|
longwayhome -> RE: 128 repudiate Trump's 9 against 35 abstain (12/22/2017 10:30:28 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
well, the UN showed pretty much what the world thinks of the bullying(blackmail) attempted by your ilk.
you sad little man, again with the bullshit. attempting to put your "thoughts" in mine, just stop, its pathetic, boring and dishonest
yawwwwwwn
Nobody has stated other countries have announced stopping trade.
it will take more than bullying.
Who exactly is trying to "bully" and blackmail" [:D]
YOU claimed that we would be isolated, not me.
Back your mad howling up if you can. How exactly is anyone going to "isolate" us
BTW, on a related note, 128 countries suffer from the cartoonish delusion that their meaningless vote "nulls" our recognition that Jerusalem is Israel's capital
As if their hatred of Jews really sways us or our relationship with Israel
I dont know, maybe that guy living on Pennsylvania Avenue that said he would withdraw aid to who ever did not vote in our favor?
What is his name? Oh yeah, President Donald Trump. You can read it for yourself.
And since you do not seem to know history, or want to completely ignore history, you might want to consider this:
quote:
United Nations Resolution 181, resolution passed by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 1947 that called for the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, with the city of Jerusalem as a corpus separatum (Latin: “separate entity”) to be governed by a special international regime. The resolution—which was considered by the Jewish community in Palestine to be a legal basis for the establishment of Israel, and which was rejected by the Arab community—was succeeded almost immediately by violence. source
So basically, during the 6 day war in 1967, Israel, in defiance of the UN resolution that created the country, invaded Jerusalem, and have been occupying it in defiance of the UN charter ever since.
Which is one of the major issues preventing any kind of lasting peace in the region. President Trump's move did nothing but give those Muslim countries that have supported the US in the past a damn good reason to support someone else, like the various Muslim terrorist groups that have been targeting everyone that supports Israel....
Oh, and all that cheap oil we get from the Middle East from countries that voted against us? And in consideration of Trump's threat to withdraw aid, well what is to stop them from jacking the price to the point we get that wonderful 4 dollar plus price on a gallon of gas?
I suggest your google 1973 Opec Oil embargo against the US.
Oh, and by the way, if you think that US oil production can make up for any that countries decide not to sell us, consider this, in 2016 the US produced 8.9 million barrels of oil per day....
The domestic demand is 19.7 million barrels per day. US Department of Energy source
And 3.13 million barrels of oil per day is imported from the Middle east.
But then there is the fact that almost all the countries we buy oil from happens to be part of OPEC, U.S. Imports by Country of Origin but hey there is all that oil in Indonesia, right?
Except that Indonesia is considered a Muslim country and Donald Trump basically told them to go such a dick by moving the embassy....
So, oh great wise ass, tell us once again how Trump's moving the embassy and then making the announcement that we will withdraw aid from countries that didnt support the US in the UN resolution wont or cant hurt us?
In a very real sense, those Muslim oil producing countries can jack up the prices of oil to the US or just not export to the US and to use the famous 11bravo saying, we be fucked.
Its simple economics, the US cannot support itself in oil production, which means that should these countries decide not to export to US, we will be in very serious trouble.
Now, considering that the GOP has regularly killed every incentive to produce biofuels, which means no one is actually producing a whole lot of them, just what do you suggest the United States do?
As I see it, we have limited options:
1) President Trump can eat a Muslim oil producing dick and announce we will not be moving the embassy
2) The American people can accept that we are not energy independent and start paying $4 dollars or more a gallon for gas and stand behind the president
3) President Trump can take a page from history and follow the Japanese solution from 1941 and invade the countries that could provide enough oil for US needs
-note this solution may just put the US in some serious diplomatic issues with our allies, who may decide not push a trade embargo against us for everything
Its global economics 101, the US cannot take an isolationist stance and survive, we are too fucking dependent on foreign imports.
The US was forced to pressure Israel into making concessions to end the embargo in 1974, Nixon and the GOP learned that the US could not bully countries into doing what we wanted, when we wanted and how we wanted.
Ever hear the saying, "Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it" well, Trump clearly does not know history, or doesnt care.
And if push comes to shove, the American people are going to get fucked.
So, tell us, exactly what will happen to Trump's popular support and by extension, the GOP's voter support if, by his actions, the American people see gas prices go through the roof and gas lines again?
Even without the oil issue, recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was always going to be counter-productive at best.
It's one thing being more isolationist but this is not an isolationist move. It's giving most of the rest of the world the finger based on some very dubious logic.
People can defend the right of the US to give the rest of the world the finger. For some it's exhilarating and feels like a blow against a world that takes the US for granted and sucks up US energy and resources (even if US hegemony, security and economic strength is partly based on applying those resources). Some would take the view that shaking the system up will have a positive effect.
Unfortunately for most of the world it just feels like a calculated wind-up from a president who gets personally turned on by doing just that. If this is a well thought out foreign policy initiative, it's a major PR fail from an administration who doesn't communicate well enough to claim that it's motives are misunderstood.
Isolationism would be leaving well alone, not throwing a match into into a fuel dump.
|
|
|
|
