Welcoming NORAD Back to Cheyenne Mountain

 

The United States military has decided that the conditions are currently of sufficient threat that they have decided to send NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) to scurry back to the warm confines of the Cheyenne Mountain complex and its independently supplied internal electricity generations and grounded steel walls where they have no susceptibility to an EMP pulse no matter the degree of severity, even the most fearsome solar storm which might char and disintegrate the entire North American electronic grid. Apparently the decision to reposition to Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs has struck a snag or two or more. They claimed the savings and ease of commute made the move economic and practical sense, especially as the Cold War had past and there is no overriding threat demanding they continue using a base which provides the level of protection as the Cheyenne Mountain Facility. Well, well, what could have occurred to alter that line of reasoning and should the average American be concerned, well, concerned at least as much as the military and the commanding staff of NORAD apparently are being. Perhaps if we view the reasoning we can decide exactly how much of a threat there is and whether serious concern might be necessary.

 

The reason announced by the military for returning NORAD was that it is now feared that the North Koreans and potentially their allies in Iran have perfected miniaturizing of their nuclear warheads and might place one atop a North Korean mobile KN-08 mobile launch vehicle. This sent the military command of NORAD scurrying within one of the world’s safest locations deep within Cheyenne Mountain buried deeply under a few thousand feet of rock, mostly granite, and encased in steel and concrete with two sets of blast doors unrivaled, one backing the other making a double door with a dead space between them to absorb any force which might manage to pierce the outer door. These blast doors close making the tunnel reaching the Cheyenne Mountain a perfect arc opened at both ends so as to pass and blast-wave from a nuclear or other device detonated near either entrance an easily followed natural flow-path right through the mountain, past the blast doors, and on out the other side. The Cheyenne Mountain location not only easily houses the necessary personnel to cover and maintain their functions without break along with their families and a full garrison of Marines but also hold the supplies that would permit operating completely closed-off safe from any attack, especially any nuclear or EMP attack. We described a means by which both Iran and North Korea could launch and use a weakness in the radar protection and by mimicking the orbit of a weather satellite, an orbit both nations have used previously for launches, near the end in the final paragraph of our article titled, ”Is North Korea Sabre Rattling for Attention or Real Threat?”

 

There are further reasons for moving NORAD back to its original safely, armored, buried, EMP proof and self-supporting location which they abandoned in favor of easier access as they have been monitoring since 2013 as reported by an ABC News reporting coverage from 2013 by Martha Raddatz ABC News Chief Global Affairs Correspondent which can be viewed below. Needless to say that placing NORAD back where they should never have left will be a far cry from ending the threats from a nuclear armed North Korea, who has been threatening a nuclear EMP first strike against the United States, or Iran as they also could use such weaponry to cover far more evil intents than just striking NORAD. There is the possibility that either Iran or North Korea could launch at a closer target causing just as much harm on the global scale and have a dastardly effect on the world or the United States. North Korea has regularly threatened their South Korean neighbors and even regularly launched rockets into their waters and threatened far worse. Iran, on the other hand, has threatened not only the United States but also Israel, Saudi Arabia and other of her neighbors. Iran is currently engaged in three wars already, there is the Syrian Civil War where Iran and their terror allies of Hezballah fight the plethora of Sunni militias all having some degree of attachment to al-Qaeda or other terrorist organization, fighting in Iraq against ISIS, a Sunni terrorist organization which follows a strident version of the Quran by which they have destroyed numerous historic relics and other precious items claiming that because they were objects which they determined were un-Islamic and thus unworthy of being displayed and especially considered precious or of any value to the human race, and now Yemen where they are arming the Houthis and may even provide them with intelligence as well as command and control assistance.

 

 

 

 

The threats made by the likes of the Ayatollahs of Iran and those made by Kim Jong-un are usually merely saber rattling meant for domestic consumption and to give the people faith that their nation is able to stand against anybody. The fact that they get media coverage as well bolsters the belief making them appear more important. The other problem is that in many ways the leadership of both Iran and North Korea actually do mean those threats they make and would act upon them if they felt they were readily executable. This makes the North Korean threats to use a hydrogen bomb on the United States as an EMP generator to destroy the North American electronic grid far more serious. The fact that these leaders continue to allow their people to suffer unnecessary hardships due largely to their leaderships’ threats of warmongering which leads their nations to face sanctions is just as monstrous and evil as one can get. The further fact that they and their coterie live lives of lavish excess eating caviar, roast duck and champagne while their people, especially the people of North Korea, starve or make do with tree bark and grass soups can only be defined by Evil as the word for such extravagances and lavish life styles and the unbelievable difference between the lives of the privileged few enjoy as compared to the lives of their military members is only exceeded by the further difference approaching the same scale between the lives of apparent excess lived by the members of the military compared to the veterans and the population as a whole. The members of the military are not the problem as in many cases parents push their children towards the military such that they can have a better level of life than the parents had suffered. These radical differences exist almost as a caste system between the political leadership at the top, the military in between and the population and the elderly living lives beyond any desperations than most of us are capable of even imagining, let alone understanding. The most absolute depravity is displayed with the fact that the North Korean elite actually will make these threats and back them through actions which if ignored might actually lead to the North Korean leadership in particular to reigniting the state of war which continues to exist between the North and South Korea simply to hold talks where along with the demands from the leadership is also requests for food and other aid to be given the people to prevent even more deaths due to starvation, malnutrition, and the desperate lack of medical attention to treat and care for the people.

 

What makes these situations even more horrific is that these conditions are not all that uncommon throughout many of the third world nations. Contrary to the apparent belief, very few if any of these situations would be alleviated by changing their governance to a democracy as this would simply result in their electing the elites back into power. The first step the world needs to take also is not necessarily food aid and other such generosities as providing such aid deprives the farmers of a local market for their produce which results in their requiring aid because they are unable to sell their produce. Where aid most likely will be required to feed the entire population, the farmers must also be able to market their produce. The kind of aid which would go the furthest would be to allow corporations to set up factories and thus provide a basis for an economy and set the nation on the road towards a functioning economic base which is currently nonexistent. These factories also need to provide jobs not solely in the major cities but throughout these nations. Currently many of these nations lack even a rudimentary base for economic production which stands between them and receiving such investments.

 

Of course there are indicators that these problems may be coming to what are currently considered first world nations as the economic bubbles have begun to deflate one after the other and in some economies the house of cards is already collapsing. This is evidenced in Europe where the attempt to place all nations on a single currency has simply led to exposing the disparate economic models causing economic collapse as this unitary currency system collapses where had these nations retained their own currencies then there economies could have survived these downturns as their currency would have been permitted to respond to the change in their economic situation according to each individual nation allowing for a more favorable return on investments which cannot be had under the unified currency of the Euro. That their currency was beyond their control simply exasperated their financial difficulties and making any response simply beyond their control as they have no means of altering the value of the currency to respond to the situation and difficulties faced. This problem was unavoidable for as long as each nation was permitted to set their financial and economic policies while sharing a single currency. This removed their ability to control the single most important item in their economies, the cost of labor. Once the cost of labor separated sufficiently from the values set for the Euro itself made the problem become irreconcilable. These problems which are only growing while those nations with healthy economies are increasingly pressed to support the less wealthy nations within the European Union in particular, and to an extent throughout the third world, the difficulties are only going to be pushed to a point where the whole financial constructs begins to fray to the point where there are no longer solutions under the current systems. In too many cases simply continuing to patch the problems while ignoring the central causes will lead to what we would call the “point of exasperation” which is where the nations giving support are brought down as the cost and needs for support reach levels beyond any reconciliation and all hope is lost and the people then turn to their governance and demand relief leading all too probably to revolutions where the violence makes even the hope for investment to flee and refuse to make investments where such expenditures are the only hope for salvation and the start of normalcy.

 

Still, where is one to take the first step towards addressing the problems, and in the case of North Korea even coming to grip with the reality the people face, and after making that assessment then turning the nation around and giving the people hope. There exists no single solution though in many cases it is the leadership’s setting of priorities which has simply aggravated the situation leading to a downward cycle which results eventually, if permitted to continue, to the unsettling set of conditions in North Korea. Solutions, and not just feel-good knee-jerk reacting, must be found and those solutions are not pumping food and funds as simply feeding the hungry for a week, a month is not going to provide the hope and the means for the people to help themselves which is so desperately what is needed. In many of these situations there exists a disparity where the very wealthy live almost in a different world than do the masses. These situations are of a kind which led to revolutions which is what eventually led to the changes in the Western world though not all nations benefitted fully from the gains made since the industrial revolution and now the information age. The efforts to attempt to bring a third world nation into the information age in one fell swoop are not the solution as such an economy is unsustainable when considering the education and familiarity with such tools is taken into consideration. One needs to walk before they can run and the same can be said for national economies. The initial problems are infrastructure, both materially and by the population as a whole. When these problems are what is addressed then there can be progress but simply shipping tons of food aid which sometimes sits unloaded and goes bad rotting in place for the lack of trucks and a distribution network as even aid packages require a certain level of infrastructure before even that is of any substance. And yes we realize that in places like North Korea and Iran part of the problem is the governance though that is an even more difficult nut to crack. There is no universal solution and as far as the threats from North Korea and possibly Iran, there is no solution beyond preparing for the worst and hopefully cutting the head off the hydra and preventing it from simply replacing that bad head for another. Iran is a nation with the wherewithal to save itself if only the people can be freed to take on the challenges directly, but that cannot happen while their leadership is intent on spreading their version of Islam to the world. Such belligerence is not to be tolerated and must be opposed, something the P5+1 negotiations is apparently refusing to oppose rather than complying in the hope that things will improve before World War III is launched from the missile pads within Iran. North Korea will remain beyond help for as long as the leadership is tolerated rather than opposed and the situation resolved. Step one is provide a path to better governance through ending the state of war between North and South Korea, until that is addressed there can be no change to the situation. These are stark and difficult challenges which is why they are also the most pressing and dangerous challenges the world is currently facing with the growing gap between the first and third worlds, a gap that is threatening to become unbridgeable.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Battle for Middle East and Beyond Are Now Choosing Sides

The forces are cementing their positions readying for a battle for the heart of the Middle East. ISIS has firm control of areas spanning Syria and central Iraq where they are facing the Kurds holding their own to the north supported by Iranian and United States efforts. Iran has given the Kurdish fighters some needed light weapons and the United States has provided crucial air support especially in Kobane. To the south ISIS faces Iranian and Iraqi forces supported by Iranian and United States air power yet still appears to be complacent cementing their positions and slowing their assault as their forces are approaching their limit until they are able to amass additional recruits to augment their ranks. ISIS should not be underestimated as they possess some potent arms and are mostly lacking in air power, barring a solution it is this lack of airpower which may sink ISIS in the end. It is very difficult to mass forces for attacks on positions when you do not control the skies over your heads leaving massed forces vulnerable to airstrikes.

 

Iran is utilizing a number of outside forces to extend their control. They have Hezballah fighting to assist their tenuous hold onto Syria by Bashir al-Assad and Lebanon. The IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) are assisting in Syria as well as fighting ISIS within Iraq where they enjoy air support provided largely by the Iranians as well as coalition bombings headed by the United States. In Yemen Iran has been supporting the efforts of the Houthis who recently forced the government to resign as they took complete control over the nation’s capital and captured the former President of Yemen. This development will deliver a strike on United States plans of using mostly drones to target mostly al-Qaeda leaders in southeastern Yemen. These forces are currently facing a direct challenge from the Houthis armed and directed by Iran who aim to take control over all of Yemen placing Iranian control over the mouth of the Red Sea and controlling the southern access and departures from the Suez Canal through the mouth of the Red Sea. Such control would also blockade the southern Israeli port at Eilat. This would augment the Iranian threat over the Straits of Hormuz through which much of the world’s oil flows.

 

Two of the richest targets lie within Saudi Arabia and will be well defended. These two main assets are of wildly different influences. The obvious are the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, the birthplaces of Islam. The others are the equally obvious oil fields clustered largely in the north eastern provinces of Saudi Arabia. It is through their control of these supplies and their high potential for output that the Saudis also control the going price of a barrel of petroleum. Saudi Arabia’s Royal Family recently suffered from the loss of their monarch, King Abdullah, who was replaced by King Salman who was often referred to as the Warrior Prince. This may prove to be an auspicious timing of placing a more militant leader on the Saudi throne just as they are facing threats from the northern and southern borders.

 

Then there have been rumors emanating from Ankara, Turkey where President Erdogan has been making innuendos to his taking a more permanent role perhaps in the nature of a monarch or sultan where he would rule absolutely through his power equal to that of the legislature and other offices in Turkey. The designs of President Erdogan to assume higher and permanent power in Turkey have been well known as have his delusions that from such a position he would be empowered to reform the grandeur and control of the former Ottoman Empire. Additionally, President Erdogan has been playing a duel game when it comes to ISIS. On the one hand, Turkey belongs to NATO and as such must support the efforts to contain and ultimately degrade and destroy ISIS which the Turkish government has done so very reluctantly. On the other hand Turkey has permitted ISIS to utilize Turkish crossings into Syria through which to resupply ISIS forces as well as run their recruitment within Turkey and thus provide them with access to a border crossing which permits the flow of manpower in and out of ISIS occupied Syria.

 

The other force is probably the most interesting force in all of the lands of Islam. We are referring to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi who recently addressed Al-Azhar University in Cairo signaling his desire to have a reformation of Islam to facilitate making the religion more accepting of modern standards and allowing for separation between state powers and religious powers. His address to Al-Azhar University, probably the central and most well accredited of all universities which teach and define Islam to the rest of the Muslim world. His speech along with a video excerpt can be found in our article titled “The Islamic Reformer in Egypt.” Should President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi succeed in his call for a reformation of Islam being undertaken it could prove to be one of the greatest reformational redefinitions of religion since the Protestant Reformation of Christianity, a change which made way for the flourishing of science and an eventual coexistence being formulated whereby each took responsibility for their own ideas and ideals while permitting the other the freedom to do so. The ensuing blossoming of scientific research and discoveries would be known as the Renaissance. What a similar reformation to Islam might bring is almost beyond imagination. If such a change in Islam and the practice of such beliefs as were in effect during the Golden Age of Islam such could change the face of the world.

 

This is where the struggle for the heart and soul of Islam is being fought and much of the world is simply sitting on the sidelines ignoring the potentials before them. It is not often that the world is offered up such potentially defining a moment as sits before us today. Islam very well could take a huge stride towards modernity if only the correct forces could take control in the near future. We are guaranteed that should ISIS or Iran become the preeminent force in Islam and define the path for Muslims for the next thousand years we will see nothing change and Jihad will continue to mean first and foremost the conquest of the world for Islam, bringing wars and terrorism to every nation bordering Islam or having a significant Muslim community making up over twenty percent of the population. Should the Saudis become the leading force in Islam the pace of reformation would be painfully slow, but there would be potential for eventual changes necessary for Islam and the modern world of science to flourish and be in harmony. But there is greater hope if only the world will heed and echo the cry from Cairo.

 

The one ray of true hope comes out of Egypt and currently consists of one man’s cry from within the darkness demanding that the lights be allowed to once again shine over Islam. That cry comes from Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi who is challenging the leading Imams to answer his plaintiff cry for the modernization of Islam. What is fascinating is that the ideas President el-Sisi is demanding are also a call for Islam to return to reclaim its place as a home leading the world for scientific research, medical breakthroughs, poetic and prose literature, mathematical formulas and other academic pursuits as were the norm during the Golden Age of Islam. President el-Sisi desires for Islam to reclaim their place as the leaders in cultural development and scientific discoveries. The change that President el-Sisi champions can only be made possible by a change of heart from most of the Islamic leadership, the Islamic teachers and Imams throughout the Muslim world. President el-Sisi made his first speech at the preeminent Al-Azhar University which is the leading institute of learning in all of Islam. If there is any reality to the mantra we hear constantly after every Islamic terrorist assault that “Islam is the religion of peace,” then the call by President el-Sisi is the answer and call behind which this reputed majority could stand and bring about that transformation to an honest religion of peace the world has been waiting. Missing this opportunity and the struggle for the heart of Islam will be won by Isis, the Mullahs of Iran or whoever proves to be the most violent force. Islamic leadership, and this includes the Mullahs of Iran and the hate filled preachers who hold the current heart of Islam. Every major change throughout history began with that one singular, plaintive cry from out of the darkness for change and the turning on of the light which would only forever grow brighter eventually reaching even the most remote corners of the recesses from amongst the kingdoms.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Did Obama and Abbas Share a Speech Scripter?

Where it would be near impossible that both men had their United Nations speech written by the same person; though, it did appear that somebody inspired the crafting such that they each played their part in a well scripted production. What has to be incorporated into these considerations is the ugly little surprise Abbas plans on hatching with an important assist he choreographed with French President Hollande during his quick stopover in Paris. The plan is with the full backing from France, Abbas will petition the United Nations Security Council for a Chapter Seven Resolution fully enforceable demand for a solution of the Palestinian conflict with Israel within three years otherwise a preset settlement will be enforced by any means necessary. The borders for the enforced settlement will, of course, be drawn around the pre Six Day War 1949 Armistice Lines, also called the Green Line, which returns Israel to her once undefendable borders with Jerusalem divided granting the entire Old City with the Temple Mount and the Western Wall to the Palestinians. This is the plan that France’s François Hollande gave Mahmoud Abbas his full support and backing for introducing to the United Nations Security Council during the intense and heightened levels of activity which seem to occupy Turtle Bay towards the end of September every year with the opening of the United Nations General Circus Assembly and the parade of tin pot dictators and oligarchic monarchs to the podium to vilify and impugn the leaders of the democratic free world. This year appears to be shaping up as a banner year tipping the scales well into the territory of the absurd.

Mahmoud Abbas led off speaking before President Obama and set the stage with his usual bombastic rhetoric castigating Israel as the greatest of evil of nations unsurpassed through the annals of history; beyond the Mongol Hordes, beyond the excesses of the Roman Emperor Caligula and unequaled even by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. This coming from the man who arranged the financing, arranged the training and the overall coordination for the terrorist assault on the Munich Olympics where his trained and financed murderers enacted a grand spectacle before the cameras the world over which culminated in the slaughter of the Israeli Olympic team. During his speech, Mahmoud Abbas statements included accusing Israel of in this, “the International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People,” of having, “chosen to make it a year of a new war of genocide perpetrated against the Palestinian people.” He further accused Israel of “launching its war on Gaza, by which its jets and tanks brutally assassinated lives and devastated the homes, schools and dreams of thousands of Palestinian children, women and men and in reality destroying the remaining hopes for peace.” Further, Abbas reiterated his string of lies against Israel including mention of “the third war waged by the racist occupying State in five years against Gaza, this small, densely-populated and precious part of our country.” Never mind that this was the third war initiated by Hamas by raining rockets onto Israeli towns, cities and Kibbutzim after, this time around, having abducted three Israeli teens and having murdered them disposing of their bodies in a shallow grave, but why ruin such a perfect rendition of fictions regaling the majority of the assembled representatives from the least reputable nations in our world. Abbas further into his speech laid out the reasoning which was supposed to mitigate the violence and rioting perpetrated by the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria or the rock ambushing of Israeli drivers by Palestinians and other assaults on Jews within Jerusalem by excusing their actions claiming, “We must also assume that no one will wonder anymore why extremism is rising and why the culture of peace is losing ground and why the efforts to achieve it are collapsing.” His resolution is that Israelis are destroying any possibility for a peaceful resolution to the situation despite his having to refused numerous offers for a Palestinians state, one such refusal even managed to infuriate President Clinton who laid the blame for his not managing to resolve the Palestinian Israeli conflict at the feet of the Palestinians and Yasser Arafat, the man whose shoes it can honestly be said Abbas has filled with the sane tenacity demanding that the sole resolution he will ever accept must include the complete destruction and elimination of Israel. Abbas insisted that the Palestinian will “not for a moment … abandon our humanity, our values and our ethics … and we will maintain the traditions of our national struggle established by the Palestinian Fedayeen and to which we committed ourselves since the onset of the Palestinian revolution in early 1965.” This may have been his sole slip as his giving the year of the initiation of the Palestinian struggle to destroy Israel as 1965 reveals a simple fact, their struggle began at least two years before there was any occupied or contested territories as the Six Day War did not occur until 1967; so who and what exactly were his Palestinian Fedayeen fighting against and for what offense or reason in 1965? That leaves only one answer should one honestly evaluate this slip, they were fighting then for exactly the same ideal and result. They now continue their fight, the eradication of Israel. Abbas even sets the date where Israel presumably established their colonizing ways after responding to an attack by Syria and Egypt and pleaded with Jordan not to join the conflict which they ignored by attacking across central Jerusalem in the second day of the Six Day War just as Abbas stated, “Israel refuses to end its occupation of the State of Palestine since 1967.”

In his lengthy and slanderous conclusions did manage to hold some jewels of truth, except that they twisted the reality to fit his dreamscape of reality. He pontificated, “It is impossible, and I repeat – it is impossible – to return to the cycle of negotiations that failed to deal with the substance of the matter and the fundamental question.” I agree with this thus far as negotiating with Abbas can only result in one of two eventualities, the end of Israel or the end of any possibility for peace as Abbas will reject anything less than Israel’s demise and thus will once again miss every opportunity. Then he finally introduced the initial introduction of his demand which will be the main theme of his entire visit at the United Nations when he said, “there is no value in negotiations which are not linked to a firm timetable for the implementation of this goal. The time has come to end this settlement occupation” Then he laid out his claim that is coming for there to be international forces sent to impose his nightmarish solutions when he pleaded, “The people of Palestine are actually the ones who need immediate international protection.”

Skip forward and we arrive with President Obama at the podium. Perhaps there is nothing to the seeming continuity where President Obama appeared to be answering Abbas and his apparent wish for a solution to be imposed so that the final solution between the Palestinians and Israelis would not be dependent on negotiations and a mutually reached agreement. While there can be serious doubt as whether President Obama favors Islamic nations over non-Islamic nations, there is little debate discounting his apparent animosity for Israel and particularly its Prime Minister, Bibi Netanyahu. President Obama’s initial introductory lines as he approached direct commentary on the future he suspects concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were uncritical and neutral as he stated, “We recognize as well that leadership will be necessary to address the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. As bleak as the landscape appears, America will not give up on the pursuit of peace. Understand, the situation in Iraq and Syria and Libya should cure anybody of the illusion that the Arab-Israeli conflict is the main source of problems in the region. For far too long, that’s been used as an excuse to distract people from problems at home.” The rest of that section began to give a small hint that things were likely to get more critical as he added, “The violence engulfing the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace. And that’s something worthy of reflection within Israel.”

The next sentence was when President Obama may have dropped the initial bombshell when he turned serious in his tone stating, “Because let’s be clear: The status quo in the West Bank and Gaza is not sustainable.” Then came the driving impetus which makes the situation untenable and in desperate need of a resolution as he stated the obvious, “We cannot afford to turn away from this effort – not when rockets are fired at innocent Israelis, or the lives of so many Palestinian children are taken from us in Gaza.” Then he left things hanging by stating a bromide which would leave most critics scratching their heads trying to figure out where he had intended to go as he concluded this section of his speech stating, “So long as I am President, we will stand up for the principle that Israelis, Palestinians, the region and the world will be more just and more safe with two states living side by side, in peace and security.” So, where was the rest of the bombshell, or did we simply miss something somewhere in the middle which held more meaning and gave a clearer picture and he simply disguised his intentions by suspending it in the middle of a lot of diplospeak?

Where this may be hyperbole and exaggeration or simply misreading President Obama or it might be the real meaning and definition of his intentions couched in an oblique set of references which might mean what I think it does. The two lines came separated as he paused seemingly as if passing from one paragraph to the next and waiting for the teleprompter to pass beyond a blank space in the text. Before the pause he critiqued Israelis claiming, “The violence engulfing the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace.” Was this simply a reference to polling results he may have read where it stated that many Israelis were less than pleased that the recent conflict with Hamas ended before Hamas had been removed from Gaza and he interpreted the reaction of Israelis to this third conflict initiated by Hamas in the last five years and a feeling that to end these rocket attacks that Hamas would need be removed permanently to mean that Israelis desired a military resolution to the entire conflict or was it an accusation fired across the bow at Prime Minister Netanyahu and many of the leaders in the parties of the ruling coalition that they be more accommodating in order to allow negotiations to lead to a final solution and blaming Israel for the lack of peace, agreeing with the accusations made by Abbas? The next line was the pause before the storm, a throwaway line meant to place doubt if the previous line and the one following were part of the same thought and should be read together without this spacer where he added almost as a disarming giveaway, “And that’s something worthy of reflection within Israel.” Then followed the strong positing of what President Obama sees as necessary to end the seemingly never ending lack of progress stating plainly, “Because let’s be clear: The status quo in the West Bank and Gaza is not sustainable.” This echoes the statements made by Abbas in his speech where he exclaimed, “It is impossible, and I repeat – it is impossible – to return to the cycle of negotiations that failed to deal with the substance of the matter and the fundamental question. The people of Palestine are actually the ones who need immediate international protection.” Add this to the likely advice which President Obama is likely to get from the United States Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power who stated clearly in an interview just over a decade ago that she would not be adverse to providing troops to enforce a peace and protect the Palestinians from any aggressions by the Israelis. This all might be the initial indications that even should the United States not support Mahmoud Abbas when he requests action by the Security Council in placing a deadline for an agreed peace otherwise a solution be imposed forcing Israel to surrender all claims beyond the Green Line and surrender much of Jerusalem to the Palestinians facing an international military force that the United States will also not use its veto to prevent such a vote from passing. With the French already supporting this proposal and neither Russia or China likely to veto any such motion, though Russia could surprise the world, that would leave the only chance to defeat such a proposal to the British as most of the rest of the nations currently serving on the Security Council would definitely see such a motion favorably. Perhaps the best hope is for Abbas to be spooked enough by his own doubts to decide not to take the risk and instead do as he has done in the past and simply settle for a General Assembly vote which carries no real weight but makes him appear to have made strides and might serve to aid him in any upcoming elections. The one truth known about Abbas is he fears falling from power almost as much as he fears having to preside over a real nation where instead of blaming Israel he actually has to deliver on providing water, electricity, trash removal and all the other banalities expected of governments.

One item always comes into focus and refuses to wane or fade into the background and instead claims to be important and necessary to point out once again. I try to minimize it by sweeping it aside with the thought that anyone who visits here has already heard of this fact and it simply demands attention for those first time or new readers; so I fear I must give in. This has to do with President Obama on his first inauguration day in January of 2009. After being sworn in (twice if you believe the going rumors), eventually the newly instated President Obama made it to the solitude and quiet of the Oval Office and sat down to make the customary calls to world leaders. The item of note is which world leader President Obama made his first official phone conversation with, and that turned out to be Mahmoud Abbas, President of a fan club more than of an actual State. Fortunately Mahmoud Abbas is no longer number one on President Obama’s speed dial; that honor now is bestowed on Turkey’s first elected President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Still, the prominence given Abbas initially has always weighed heavy and helped explain the disdain for Israel and Netanyahu shown by President Obama in his first term and with the two speeches this fear of their teaming up still is haunting from deep in the dark recesses of my thoughts.

Beyond the Cusp