While the details of President Trump’s “deal of the century” peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians are still secret, officials offered some spoiler alerts, saying that the White House feels no need to try to offer a balanced plan, or do anything to show themselves to be honest brokers.
Instead, they say the administration wants to underscore that it is “proudly supportive of Israel,” and feels no need to balance the peace proposal with anything that the Palestinians might want, because they don’t see an “equivalency” between the two.
Which is, of course, not how deals end up being made. This is, rather, a continuation of the US policy toward the Israel-Palestine conflict for decades, initially talking up a fair deal but finally offering a plan that would rubber stamp Israeli policy, and offer the Palestinians effectively nothing in return.
When the plan is offered, the Palestinians can be expected to reject it, because it is admittedly going to be biased against them. Then administration officials can condemn the Palestinians for not taking part in the US-led process, and punish them further.
The irony of this is that, because an Israeli election is just around the corner, if the proposal is offered before the vote the far-right Israeli government will also spurn it, no matter how in favor of Israeli policy it is, because any deal would conceivably give the Palestinians something, even if it’s by accident, and that would open up other Israeli parties to attack the government as weak.
Whores…
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Trump+and+clinton+licking+zionist+boot&t=hj&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.huffingtonpost.com%2F2016-01-16-1452946810-6459589-ScreenshotofU.S.presidentialcandidatesDonaldTrumpHillaryClintonlickingIsraelsboots-thumb.jpg
What’s new? Both parties are in power because they are willing to lick zionist boots.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Trump+and+clinton+licking+zionist+boot&t=hj&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.huffingtonpost.com%2F2016-01-16-1452946810-6459589-ScreenshotofU.S.presidentialcandidatesDonaldTrumpHillaryClintonlickingIsraelsboots-thumb.jpg
Pathetic.
The US has always been strongly bias towards Israel.
The only difference from before Trump and now is…… its even more in the open now.
Since 1967, not before. That war charmed the US, mired in Vietnam and with its own Army falling apart.
1967….thats 52 years….half a century. Most of Palestinian land has been stolen, tens of thousands have been killed in that time, the middle east is in chaos.
True. However, it is helpful to understand that they were able to do all of that, and are still doing it, due to the reaction of the US to that one thing, the magical great victory of the miraculous Six Day War. It was the total victory, the short time, and the moment it happened when the US seemed unable to do anything like it. Israel has been riding that wave ever since, presumed to have the answers to the questions that fascinate American hawks.
If ever they had that presumption of military magic stripped away, they’d be left with nothing. It is the US worship of that one event, and US assumptions that, which has shaped all the rest.
Anything short of outright extermination is insufficient in the eyes of the Zio-Wahabi-Rapturist troika of tyranny. They don’t see other people as human beings. The world is divided into those that align with their current interests and those that don’t.
Sovereign nations have no rights to avoid being targeted by the big bad USA, but dear little Israel can decide what Big Brother is allowed to do.
” We must define our position and lay down basic principles for a settlement. Our demands should be moderate and balanced, and appear to be reasonable. But in fact they must involve such conditions as to ensure that the enemy rejects them. Then we should manoeuvre and allow him to define his own position, and reject a settlement on the basis of a compromise position. We should then publish his demands as embodying unreasonable extremism.”
(Yehoshafat Harkabi, 2 November 1973)
***
We had an Israeli lecturer on the subject of Negotiation. His position was that on entering negotiations the desired outcome is that you get everything and they get nothing. Anything less than that could be seen as a failure.
You start out saying you are willing to pay 100 and they say they want 200. In normal expectations one would expect a price around 150.
However the moment that they move off the base of 200, you change your starting point to 50. Now the expectation is that you will end up nearer 100. As they move down, so do you.
You can often end with a price below 100.
He was a despicable PoS.