Beyond the Cusp

April 12, 2013

How North Korea with Nukes Defines Iran with Nukes

A good number of world leaders are currently sweating nervously while hanging on every threat that the new North Korean Dear Leader Kim Jong-Un utters with their nerves fraying even more each time the satellites or other intelligence sources report any activities taking place anywhere near missile sites or nuclear instillations. Even China, the one who usually is called upon to calm situations emanating from North Korea, has placed additional troops on their border with North Korea and appears to be just as concerned as anybody else. Russia has made statements which could be seen as indicating that they are also in the dark as to what this new, young and untested North Korean leader is likely to do. The concerns are spread throughout the whole gambit of possibilities. Will he launch a middle-range missile or two or many more? Will he launch the reported untested long-range missile? Will the missiles be armed with active warheads? Would he honestly choose to place a nuclear weapon atop one of the missiles and if so where the nuclear warhead would be aimed? Everything is very much unknown largely due to no clear intelligence on North Korea and absolutely no history or even inklings of information about the new leader of North Korea. The entire world is in the dark forced to take guesses and attempt to be ready for any and every possibility. And as unclear everything is concerning this confrontation that has thus far been simply words and false moves without any actual belligerent acts, the world does have the one calming hope that all of this will result in simply meeting some demands for easing sanctions and some other mostly political compromises and food aid or other trade items as this has been the scenario in the past when his predecessors, his father and grandfather, had taken similar actions of saber rattling and boisterous threats. The level of trepidation which seems to have gripped our leaders where they have taken precautionary measures but at the same time are tip-toeing so carefully around the problem refusing to stand up against the threats coming from North Korea as if they are quiet enough things will calm down on their own. Such a timid approach only emboldens Kim Jong-Un and allows him to appear far more powerful than he actually is which is exactly what he desires. Where part of this strutting and bellowing out threats is done for intimidation and effect in order to have his demands met once they are stated, the other part is for propaganda on the home front where Kim Jong-Un will have reports for the foreseeable future regaling how the world was hanging on his every word and willing to grant him whatever he demanded and their sacrifices have not been in vain as North Korea is so powerful they can virtually stop the world from spinning. Maybe things would end quicker and Kim Jong-Un could be denied the endless ranting under the spotlight if he was confronted and somebody demanded him to simply state what this was all about and after he makes some demands instruct Kim Jong-Un that he will accept exactly what the rest of the world is willing to give him until he compromises and allows some freedoms and begins to serve his people instead of his ego. But the world does not seem to work like that which is why people like Kim Jong-Un and his fathers before him can get away with such antics.

Now look down the road about three or four years, or maybe by the end of this year depending on which report is correct on the Iranian nuclear weapons program and imagine how the world will react to the Iranian President, whomever wins the election this June to replace Ahmadinejad, along with whatever supporting role the Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei decides to play making demands of the world. Imagine, if you can, Iran and the IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps) along with their terrorist branches the world over, like Hezballah, threatening to detonate nuclear devices in multiple capital cities around the globe if their demands are not met. How would the world react if Iran decided to annex Iraq claiming they were simply reforming their rightful lands as the inheritors of the lands that belonged to Persia? They could then annex Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan all with the same claim. At what point would the world leaders decide it was too much and take a hard stand? Would it take having them attack a NATO country such as Turkey? Would the Europeans even flinch if they attacked Greece or would the Europeans see that as good a way as any to rid themselves of a problem? What if Iraq, Syria and Lebanon simply announced that they desired to form a confederation under Iranian rule with their retaining some amount of autonomy but falling under the protection of the Iranian nuclear umbrella? If the world is apoplectically paralyzed by North Korea when they presumably do not possess ballistic missiles capable of striking anywhere on the globe, what would be the reaction to Iran who by then will almost certainly possess such missiles? Would the United States go to war over Israel or would Israel become literally the Czechoslovakia of World War III? How about over Kuwait or Saudi Arabia? Would the world rise up to protect any of the Sunni Islamic countries if they began to fall under Shiite Iranian hegemony? After Iran crept across North Africa, would we then rise if they laid claim to Andalusia which is what the Islamic powers called Spain when they held much of it until 1492 when King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella marshaled the Spanish people and threw off the Islamic rulers. What if there were to be a modern battle of Tours in southern France. Iran is not a poor and economically desperate nation despite the effects that the sanctions have had on them. The Iranians are still managing to trade some of their oil and other goods and as the Western nations fall deeper into their own economic troubles we might very well see a resurgent Iran with many Asian and other nations discarding the sanctions and resuming trade with what would appear to be an Iran with a brighter future than the debt ridden Western nations. We need to remember that North Korea has a controlling power on its northern border and China would not allow the situation over North Korea threaten to bring a nuclear exchange to her southeastern border. Russia also would have something to say about such a possibility. North Korea also is far smaller and does not possess the natural resources that Iran does. Iran with nuclear weapons is a completely different and extremely dangerous threat which really cannot be compared to North Korea. If the nations of the world are unable to squelch the protestations and threats of Kim Jong-Un out of North Korea, then we will be in even worse position should Iran start to make similar noises backed by nuclear weapons. That is something to consider but not too close to bedtime if one wishes to sleep free of nightmares.

Beyond the Cusp

February 27, 2013

Republican Lack of Discipline Exposed by Hagel Confirmation

Filed under: Obama,Israel,Middle East,Palestinian,Hezballah,Hamas,Palestinian Authority,West Bank,Gaza,Jews,Muslims,President Obama,Administration,Peace Process,Iran,Nuclear Weapons,Netanyahu,Syria,Politics,Conservatives,Islam,United States,Terror,Refugee Camp,Muslim Brotherhood,Jihad,Congress,Europe,Samaria,Judea,Palestinian Security Force,Jerusalem,Disengagement,Mahmoud Abbas,Afghanistan,Hamas Charter,Fatah,Fatah Charter,Democrat,Zionist,Arabs,Partition Plan,Palestinian Legislative Committee,Extreme Leftist,Anti-Israel,Borders,Anti-Zionist,President,Settlements,2012 Elections,Neglection of Duty,Right of Return,1967 Borders,History,Oslo Accords,Rafah Crossing,Gaza Blockade,Boycott,Divestment,1949 Armistice Line,PLO,Old City,Jewish Leadership,Secretary of Defense,Government,Refugees,Ahmadinejad,Iraq,Checkpoints,Kotel,Fayyad,United States Constitution,Temple Mount,Checks and Balances,Senate Majority Leader,Senate,Intifada,Condemning Israel,Prisoners,Protests,Sanctions,Economic Sanctions,Suicide Bomber,Extreme Right,Secretary of State,Golan Heights,Pre-Conditions,Democracy,Islamic Jihad,Constitutionalist,Prisoner Release,Protect Citizenry,Rocket Attacks,Rock Throwing,Response to Terrorism,Judean Hills,Parliamentary Government,CIA Chief,Consequences,Democracy,Two State Solution,Western Wall,Building Freeze,Jewish State,Recognize Israel,Uranium Enrichment,Zionism,Submission,Green Line,Constitutional Government,FBI,PLO Charter,Ayatollah Khamenei,Nuclear Research,Missile Research,Uranium Enrichment,Warhead Development,P5+1,Coalition,Jewish Home,Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps,Israeli Capital City,Nuclear Sites,Qom,Parchin,Debate,Ineffective Sanctions,Foreign Policy,Nuclear Program,Smuggling Tunnels,Vote,Federal Government,Appointment,Cabinet,Land for Peace,Separation Barrier,Jewish Heritage,Chuck Hagel,James Inhofe,Senate Armed Services Committee,Oklahoma,Filibuster,Cloture,Tom Coburn — qwertster @ 2:11 PM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

There is a theory throughout the free world that on certain votes party discipline is expected. Such examples abound in the Parliaments in Europe, Israel, Japan, Australia, Canada and any we may have omitted. It has often been on display within the United States Congress, but almost exclusively by the Democrat legislators and almost never, actually might be never, from the Republican side of the aisle. The nomination by President Obama of former Senator Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense was problematic even before his dreadful performance at his confirmation hearings. As positions go in a President’s Cabinet, Secretary of State, CIA Chief, Chief of the FBI are the few of the positions which rival Secretary of Defense in their importance. This makes the ability to answer questions competently and without overly long hesitations very crucial. Mr. Hagel’s performance left loads to be desired. He not only stumbled on answering questions but also had to correct answers he had given after conferring with handlers sent to aid him in his responses. The United States does not need or desire a Secretary of Defense who is less prepared to answer vital questions than the average Senator would be. Even if this had been the only problem with the Hagel appointment it still would have been worthy of greater objection than was displayed.

But there were already other questions and difficulties posed by Senator Hagel’s previous statements concerning the United States staunchest Middle East ally Israel and his lack of resolve shown towards the Iranian nuclear program as well as his soft approach to such terrorist groups denoted as such by the State Department as Hamas and Hezballah. When one additionally inspects Senator Hagel’s voting record his appointment becomes all the more troublesome. Add in his flippant disregard for many such votes and his snide remark that there was no evidence that any of his votes ever did any damage to Israel which though technically true, it is not for want of trying on Hagel’s behalf and solely due to the fact that Hagel’s vote was among the minority and the vast majority of his fellow Senators supported the United State’s ally Israel. The final nail in the coffin for the Hagel appointment should have come when at least one Republican Senator decided to filibuster the nomination and requested his fellow Republicans support his efforts. Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma even wrote a letter asking as much and despite being given the support of a number of fellow Republican Senators; the party supported his efforts only through one cloture vote stalling the confirmation over one little weekend.

After supporting the Senator Inhofe intent to filibuster on a Friday vote, Senator Reid, the Majority Leader of the Senate, was assured by numerous Republicans that they would no longer support any further Republican efforts to filibuster and delay a confirmation vote. What makes the whole cloture vote fold by Republican Senators so disheartening is when the actual vote came to confirm the Hagel appointment as Secretary of Defense, the final vote was insufficient to have overcome the filibuster by a fair margin of 58-41, two votes short of cloture if the Senators had voted their up or down vote during the cloture vote. Despite the four Senators from the Republican side of the aisle who voted to approve the Hagel nomination, the cloture vote of 71-27 reveals that an additional thirteen Republican Senators voted to end the filibuster by their own party than eventually supported the nomination. The question which those whose Senators voted for cloture despite opposing the nomination must be asked is why, knowing that a vote for cloture guaranteed the nomination, did they ignore the sole path to resist this atrocious appointment and fold to the demands of President Obama, Senator Reid and the Democrats? Are they that afraid to stand strong for their beliefs and only vote their conscience when it will not make a difference and when their vote matters simply fold under even the slightest of pressures from the Democrats? What are they afraid of, missing out on some brie and red wine luncheons in the Capital Building or some other social affairs? If they are unable of standing when their votes matter, perhaps they should be replaced. If your Senator was among the four that voted for Hagel, well, at least they were consistent and voted their minds. But if your Senator is among the thirteen who voted for cloture thus guaranteeing a confirmation which they then voted against, you may wish to replace the worms you currently have as the next choice could not be worse. Maybe you can find a real Republican Senatorial candidate to run against the worm in the next primary and send a real conservative Constitutionalist Senator to Washington. Would that be too much to ask? My Senator, he was the one who first stated intent to filibuster and the other supported him and is known as Senator No. I am glad you asked.

Beyond the Cusp

November 4, 2012

Abbas Speaks Again with Forked Tongue

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gave an interview to Israeli Channel 2 television in which he suggested the he would be willing to give up the “right of return” and that he believes that the Palestinian State would only contain the lands liberated by Israel during the 1967 Six Day War. Israeli President Peres was very quick to laud with great compliment the statements made by Abbas and stated that the statements were a positive sign and revealed that Israel indeed has a man of peace with whom they may reach a negotiated and lasting agreement. I can only forgive President Peres as he has invested much of his life in the folly of Oslo and is still to this day the dreamy eyed optimist who grabs onto any morsel to prove that his part in instigating Oslo was not in vain. Unfortunately for over a thousand Israelis all that Oslo brought was the Second Intifada and death and we dare not forget the thousands more who have suffered permanent serious injuries and that almost no Jew in Israel has not been touched by the violence spawned by Oslo and Yasser Arafat and his close second in command, Mahmoud Abbas. It was less than a day later when Nabil Abu Rudeineh published a clarification refuting everything stated or implied by Abbas. Every concession implied by Abbas now stands refuted and withdrawn excused as a simple misstatement or misunderstanding.

 

This ploy by Mahmoud Abbas is the same one used by Yasser Arafat and by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian negotiators in the matter of their nuclear program. This method is to offer forth an olive branch then refute that the offer was made and put it up to a misunderstanding, a miscommunication and was not what they had actually stated. They then will claim that the other side is making false claims and that such lies make any agreement or negotiation impossible. This is done with complete faith that as reasoning people who value life above almost everything else their adversaries will offer up concessions if only the talks are resumed and pledge this time to be more lenient to the Palestinian or Iranian claims. Then the talks are scheduled and often called off due to Islamic holiday or other difficulties or the Palestinians schedule an election which never materializes but delays negotiations. The aim is to wear down the opposite side and slowly gain concessions even if they are but an inch at a time, knowing that the inches will eventually mount and yield miles of advantages. These tactics work as the West and Israel both suffer from the same malady, they honestly wish for peace and will do almost anything to avoid conflict and especially avoid war. As long as there is no penalty for such deceptions and as long as the Western and Israeli leadership are willing to grasp at even the suggestion that a solution is possible and is just around the next corner if only they talk and offer that little bit more, then the feints and false offers will continue and the negotiations will go nowhere and the willingness of the West and Israel to continue to be taken in is used as propaganda at home to cast them as fools who are too ignorant and dimwitted to catch on to the sophisticated maneuvers being played upon them. The sadness is that eventually the lies and the ploys will be refuted and refused and on that day there will be a reckoning for all the time and efforts wasted over their deceit. It will be said in the history that the West and their allies were slow to anger and had unimaginable patience but once that patience was worn out, then they answered with definitive force and truth. Such will be a terrible reckoning but it is inevitable as is the fact that the lies and deceit will continue to mount and no true peace will ever be found.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: