Jerusalem: UN resolution rejects Trump's declaration

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33

But it just wasn't America taking names, I am sure the Mossad was too...........

Yeah! So I expect to see plenty of Saudis flying airplanes into buildings in various foriegn cities over the coming year.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: intrptr

Actually thats what the the whole world thought about "US": 'Eff them, corrupt bunch of tools that they are'.

Except I don't really care what they or you think. But you know that already, right my dear friend?

You're not my friend. Enough to reply though huh, your imperilous exceptionilus.

originally posted by: intrptr
You're not my friend.

Duh.

Enough to reply though huh, your imperilous exceptionilus.

Why wouldn't I? I was hoping that your initial reply to me had some banalities about the gubment killing brown people. Bombs away pal of mine.

the real question is why are they making such a big deal about something that happened 37 years ago.

Too bad the UN is pretty much meaningless and this action doesn't require their approval.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33

But it just wasn't America taking names, I am sure the Mossad was too...........

Yeah! So I expect to see plenty of Saudis flying airplanes into buildings in various foriegn cities over the coming year.

Yeah so since America already had their false flag event and are fully on board, I guess the UK will get a plane into Big Ben that should galvanize British people, it's a pity they never got with the program yet........

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Would there be this much controversy if Italy moved their capital to Naples?

As Naples is in Italy No but Jerusalem is supposed to be shared between Israel and the Palestinians , the US recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is basically a green light for Israel to claim Jerusalem and so end the peace process , something they never wanted anyway.

West Germany did exactly that, with respect to Berlin during the cold war. They claimed it as their capital (although for all practical purposes the nation was really administered out of Bonn).

West Berlin was entirely located inside of Soviet East Germany. And the biggest symbolic moment in the fall of the USSR was when the wall between East and West Berlin came down.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Would there be this much controversy if Italy moved their capital to Naples?

For comparison:

California decides that Calexico is it's new state capital.
Then claims that Calexico/Mexicali is an eternal-undivided city and that California has the right to control and settle Mexicali.

Suppose then that the U.S. backs California's claim against Mexico and the civilized World.

My position is that Calexico/Mexicali is not eternal but rather man made. There were millions of years in which no one lived there, and there will be millions of years in which no people will live there before the Earth ends, therefore the words eternal and undivided have no rational meaning when discussing human affairs.

Jerusalem is a very old city, though. It had already been around a long time and was already considered to be important, way before the Israelites got hold of it

They are not the original inhabitants. Just the oldest remembered conquerors.

a reply to: gortex

All Together Now My Fellow Americans !

FUUUUCK The U.N. !

a reply to: gortex

This is an excellent example of just how useless and what a waste of time/money the UN is. We move our embassy to jerusalem (haven't actually even done it yet), they flip out. Meanwhile member states are murdering their own people without a peep from the UN.

a reply to: Dfairlite

This is an excellent example of just how useless and what a waste of time/money the UN is.

The UN needs reform that's for certain but it is essential , the countries of the world need a forum where they can air disagreements , seek support from their peers and censure members for poor or illegal behavior, the UN isn't perfect but for now it's all we've got.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Jerusalem is a very old city, though. It had already been around a long time and was already considered to be important, way before the Israelites got hold of it

Yes indeed!

One of the oldest cities in the world, Jerusalem was named as "Urusalima" on ancient Mesopotamian cuneiform tablets, probably meaning "City of Shalem" after a Canaanite deity, during the early Canaanite period (approximately 2400 BCE).
...
The name "Jerusalem" is variously etymologized to mean "foundation (Sumerian yeru, 'settlement'/Semitic yry' 'to found, to lay a cornerstone') of the god Shalem";[40][41] the god Shalem was thus the original tutelary deity of the Bronze Age city.
Jerusalem and etymology

A Ugaritic myth known as The Gracious and Most Beautiful Gods, describes Shalim and his brother Shahar as offspring of El through two women he meets at the seashore. They are both nursed by "The Lady", likely Anat (Athirat or Asherah), and have appetites as large as "(one) lip to the earth and (one) lip to the heaven." In other Ugaritic texts, the two are associated with the sun goddess.
Shalim

I find it rather odd that the city was never renamed, or rather, none of the re-names took, seeing as it seems to be the focus of supposedly monotheistic sects. Is it a conspiracy? "Let us all pretend that it is not a Canaanite city, still bearing the name of a Ugaritic deity."

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Dfairlite

This is an excellent example of just how useless and what a waste of time/money the UN is.

The UN needs reform that's for certain but it is essential , the countries of the world need a forum where they can air disagreements , seek support from their peers and censure members for poor or illegal behavior, the UN isn't perfect but for now it's all we've got.

Remove veto powers from ALL nations. Then it's not a back and forth circle jerk.

wrong topic I posted in.

My bad.

The problem with the UN is that it gives too much power to nations that have no real impact on the world economy. Nations that shouldn't really be important.

It's just a place for the nobodies to take pot shots at anyone who tries to lead.

How do you take the General Assembly seriously when Haiti gets a vote, or El Salvadore, or Luxenburg. There are quite a lot of nations that barely count as a "country" and have no vested interest in the topic being discussed. (Why does Guam care if Israel puts its capital in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv?)

originally posted by: pthena

I find it rather odd that the city was never renamed, or rather, none of the re-names took, seeing as it seems to be the focus of supposedly monotheistic sects. Is it a conspiracy? "Let us all pretend that it is not a Canaanite city, still bearing the name of a Ugaritic deity."

I forgot that archaeology is starting to show that it was likely Canaanite.

In the bible, it mentions Abraham going to the priest of "Salem", most likely Jerusalem, to get a blessing. So the legendary father of all Israel acknowledged the residents of Jerusalem (most likely Canaanite) as being good with his god, and the city as already being a religious center for his god.

His descendants couldn't change the name after they conquered it, then. But most of the meaning attached to it has been lost, as the Yahew cult evolved and earlier versions of the doctrine had to be left out the record. We'll never know how David justified his invasion of it. (And it probably would have been written down if the reason had any merit.)

How many soldiers would liechtenstein send if the UN had to go to war to enforce one its resolutions?

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Dfairlite

This is an excellent example of just how useless and what a waste of time/money the UN is.

The UN needs reform that's for certain but it is essential , the countries of the world need a forum where they can air disagreements , seek support from their peers and censure members for poor or illegal behavior, the UN isn't perfect but for now it's all we've got.

Remove veto powers from ALL nations. Then it's not a back and forth circle jerk.

that would be great if only they were not stacked againt western powers.

a reply to: gortex

Nah, we have no need for the UN. Imagine it ceases existing, what would happen? Nothing would change except the US would save a few billion dollars.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Dfairlite

This is an excellent example of just how useless and what a waste of time/money the UN is.

The UN needs reform that's for certain but it is essential , the countries of the world need a forum where they can air disagreements , seek support from their peers and censure members for poor or illegal behavior, the UN isn't perfect but for now it's all we've got.

Remove veto powers from ALL nations. Then it's not a back and forth circle jerk.

The UN would cease to exist. The Big powers of the world do have the final say. Like Tuvalu with 11,000 people actually has the same clout as China or India ect. You think permanent members of the UNSC are ever going to give up their veto power?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: gortex

Nah, we have no need for the UN. Imagine it ceases existing, what would happen? Nothing would change except the US would save a few billion dollars.

I wouldn't go quite that far.

It does provide a forum, where the lesser powers can say how they feel about things. It also does a decent job of coordinating efforts to improve infrastructure in the third world, and provide humanitarian aid.

The problem is that its ego demands that it be considered to be more than what it is. It's not much of a world government. Just a figure head, if even that.