Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrump makes it clear: he's AGAINST ending the Israel/Palestine conflict.
There is no other conclusion that you can draw from his insistence on moving our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
He knows endorsing Netayanhu's demand for ALL of the city means opposing peace...he knows that peace is impossible unless the Palestinian capital is East Jerusalem-yet he chooses, as he always chooses, conflict and chaos over reconciliation and hope.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 542 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump makes it clear: he's AGAINST ending the Israel/Palestine conflict. (Original Post)
Ken Burch
Dec 2017
OP
spanone
(135,844 posts)1. It's unnecessary and people will die.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)2. perhaps the city should be put under UN control
RKP5637
(67,111 posts)3. Or better, Trump under UN control!!! n/t
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)5. I'd issue tranquilizer darts to the peacekeeping troops.
n/t.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)4. It might have to come to that.
Go back to the old "international city" concept that was originally proposed and that, at the time, neither side was prepared to accept.
Something has to change, because the status quo can't be maintained and this can't be ended by military "victory" in the sense that that concept used to exist in the West.
Sneederbunk
(14,291 posts)6. Not a healer but a destroyer.