I think it is far too ambiguous to interpret. "Saving" can be taken in two ways. In one way, it is related to salvation, or the rescue of someone from a threat. Which would suggest that Israel's future is to be saved. For someone that embarked on the Abraham Accords, that would seem to be an expectable goal. In another way, it can be related to deprioritization, or the leaving of some task to the last. Which would suggest that whatever problems are to be solved for Israel, it may require that the other problems be solved first. Considering that the politics of Israel may be entwined with the politics of the U.S., that may be the case. It could well mean both interpretations.
I have never understood what that phrase is supposed to mean, and I think many on this page read into it their own prejudices. I think it is clear that Trump regards Israel with the deepest religious respect, and I have no problem with that.
Thanks for your response. It was articulate and thoughtful! I certainly agree that Israel has problems and that those problems probably can't be solved until other problems are solved first.
And I agree that "the politics of Israel may be entwined with the politics of the U.S." And that's the worrisome part to me. Is it right for our Senators and Reps. to be dual US/Israeli citizens? Which nation are they loyal to? What would people think if our politicians held dual citizenship with another country? How about US/Germany dual citizenship? Or US/fill in the blank?
And what campaign contributions politicians receive from AIPAC, the American/Israeli PAC? There's only a handful of US politicians that don't take AIPAC $$. It's almost as if our foreign policy is controlled by Israel. I have no problem with Trump having the "deepest religious respect" for Israel. I have the deepest religious respect for Israel also. The problem comes in when we mix up religious respect with politics and foreign policy.
What's missing in this is that no one has done a survey of these dual-passport persons to solicit their reasons for having a dual citizenship. I distrust resorting to paranoia when actual research is needed.
To give you an example, my wife is a Zambian national in the U.S. on a green card, intending to apply for U.S. citizenship. She is by birth a Zambian citizen. She and we have children and relatives still in Zambia, which is a wonderful place to visit. Once she gets her U.S. citizenship, according to the law in Zambia, as her husband I will be eligible for Zambian citizenship also, not requiring that I renounce my U.S. citizenship. That would make life much easier in traveling to and from Zambia and conducting business over there. It would be obligatory not to get into circumstances where there would be a conflict of loyalty. So, do people do this? Plenty, it turns out, but Zambia is not at the axis of world politics.
As for AIPAC having an influence, that would be its purpose. israel knows very well that if America was not its friend, its days would be over, with mass genocide. If I were in their shoes, I could hardly do otherwise. At least they are open and above board with their influence. The lobbyists are totally under the table.
I think it is far too ambiguous to interpret. "Saving" can be taken in two ways. In one way, it is related to salvation, or the rescue of someone from a threat. Which would suggest that Israel's future is to be saved. For someone that embarked on the Abraham Accords, that would seem to be an expectable goal. In another way, it can be related to deprioritization, or the leaving of some task to the last. Which would suggest that whatever problems are to be solved for Israel, it may require that the other problems be solved first. Considering that the politics of Israel may be entwined with the politics of the U.S., that may be the case. It could well mean both interpretations.
I have never understood what that phrase is supposed to mean, and I think many on this page read into it their own prejudices. I think it is clear that Trump regards Israel with the deepest religious respect, and I have no problem with that.
Thanks for your response. It was articulate and thoughtful! I certainly agree that Israel has problems and that those problems probably can't be solved until other problems are solved first.
And I agree that "the politics of Israel may be entwined with the politics of the U.S." And that's the worrisome part to me. Is it right for our Senators and Reps. to be dual US/Israeli citizens? Which nation are they loyal to? What would people think if our politicians held dual citizenship with another country? How about US/Germany dual citizenship? Or US/fill in the blank?
And what campaign contributions politicians receive from AIPAC, the American/Israeli PAC? There's only a handful of US politicians that don't take AIPAC $$. It's almost as if our foreign policy is controlled by Israel. I have no problem with Trump having the "deepest religious respect" for Israel. I have the deepest religious respect for Israel also. The problem comes in when we mix up religious respect with politics and foreign policy.
What's missing in this is that no one has done a survey of these dual-passport persons to solicit their reasons for having a dual citizenship. I distrust resorting to paranoia when actual research is needed.
To give you an example, my wife is a Zambian national in the U.S. on a green card, intending to apply for U.S. citizenship. She is by birth a Zambian citizen. She and we have children and relatives still in Zambia, which is a wonderful place to visit. Once she gets her U.S. citizenship, according to the law in Zambia, as her husband I will be eligible for Zambian citizenship also, not requiring that I renounce my U.S. citizenship. That would make life much easier in traveling to and from Zambia and conducting business over there. It would be obligatory not to get into circumstances where there would be a conflict of loyalty. So, do people do this? Plenty, it turns out, but Zambia is not at the axis of world politics.
As for AIPAC having an influence, that would be its purpose. israel knows very well that if America was not its friend, its days would be over, with mass genocide. If I were in their shoes, I could hardly do otherwise. At least they are open and above board with their influence. The lobbyists are totally under the table.