So... Is Trump actually trying to start another war for Israel?

Was it the capital of the Jewish homeland for the many centuries that few Jews lived there?

I think they consider it the capital going back to King David. The second (and greatest) king over all of Israel. When historically Israel was the strongest it ever was (about twice as large in territory as it is now).

At any rate, you can't get past the fact that as a result of the Israeli War of Independence

1) Israel has controlled West Jerusalem for its entire existence.

As a result of the Six Days War (a war that Israel did not start)

2) Israel has controlled all of Jerusalem for the last fifty years.

3) Any Palestinians who have any idea that Israel would give up East Jerusalem to them are living in fantasy land equivalent to those who think that Israel is one day going to be "driven into the sea".

This country would be better off if we didn’t fight Israel’s wars.

Which of Israel's wars did this country fight?

We've never fought Israel's wars. We have assisted them. Most notably with Operation Nickel Grass during the October War in 1973 (airlift of weapons and munitions to a severely stressed IDF).

On the other hand Israel assisted the U.S. a great deal during the Vietnam War (by turning over captured Soviet MIGs to the U.S. for pilot training and developing combat tactics against them)

A fairy tale with little or no connection to reality.

Yeah. That's an attempt at a factual claim you just made, not some political stance, and it is factually false according to history books as well as the Bible. You're just plain wrong.

I'm pretty sure that a non Biblical source has been found that confirms King David once ruled Israel.

There was probably a petty warlord who bears some slight relation to the character you're talking about. But that's not a verification of your claim.

Doesn't really matter for this issue, since the Bible also reports several long epochs in which Jerusalem was not the capital of the Jewish homeland, so the original claim is false in either case.

This reminds me of the argument folks made how it was perfectly okay for protestors to tear down a statue honoring Confederate soldiers because even if it led to violence, it would force America to address the issue of such statues and institutional racism in the country. If innocent blood was shed as a result, well, that was just the price to be paid.

In the great sweep of history one could make a strong argument that Philip of Macedonia (Alexander the Greats father) was merely a "petty warlord".

Did you agree with him?

Nope. And if you need proof that I thought that pulling such statues down illegally was a bad idea, I'll simply direct you to this thread.

No. I'll take your word on it.

Boy, I wonder why so few Jews lived there, at that time, Ricky terrorist supporter?

Thanks, professor.

Most of the people living in that area would find their civil rights dramatically improved as a result of that scenario...

Does recognition of historical reality make one a terrorist supporter?

In general, reality has a liberal bias. Of course, that isn't a liberal accomplishment. It's just a function of neo-cons turning their back on truth.

Obama must be bummed, apparently after eight years he still can't wash the taste of Palestinian dick out of his mouth.

Everyone wants to debate history, as if some killer factoid will make the Israelis say "Oy vey, you're right! This isn't our land!" after which they all march into the Mediterranean. Who owned what and when doesn't matter; it matters who controls what in the here and now.

Jerusalem is inside territory Israel controls. Israel claims Jerusalem as its capitol. Israel has its top government elements there. There is no ongoing process that's going to change ANY of that.

I don't give two shits what the Palestinians think about this. They have a pattern of refusing to compromise, and then winding up the worse off for it. Well, this is where that process leads.

Aren't you failing to recognize historical reality when you ignore the reality of Israel controlling all of Jerusalem for 50 years?

What historical reality would that be, comrade?

*redacted for ignorance*

Negative, Ghost Rider.

https://writingexplained.org/capital-vs-capitol

They're referencing the city, not a building.

I did not know that!

I know it doesn't mean anything but if I were president I would fully intend to NEVER appoint a U.S. ambassador to Vatican City or the Holy See that is.