Trump-Haters Claim He’s Jeopardizing Peace In The Middle East, But They Overlooked One Huge Thing …

December 7, 2017 6:05 am  

(  – After years of American presidents promising to accept Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, President Trump actually follows through. That’s not a surprise.

For it, he is being criticized by liberals, RINOs and Muslims. No surprise there either.

What is a surprise is that so many people are claiming that the move could destroy peace in the Middle East. The only surprise here is that anyone thinks there is a peace process in the Middle East. It’s impossible to get along with people who literally put your destruction in their constitution.

Anyone who has been alive for the past 40 years can tell you that every time the press came out with an story about a Middle East peace treaty, it always falls apart when the Arab countries involved are told they have to accept the existence of Israel. How do you get from there to peace? No one knows.

The only time peace came out of the Middle East was when Israel and Egypt reached an agreement and Jimmy Carter was president at the time. That’s practically ancient history.

From The Daily Caller

The president’s critics say he has alienated the Palestinians and the Arab world in one fell stroke, dealing a death knell to any future peace processes between Israelestine and may even be responsible for violence. Abbas’s political party called for three “days of rage” and riots are expected in the West Bank.

The only problem, however, is that no substantive peace process is in the works or has existed in recent years. U.S. law has dictated since 1995 that the U.S. Embassy must be moved to Jerusalem and every President since Bill Clinton has pledged to follow through on the move. “If the movement of an American Embassy that was signaled more than 20 years ago is enough to scuttle peace talks, then maybe the basis for peace doesn’t yet exist,” the Wall Street Journal editorial board poignantly observed.

Eli Lake of Bloomberg of Bloomberg makes a good observation on the situation. He says that the American’s neutral stance might be why Palestinians already riot and send missiles flying into Israel. They have come to believe if they continue to rain violence down on Israel, they will eventually give up. If that’s what they truly believe, they don’t know the Israelis very well. Name one other country that would have attempted the Entebbe Raid. The United States might under a Republican president.

Lake argues:

“Palestinians are fed a steady stream of propaganda about the danger to Jerusalem,” Lake declared, adding “that’s the real danger of sticking to the policy of Jerusalem neutrality. It feeds a Palestinian illusion: With enough patience and rage, one day the Jews will be evicted from their eternal capital. That’s not going to happen.”

Shadi Hamid of the Atlantic observes that even among some of the Arab countries is nothing more than bluster. For example, Saudi Arabia made a lot of noise about the move but there are two reasons why it was all for show. The Saudis are forging an alliance with Saudi Arabia, creating a united front against Iran. The Saudis don’t have nukes, but the Israelis do. Secondly, considering their close ties with the United States if the Saudis were serious about blocking the move, they would addressed that directly to President Trump.

You can expect violence for a while aimed at Israel but the Israelis have always expected that to happen if the United States ever recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Besides, the Israelis are very capable of defending themselves without involving the US.

You Might Like


Please help us stay spam-free. Mouse over a spam post and click the X to report spam.
Web Analytics