UN Security Council demands end to Israeli settlements

[yardrunner]

2 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Yep. Obama will be gone soon - forever- and Trump has already made it clear that he will back Israel and fight Islamic terrorism in a serious way. Good riddance.

Another reason to dislike Trump and what he stands for

[yardrunner]

2 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

As Trump has said on this UN resolution: "Things will be different soon" 

 

http://thehill.com/policy/international/311703-trump-warns-un-after-israel-vote-things-will-be-different-soon

Until he wakes up tomorrow morning and says the opposite 

[up-country_sinclair]

1 minute ago, yardrunner said:

the government needs to look in the mirror 

 

Sure, but it's the people who elect fanatical politicians which perpetrate these violations of morality and international law.  

 

The people themselves need to look in the mirror.  But they won't, because they're afraid to see that they've turned into what they once denounced as monstrous.

[yardrunner]

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

Jews in America backed Obama. So, they shouldn't complain. Personally, I stopped caring.  The really good thing about this is that it is causing an extreme backlash against the UN by all the neocons and foreign interventionists within the Deep State bureaucracy.  With any luck, this might be used by Trump to simply cut all funding for the UN and then go about using the US veto to sabotage every single thing the UN wants.  No more UNESCO, IMF, ILO, WHO, or any of the other myriad UN agencies.  Down and out they go.  And just veto everything that comes through the security council. Everything. 

And America will go back to being an isolationist country with no influence on the world stage as happened in 1919 until they were woken up at Pearl Harbor. perhaps next time it will be too late as Putin flexes his muscles

[Jingthing]

I have a mixed reaction to this.

It seems to be alot about an Obama message to trump.

As trump's agenda on Israel seems so incredibly right wing extremist, more so than Netanyahu for sure. Look at the ambassador to Israel he picked. Pro right wing settler extremist and very insulting to liberal American Jews that seek a two state solution, which are the solid majority.

If Hillary Clinton was in office now, do you think she would have vetoed?

I think she would have.

If Hillary Clinton had won, and the vote came up now, would Obama have abstained instead of the traditional Israel supporting veto? I really don't know but I'm guessing he probably would have vetoed as usual ... thus my theory that this is largely about trump. 

What the U.S. U.N. ambassador has said is correct. It has been bipartisan U.S. policy to support a two state solution and to view Israel west bank settlements as retarding any hope for peace negotiations, just as Palestinian violence does also.

So her speech wasn't wrong.

But Israel isn't wrong to feel betrayed by the USA either.

As far as the details, of course knowing Israel is going to ignore this latest resolution, to me a grey area is specifically about EAST JERUSALEM. I see those as different than settlements deeper in the west bank and should be open to negotiation if there is ever a real peace deal. 

As far as American Jewish politics, American Jews do not vote on Israel policy alone, and there is great division on feelings about west bank settlements, with the vast majority being against expanding them.

But on the feeling that an abstention like this appears to be a betrayal of Israel, many American Jews probably do feel that. Perhaps even a majority ... hard to say without polling.

As far as American Jews becoming a majority trumpist demographic over this one issue ... NO. NEVER.  

Trumpist ideology is far to the right of the majority of American Jews on Israel policy and like I said before most American Jews do not vote on Israel policy alone. 

 

Edited December 24, 2016 by Jingthing

[JKfarang]

Unfortunately, the US' unconditional support of Israel will probably never change (at least not in my lifetime) and the State of Israel will continue to do whatever it wants as a result.  There are many who believe that Israel needs no assistance from the US.  I serious doubt that is true but there's only one way to find out and, again, that will never happen; though I very much wish it would.

 

Some years ago, I read an article which claimed that the largest supporter of Israel in the US is actually Christian fundamentalists who believe in "end days" and the second coming of Christ.  Whether true or not, I have to wonder how much better a place the world might be if religions did not exist.  I can understand some of the reasons for it existing 2,000 years ago (when people thought the world was flat, the Earth was the center of the universe, most people died well before their 30th birthday, etc. etc.).  However, for most of us anyway, those days are long gone.

 

Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah!

[zydeco]

24 minutes ago, yardrunner said:

And America will go back to being an isolationist country with no influence on the world stage as happened in 1919 until they were woken up at Pearl Harbor. perhaps next time it will be too late as Putin flexes his muscles

 

Was America really isolationist and not engaged before Pearl Harbor?  Then, why were US bases simultaneously attacked on the Philippines?  Why were American arms, munitions, naval vessels, and other military equipment already in a ceaseless flow to Britain before Pearl Harbor? In the 1920s, America was directly responsible for and intricately involved in European security and financial stabilization with both the Dawes and Young Plans. Then there was the Washington Armaments Conference and Nine Powers Treaty of the 1920s aimed at stabilization in Asia. Then, there is Kellogg-Briand.  The 1920s and 1930s were rife with US involvement around the globe.  The list could go on and on. The only lesson is: if another nation wants to go to war, they will go to war with you.  The US didn't need a wake-up call at Pearl Harbor. It was already wide awake. That was why the US Pacific fleet was moved to Pearl from San Diego in the first place.

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, deathmule said:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Jewish-groups-disappointed-with-US-vote-on-settlements-476373

 

 

Maybe he assumed it but according to the Jerusalem Post, the American Jewish Committee amd the Jewish Federation of North America are disappointed with how the US handled the UN Security council resolution.

 

 

Anti Defamation League looks pissed too

 

All these organizations are American based by the way

 

Of course when he said Jews he didn't mean 100% of the Jews but you could interpret it like that if you wish.

"A plurality of Jews in Israel (42 percent) say the continued building of these settlements helps the security of Israel. Only 17 percent of U.S. Jews agree. By contrast, in the United States, a plurality of Jews (44 percent) says the settlements hurt Israel’s own security interests; fewer Israeli Jews (30 percent) take this position. "

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/10/are-american-jews-turning-away-from-israel/

Why do you assume that these organization speak for all or even most American Jews?

[Jingthing]

39 minutes ago, JKfarang said:

Unfortunately, the US' unconditional support of Israel will probably never change (at least not in my lifetime) and the State of Israel will continue to do whatever it wants as a result.  There are many who believe that Israel needs no assistance from the US.  I serious doubt that is true but there's only one way to find out and, again, that will never happen; though I very much wish it would.

 

Some years ago, I read an article which claimed that the largest supporter of Israel in the US is actually Christian fundamentalists who believe in "end days" and the second coming of Christ.  Whether true or not, I have to wonder how much better a place the world might be if religions did not exist.  I can understand some of the reasons for it existing 2,000 years ago (when people thought the world was flat, the Earth was the center of the universe, most people died well before their 30th birthday, etc. etc.).  However, for most of us anyway, those days are long gone.

 

Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah!

Yes, the support of more fundamentalist American Christians, some with very bizarre beliefs that are not in any way ultimately positive towards Jews, is an important support base for Israel. You know, politics makes strange bedfellows and all that.

But as far as Jews and Israel, you can't say it's only about the Jewish religion. The origin story of the state of Israel sprung from ZIONISM, which at it's root was a liberation political movement about seeking POLITICAL self determination for the Jewish people (as life for Jews in the diaspora for thousands of years proved so insecure), both secular and religious. Jews are an ethnoreligious group and a huge portion of global Jewry  are not observant Jews. 

Edited December 24, 2016 by Jingthing

[Morch]

5 hours ago, ezzra said:

 

This was a blatant in your face Netanyahu, parting shot from Obama and his soon

to be unemployed staff,

the thing is that nor Obama or the UN are relevant no more, no one pays heed

to what they ' resolute ' as many of their resolutions in past years has

gone with the wind,

With Trump in soon, there will be new wind blowing in the faces of all those

how only want to see Israel reduced to sniveling and venerable bunch of Jews

waiting for mercy, well, No more, Israel will do what it takes to protect itself,

because no one else will.....

 

It is not that the UN resolutions are not heeded, but that they are paid selective heed according to agendas and interests. In this manner, a country (any country) can blast the UN for one resolution, and use another UN resolution to support its case. In that sense, resolutions do carry less meaning and authority than they ought to.

 

 

[Morch]

5 hours ago, dexterm said:

Too little too late.

If USA had simply abstained from using its veto years ago to shield Israel from world opinion, perhaps Israel would have felt the pressure sooner to do what is morally right and end its illegal occupation and colonization.

 

Some would never be satisfied.

 

The US does not subscribe to your politics and views. Get over it. As the ambassador power put it, even if the illegal settlements were to be dismantled tomorrow, it wouldn't result in a lasting peace. The illegal settlements are certainly a major element in the conflict and a huge obstacle for its resolution - but they are hardly the only issue , nor is Israel the only party involved.

[Jingthing]

The thing about the U.N. and Israel is that there no doubt at all that Israel get's dissed by the U.N. way out of proportion to whatever flaws they have relative to other nations that really deserve much more attention. I think that's a big part of the "traditional" U.S. veto of such U.N. resolutions. If you're going to unfairly gang up on one nation, a very close ally of the U.S., then that's what veto power is good for. So it's a precedent but a short lived one as trump is coming very soon. 

 

While Israel will of course ignore this U.N. resolution, they're right to be concerned that it will open Israel up other actions from other international bodies, and also of course, I wonder if this will give a boost to the BDS movement, which lately seems to be have faded rather significantly. 

Edited December 24, 2016 by Jingthing

[Morch]

5 hours ago, deathmule said:

 

Who are those who want to see Israel reduced to sniveling and etc etc?

 

Everybody let's you do your thing in Israel. Has anybody audited the Dimona nuclear research center? No.

 

Has any government talk about the Palestine genocide? https://ccrjustice.org/genocide-palestinian-people-international-law-and-human-rights-perspective#

 

Has anybody talk about Israel being extremely non diverse? 75% homogenic http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/newpop.html

 

Please.

 

Who? Some of the regular posters on these topics, for example. Many of the Palestinians. Many Arabs. Many Muslims. If that's not enough add many of those holding extreme left and extreme right on other countries.

 

The use of genocide with regard to the Palestinians is intentionally misleading propaganda. Often made nonsensical when it gets coupled with the demographic time-is-on-the-Palestinians-side remarks.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, dexterm said:

The topic concerns a UN resolution about the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements. No mention of the fight against terrorism in the OP, despite your attempt to deflect by muddying the waters.

 

from the OP....
“One cannot simultaneously champion expanding Israeli settlements and champion a viable two-state solution that would end the conflict,” Power argued.

 

On the contrary, it is people like Trump who will ultimately bring an end to the Zionist dream of a predominantly Jewish state of Israel, when he encourages a one state solution, in which 4.5 million Palestinian co-residents' civil rights will need to be addressed, together with the already 2 million Israeli Palestinian population, who already hold citizenship.

 

The OP is not the resolution, though. In the resolution itself, terrorism is mentioned quite a number of times - if it wasn't the US would have probably exercised its veto right.

 

READ: The Full Text of the UNSC Resolution on Israeli Settlements
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.761030

[Jingthing]

Good point. There was more balance in this resolution which made it more politically possible for the U.S. not to veto. 

[ilostmypassword]

58 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Yes, the support of more fundamentalist American Christians, some with very bizarre beliefs that are not in any way ultimately positive towards Jews, is an important support base for Israel. You know, politics makes strange bedfellows and all that.

But as far as Jews and Israel, you can't say it's only about the Jewish religion. The origin story of the state of Israel sprung from ZIONISM, which at it's root was a liberation political movement about seeking POLITICAL self determination for the Jewish people (as life for Jews in the diaspora for thousands of years proved so insecure), both secular and religious. Jews are an ethnoreligious group and a huge portion of global Jewry  are not observant Jews. 

Jews are not one single ethnoreligious group. Apart from religion, what do Ashkenazi Jews have in common with Jews from the Arab world? Actually, they have a lot less in common with Arab Jews than with the European locals.

[yardrunner]

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

 

Was America really isolationist and not engaged before Pearl Harbor?  Then, why were US bases simultaneously attacked on the Philippines?  Why were American arms, munitions, naval vessels, and other military equipment already in a ceaseless flow to Britain before Pearl Harbor? In the 1920s, America was directly responsible for and intricately involved in European security and financial stabilization with both the Dawes and Young Plans. Then there was the Washington Armaments Conference and Nine Powers Treaty of the 1920s aimed at stabilization in Asia. Then, there is Kellogg-Briand.  The 1920s and 1930s were rife with US involvement around the globe.  The list could go on and on. The only lesson is: if another nation wants to go to war, they will go to war with you.  The US didn't need a wake-up call at Pearl Harbor. It was already wide awake. That was why the US Pacific fleet was moved to Pearl from San Diego in the first place.

 

America had a President, Woodrow Wilson who promoted the league of Nations but the american people and government did not support him and America never became a member of the League of nations,

Britain will always be grateful for the help from F D R before America entered the war but all the aid had to be delivered by subterfuge as the U S A did not want to be involved.

As for Pearl harbor, the reason for the Japanese attack was American policies on Oil and other raw materials which the Americans were blocking Japan from receiving. And if America was that wide awake the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor would not have been as succesful 

[Kiwiken]

4 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Five Ways Trump Could Avenge the Anti-Israel UN Vote

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/23/five-ways-trump-will-avenge-anti-israel-un-vote/

 

First 100 days, big things are going to happen! 

You can get flatulence tablets for that. But i am sure his Nanny can change his Diapers

[Morch]

4 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Five Ways Trump Could Avenge the Anti-Israel UN Vote

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/23/five-ways-trump-will-avenge-anti-israel-un-vote/

 

First 100 days, big things are going to happen! 

 

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

I like them all on that list, but start with this one:

 

1. Signing a congressional declaration that the UN Security Council resolution is not United States policy. Congress could quickly pass, and President Trump would sign, a declaration that the previous administration had no mandate to allow the UN Security Council resolution to pass. The declaration could affirm prior U.S. policy that some areas in the West Bank will always be under Israeli control — or it could even leave the status of the West Bank open to potential Israeli annexation.

 

The list is mostly nonsense.

 

The US does not set its foreign policy according to UN resolutions, but like all nations, uses them when they fit, ignores or circumvents when they don't. So nothing new here, and no special need for a congressional declaration, pretty much a waste of hot air.

 

Moving the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem or cutting off funds to the Palestinians are irrelevant. They will not alter the resolution, they will not make the illegal settlements any more acceptable or any less of an obstacle to peace. Same goes for a presidential visit.

 

Cutting off UN funding - that's an issue with rather wide implications. Perhaps a decision that merits some deliberation rather than being applied as a petty punitive measure.

 

The whole point of view suggested, by the way, is falsely equating between support for Israel and support for the illegal settlements. The two are not the same.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, ezzra said:

Why are we all wasting our times here to put forward our opinions?

we all know very well that no UN resolutions will change anything

on the landscape, and believe it or not, it's not even up to Israel to give

the Palestinians a country, there're far stronger agendas at play here,

most of it is clandestine and hidden, even if Israel will tomorrow withdraw

back to it's pre 1967 borders, nothing will change, as the Palestinians want

a lot more than just land, they want revenge and blood and at any cost,

so guys, no one is going anywhere, US resolution or not.....

 

Since you seem to be in the know, perhaps shed a light on "...there're far stronger agendas at play here, most of it is clandestine and hidden..."?

 

 

[dexterm]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Some would never be satisfied.

 

The US does not subscribe to your politics and views. Get over it. As the ambassador power put it, even if the illegal settlements were to be dismantled tomorrow, it wouldn't result in a lasting peace. The illegal settlements are certainly a major element in the conflict and a huge obstacle for its resolution - but they are hardly the only issue , nor is Israel the only party involved.

No need to be rude.

 

I agree with you
"The illegal settlements are certainly a major element in the conflict and a huge obstacle for its resolution"

 "- but they are hardly the only issue , nor is Israel the only party involved."

Despite your attempt to deflect, illegal settlements are the issue/topic in the OP.

 

True..the Palestinians are involved too. They are the dispossessed occupied not the occupiers.

 

I think Obama has been a dismal failure in living up to the faith the world community placed in him to promote peace when he first came to office. He has allowed himself and the most powerful country in the world to be bullied and dictated to by Netanyahu and his cohorts.

 

Trump will now trample on any possibility of a two state solution which will only hasten a one state solution. Fast track to a binational state.

Fine! It's an inevitability anyway for peoples who are eternal geographic neighbors.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, yardrunner said:

I and i believe many others have no problem with Israel defending itself, the problems begin when Israel behaves like an early version of the third Reich encouraging theft of innocent peoples property and blaming one part of the population of Israel for all the ills of the country, the government needs to look in the mirror 

 

And that didn't take long...the usual nonsense comparisons. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is real. There was no such violent conflict between the Jews and Germany. Over the top and out of context.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, up-country_sinclair said:

 

Sure, but it's the people who elect fanatical politicians which perpetrate these violations of morality and international law.  

 

The people themselves need to look in the mirror.  But they won't, because they're afraid to see that they've turned into what they once denounced as monstrous.

 

Drivel. Would be semi-meaningful if you'd bother applying it non-selectively. But then you reject exactly the same argumentation when applied to the Palestinians.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I have a mixed reaction to this.

It seems to be alot about an Obama message to trump.

As trump's agenda on Israel seems so incredibly right wing extremist, more so than Netanyahu for sure. Look at the ambassador to Israel he picked. Pro right wing settler extremist and very insulting to liberal American Jews that seek a two state solution, which are the solid majority.

If Hillary Clinton was in office now, do you think she would have vetoed?

I think she would have.

If Hillary Clinton had won, and the vote came up now, would Obama have abstained instead of the traditional Israel supporting veto? I really don't know but I'm guessing he probably would have vetoed as usual ... thus my theory that this is largely about trump. 

What the U.S. U.N. ambassador has said is correct. It has been bipartisan U.S. policy to support a two state solution and to view Israel west bank settlements as retarding any hope for peace negotiations, just as Palestinian violence does also.

So her speech wasn't wrong.

But Israel isn't wrong to feel betrayed by the USA either.

As far as the details, of course knowing Israel is going to ignore this latest resolution, to me a grey area is specifically about EAST JERUSALEM. I see those as different than settlements deeper in the west bank and should be open to negotiation if there is ever a real peace deal. 

As far as American Jewish politics, American Jews do not vote on Israel policy alone, and there is great division on feelings about west bank settlements, with the vast majority being against expanding them.

But on the feeling that an abstention like this appears to be a betrayal of Israel, many American Jews probably do feel that. Perhaps even a majority ... hard to say without polling.

As far as American Jews becoming a majority trumpist demographic over this one issue ... NO. NEVER.  

Trumpist ideology is far to the right of the majority of American Jews on Israel policy and like I said before most American Jews do not vote on Israel policy alone. 

 

 

I mostly agree with what you posted.

 

Don't know that Israel as a whole feels betrayed. Many Israelis do. Right wing voters for sure.

 

The majority of American Jews may not support Trump's politics on Israel, but that's a present situation. We touched upon the subject of changing demographics and political views on other topics. May not materialize during Trump's years in office, of course.

 

 

[thetruth revealer]

5 hours ago, deathmule said:

 

Who are those who want to see Israel reduced to sniveling and etc etc?

 

Everybody let's you do your thing in Israel. Has anybody audited the Dimona nuclear research center? No.

 

Has any government talk about the Palestine genocide? https://ccrjustice.org/genocide-palestinian-people-international-law-and-human-rights-perspective#

 

Has anybody talk about Israel being extremely non diverse? 75% homogenic http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/newpop.html

 

Please.

As always the ISRAELI tactic to blame the whole world and show themself as victims instead beeing aible to recognize whats reality and considered GENOZID .

This kind of double morality and double standard is akward and disgusting while tolerated by especially the US and others.

Shame on them all .

[thetruth revealer]

5 hours ago, up-country_sinclair said:

 

The world has spoken:  The settlements are illegal.

The world has spoken:  The occupiers have flagrantly violated international law.

 

Everyone knew this to be true before this landmark vote, but now it is official.  

 

Yes, the Obama administration should have taken this step back in 2011, but this is truly a case of "better late than never".   

 

Bravo.

 

      

Its time to accept reality.

[Kiwiken]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

I like them all on that list, but start with this one:

 

1. Signing a congressional declaration that the UN Security Council resolution is not United States policy. Congress could quickly pass, and President Trump would sign, a declaration that the previous administration had no mandate to allow the UN Security Council resolution to pass. The declaration could affirm prior U.S. policy that some areas in the West Bank will always be under Israeli control — or it could even leave the status of the West Bank open to potential Israeli annexation.

Is this so Israel can have lebensraum.  Sounds very much like the actions of a previous Government in Germany. Maybe Israel should just annex the West Bank and the Gaza strip. Good luck assimilating the populations. First you steal the land then you eliminate (cast out , exterminate) the previous inhabitants. A dangerous path and Policy. And will keep the USA tarred as a supporter of Genocide. The West Bank and Gaza strip are Palestinian. East Jerusalem is its Capital. Israel is an occupying and hegemonous  State. There can be no peace on this path. For their Part the Palestinians must rein in their support for Extremism. Both Sides Policies only further the divide and make rapprochement impossible  . The Sponsors of the Bill sought to stop One side while also saying the other must move to curb violence.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, thetruth revealer said:

Its time to accept reality.

Israel has accepted "reality" for a long time. That there are strong forces in the world that don't want it to continue to exist, and don't think it should have ever existed in the first place.

Israel says NO to all that (in Hebrew). 

[dexterm]

31 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The OP is not the resolution, though. In the resolution itself, terrorism is mentioned quite a number of times - if it wasn't the US would have probably exercised its veto right.

 

READ: The Full Text of the UNSC Resolution on Israeli Settlements
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.761030

Thank you for the link to the full text. Well worth a read. Doesn't pull any punches.

 

I notice that where the resolution condemns terrorism, violence against civilians and incitement, it does not single out a particular side....Palestinians or Israelis.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, Kiwiken said:

Is this so Israel can have lebensraum.  Sounds very much like the actions of a previous Government in Germany. Maybe Israel should just annex the West Bank and the Gaza strip. Good luck assimilating the populations. First you steal the land then you eliminate (cast out , exterminate) the previous inhabitants. A dangerous path and Policy. And will keep the USA tarred as a supporter of Genocide. The West Bank and Gaza strip are Palestinian. East Jerusalem is its Capital. Israel is an occupying and hegemonous  State. There can be no peace on this path. For their Part the Palestinians must rein in their support for Extremism. Both Sides Policies only further the divide and make rapprochement impossible  . The Sponsors of the Bill sought to stop One side while also saying the other must move to curb violence.

As was predictable in any Israel political topic, the HARD CORE Israel demonizing rhetoric comes out of the closet that it's not in. Suggesting an equivalence between modern Israel and Nazi Germany is Jew hating hate speech. Once you go there, you lose all chance of having any reasoned discussion on these matters..