It's just that, if Trump is really interested in helping negotiate a Middle East peace agreement, like he said he was, this probably isn't a real helpful way to start. We just took a side on one of the biggest issues of the situation.
We did. We always have. For as long as this modern state of Isreal has exsisted we have been more or less on their side than on any other side.
No one involved in the region even remotely thinks of the US as an unbiased middle man.
This article, an opinion piece from a right leaning source, talks about the sad reason why this move doesn’t matter that much.
http://thehill.com/opinion/internat...e-probably-wont-change-anything-heres-the-sad
If even the right is able to say we are not doing much for peace in the Middle East ANYHOW... that’s really something. We didn’t lose some huge ground we were making for peace because we were not making much of an effort anyhow.
Nations treat Jersusalem as the functional capital anyhow, and Jared Kusher’s grand plan for peace in the Middle East is not something that anyone is hanging their hat on at all. This move should be a greater loss in that effort, but it’s pretty much non-existent... so it is actually sad that there really isn’t much lost by this move because the US wasn’t making a grand effort towards compromise anyhow.
It does suggest that the move should have been a part of a peace deal between the two sides. It would have been really great to have it moved as a symbol of unity.
lIf he truly wanted peace, he would have left things as they were, just like the last few presidents have.
Keeping things as they are... this does not mean peace in any the Middle East. It’s worse than ever.
Enacting laws we don’t mean to carry out is silly. The previous presidents could have solved this 1995 law they have to take action postpone every 6 months, but instead they kicked the can down the road.
This is what happens when you delay it for someone else to deal with a problem. Eventually, someone deals with it. And this should not be a surprise to anyone. The GOP (numerous candidates) have been campaigning on the stance they would move the embassy for a long time. The democrats should have expected that if they kept kicking this can down the road, eventually the GOP might do what they say they will do and pick up the can and move the embassy without a peace agreement.
I do not like or support Trump, but I will not go so far as to ascribe to him based on this act alone that he is someone who does not want peace in the Middle East. I believe that is too simplistic of a way to look at it, and overlooks how much evangelical voters ***wanted*** this... and all the political gain amoung evangelical voters that he gets for this move.
I very much believe Trump did this because of US politics and to try to hang on to evangelical voters because of the mess with Russia and Roy Moore, not because he has a moral principle for supporting Israel
I think the US has been foolish by enacting laws they then don’t put into action... what even is that? Both parties in favor of a law they did not want actually carried out.
It is odd to me that no one that I have read against this move is asking for the repeal of the 1995 act to move the embassy. If this is truly a bad move then I believe the Democrats could file a bill to revoke that law to go on record this law should not be carried out short of a peace deal. But they too have no backbone. Some of the same senators who voted for this are now saying the very law they passed should be be carried out and get do not have the courage of their convictions to seek to revoke the law and pass a better one.
It is my opinion that there is no consisteny, no spine, no backbone in US politicians, and that is the real problem. They play politics over principles.
