|
Volkerball posted:https://twitter.com/MannfredNikolai/status/813483703225741316 What, exactly, are "working ties?" Like are they actually suspending trade and ejecting ambassadors, or are they just throwing a fit and saying they won't extradite criminals or whatever?
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
Volkerball posted:That's up to Israeli voters. I assume The people who arnt die hard right wing Zionists won't like pissing off the world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:I assume The people who arnt die hard right wing Zionists won't like pissing off the world. Yeah I don't know how big a sect of the population that is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:What, exactly, are "working ties?" Like are they actually suspending trade and ejecting ambassadors, or are they just throwing a fit and saying they won't extradite criminals or whatever? My best guess, with the UK, France, Russia, and China on that list, it's not going to impact economic ties at all, unless Bibi really has gone batshit. Most likely it just means any ongoing agreement negotiations are on hold, extraditions will be ignored, and there aren't going to be any joint military exercises for the forseeable future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:That's not what it says though: It also calls all settlements illegal, so this doesn't contradict what I said at all. I specifically read the text after it was posted because I wanted to see the wording on the bit about the demand for dismantling post-2001 construction. So yes, it's a very confused and contradictory resolution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:It also calls all settlements illegal, so this doesn't contradict what I said at all. I specifically read the text after it was posted because I wanted to see the wording on the bit about the demand for dismantling post-2001 construction. So yes, it's a very confused and contradictory resolution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:What, exactly, are "working ties?" Like are they actually suspending trade and ejecting ambassadors, or are they just throwing a fit and saying they won't extradite criminals or whatever? They'll allow the ambassadors to remain, just stop dealing with them, and Bibi will stop talking to foreign ministers from those countries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:It also calls all settlements illegal, so this doesn't contradict what I said at all. I specifically read the text after it was posted because I wanted to see the wording on the bit about the demand for dismantling post-2001 construction. So yes, it's a very confused and contradictory resolution. The settlements are illegal and the UNSC says that it doesn't recognize any of them unless they are agreed upon by the Palestinians, this has always been the outlook of the so called international community, it never changed. This is just further refutation of Israel's "Facts on the Ground" doctrine, it's the world saying "Hey, we can see what you're doing, we're not playing along", that's it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
ride a white app in the footsteps of dawn, trying to find a start-up that's never, never, never been born
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
I'm impressed that the totally not worthless American media managed to report this resolution as "killed by Trump's meddling on Twitter" and then suddenly it happened anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:It also calls all settlements illegal Does it also say that water is wet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:https://twitter.com/MannfredNikolai/status/813483703225741316 This means war! https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/813826956215119872 Notably, the linked article mentions the possibility of Israel withdrawing its ambassador to New Zealand.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
I was in the 'this doesn't matter' camp but maybe the Israeli government's freakout over it could push them away from their allies. The truth of the matter is that the resolution is extremely uncontroversial outside of the US and Israel - it is so obviously true that basically every other country has it as their official policy and would always vote for it. The only unusual thing is that the US did not veto it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
If anything, the incoming Trump administration will draw more attention to this, on the assumption that strong support by Trump's rolling disaster will not be a net benefit for Israel's hard right. It's a major change for Netanyahu because now he knows he cannot depend on elected Democrats to support Israel unconditionally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/dhalperin/status/813954924824371204 dang
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Bibi bitches and moans and fronts like he's going to pick a fight with the entire planet, but behind all this bluster lies the heart of a coward. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...0a02_story.html quote:Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu instructed the Jerusalem municipality on Wednesday to wait on approving new housing units in a bid to avoid further strain in U.S.-Israeli relations, a local official said. It's working!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Every strongman leader who sits at a desk and responds to every crisis by telling uniformed men to kill or jail brown people is a coward at heart. Actually responding to international criticism for goddamn once may be the gutsiest thing Bibi has done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
he doublin' down on trump lmao https://twitter.com/netanyahu/status/814129958385831936
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
I'm annoyed that Obama waited until now to piss off Bibi on purpose, this week has been gold
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
In the future, schoolchildren will be really loving confused when they read about the New Zealand - Israel War of 2017.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Obama is a coward.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Obama is a coward. Yes. I really don't get why so people are so hyped about this, it just goes to show that there was a president who knew which side is up and had a pretty good grasp on how to go about unscrewing the i/p pooch but chose to do absolutely nothing for 8 years , this timid wrist slap which only sets the stage for Trump to win the favor of AIPAC is absolute dogshit and nothing to be pleased about. Yes Bibi has taken it like a kid who had his toys taken away and it's hilarious but it's not gonna change anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Obama was excessively optimistic about the value of reason and discussion and good faith multilateral action? You don't loving say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Obama is a coward. It shows how much the political class is terrified of AIPAC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
At some point people will get used to Israel taking over the West Bank, just like China and Tibet, Russia and Crimea, and so forth. It seems like a lost cause.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
sincx posted:At some point people will get used to Israel taking over the West Bank, just like China and Tibet, Russia and Crimea, and so forth. It seems like a lost cause. While those situations aren't great, the people in Tibet and Crimea are citizens of China and Russia. Israel doesn't have the ability to absorb the population of the West Bank, and governing millions of people while denying them citizenship is what will (hopefully) make that situation eventually untenable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
If they hang on for just five years it won't be millions of people any more though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Letting Kerry off the leash 3 weeks from the end of his presidency to give a speech that years ago would not be controversial is pretty dumb. Given recent history, Obama's reluctance to take a politically controversial stance in advance of the US general election was exactly correct. There's not much to gain and a lot to lose for a US politician to come out against Israel, to AIPAC's credit. Too bad the Democrats lost anyway!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
sincx posted:At some point people will get used to Israel taking over the West Bank, just like China and Tibet, Russia and Crimea, and so forth. It seems like a lost cause. Don't forget the Golan Heights!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Yes. AIPAC is going to avoid Trump like a plague. They've built their brand on being a safe bipartisan choice for Israel-backers of any political allegiance, and they can't get away with that with a firebrand like Trump. The only meaningful effect, I'd say, is domestic. By allowing the resolution through, Obama has dragged America's Israel policy onto the political stage and then given it a nice big shove, presumably knowing there's a good chance that it'll fall right into the middle of the civil war brewing behind the scenes in the Democratic Party. Fourteen Dem senators - including leadership figures like Schumer - publicly criticized or condemned their own party's very popular president for failing to veto the UN resolution. That's just more ammo for the activists who are already gearing up to pressure the Democratic establishment from the left, and whom will presumably be quite eager to have round 2 on yet another issue fought over in and immediately after the primaries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:AIPAC is going to avoid Trump like a plague. They've built their brand on being a safe bipartisan choice for Israel-backers of any political allegiance, and they can't get away with that with a firebrand like Trump. Wouldn't bet on it. They've gotten more partisan as Bibi himself has come to align himself more and more strongly with the Republicans. If Trump asks them to kiss the ring, they'll have a hard time resisting. Main Paineframe posted:The only meaningful effect, I'd say, is domestic. By allowing the resolution through, Obama has dragged America's Israel policy onto the political stage and then given it a nice big shove, presumably knowing there's a good chance that it'll fall right into the middle of the civil war brewing behind the scenes in the Democratic Party. Fourteen Dem senators - including leadership figures like Schumer - publicly criticized or condemned their own party's very popular president for failing to veto the UN resolution. That's just more ammo for the activists who are already gearing up to pressure the Democratic establishment from the left, and whom will presumably be quite eager to have round 2 on yet another issue fought over in and immediately after the primaries. I think you're dramatically overestimating how much voters care about foreign policy, and how long this will be a prominent issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Wouldn't bet on it. They've gotten more partisan as Bibi himself has come to align himself more and more strongly with the Republicans. If Trump asks them to kiss the ring, they'll have a hard time resisting. AIPAC haven't. Other pro-Israel organizations have blatantly taken sides, but aside from the ADL, most of the traditionally non-partisan organizations have been insistently refusing to comment on anything Trump for a good six months or more. Israel is already a big wedge issue in the Democratic Party. The last couple of Democratic platforms have faced hard fights by pro-Palestinian groups seeking to tilt the platform in a more neutral direction, and while the party leadership has largely stuck to the traditional pro-Israel message and fought off challenges to that message, their control of the party is a lot less secure now that they've lost the election and plenty of rebel factions are ready to go another round with them in the new year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Israel is already a big wedge issue in the Democratic Party. The last couple of Democratic platforms have faced hard fights by pro-Palestinian groups seeking to tilt the platform in a more neutral direction, and while the party leadership has largely stuck to the traditional pro-Israel message and fought off challenges to that message, their control of the party is a lot less secure now that they've lost the election and plenty of rebel factions are ready to go another round with them in the new year. The DNC candidates are pretty much the only people not talking about the UN resolution, so it seems like something Democrats realize they're mostly better off not fighting about for now. Fighting a civil war over a tiny part of our giant collection of foreign policy obligations is pretty stupid when the real goal is beating Trump. I'm not saying the issue won't come up at all in the next election, but there are much bigger issues out there that actually affect American voters, and the candidate who wins based on those issue is going to be the one who gets to decide where to take the Democratic Party's Israel policy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
As the situation in Israel dragged on with Obama doing really nothing about it, it became more of a contentious issue. Finally making a diplomatic maneuver was an important step to legitimize criticism of Israel among Democrats on the government level, which is really the only level remaining on the left that has any sympathy for Israel's hard right. Israel/Palestine has gone from being a divisive issue of "Who can know which side is right? What does it mean to be right?" to "What Israel is doing is wrong." For all Obama's reputation for being The Reasonable Centrist, he's clearly on the side of the party that is going to roundly reject empty suits like Schumer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Don't forget the Golan Heights! Israel's policy there has been drastically different though, and there's good documentation that they were relatively close to a deal with Assad several years ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Schumer's still probably going to be the most important Democratic leader for the next 2 years at least. If there's going to be an ongoing change, it's going to be up to the next Democratic president to lead it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Schumer's still probably going to be the most important Democratic leader for the next 2 years at least. If there's going to be an ongoing change, it's going to be up to the next Democratic president to lead it. someone needs to tell him politely he looks like an old lady when he does the glasses at the end of his nose thing
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Yes. Him waiting until now makes me respect him less than if he didn't do it at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
This is going to continue to be an issue. Haim Saban (major Dem donor) has opposed Keith Ellison because he is not pro-Israel enough
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 23:38
|
|