerful have a greater degree of responsibility and should cease throwing stones on the road for a two State Solution.

 

Under UN rules the US does not have the authority to make unilateral decisions concerning the status of any refugee group. The Trump Administration is again demonstrating its contempt for the Rule of Law.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Without access to the review and associated report upon which the WH claims to have made this decision, you and everyone else is guessing what the motives are.

 

You just keep harping on the same issue (which may or may not be an actual issue). As asked earlier - other than in your posts, did relevant, involved parties take up your complaint as their banner?

 

Whether or not this bit of info is crucial to analyzing the Trump administration position can be questioned. It's not like Trump got much issues declaring policies without firm factual basis. That said, though - criticism of UNRWA is nothing new (even the recent EU statement of support and pledge of funds included a bit of that). 

[Morch]

27 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The leadership of all players  have failed to develop acceptable peace plans, it is not a one way street. IMO the Israelis and the USA being the most powerful have a greater degree of responsibility and should cease throwing stones on the road for a two State Solution.

 

Under UN rules the US does not have the authority to make unilateral decisions concerning the status of any refugee group. The Trump Administration is again demonstrating its contempt for the Rule of Law.

 

Problem with the first notion is that some seem to have trouble with the concept of "degree". Most "takes" on things end up as being one-sided, some in the extreme. That's all the more apparent when people get caught up in propaganda catchphrases and slogans. As for being "powerful" actually denotes having more responsibility, rather than more leverage - I think that this is, again, an area where posters conflate between the ideal and the real. Expecting too much of the former, and disregarding the latter is not particularly constructive.

 

The UN isn't a world government. The US may not have the "authority" to do whatever with regard to UN designations, but in effect, this remains in the formal or procedural level. In effect, the US can certainly decide on applying other criteria as to which efforts it funds and how.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, The manic said:

They want the destruction of Israel and destruction of Amrakia! There is no such place as Palestine and no such people.

 

Whether some posters like it or not, the Palestinians are a people. Asserting otherwise wouldn't change things much. They may be a relatively new group on the national scene, and may not have much of history - but that pretty irrelevant to the wholesale dismissal.

 

There is definitely a Palestine. The issue is more with disagreements as to its current and future status.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, The manic said:

The oil rich Muslim countries can pay...and give full citizenship to the Pals. But they don't.  The pals have waged a war of terror against the USA and it's allies. The USA should not be giving any money to these vicious parasites.

 

Do tell about the "war of terror" Palestinians are currently engaged in vs. the USA.