In the last Republican debate, Marco Rubio blasted Donald Trump for not taking the side of Israel over the Palestinians in what could be a future negotiation between those two parties, that Donald Trump, if president, would reside over.
Marco Rubio’s position was that because Israel is our friend and ally, that essentially Israel should get ninety percent of the pie – going in, as a silent precondition. And then they’d haggle over the other ten percent, with again Israel taking the greater portion of the ten percent. That was the gist of it.
To Israel: Hey, don’t worry, I’ve got your back. I’ll make sure they get squat.
At that point, the Israeli leader would generously hand over a few trinkets not in the deal to sweeten the deal and all will be happy.
Yeah, maybe in Rubio’s la-la land mind.
There can be no favoritism when one person or one entity, claiming to be an honest broker in whom both sides can trust, negotiates in the best interest of both parties.
It has to be in the best interest of both parties absent punishment for past deeds or speech directed at either party by the opposing party.
Otherwise you’re not the so-called honest broker you claim to be and you have no business negotiating except on behalf of one faction. In that scenario, there’s only one faction sitting at the table. That’s been the problem since the beginning. All the so-called honest brokers were not so honest. They all gave Israel the upper hand. That’s why there was never a viable deal that was going to happen. Israel and their negotiators made sure of that. Then they blamed the Palestinians for leaving the table, when their intent was to make them walk away in the first place.
Israel wants only one deal – their deal. When they promise to give something up, you can be sure that they designed specific areas in advance – over the years – to offer as tokens to the Palestinians. The settlers in those designated areas will make a big noise, as if they were being driven from their God-given homes supported by the bible-document, when they were paid to settle for that purpose to begin with. All done to make Israelis look like they’re making painful sacrifices.
Marco Rubio has never negotiated anything of import that could prepare him for the presidency.
Hillary Clinton already had her shot as Secretary of State and missed.
Bernie Sanders couldn’t negotiate his way out of a paper bag.
Ted Cruz goes in as Czar, and sure the Russian Jews in Israel like that, since many of them took Palestinian land under Ariel Sharon and want to keep it, but Cruz might not have the stomach to defy those who steal land, who might be willing to die to keep that land. (That’s what we did to the American Indian.)
So as an easy way out, he’ll rely on the bible-document as his main witness and proof of ownership. God said the land belonged to the Jews and so it belongs to the Jews, and so it is decided. Yeah, he would definitely use the bible-document approach.
That would be a national security risk for the USA – settlers in Israel with USA connections wanting to teach a lesson to Americans about land rights. Evangelicals would probably get on board.
Right now, since the issues all surround real estate, Donald Trump – out of all the other candidates for president – has the best chance of negotiating a fair deal – honest or not.