RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Trump's Decision To Pull Forces Out Of Syria Has Upsides - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Trump's Decision To Pull Forces Out Of Syria Has Upsides Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Liz 

  • ***-----------***
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 50,837
  • Joined: 28-February 03

  Posted 26 December 2018 - 12:32 AM

Trump's Decision To Pull Forces Out Of Syria Has Upsides

Jewish World Review
By Caroline B. Glick
Published Dec. 24, 2018

Excerpt:

On its face, President Donald Trump’s announcement that he is pulling US forces out of Syria seems like an unfriendly act towards Israel. But it isn’t. Trump’s decision to pull US forces out of Syria is of a piece with outgoing US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley’s address on Tuesday to the UN Security Council regarding the Palestinian conflict with Israel. Both statements reflect the depths of the administration’s friendship and support for the State of Israel.

In Haley’s speech at the Security Council’s monthly meeting concerning the Palestinians’ conflict with Israel she decried the “UN’s obsession with Israel.”

Haley noted that the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians has failed for 50 years. And she said that it is time to try something new. She enjoined her “Arab and European brothers and sisters” to move beyond the “failed talking points” that formed the basis of the failed peace plans of the past half century.

Haley’s address intuited a key point that has never been raised by a senior US official. The “peace process” which has been ongoing between Israel and the PLO since 1993 is antithetical to actual peace.

Consequently, any effort to achieve actual peace between Israel and the Palestinians requires the abandonment of the “peace process.”

Haley made this clear by acknowledging that Israel has far less to gain and much more to lose from the peace process than the Palestinians do.

In her words, “Israel wants a peace agreement, but it doesn’t need one.”

“Both sides would benefit tremendously from a peace agreement. But the Palestinians would benefit more and the Israelis would risk more,” Haley said.

She added that if efforts to achieve peace were to fail, “Israel would continue to grow and prosper.”

The Palestinians on the other hand, “would continue to suffer.”

Haley’s insight puts paid the popular claim that Israel’s survival depends on the establishment of a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and northern, eastern and southern Jerusalem. For years, pro-Palestinian forces have insisted that their demand that Israel surrender its capital and its heartland to the PLO is actually a pro-Israel position. Indeed, they say, anyone who rejects it is anti-Israel.

Haley exposed their conceit. “It would be foolish for [Israel] to make a deal that weakened its security,” she insisted.

The ambassador argued in favor of the administration’s still unpublished peace plan based on the plan’s rejection of the peace process’s “unspecific and unimaginative guidelines.” The administration’s plan is promising she said, because it is based on reality – or in her words, because it “recognizes [that] the realities on the ground in the Middle East have changed... in very powerful and important ways.”

HALEY ENCOURAGED the Europeans and Arabs to make a choice “between a hopeful future that sheds the tired, old and unrealistic demands of the past or a darker future that sticks with the proven-failed talking points of the past.”

That is, she told them to abandon the catechisms of the peace process in favor of a path that is based on the realities she outlined in her speech: Israel doesn’t need peace and it won’t sacrifice its security to achieve one. The Palestinians need peace more than Israel does and they should be willing to make sacrifices to achieve it.

The European response to Haley’s speech showed just how stark a departure her speech – and the Trump administration’s general vision for resolving the Palestinian conflict with Israel – is from everything we have experienced since 1993.

The eight European members of the Security Council – France, Britain, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Belgium, Germany and Italy – issued a joint statement rebuking her. They warned the administration that any peace plan that would disregard “internationally agreed parameters… would risk being condemned to failure.”

The European statement continued, “The EU is truly convinced that the achievement of the two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as the capital of both States – that meets Israeli and Palestinian security needs and Palestinian aspirations for statehood and sovereignty, ends the occupation and resolves all final status issues in accordance with Security Council Resolution 2234 and previous agreements – is the only viable and realistic way to end the conflict and to achieve a just and lasting peace.”

They then enjoined the US to get back to the business of putting the screws on Israel to agree to these “parameters,” stating that the EU “will continue to work towards that end with both parties and its regional and international partners.”

Trump and his advisers are unlikely to be swayed by the European threats. After all, if they had been trying to make the Europeans like them, they would have just continued the foreign policy of their predecessors. The EU’s rebuke of Haley was important not because it impacted the administration’s determination to abandon a quarter century of failure in favor of reality-based success – it was important because it showed just how far away the Trump administration has walked from the failures of its predecessors.tinian security needs and Palestinian aspirations for statehood and sovereignty, ends the occupation and resolves all final status issues in accordance with Security Council Resolution 2234 and previous agreements – is the only viable and realistic way to end the conflict and to achieve a just and lasting peace.”

*snip*

Full Commentary
0

#2 User is offline   Bubbajoebob 

  • M dwarf stars
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 616
  • Joined: 28-July 09

Posted 26 December 2018 - 09:37 AM

Until those fighting against the existence of Israel love their children more than they hate the Jews no "peace process" or "peace agreement" or land deal or anything will make a lasting difference.
0

#3 User is offline   gunit91 

  • Newbie
  • Group: Registered Guest
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 30-January 19

Posted 30 January 2019 - 12:50 PM

With all the madness surrounding the WH its easy to miss some big stories. I just read about the Worldwide Threat Assessment presented to Congress by US intelligence chiefs (Trump appointees BTW). They contradict every step of POTUS' foreign policy. In case you missed it like I did here are the highlights: (1) North Korea will not denuclearize (2) Iran is and would have adhered to the agreement but is now considering taking steps to back off due to POTUS opting out (3)Russia and China are threats and are working more closely together against our interests than ever before (4)ISIS is not defeated by any stretch (4) But most importantly the report found that American trade policies and “unilateralism” (:Hint: "America First“) have strained traditional alliances and prompted foreign partners to seek new relationships. This comes from his own administration. Can you imagine if such a report came out under prior administrations? That everything the Pres was doing on foreign policy is wrong, based on lies, and harmful to US interests? Yet his supporters will still believe we need a wall and that he cares about them and the country.
0

#4 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 56,200
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 30 January 2019 - 04:33 PM

View Postgunit91, on 30 January 2019 - 12:50 PM, said:

With all the madness surrounding the WH its easy to miss some big stories. I just read about the Worldwide Threat Assessment presented to Congress by US intelligence chiefs (Trump appointees BTW). They contradict every step of POTUS' foreign policy. In case you missed it like I did here are the highlights: (1) North Korea will not denuclearize (2) Iran is and would have adhered to the agreement but is now considering taking steps to back off due to POTUS opting out (3)Russia and China are threats and are working more closely together against our interests than ever before (4)ISIS is not defeated by any stretch (4) But most importantly the report found that American trade policies and “unilateralism” (:Hint: "America First“) have strained traditional alliances and prompted foreign partners to seek new relationships. This comes from his own administration. Can you imagine if such a report came out under prior administrations? That everything the Pres was doing on foreign policy is wrong, based on lies, and harmful to US interests? Yet his supporters will still believe we need a wall and that he cares about them and the country.


Got a link?

(And by the way, (5) comes after (4)...)

And yes, obviously we need a wall and equally obviously Trump cares deeply about America and Americans. EVEN IF for argument's sake we "accept" all the above statements at face value, and therefore (again purely for argument's sake) conclude Trump has made some awful mistakes, there is still no evidence whatsoever that they weren't honest "mistakes" made by a man who loves his country and is doing his best to do right by its citizens.

B)
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users