Beyond the Cusp

April 23, 2013

Which Faction in Syria Fielding Terrorist Soldiers?

We hear claims about the existence of terrorist fighters fighting alongside of others in the multiple-front battles going on in the Syrian civil war. Spokespeople for President Obama, the European Union and other Western sources of aid to the Syrian rebels are making statements that their aid is intended and funneled solely to the secular rebel forces and are not going to any terrorist interests. Then there is Syrian President Bashir al-Assad who has claimed from the outset that he is fighting against terrorists who are attempting to conquer Syria and impose Islamist governance. Before we can determine which sides might be fielding terrorist forces and which might be truly supporting what could be classified as free and democratic governance we must recognize all the disparate forces fighting to take control of Syria. There is the Syrian army which has remained largely loyal to President Bashir al-Assad who has some so-called volunteer forces also fighting alongside the regulars of the Syrian armed forces. These would be forces best described as loyal to the Syrian Ba’ath Party government and the Alawite tribal preeminence. Among the groups who are collectively described as the rebel forces there are the Syrian National Coalition; the groups allied with the Al-Nusra Front which include for argument’s sake the Ghuraba al-Sham and the Syrian Islamic Front; and the Kurdish Democratic Union Party. So, let’s take them one at a time and inspect who exactly make up these groups.

The Syrian Military which has remained loyal to President Bashir al-Assad is made up largely, especially the officers corps, of Alawite Tribal members and some Bedouin tribal members from within Syria. Fighting alongside the Syrian Military are Iranian Military units from the IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) who are an arm of the Iranian government which are a secondary military force which is largely responsible for training terrorists forces and carrying out enforcement and other missions beyond the Iranian border. A number of countries have classified at least parts of the IRGC to be a terrorist group or tied to terror operations. Additionally fighting to keep President al-Assad in power are fighters from Lebanon who belong to Hezballah, an almost universally recognized terrorist entity. At best one would have to conclude that a goodly portion of the forces defending the al-Assad regime are composed of actual terrorists and some terror related groups such as the IRGC and likely the al-Quds forces which are an elite corps from within the IRGC assigned almost exclusively to carry out terror operations often in collaboration of Hezballah and similar terrorist groups.

The Al-Nusra Front is a declared al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist group by their own admission and by declaration of al-Qaeda sources. They are allied with two other terrorist groups, Ghuraba al-Sham and the Syrian Islamic Front. These terrorist groups have imported Mujahedeen fighters and other related terrorist entities. There is no disagreement that this sector of the rebel forces are strongly terror related. They have also been the beneficiaries of arms shipments from fellow terrorist groups in Libya who have a large cache of arms consisting of those inherited from the overthrown Gadhafi dictatorship as well as arms provided the rebels by NATO in the Western support of their revolt. There have been reports of other Muslim countries providing these terror forces with arms as well with most of them flowing into Syria from Turkey.

The Syrian National Coalition is supported by the Western powers who claim thus far to only supplying non-arms related support including food, medical supplies and other such provisions. If one desires to simply take the government’s word at face value, then the Syrian National Coalition is a terrorist free organization. The troubling part in simply believing the government position is it is based on the definition of the Muslim Brotherhood, which the government admits is the organizing and financial force behind the Syrian National Coalition, as a purely secular organization which has eschewed violence and represents a democratic movement within the Muslim world. This definition does run into some troubling complications once one considers any of the groups which have been spawned from and supported by the Muslim Brotherhood. The likely most well-known of these groups would be Hamas which is a recognized terrorist entity which currently rules the Palestinians of Gaza and regularly has launched rockets and mortars into Israel aimed at civilian targets.

If you take a relatively uncomplicated and simple approach to the Syrian civil war one could easily claim that all the three factions mentioned above are all in some form or another terrorist groups or supported by terrorist groups. So, if you wish not to risk supporting any form of terror groups, who can one support. There is the Kurdish Democratic Union Party which for the most part is taking a purely defensive approach to the entire conflict and merely attempting to protect the Kurdish community within Syria or in the refugee camps where millions of Syrians have sought safety. There are similar groups doing much the same with the Christians who remain in Syria or have fled over the borders. Both of these groups, the Kurds and the Christians, realize that they are not going to be winners no matter which groups prevails in this three way civil war. For those who will claim the struggle in Syria is not a three way affair, all I ask is wait and should al-Assad be dethroned see if the war does not continue with the groups supporting the al-Nusra Front continue the fight against the Syrian National Coalition for control over Syria. Simply put, this conflict must have but one result, terrorists of some degree will control Syria and as is the way with terrorist groups, there can be only one reigning supreme in the end.

Beyond the Cusp

March 21, 2013

Argument Against Claims Israel Occupying Palestinian Lands

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,1967 War,24/7 News Reporting,Act of War,Administration,AFP,Agency France Press,Al-Jazeera,al-Qaeda in Gaza,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Arab League,Arab World,Armed Services,Balfour Declaration,Bashir al-Assad,BBC,Blood Libel,Borders,Britain,British Mandate,Building Freeze,Caliphate,Ceasefire,Churchill White Paper,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Consequences,Defend Country,Defend Israel,Democracy,Disengagement,Egypt,England,Executive Order,Fatah,Flotilla,France,Galilee,Gaza,General Assembly,Golan Heights,Golan Heights,Government,Government Controlled Media,Green Line,Haaretz,Hezballah,History,Holy Sites,Human Rights,IDF,IHH,Intifada,Iran,Iraq,Islamic Jihad,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jihad,Jordan,Judea,Judean Hills,Kotel,Land for Peace,League of Nations,Lebanon,Libya,Mainstream Media,Meaning of Peace,Media,Media Censorship,Middle East,Military,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslim World,Myth,Naqba,New York Times,NGO,Old City,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Partition Plan,Peace Process,Peace Treaty,Peel Commission,PLO,Political Talk Shows,Politics,Post-Zionist,PRC,Pre-Conditions,President,Promised Land,Protect Citizenry,Recognize Israel,Refugee Camp,Refugees,Response to Terrorism,Right of Return,Rock Throwing,Rocket Attacks,Samaria,San Remo Conference,Settlements,Statehood,Suicide Bomber,Support Israel,Syria,Taqiyya,Temple Mount,Terror,Terrorist Release,Theocracy,Third Intifada,Transjordan,Two State Solution,UNHCR,United Nations,United States,Uprising,War,War of Independence,West Bank,Western Wall,Yasser Arafat,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 5:18 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In a recent article discussing how Prime Minister Netanyahu should respond to any pressures from President Obama if he should demand or simply pressure Israeli leadership to provide a schedule for the withdrawal of Israelis from Judea and Samaria, aka the West Bank, my advice was that Prime Minister Netanyahu should “refuse to give the withdrawal even the dignity of discussion.” A comment posted in reaction to the article Rumor Obama Will Demand Timetable for Israeli Withdrawal West Bank Looking Credible insisted that I withdraw the word ‘dignity’ from my article. But they were not finished with my dressing down as they went on stating, and I quote the whole of the comments exactly as written, “I think you should remove the word dignity. Regardless of your views, which seem to be(this is not an absolute statement) pro-Israeli at any costs, there is still the case of an occupation that never ends. Occupation is not a picnic, it’s a horror trip, no matter how much we try to doll it up. And refusing discussion of any kind is the worst advice anyone can receive. Israel is a super-power, not some half-starved wannabee state with Katuscha fireworks, stop pretending that it isn’t. Unfortunately, anyone who doesn’t support the occupation regime(policy) is immediately set upon, whether friend or foe: the world does not support it – it’s wrong and unbecoming of the Jewish/Israeli people. Talking/Dialogue is always the right way forward, and anyone who says otherwise, is a warmonger.” Well, let us look at the reality according to treaties, agreements and other pertinent items and see if I truly must be considered a warmonger.

The crux of the commenter’s argument is bound to the opinion that Israel is in occupation of lands which belong to some other nation and that Israel is the militarily superior power in the region possessing immense military and in comparison we see, and I quote, ‘some half-starved wannabee state with Katuscha fireworks.’ Apart from the misrepresentation of the presumed limited firepower possessed by the Palestinian terror forces who, in addition to the presumably harmless Katyusha fireworks, which are actually dangerous and potentially deadly rockets and not merely harmless fireworks, also have rockets capable of carrying payloads of up to a one ton warhead with a range capable of reaching the outskirts of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem from their launching grounds in Gaza. Should one actually be fully honest they would also need to include the rocket stores held by Hezballah in Lebanon which will someday very likely be loosed on Israel which include scud rockets provided by Syria and Iran which are capable of being armed with chemical or biological warheads supplied by Syria’s President Bashir Assad. The representation of the forces allied against Israel as being represented solely by the Palestinians, or even including Hezballah, is a misrepresentation as the reality is that Israel’s enemies include numerous other Arab and Muslim countries some of which are still in a state of war with Israel. What is commonly ignored is that of the countries who declared war on the nascent state of Israel in 1948 only Jordan and Egypt have made a technical peace with Israel. That means that Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon, and the entirety of the Arab League nations remain in a state of war with Israel. In addition to these countries which continue to hold themselves as in a state of war with Israel since her founding in 1948, we must add the name of Iran as they have declared themselves in a state of war with both Israel and the United States but have simply chosen to not turn from their declared cold war into an active hot war. Stating that the entire conflict between the Arab and Muslim world and Israel consists of just the Palestinians is ignoring the larger threats which are very real and will be acted upon should the situation ever appear to favor these forces being able to defeat Israel. Should these other nations decide to renew active warfare with Israel we can assume with a fair amount of confidence that Egypt and very likely Jordan will renege on their peace treaties with Israel and join the assault. So, the truth is that Israel’s adversaries when viewed in their true entirety are armed with far greater sized military forces than Israel could ever dream of fielding.

But what can be said about this so-called occupation? I believe my commenter is referring to the misconception that Israel is in occupation of the Palestinian people and refusing to permit their constituting their country of Palestine. For Israel to be in occupation of a nation called Palestine it would have been necessary for Israel to have been at war or in a state of hostilities with a country called Palestine and have defeated them and taken over their recognized lands. But Israel has never been at war with a country named Palestine; not now and not even in antiquity. Israel did have a period where there was a state of war between the Israelis (also known then as the Hebrews) with the Philistines from the nation of Philistine. This conflict has been settled history for over three-thousand-years and the Philistine people melted into the pages of history and no longer are a recognized people. The Palestinians, despite modern mythology, are Arab peoples originating from Syria, Egypt, Iraq and small numbers from other Arab nations. The mislabeled West Bank was given this false name by Jordan after they conquered Judea, Samaria and the eastern half of the city of Jerusalem during the 1948 war of annihilation declared by several Arab nations who intended to completely erase the newly formed Jewish State from existence. Israel, through a miracle from Hashem, managed to survive this onslaught but lost some lands which included Judea, Samaria and the eastern half of the city of Jerusalem lost to Jordan, the Golan Heights lost to Syria, and the Gaza Strip lost to Egypt. Egypt never claimed Gaza so there was no international decision as to whom Gaza actually belonged. Syria claimed the Golan Heights and was recognized as rightfully possessing the land. Jordan claimed what they called the West Bank to obscure the Jewish roots of the actual names of the lands they held. The rest of the Arab world did not recognize the Jordanian claim and neither did the majority of nations. The only countries which recognized the Jordanian claim were Great Britain and Pakistan. So, Jordan was seen as an occupying force when they held what they called the West Bank.

That begs a question; whose lands did Jordan occupy when they claimed the lands of Judea and Samaria along with the eastern half of Jerusalem? Jordan was occupying Israeli lands as the lands from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea were the recognized borders for Israel when the Arab League refused the partition plan refusing to establish an Arab state side by side with Israel in 1948. So, as Jordan was occupying Israeli lands after the 1948 war, when Israel reestablished control over Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem they were liberating these lands and reestablishing their rightful ownership. By International Law the Arabs who were residing in the areas of Judea and Samaria along with eastern Jerusalem who moved there after the end of the 1948 War along with any residents who took the Jordanian offer of citizenship would be returned to their country of origin and would be resettled in Jordan. Those who resided on these lands before the 1948 War would be eligible to petition for Israeli citizenship and if accepted be Israeli citizens and if refused could remain on the lands as legal foreign residents where they would own their land and would be permitted limited rights including being allowed to seek employment and if doing so to pay taxes, they would not be granted full citizenship and would not be granted the vote. Israel is not occupying any lands as they liberated what were previously their lands from Jordanian occupation. Even the presumed granting the Jordanian rights to the land to the Palestinians are meaningless as Jordan never rightfully owned these lands.

The final argument over the rightful ownership of the lands of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem we need to look back at the history of treaties and other legal documents and edicts. The original division of the lands was declared in the Balfour Declaration which set aside lands between the Mediterranean Sea and the border with Iraq for the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people. The League of Nations ratified the Balfour Declaration and codified it as an International Agreement including setting up the Mandate system from which many of the countries in the Middle East were formed. These included but not limited to Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Oman. The Jewish homeland was initially including everything from the Mediterranean Sea and the border with Iraq. The British decided to renege on this agreement and approached the Zionist leadership and made them an offer which they were not in any position to refuse as the English were a world power and the Zionists were a committee and some settlers without any military might. The agreement was written out in the Churchill White Papers taking the area of the British Mandate Lands from the Jordan River to the Iraq border and founded Transjordan which is known today simply as Jordan. That removed seventy-eight-percent of the lands originally intended for the Jewish State. The British and the member States of the League of Nations promised that the remaining twenty-two-percent of the Mandate Lands, including all from the Jordan River west to the Mediterranean Sea, were to be held sacrosanct and indivisible for the Jewish homelands. The founding of the United Nations included in its Charter in Article 80 the full recognition of the Mandates and all that was formed from these lands which had been tasked to France and Britain to dispense and establish nations. The only treaty which pertained to the lands of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem subsequent to the United Nations Charter was the Jordanian Israeli Peace Treaty in which Jordan recognized the return of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem to Israeli control. As an afterthought and in recognition of Yasser Arafat and his efforts against Israel, the King of Jordan claimed that he had actually deeded the lands of the West Bank to the Palestinian people to establish their own State in the treaty with Israel. No such denotation is written in that peace treaty where it states that the lands which Jordan referred to as the West Bank, also known as Judea, Samaria and eastern parts of Jerusalem, were ceded back to Israeli control.

One is not a warmonger to claim that the contested lands rightfully belonging to Israel. The Arab League could have established an Arab country on half of the lands in 1948 but instead opted to use an attempted war of genocidal aggression to erase the Jewish State and murder its peoples. The combined Arab armies were, blessed be Hashem, unsuccessful and only managed to steal some of the lands. Among the stolen lands are the contested lands that my commenter believes belong to a mythical people who populated a nation called Palestine which was subsequently conquered through Israeli reactions to aggression, as if it existed and had lost a war of aggression against Israel. Even if this were a reality, Israel would still be entitled to retain the lands under International Law which allows any State which gains lands responding to the aggressions of another State is entitled to retain those lands. So, even if the lands belonged to Jordan or anybody else, since the war in which they fell to Israeli control was brought upon Israel and she fought a defensive war against efforts of aggression, then Israel still retains the lands and there is no occupation. No matter how one approaches the ownership of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, International Laws and agreements and treaties all grant Israel sovereignty over the lands if she so chooses to exercise her rights under International Laws and Agreements.

Beyond the Cusp

March 17, 2013

A War the United States Will Not be Able to Run From

Filed under: 9/11,Absolutism,Administration,al-Qaeda,al-Qaeda,Arab Spring,Arab Winter,Arab World,Armed Services,Asia,Austerity Measures,Ayatollah Khamenei,Bashir al-Assad,Biological Weapons,Blue Water Navy,Boko Haram,Boko Haram,Calaphate,Caliphate,Chemical Weapons,China,Christians,Civil Disobedience,Civil War,Civilization,Clan,Consequences,Cost of Living,Debt,Debt Ceiling,Demonstrations,Dictator,Drone Strikes,Economic Fascism,Economic Growth,Economy,Egypt,Elections,EMP Attack,Euro,Euro Zone,Europe,European Governments,European Union,Financial Crisis,Foreign Policy,Foreign Trade,French Military,Funding,Government,Government Control,Higher Prices,History,Homeland Security,Hyper-Inflation,Increased Spending,Inflated Spending,Inflation,Iran,Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps,Iraq,IRGC,Islam,Islam,Islamists,Leftist Propaganda,Libya,Main Stream Media,Mainstream Media,Mali,Media,Military,Military Advisors,Military Base,Military Intervention,Military Option,Multiculturalism,Muslim,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslim World,National Debt,Nigeria,Nonjudicial Assassination,Nouri al-Maliki,Nuclear Program,Nuclear Weapons,Nuclear Weapons,Panic Policies,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Protests,QE1,QE2,QE3,Quantitative Easing,Religion,Reserve Currency,Revolutions,Riots,Sequestration,Socialism,Society,Special Forces,Spending Cuts,Supreme Leader,Syria,Syrian Military,Taqiyya,Taxes,Terror,Theocracy,Threat of War,Tribe,Under Employment,Unemployment,United Nations,United States,Unrest,Upgraded Military Capabilities,Uprising,US Air Force,US Army,US Marines,US Navy,Vote,War,Wealth Redistribution,Weapons of Mass Destruction,WMD,World Without Zionism or America,Yemen — qwertster @ 4:42 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The media, our representatives in the Federal Government, the President with the full backing of his Cabinet and the vast majority of Americans all believe that the battles for Afghanistan and Iraq have been won; and now that the troops are finishing up any untied strings and heading home for good. Nothing could be further from the truth and there is only one place to pin the blame, President Obama and Congress. They will likely claim that they are simply responding to the wishes and desires of the American people, and that holds a fair amount of validity. The problem is that Congress and the President are elected to serve the people, defend the Constitution from all threats foreign and domestic, to act as the adults in their relationship with the citizenry and to treat the people with respect by telling them the truth along with advise as to what choices are available along with a predicted result for each and after educating the citizenry the country can, as a whole, come to an educated consensus. Thus far none of these discussions have taken place and it is as much the blame of the mainstream media as it is the President, his administration and the members of Congress. The impression that has been put forth is a picture of Iraq and of Afghanistan each with a steady government that the United States have greatly aided and who is indebted to the United States and its military and will be one of the closest allies which the United States can rely upon in the future. If only that was even ten percent of the truth.

 

Let us begin with Iraq and open up some eyes to what is coming. The Iraqi Shiites can hardly wait for the last American to exit their country. They have already demanded and forced the United States military to sequester their personnel onto one of two main base locations, one in Baghdad in what was called the Green Zone where the government offices and the sprawling complex which is the United States Embassy and the rest isolated out at Camp Liberty in the middle of the desert miles from any town or other habitation. The American forces have to clear any operational moves or simple troop movements with their Iraqi advisors, though I am tempted to refer to these advisors as overlords as their decisions are usually final. Iraq has already aligned with Iran and is allowing Iran to supply Bashir Assad in Syria overland crossing central Iraq thus aiding Assad in his slaughtering of his own people as well as jihadists who have joined the battle against Assad in the name of al-Qaeda and/or the Muslim Brotherhood. Despite what the public back in the United States has been fed about Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, he was the most ardent of the Shiite candidates and was all but hand-picked by the true leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

 

Even as the troops from the United States and their allies were pulling out from their station points in Iraq in preparation to return home, the Shiite leadership of the government began a cleansing of the Sunni influences within the government wherever they were able. This has caused great amounts of friction and building animosity which is what has led to the drastic increases in terror attacks mostly in central Iraq. These ambushes will only increase and there is a possibility that the Sunni Muslims in Iraq will ally with the Kurds in the north and either begin an endless struggle for dominance against the Shiite loyalists in the south or possibly declare their independence. Whichever direction they should decide to move, once all the foreign forces have left or dwindled to the point of inability to influence or prevent fighting, then a war of some degree will break out and continue with no end in sight. This could become a winner take all take no prisoners blood feud and will not be pretty.

 

The last item about Iraq is that the leadership of the United States has misplayed their hand so pathetically by abandoning the only real friends they had won in Iraq, the Sunni and many of the Kurds, simply in order to get out as fast as possible and damn the consequences. Thus the result was a power vacuum which left a shaky balance between the three sects within Iraq with the Kurds relatively safely entrenched in the north and the Shiite in control in the center and south with the Sunni mostly in the center and at the mercy of the Shiite except in a few towns and cities closest to the Kurdish provinces. The result was a purge of the Sunni by the Shiite with Iranian backing followed by the Shiites seeking vindictive reprisals over the years of suffering they had suffered under the Sunni rule of Saddam Hussein. This is what will lead to a vicious civil war and possible bloodbath. The Sunni in Iraq, if any should survive, will never forgive the United States, who they trusted and joined making the surge a success, for abandoning them leaving them at the mercy of their historic rivals. The result is that every sector of Iraqi society now despises the United States because each one perceives that the United States deceived them and treated them poorly. We are leaving Iraq feeling greater animosity towards the United States than when the United States arrived or any time since. Iraq has resulted in a failure.

 

In Afghanistan we have played the political game poorly and what makes matters worse, we got caught at the game. Afghani President Hamid Karzai was an ally of the Americans who now feels betrayed after he became aware that the government of the United States had opened up negotiations with the Taliban without consulting or informing Karzai. He immediately opened his own dialogue with them and soon the situation became exactly what one would expect, the Taliban began playing the American and Karzai off of one another. This only served to deepen the rift that was forming between the two countries. Then there were a number of accidents and the beginning of the drone war operations all of which resulted in injured and murdered Afghani civilians. The United States admitted to a few civilian casualties and held the position that the greater majority of those killed were al-Qaeda and other jihadists and terrorists. Karzai saw the picture far differently and his protests only grew angrier and louder as the bodies piled up and the United States appeared not to care and refused to change their method of engagement. This eventually came to a head and President Karzai forced a curtailment of the drone war and a rewriting of the Rules of Engagement (ROE) for United States and allied troops which served to make these troops operations extremely difficult and eventually resulted in numerous additional casualties and deaths as troops were often denied air or artillery support under the new ROE. Another change was the demand that the United States and allied troops not carry their arms when within the wire back at major camps and bases. This is what has allowed for what is known as Green on Blue attacks. Green on Blue attacks are where Afghani police or military, who are trained by the United States and their allies, shoot often killing their American or allied counterparts. These shootings usually happen within the compounds of the major bases where the American and allied troops are disarmed by regulations and are unable to defend themselves. There has been no explanation provided by the Afghan government and seemingly no investigations or steps have been taken to address these disastrous and often fatal attacks. Needless to point out that these attacks are but a symptom of the animosity felt towards the United States and allied presence in Afghanistan. Afghanistan will return to the tribal and fractional confrontations and hostilities as soon as the United States and allied troops depart. There is a distinct possibility, maybe even inevitability, that the Taliban will once again rise to power and the terror training bases reopen returning to business as usual which spawned 9/11. Needless to point out but Afghanistan will end up being a complete disaster.

 

Then there is the Arab Spring, or as we here at BTC have called it since very early on, the Arab Winter. As was pointed out here, the people being supported by the United States fall into three categories, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda aligned terrorists, other terrorists who possibly are aligned with Iran. President Obama may make grand speeches about the democracy revolutions and the youth with the use of social media bringing a change to these Muslim countries such as Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and possibly Syria, but that is a pipe dream. Yes, there were many youth who demonstrated for hope and change and they received change without any hope. The beneficiaries of the revolutions spreading across the Arab world thus far have been the Muslim Brotherhood with a definitive victory in Egypt where they now control the Presidency, are on their way to control of both houses of the Parliament, have taken over the majority of the courts, and have replaced almost all of the higher officers in the military. The sole grand accomplishment in Egypt was to replace a military backed dictatorship where regular election frauds were held with a Muslim Brotherhood military backed dictatorship where regular election frauds will be held in the future. In Tunisia the Islamists have gained the majority of the Parliament but have been blunted to some extent and who will win out has yet to be decided. Libya has dissolved into a fractional state where different tribes now control their own parts of the country and terrorist groups roam freely and are carrying their revolution into the neighboring countries. The most closely covered has been in Mali where French forces are assisting the Mali government forces in containing the terrorists in the north of the country. Nigeria is another front which has had numerous assaults by Islamist terrorists, mostly from the Boko Haram terror group. The Boko Haram terrorist fighters have bombed and burned numerous churches in the north and into the center of the country often during services killing and maiming numerous Christians as well as torching neighborhoods and stores owned by Christians. The situation threatens to devolve into a civil war in Nigeria as the violence builds just as it has already become in Mali.

 

The final front is Iran and their aligned forces which include Bashir Assad in Syria, Hezballah which rules Lebanon by overt military threat, Hamas in Gaza, the IRGC and affiliated terror units which operate worldwide including a large base in the tri-state area of South America on the borders of Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina shared borders meet. Iran also has made allies with Venezuela and Nicaragua while also wooing additional South and Central American countries including Brazil, Peru, Argentina and others. Iran is also suspected of working towards attaining nuclear weapons. Iran has apparently made an agreement with North Korea under which the two countries share rocket and nuclear research and design information. Many believe the two have been working to perfect a special type of nuclear weaponry which is quite different than the normally perceived nuclear ballistic weapons which are largely destructive due to their explosive properties. The kind of weapon Iran and North Korea are researching is a low yield high Gama burst device which has an explosive component of only one to twelve kilotons but discharges an enormous Gama ray burst which causes a massive EMP pulse which can be destructive to unshielded electronic devices and networks such as power grids and communications systems which would include television, radio, phone, internet, and electronic generation systems. Such a devise, it has been suggested, could theoretically be so destructive that one warhead detonated over the Kansas City to St Louis areas would take out almost all electronic equipment and power from the East Coast to the Rocky Mountains and possibly all the way to the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The other advantage of such a weapon is it does not require any hardened heat shield as it does not need to reenter very far into the atmosphere before being detonated and thus is far lighter allowing for a more powerful device to be placed atop a launch vehicle.

 

The truth is that between the economic time bomb which is the European Union and the budgetary and debt problems plaguing the United States when combined with the problems spreading through the Middle East and North Africa and throwing in the axis being built between North Korea and the areas of Iranian influence there are more than sufficient potentials for serious problems and likely scenarios which result in confrontations which could easily explode with little or no notice that one might believe that governments have not been exactly truthful as they peddle the idea that all is going to be just fine. President Obama has on many an occasion claimed that the United States does not have a spending problem. If President Obama means that the United States has no problem spending, then he has been truthful; otherwise he has been misleading the American public. The claims that the Arab Spring will result in Western style liberal democracies throughout the Arab world is wishful dreaming at best and foolish lies which can only end poorly at worst. The claims that Europe and the United States are experiencing an economic recovery and the end of their financial woes is just around the corner are simply a misrepresentation of reality. The stock market is showing gains simply in proportion to the rate of increase in the money supply from the three sets of Quantitative Easing with a simple delay built in as the stock market is almost always a lagging indicator of such forms of stimulus. The actual value of the majority of stocks has not changed very much but is only representing the soon to be realized inflation which will balance the stock gains out through higher prices across the board. Behind almost every rosy picture the media and politicians are attempting to sell is a large amount of fertilizer. We live in what the Chinese might call interesting times, and to them interesting times is a form of curse. Perhaps that is the one piece of truth, we are in interesting times and China just launched their first aircraft carrier on their way to having a blue water navy comparable to that of the United States, and President Obama’s cuts to the military, the Navy in particular, is making their task all the easier.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: