U.S. VP Pence pressures Paraguay over Jerusalem embassy move

[connda]

On 9/7/2018 at 7:43 AM, webfact said:

Pence "strongly encouraged" Abdo to follow through with Paraguay's commitment to move the embassy to Jerusalem

With a carrot or a baseball bat? 

[Tailwagsdog]

Much ado about nothing ....

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Oh, so disregarding Trump's statements and words is the thing in some situation, but on others, a minute examination of his words and supposed hidden meaning is in order. About as consistent as...well, Trump. Seems like it gets weirder, considering even on this topic no such opinion was aired with regard to previous posts from other posters insisting on doing just what you now "reject".

Apart from the fact I never suggested a minute examination of his words.

 

Meanwhile the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem is by the evidence of the responses it prompted clearly not a neutral action, that the US lobbies other nations to do likewise is troubling.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[Morch]

45 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Apart from the fact I never suggested a minute examination of his words.

 

Meanwhile the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem is by the evidence of the responses it prompted clearly not a neutral action, that the US lobbies other nations to do likewise is troubling.

 

 

 

That the best spin you can put on things? You have no issues analyzing Trump statements on other topics and you did not object when the poster I replied to went on about such things. About as obvious as they come, really.

 

That the US is not quite a neutral party (certainly not under Trump's administration) is nothing new. There wasn't any such assertion made. The comment was simply with regard to the statement - and the misleading presentation provided. The US lobbying other countries to act in a manner enhancing it's own foreign policy goals (regardless of their merit) is routine, rather than "troubling". Most countries do so.

[dexterm]

58 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Apart from the fact I never suggested a minute examination of his words.

 

Meanwhile the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem is by the evidence of the responses it prompted clearly not a neutral action, that the US lobbies other nations to do likewise is troubling.

 

 

Trump certainly seems to have omitted mentioning his own fine print that technically nothing has changed.

 

Listen to him describing his move to a group of influential American Jews.

 

"Last year, I kept my promise to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, as we have since moved our embassy to Tel Aviv to its rightful home in the Holy City.... it's something that I'm very, very proud of.

But the fact is that I took something off the table. If you go back and look at your negotiations with the Palestinians over the years, the first thing was Jerusalem and moving the embassy to Jerusalem, thereby making it the capital." 

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/251719

Edited September 9, 2018 by dexterm

[Chomper Higgot]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

That the best spin you can put on things? You have no issues analyzing Trump statements on other topics and you did not object when the poster I replied to went on about such things. About as obvious as they come, really.

 

That the US is not quite a neutral party (certainly not under Trump's administration) is nothing new. There wasn't any such assertion made. The comment was simply with regard to the statement - and the misleading presentation provided. The US lobbying other countries to act in a manner enhancing it's own foreign policy goals (regardless of their merit) is routine, rather than "troubling". Most countries do so.

You return once again to drawing conclusions from the absence of my comment to ANOther poster.

 

There are multiple reasons why I might not reply to a post, the most likely that I never read it.

 

“That the US is not quite a neutral party (certainly not under Trump's administration) is nothing new.”

 

I underestimated you, I never had you down as a master of dark humor.

 

But you are correct, nobody could accuse the US of being not quite neutral wrt Israel.

 

Apart from this, I humbly beg your forgiveness that I hold different views than your own.

Edited September 10, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[bendejo]

Gee, I wonder if there is something Paraguay has against Israel.  The demographic of that of-the-beaten-track, landlocked country began changing in, um, let's see, around 1945.  Any notable events in world history happen that year?  Since then, there has been a population increase there of people with names like Jose Carlos Schnickelgruber.

 

Other than that, nearly every problem Brazil has is Paraguay's fault.  If you want to know why ask any Brazilian, and be prepared for a long lecture.  Try not to laugh.

 

 

[bristolboy]

17 hours ago, Morch said:

 

That the best spin you can put on things? You have no issues analyzing Trump statements on other topics and you did not object when the poster I replied to went on about such things. About as obvious as they come, really.

 

That the US is not quite a neutral party (certainly not under Trump's administration) is nothing new. There wasn't any such assertion made. The comment was simply with regard to the statement - and the misleading presentation provided. The US lobbying other countries to act in a manner enhancing it's own foreign policy goals (regardless of their merit) is routine, rather than "troubling". Most countries do so.

The question isn't whether the tactic is something new or not, but what it's in aid of. In this case, it's to cement US recognition of the legitimacy of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem. And that is new.

And no, the US is not quite a neutral party now nor was it before.  Using a vague term like "not quite" to describe the situation both now and before is quite disingenuous .The question is how much less so now than before. 

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The question isn't whether the tactic is something new or not, but what it's in aid of. In this case, it's to cement US recognition of the legitimacy of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem. And that is new.

And no, the US is not quite a neutral party now nor was it before.  Using a vague term like "not quite" to describe the situation both now and before is quite disingenuous .The question is how much less so now than before. 

 

Nope, that would be you trying to frame the "question" along certain lines, which fit your argument and supplied "answer". I fail to see how or what, in the US move amounts to "recognition of the legitimacy of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem". Considering the direct reference doesn't support this, nor does the move itself create such a recognition.

 

As for the making a whole lot of a single phrase used in my post - well done. About as substantial an "argument" as can be expected from some. And, of course, even on this score you try and dictate what the "question" is. Good luck with that.

[metisdead]

Some inflammatory as well as insulting posts and the replies have been removed. 

[JAG]

Umh, what business is it of Mr Pence if Paraguay locates it's embassy in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or a small shepherds tent next to the Sea of Galilee?

 

I do get rather tired of the United States interfering in smaller countries affairs, so often with the implicit subtext "or else"!

 

The USA does itself no favours by making statements or observations like this.

Edited September 10, 2018 by JAG

[Brunolem]

On 9/9/2018 at 3:12 AM, oilinki said:

Pence is nothing more than a male version of Sarah Palin. While Trump is a disaster as the president of United States of America, she would be a catastrophe.

 

Yet Pence cannot see Russia from his balcony, like Palin did!

 

Worse than Palin and Pence, and waiting in the wings is Nikki Haley!

Imagine Trump removed from office, replaced by Pence, with Haley as VP!

 

Too much to contemplate and yet quite possible.

 

I am going to the temple right away to clear my mind!

[Morch]

 

@Chomper Higgot

 

I comment on your choice of which issues to comment on and which posters or posts your comments are addressed to. Considering the issue was brought up by another poster (who seems to believe everything Trump utters merits minute analysis) and you not expressing reservations, but rather clicking that "like" button sort of takes away your argument, or the "I never read it" excuse.

 

I stand by my former characterization of your "contributions" to these topics. And this one ain't different. Of course, there wasn't anything implied regarding your right to hold opinions, regardless of their value.

Edited September 10, 2018 by Morch

[Morch]

56 minutes ago, JAG said:

Umh, what business is it of Mr Pence if Paraguay locates it's embassy in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or a small shepherds tent next to the Sea of Galilee?

 

I do get rather tired of the United States interfering in smaller countries affairs, so often with the implicit subtext "or else"!

 

The USA does itself no favours by making statements or observations like this.

 

The US lobbying other countries (big or small being immaterial) to act in ways supporting its own policies and goals is pretty much the norm. All countries do so, to the best of their capabilities, leverage and such. Considering the US's move was widely unpopular (and rightly so), every bit of diplomatic support is seen as lending it credibility and acceptability. People can reject the US move, but lobbying other countries for support is routine.

 

As for the style this administration presents on a regular basis - no argument. Bottom of the barrel. With regard to asserting how effective this style is, opinions can vary. Some of the expected drawbacks and reactions didn't quite materialize (or at least, not yet). On the other hand, as said above, not particularly helpful if the aim is to foster better relations with other countries. In terms of actual gains, I think it would be hard to point at something concrete. There is a chance that some of that will pay in time, but remains to be seen.