But inquest is wrong...
It isn't the same...
First of all, we are talking about moving an embassy...not carving out part of a sovereign nation and handing it over to appease the war aims of a despot.
How can I say that? UN Resolution 242...
The purpose of this Resolution was to guarantee that Israel would get defendable borders and peace and the right to exist.
The Roadmap does call for a Palestinian state but that is hardly being fostered or extorted from Israel. That ship sailed at the Oslo Accords. (Not that the Accords called for a state, but it set into motion the irretrievable... and Barak in 2000 did nothing to disabuse that notion)
Texasflower, you are hardly Chamberlain...and inquest knows it...
Thank you carton. I had no idea of what he meant.
The last thing we need to do is cause more instability in the middle east right now. That would sure do it I think.
It's very wise to wait IMO.
Your posts are interesting to read, BTW!
One of the attributes of sovereignty is the ability to put your capital wherever you damn well please within your own territory. So by dictating to Israel where to put it, the Palestinian despots are indeed attacking its sovereignty, and we are indeed appeasing their war aims by going along with that nonsense.
The purpose of this Resolution was to guarantee that Israel would get defendable borders and peace and the right to exist.
Yeah, "peace" by giving up a part of its territory in an attempt to appease despots. Seems to me that's been tried before somewhere...
Texasflower, you are hardly Chamberlain...and inquest knows it...
No, the parallels are quite striking. Chamberlain likewise believed that it wasn't the right time to be charging directly into trouble over such a marginal issue. In fact, if anything, Chamberlain wasn't being as foolish as Bush. At least Chamberlain understood that opposing Hitler would have involved military force. What would it have involved from us to respect Israel's choice of capital city? Some construction machinery? That's about it.