Donald Trump for President of the USA

Both of you make valid points, but I personally think that what he has done is wrong. Who benefits from his statement ? The Israelis, and for what? The Palestinians have again come out on the 'losing' side. I'm not arguing for one side or the other, but I would say that Trump, even though he is 'acknowledging' the 'elephant', has done the peace process no good.

T.R.O.Y wrote:1948 - 1967 Jordanian troops controlled the West Bank including East Jerusalem, history is factual not something you can twist like you normally do on here. Look it up.

Israel may have declared Jerusalem it’s capital but thats beside the point it’s meaningless, Palestine claim East Jerusalem as theirs too. Not recognising that (as Trump has done) ends any miniscule chance of a two state solution and with it peace.

You have no argument, you’re trying to score points by saying it’s a ‘truism’. We are all well aware of that, but it is the political symbolism of the city and yet another insult to the Palestinian people which threatens peace and has caused such outrage.

Me twist things - more like you mate!

I've said all along that Israel populated Jerusalem from 1917 and took control of the city apart from East Jerusalem from 1948 onwards - taking charge of the whole city in 1967.

I'm not arguing about East Jerusalem (prior to 1967) nor the West Bank - you're the one whose doing that.

You do know the West Bank and West Jerusalem are two different things don't you?  I'm thinking that you probably didn't?

As I've kept saying - and which the history books will confirm - Israel has had a major - and continual - presence in Jerusalem growing from the end of Ottoman rule of it in 1917 to this day.

It's you that needs to check your facts - not me!


And just to save you the bother - here they are - 

From 1922 to 1948 the total population of the city rose from 52,000 to 165,000, comprised two-thirds of Jews and one-third of Arabs (Muslims and Christians).

Relations between Arab Christians and Muslims and the growing Jewish population in Jerusalem deteriorated, resulting in recurring unrest.   In Jerusalem, in particular, Arab riots occurred in 1920 and in 1929. Under the British, new garden suburbs were built in the western and northern parts of the city and institutions of higher learning such as the Hebrew University were founded.

As the British Mandate for Palestine was expiring, the 1947 UN Partition Plan recommended "the creation of a special international regime in the City of Jerusalem, constituting it as a corpus separatum under the administration of the UN."  The international regime (which also included the city of Bethlehem) was to remain in force for a period of ten years, whereupon a referendum was to be held in which the residents were to decide the future regime of their city.

However, this plan was not implemented, as the 1948 war erupted, while the British withdrew from Palestine and Israel declared its independence.

In contradiction to the Partition Plan, which envisioned a city separated from the Arab state and the Jewish state, Israel took control of the area which later would become West Jerusalem, along with major parts of the Arab territory allotted to the future Arab State; Jordan took control of East Jerusalem, along with the West Bank. The war led to displacement of Arab and Jewish populations in the city. The 1,500 residents of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City were expelled and a few hundred taken prisoner when the Arab Legion captured the quarter on 28 May. Arab residents of Katamon, Talbiya, and the German Colony were driven from their homes. By the time of the armistice that ended active fighting, Israel had control of 12 of Jerusalem's 15 Arab residential quarters. An estimated minimum of 30,000 people had become refugees.

The war of 1948 resulted in the division of Jerusalem, so that the old walled city lay entirely on the Jordanian side of the line. A no-man's land between East and West Jerusalem came into being in November 1948: Moshe Dayan, commander of the Israeli forces in Jerusalem, met with his Jordanian counterpart Abdullah el-Tell in a deserted house in Jerusalem's Musrara neighbourhood and marked out their respective positions: Israel's position in red and Jordan's in green. This rough map, which was not meant as an official one, became the final line in the 1949 Armistice Agreements, which divided the city and left Mount Scopus as an Israeli exclave inside East Jerusalem.   Barbed wire and concrete barriers ran down the centre of the city, passing close by Jaffa Gate on the western side of the old walled city, and a crossing point was established at Mandelbaum Gate slightly to the north of the old walled city. Military skirmishes frequently threatened the ceasefire.

After the establishment of the state of Israel, Jerusalem was declared its capital city. Jordan formally annexed East Jerusalem in 1950, subjecting it to Jordanian law, and in 1953 declared it the "second capital" of Jordan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem#Jordanian/Israeli_rule_(1948–1967)

Jordan and an alliance of Arab states rejected the 1947 UN Partition Plan under which Jerusalem was to be a corpus separatum, choosing instead to invade and conquer the Old City and East Jerusalem, although the Arab invading armies failed to conquer West Jerusalem. The city was divided along the 1949 Armistice Line until Jordan chose to join a coalition of Arab states and invade Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reunification_of_Jerusalem

You seem to think Israel having a presence in Jerusalem, proved whatever point you’re failing to make and that a few selective copy and pastes from Wikipedia proves that? I’d recommend avoiding Wikipedia as a historical source by the way, authors tend to have vested interests and are bias.

Anyway at no point have I argued this, Israel has a genuine claim to Jerusalem, this cannot be denied - But I’ve no idea why it’s now become your sole focus, this has never been in question.

I’m going to repeat and simplify my point to avoid any confusion/twisting of arguments:

1. Israel took East Jerusalem in a land grab at the end of the 6 day war breaking international law.
2. Trump has now essentially legitimised that land grab with his actions today
3. Leaving Palestinians with no claim to their capital city a key tentant of any peace process
4. Leaving refugees with no chance of returning ‘home’ and a peace process with nowhere to move to.

Good on him, he’s right.

No, Scott.....he's an unprincipled, divisive, myopic, undiplomatic, crude egotist who is a threat to world peace and to the world's climate. He is untrustworthy and wildly impetuous. 

Add to that the fact that he's a misogynist, a bully, a narcissist, a racist, a liar with a limited vocabulary and intelligence......all these are offset only by his ability in commerce.

Good choice, America!

okocha wrote:No, Scott.....he's an unprincipled, divisive, myopic, undiplomatic, crude egotist who is a threat to world peace and to the world's climate. He is untrustworthy and wildly impetuous. 

Add to that the fact that he's a misogynist, a bully, a narcissist, a racist, a liar with a limited vocabulary and intelligence......all these are offset only by his ability in commerce.

Good choice, America!

Okocha, apart from those you list, what don't you like about him ? 

He doesn't support The Trotters, Glos!

T.R.O.Y wrote:You seem to think Israel having a presence in Israel, proved whatever point you’re failing to make and that a few selective copy and pastes from Wikipedia proves that? I’d recommend avoiding Wikipedia as a historical source by the way, authors tend to have vested interests and are bias.

Anyway at no point have I argued this, Israel has a genuine claim to Jerusalem, this cannot be denied - But I’ve no idea why it’s now become your sole focus, this has never been in question.

I’m going to repeat and simplify my point to avoid any confusion/twisting of arguments:

1. Israel took East Jerusalem in a land grab at the end of the 6 day war breaking international law.
2. Trump has now essentially legitimised that land grab with his actions today
3. Leaving Palestinians with no claim to their capital city a key tentant of any peace process
4. Leaving refugees with no chance of returning ‘home’ and a peace process with nowhere to move to.

It's been my sole focus because it was the only thing I had been talking about all along.

I started off by stating Trump had only stated the obvious.

You asked me did I know how it became part of the Israeli state and I give you its history from 1917 showing that I did - as I mentioned I even knew a bit about it from someone who lived there for a while, my dad who was stationed there 20 years before the 6 day war even took place!

You replied by completely referencing the 6 day war and completely omitting the period of Jerusalem becoming open and safe to a Jewish population again from 1917 onwards, it becoming a predominantly Jewish inhabited city by 1948, which upon the declaration of independence by Israel was named its capital, defeated the Arabs effort to 'capture' the city from them, and was named by Israel as it capital and housed its administrative, legislative and judiciary from Israel's inception continuously and without interruption to this day.

It's clearly you who doesn't have a complete grasp of the history of Jerusalem - you probably thought it was part of the West Bank territory - or was accessed across Jordanian controlled territory - neither being the case.

As for Wicki - I certainly would not have depend on it to have written my Masters thesis based on its content but its plenty good enough to refute your lack of knowledge about Israel and its occupation and importance of Jerusalem (in particular West) between 1917 to 1969.

okocha wrote:He doesn't support The Trotters, Glos!

That's done it for me. I'm with you 

You are clearly arguing once again for arguments sake.

Nowhere have I commented anything other than Trump stating the obvious physical truth that Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel for decades - dating back pre-1967 - to 1948.

Yes, there are plenty of religious, political and social reasons why the rest of the world has not acknowledged the truism of the reality of this being so - but I've not taken any side on those issues (if I did it would be a pro-Arab one) - despite your many attempts to try to imply I have somehow.

You've no need to be alarmed either because I am fully aware that a large majority ethnic population in a town or city does not infer rights of sovereignty, neither have I been conflating Jewish people with the state of Israel.

I have also not commented on Palestine's claim on Jerusalem, the peace negotiations, the West Bank settlements nor anything else you have flung into the pot in an attempt to stir your argument up with.

I have therefore not 'twisted', 'spun', deviated or whatever else you would like to call it from my simple initial statement, namely that like it or not Jerusalem has been administratively, politically and judicially the capital of Israel (in all but recognition from the international community), for the best part of 70 years now.

In many respects the complex history of the land is irrelevant in this situation and I certainly doubt it crossed Trump's mind when he made the statement. 
However the fact is that under Ottoman rule and right up to the First World War, Jews in Palestine/Israel were a small minority - around 1.5% of the population in the 16th century rising to 8% of the population by 1918 - but mass emigration from Europe due to persecution saw that figure quickly rise to 30% by 1946. With Europe desperate to find a place for the Jews they clearly did not want, Balfour switched sides in the conflict and opened the floodgates and in just two years, over a million Palestinians were moved off their land (the Arab population in the area declining from 1.2 million to just over 156 thousand in 2 years, mainly during the Nakbah) and were replaced by European immigrants which took the Jewish population up to 82%.
A further million Jews emigrated to the area over the next 10 years. 

And this is the core of the problem, because regardless of where your sympathies lie, refugee Palestinians and their descendants throughout the world still believe (rightfully IMO) that they had their land stolen and given to immigrants as part of a European ethnic cleansing programme that included both Nazi Germany and the Russian pogroms. 

Trump's comment, rather than "stating the obvious" completely disregards history and in that respect it is unsurprising that the Palestinians are deeply upset, just as I would be if I was evicted from my house and land and they were handed over to immigrants. And as Glos says, Trump's ignorance has probably set the peace process back considerably.

Did you notice his slurred speech?

I wondered how long it would take for me to be accused of ‘arguing for arguments sake’. Absolutely ridiculous, I’ve behaved no differently from you in this debate. But fine let’s shut down another decent stream of content.

wanderlust wrote:In many respects the complex history of the land is irrelevant in this situation and I certainly doubt it crossed Trump's mind when he made the statement. 
However the fact is that under Ottoman rule and right up to the First World War, Jews in Palestine/Israel were a small minority - around 1.5% of the population in the 16th century rising to 8% of the population by 1918 - but mass emigration from Europe due to persecution saw that figure quickly rise to 30% by 1946. With Europe desperate to find a place for the Jews they clearly did not want, Balfour switched sides in the conflict and opened the floodgates and in just two years, over a million Palestinians were moved off their land (the Arab population in the area declining from 1.2 million to just over 156 thousand in 2 years) and were replaced by European immigrants which took the Jewish population up to 82%.
A further million Jews emigrated to the area over the next 10 years. 

And this is the core of the problem, because regardless of where your sympathies lie, refugee Palestinians and their descendants throughout the world still believe (rightfully IMO) that they had their land stolen and given to immigrants as part of a European ethnic cleansing programme that included both Nazi Germany and the Russian pogroms. 

Trump's comment, rather than "stating the obvious" completely disregards history and in that respect it is unsurprising that the Palestinians are deeply upset, just as I would be if I was evicted from my house and land and they were handed over to immigrants. And as Glos says, Trump's ignorance has probably set the peace process back considerably.

Balfour died in 1930, so I've no idea what you are talking about in respect to him 'switching sides in the conflict' - what sides, what conflict, when???

Also almost 70 years of Jerusalem being the actual capital of Israel in all but name - is stating the obvious - or do you want to go back to biblical history when some 1,300BC Moses led the exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt to found their nation in roughly the same part of the world as it is today?

In practicable terms Jerusalem has been Israel's capital since 1948 - just that no one in the wider world community has wanted to acknowledge that because of the sensitivities involved by doing so, until (rightly or wrongly) Trump opened his trap yesterday.

The conflict was the first world war in which the Ottoman Empire sided with the Germans whereas the Arabs, who were at the time being suppressed by the Ottomans sided with the British and received support from the British to help oust the Ottomans. 
Under the McMahon - Hussein Correspondence, the British agreed to grant the Arabs sovereignty over Palestine/Israel in return for "the Great Arab Revolt" (1915) Just two years later the Brits reneged on the deal with the Balfour Declaration in support of Zionism.
Ergo "switching sides in the conflict" - and doing the dirty on our Allies.

East Jerusalem - the Arab Quarter, which is bigger and more populous than the Christian Quarter, the Armenian Quarter and the Jewish Quarter has been the capital of Palestine for at least 400 years by the way - so it was noticeable that Trump didn't use the Zionist definition of Jerusalem.

Meanwhile...
Trouble at mill...

According The Arabs by Eugene Rogan, at one time the British had promised Palestine to the French, Zionist lobby and Jordan.

Not what you said - also your timeline is well out - Balfour declaration 1917, Balfour dies 1930, Palestine exodus 1948.

And also have you made up the bit about East Jerusalem being Palestine's capital for the last 400 years because it's certainly not what the history books say!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutasarrifate_of_Jerusalem

It is a tragedy though that people are getting hurt over this after all these years.  People need to talk, be realistic, settle their differences and get on with life.

Easier said than done though - I know.

You keep saying the actually capital as if you defining Jerusalem in that way actually makes it factual. But capital cities are largely symbolic, Istanbul/Ankara Rio/Brazilia Sydney/Canberra. Hence the significance of Trump simultaneously dismissing Palestine’s claim at a capital and legitimising Israel’s. So consider what you really mean here?

From what I’ve read, much of what you’ve commented ends up at various points agreeing with what myself, Lust or Glos has written. Yet you continue to argue as if you have a separate standpoint - which largely seems to be posting Wikipedia references with little explanation as to how they prove your point.

To me, it seems your arguing for the sake of it.

T.R.O.Y wrote:You keep saying the actually capital as if you defining Jerusalem in that way actually makes it factual. But capital cities are largely symbolic, Istanbul/Ankara Rio/Brazilia Sydney/Canberra. Hence the significance of Trump simultaneously dismissing Palestine’s claim at a capital and legitimising Israel’s. So consider what you really mean here?

From what I’ve read, much of what you’ve commented ends up at various points agreeing with what myself, Lust or Glos has written. Yet you continue to argue as if you have a separate standpoint - which largely seems to be posting Wikipedia references with little explanation as to how they prove your point.

To me, it seems your arguing for the sake of it.

You just go on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and............zzzzzzz


Everyone knows that's your way of trolling by now.




PS - very unlike you to spell 'you're' incorrectly - rushing to quickly to wind me up perhaps mate?