Beyond the Cusp

November 24, 2017

Who Starts the Next War?

 

Oh, the possibilities we have. Will it be Trump or Kim Jong-un, Saudi Royal Prince Mohammed bin Salman or the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, the new Hamas Leader Yahya Sinwar or Hezballah’s Leader Hassan Nasrallah or will it come out of the blue from an unexpected source responding to a terror attack or assassination as happened to start World War I? Will it perhaps be China moving on Taiwan or Russia finishing off the Ukraine or Georgia? It could simply be a severe escalation of Turkey’s private war against the Kurds in Syria and Iran spreading into a Kurdish rebellion within Turkey with the entirety of the Kurdish People finally demanding their own homeland refusing to be picked apart individually by Iran, Syria, Turkey, Iraq and any terror forces sent by the same or even Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood. It might be the Basques or Catalan People of Catalonia declaring themselves independent from Spain with Spain having the obvious reaction and moving to end such as that might cause others to have similar thoughts causing the Balkanization of Spain. There are such movements within virtually every nation of Europe and likely the world. There are numerous other peoples in Northern Africa which currently are ruled over by foreign peoples who came along with the Islamic conquests of the Caliphate. One such are the Berbers, one of the tribes which converted to Islam only to be subsumed by Arab culture and rulers. The possibilities are endless but the real contenders come down to the first few listed as those are the least stable places with the most to gain or lose as the world moves forward.

 

The possibility that President Trump will start a war are, contrary to the wild accusations of some detractors, somewhere around nil. First, he would need a declaration from Congress for any actual war or even military actions. The Congress appears barely capable of passing the budget for a single year. Trump also has no taste for any conflict despite all of his bluster and even Kim Jong-un is aware that Trump was all talk and no teeth. This was part of why Kim Jong-un and Trump both have all but ended their contest of words, both realized the other was not about to start a war at this time, so tempting one was simply a waste of effort. So, North Korea and United States are not about to go to war, which should be a relief. If such a conflict were to come to fruition, we would predict that the North Koreans would attempt to make the initial strike forcing President Trump and the Congress to respond in kind. Thus, should a war ever come between the United States and North Korea, it would be at the insistence of North Korea.

 

The next pairing was between Saudi Royal Prince Mohammed bin Salman or the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei. Prince Mohammed bin Salman is the next directly in line to the crown of Saudi Arabia and has been assuming more and more power taking over responsibilities from his father, the aging and ailing King Salman. The Prince was the mastermind behind the Sunni forces which were routed in Syria and has mismanaged the Yemen-Saudi conflict allowing Iranian missiles and Hezballah and IRGC fighters to enter Yemen. Just last week an Iranian provided missile was launched from Yemen towards Riyadh. This was declared to have been an act of war by Iran against Saudi Arabia and there were rumors of an imminent war on the horizon. Prince Mohammed bin Salman has also moved to secure his own position by arresting for criminal corruption close to a dozen of his closest relatives, cousins, leader of the National Guard, governor of Riyadh, and the internationally renowned Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.

 

Further, Prince Salman has promised, or threatened, to westernize, or modernize, Saudi Arabia in an attempt to improve the economy such that it is not entirely dependent upon their oil wealth. The religious class, the clerics and heads of the Wahabbists, are very much opposed to such a plan seeing it as a direct threat to their power and influences on Saudi politics and direction. They have lived off the Royal Family paying them, rewarding them richly from the oil wealth such that they would back the Royal Family permitting them to remain in power. This arrangement left out one very important group, the people of Saudi Arabia who were sentenced to a life of moderations and poverty in far too many instances with lacking education and little chance for improvement.

 

Saudi Arabia and Iran War

Saudi Arabia and Iran War

 

All but needless to say, but a war is actually the last thing Saudi Arabia needs, now or at any time. Should such a war with Iran become inevitable, the winner, if there actually would be a winner, would not gain much and the loser would lose everything. It is for this reason such a war would be devastating to the Middle East and would also have a great possibility to spread and involve other countries. With the Iranians, one could expect Yemen, Iraq, Qatar, what is left of Syria, Lebanon and Turkey, while with Saudi Arabia, one would expect the Gulf States of the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council which includes Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman), Jordan and eventually Egypt. There are some wildcards in the equation which include Pakistan, India, Israel and the United States. Pakistan actually could be thought to assist either side as they trade with Iran but they also owe Saudi Arabia for providing the necessary cash required to finance their drive for nuclear weapons. India does have a fair number of trade deals with Iran and they do have a common neighbor in Pakistan plus share the waterway, the Arabian Sea. Israel and the United States are the real game-changers which could completely alter the outcome of the conflict but are also the least likely to enter such a conflict, especially should the Saudi Arabians be the initiator of the conflict. Should Iran start such a conflict, then the probability that Israel or the United States would be greater, especially if the Saudis appeared to be on the losing end.

 

Estimating who would win such a war would need to weigh far too many variables. The basic equation places the newer and superior equipment and technology having bought $350 billion arms deal this year alone. But the Iranians have the population numbers and their military has been tested in Syria and thus experienced, especially the IRGC and Hezballah, the core fighters Iran would use for the tip of their spear. The Saudi Arabian military are known to march very nicely and have little to no actual experience in actual combat. The best equipment cannot make up for lack of experience and experience only mitigates lesser weaponry partially, so the question is which would be the greater equalizer and how long would this difference provide superior fighting ability. In the end, the real question comes down to whether Russia would assist Iran and do so at sufficient a level before the United States decided they needed to assist the Saudi Arabian side of the conflict. The final wildcards bring a nuclear answer to this conflict should nobody use such earlier as Iran is suspected of having nuclear weapons and Saudi Arabia is rumored to have an agreement with Pakistan to provide as many as a dozen such weapons on demand. These wildcards are North Korea and their eight-hundred-pound gorilla which often accompanies them in endeavors, China. One could trace how a conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran could draw in other nations until it would become the next World War, World War III. Such a war, according to Albert Einstein, would guarantee that the following World War, World War IV, would be fought with sticks and stones. We are thinking of going and picking up some stones tomorrow.

 

The real question we should be answering is, who might be planning to spread their influence and do so successfully enough that they become a threat to the peace of the entire planet? North Korea has talked of conquest but it has mostly been about the Korean peninsula and occasionally of the United States, and that second is simply bluster for domestic consumption. China appears readying to become the Pacific hegemon sharing that title with the United States and have raised expectations that they will be the first to build a Moon base. Japan has also talked of plans to place a base on the Moon in the near future. The United States and Russia have talked of Moon bases as well. Hopefully, the next war that threatens humanity will not be a Moon War where Moon bases start shooting at each other. The Moon race will hopefully be used to initiate cooperation instead of conflict. So, fortunately, the Moon is unlikely to spark the next World War. There have been accusations that Israel desires to conquer much of the lands surrounding them forcefully displacing the Muslim populations. That is pure propaganda which is provably false, as Israel has given up claims to land such as the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza in efforts to reach peace with varying amounts of success. Then there is Iran which has spread their control since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 to Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen. Iran has made claims that they intend to destroy Israel and the United States, establish a Shiite Crescent across the heart of the Middle East (see map below). The truth is Iran is in the stage of cementing their Shiite Crescent and may be looking further starting with Yemen.

 

Shiite Crescent including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran

Shiite Crescent including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran

 

The one item which Iran has claimed to desire is represented on the map above by the big green star, that covers Mecca and Medina, which along with the oil fields in the northeast of Saudi Arabia make up the targets upon which Iran has set their eyes. Iran has also made constant references to the Persian Empire and reestablishing exactly such hegemony over the Middle East and reaching all the way into Greece and Egypt which was once the extent of the Persian Empire. Both the founder, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Sayyid Ruhollah Mūsavi Khomeini, and his successor, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hosseini Khamenei, have both made references to spreading Shia Islam over the entire planet fulfilling the promises given by Allah in the Quran for Islam to rule the planet. There have been Sunni Muslims who also claimed they would fulfill the same promises such as al-Qaeda, Islamic State and Hamas. Al-Qaeda and Islamic State do not appear to have had much success in this effort and Hamas appears to be currently stymied by Israel and if they were to spread any form of Islam, it would probably be Shia since, just like Hezballah, Hamas is now in the service of Iran. For all intents and purposes, the only groups or nations with any current abilities which have also expressed the desire for word conquest all appear to be serving or are Iran. Additionally, Iran has spoken of their intention to erase the nation of Israel from the map commenting that Israel would be a one-bomb nation once they have sufficient nuclear weapons. They have also shared research with North Korea and shared tactics for a southern approach for using an orbital nuclear weapon to deliver and EMP to the United States destroying much of the electrical infrastructure. The real question that the world needs to address is who is going to stop Iran, when do they plan on starting and what it will take for people to take the concept of Iranian world conquest seriously. Ask almost anyone other than a minority of military leadership about Iran declaration of intent for world conquest; they will laugh at you as if you are insane if not actually trying to get you some medical assistance for your obvious problems. We all may as well face the fact that nobody believes in world conquest by any nation any more now, than anyone had in 1933 when Germany talked of world conquest. The world did finally respond to Germany but had they worked to prevent Germany from building up their military the world would have been saved the horrors of World War II. Iran has spread its influence across the Middle East, has all but surrounded Saudi Arabia, had closed in on Israel on three borders and has control over the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el Mandeb Strait giving them control over oil shipments to the world and the southern exit from the Red Sea blocking any use of the Suez Canal. How far does Iran need to go to prove they intend to try to conquer the world for Allah and Shiite Islam? This is a question which may get more important as time passes, or we may get fortunate and their efforts fail from reaching any critical point where preventing them becomes an absolute necessity, which would mean they have reached military capabilities making world conquest a possibility.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

November 15, 2017

Could United States Forces Prevent North Korean Attack?

 

Lieutenant General (ret.) Jan-Marc Jouas wrote in a leaked letter to members of the US Congress, US troops “are vastly outnumbered by North Korean forces, as well as (South Korean) forces that will conduct the overwhelming majority of the fighting.” General Jouas adds, “Unlike every conflict since the last Korean War, we will not be able to build up our forces prior to the start of hostilities.” May we add that in our opinion, the general is a flaming optimist. There is anywhere, depending on the assessed threat levels, between thirty-five thousand and fifty thousand United States Army forces on the line at any given time backed up by what is considered a significant number of South Korean forces. They are backed up by air power and artillery stationed in South Korea as well as air-power from Guam, the Philippines, Hawaii, Japan and the naval forces from United States Seventh Fleet (Seventh Fleet Battle Group pictured below).

 

United States Seventh Fleet Battle Group

United States Seventh Fleet Battle Group

 

The following is our own assessment of the situation for the United States forces stationed in South Korea and their civilian employees and the rest of the population of South Korea. They are all toast should North Korea decide to initiate a war. The initial threat would be the launching of rockets and firing of artillery which might include chemical weapon rounds and would lay waste to much of the northern sections of Seoul. The initial firings and launchings could be utilized to a devastating effect on the entire length of the DMZ emplacements which defend South Korea and are often referred to as the first line of defense. The name we gave these soldiers was the trip wire which would notify command that everything they prayed would never happen, was in fact happening. These troops were never designed to prevent North Korean troops from invading South Korea, they were placed there such that the United States would have an excuse to reengage in the actual longest running war in which the United States has ever been engaged. The Korean War never ended, it only was suspended with the signing of an armistice which is merely a cease-fire. Every time even a single bullet crosses the DMZ, even an accidental discharge, the armistice is technically broken and the other side could reengage in hostilities while blaming the other side for actually initiating the renewed war. Other than the troops “guarding” the DMZ, the population of Seoul would be the other major group of victims as North Korea has made everything clear that they would intentionally target all of Seoul murdering civilians. This is their intentions despite North Korea being a signatory to the Geneva Convention Protocols.

 

Known North Korea Artillery Sites with Range of Fire

Known North Korea Artillery Sites with Range of Fire

 

In the end, the resulting carnage would be something the Korean Peninsula would find recoverable but requiring decades if not centuries. North Korea would likely face destruction on a scale previously thought unimaginable should this occur while President Trump is in office as it is doubtful Secretary of Defense James Mattis, a retired Marine four star General as well as Commander of United States Central Command, Commander of the United States Joint Forces Command, Supreme Allied Commander Transformation and whose dress blues are decorated with an impressive amount of salad, would even wait for President Trump to order an attack before readying all the forces which could conceivably engage North Korea to prepare to act immediately when given the go command. He did not earn the nickname “Mad Dog” for a passive demeanor, so one would expect him to be ready for any threat. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson may try to be a voice of reasoned response and advise caution, which we would not be surprised to hear, but between Secretary of Defense James Mattis, White House Chief of Staff and John F. Kelly, also a four star Marine General, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph F. Dunford, another four star Marine General and active as well, and if three retired Marine Four Star Generals were not sufficient to convince President Trump to overreact immediately, there would likely be one more voice demanding action, United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley. One might almost feel sorry for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson trying to make himself heard as the voice of reason calling for some degree of hesitation to try to end the confrontation without resorting to escalating the situation. Then again, we are prejudging that Secretary of State Tillerson would not also be in favor of making South Korea into an island off the coast of China.

 

The truth is that should Kim Jong Un actually desire uniting the Korean Peninsula knowing that the United States is tied by treaty and United Nations edict to come to the defense of South Korea should they be attacked by North Korea, Kim Jong Un would be more likely to act first on his threats against the United States as well as President Trump. This could be accomplished in any of a number of means. The most obvious is the expected firing of ICBMs at the major cities of the United States. There has been discussion of the southern vulnerability to orbital missile attack which the United States faces. This exists as the United States defenses were all designed in addressing an attack from the Soviet Union. North Korea is a new threat and was given access to the Soviet Union southern attack plans which they developed back in the 1980’s in order to address a means of avoiding the United States defenses. North Korea has already launched satellites which would have been capable of using just such an approach in the past. But this attack plan has given way to something more realistic, so keep reading.

 

North Korea has tested six nuclear weapons in the recent past. The last two were reportedly thermonuclear weapons, in the vernacular, hydrogen bombs. Most of their weapons have had much lower yields than what most expected such weapons to produce. There is but one rational explanation for this result. These weapons are intended for a specific purpose, to produce the maximum EMP which, for reasons which nuclear expert scientists can ably explain, are a special orientation which while producing the maximum EMP yield and also a rather dirty bomb with high but very short lived radiation, produce lower than expected explosive yields. In other words, they give less pop but more pizzazz than the normative thermonuclear device of old which was designed to destroy a city. These devices are called Super EMP devices which are the result of a concerted effort between the Soviet Union and China and provided to North Korea by their ever-caring provider, China. Yes, the same China which now claims to have lost their leash and declared Kim Jong Un to be outside their control. Of course that is simply only partly true as China and her trade and support financially of North Korea is responsible for most of the economy.

 

The threat such a weapon poses were it to be exploded high in the atmosphere over the central United States is potentially devastating. Such a detonation could conceivably destroy the majority of the North American electrical grid plunging all but the east and west coasts into blackout as the transformers would be overloaded and rendered inoperable. Estimates are that it could take as long as a decade to completely repair the damage. The worse case scenario would have well over three-quarters of the population of the United States perishing in the first year alone and also rendering the United States vulnerable to invasion. There would also be problems for central Canada though northern Canada and her coasts would be unaffected. The dire consequences of such an EMP device is well defined by Dr. Peter Vincent Pry as well as debunking the detractors who claim otherwise. Needless to point out, the United States vulnerability to such a devastating attack should be of far more importance than it has received to date. As pointed out by Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, “For 17 years the EMP Commission warned, in the words of the 2004 EMP Commission Executive Report: “The current vulnerability of U.S. critical infrastructures can both invite and reward attack if not corrected; however, correction is feasible and well within the Nation’s means and resources to accomplish.”

 

The truth is that the Congress and President were first briefed by the military upon their surprise discovery of the dangers of EMP after their own nuclear tests having knocked out electrical devices at a distant base after a nuclear above ground test in the Pacific theater. This was back in the 1950’s when adapting the electrical grid would have been far simpler and almost inexpensive by even the standards of the day. The electronic grid could be modernized and protected from an EMP device and implemented in 3-5 years at a cost of $10-20 billion. The complication is that every year the price will rise and the time required would also grow. Such an upgrade could include other upgrades making the grid intelligent which would lead to lower maintenance costs as well as numerous other advantages. But as nobody in Congress can place their name on an upgrade, the funding will go into items which often are unnecessary but are new constructions which Senators or Representatives can place their name on a sign taking credit. When someone becomes the first to place a sign taking credit for an upgrade, such as this resurfacing brought to you care of Senator Blah, perhaps upgrading on substations could begin. Until such a time or when the people find out the truth of the EMP vulnerability of the United States and entire North American electrical grids, then perhaps the required and necessary upgrades will be considered. What would it take to get these upgrades done, probably a miracle from Heaven. Still, the North Korean madman, Kim Jong Un, is most likely to attack the United States before attempting to unify the Korean Peninsula and such an attack would take the form of an EMP attack. As far as the United States preventing such an attack, that might take a miracle where just the right balance between bluster and pressure on China to pressure North Korea. There will always be those claiming that pressure should come from the United Nations Security Council sanctions where approximately seven sets of sanctions passed already have had absolutely minimal effect. This could be something which can be done with no desired result just to say it was tried, but some point of strength and threat need be put in place always leaving that small amount of doubt in Kim Jong Un’s mind just to keep him balanced, unbalanced is his normal condition.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

November 11, 2017

Who Turns First, Britain or America

 

The United States and Great Britain both have conservative party leaders currently. Both Prime Minister May and President Trump have made mention of items concerning Israel. President Donald Trump stated early in his term when Prime Minister Netanyahu visited the White House, “With this visit, the United States again reaffirms our unbreakable bond with our cherished ally, Israel.” Speaking during events centered around the centennial celebration of the Balfour Declaration, British Prime Minister Theresa May stated concerning Arab and leftist calls for Britain to apologize for ever issuing the Balfour Declaration, “Balfour wrote explicitly that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.’ So when some people suggest we should apologize for this letter, I say absolutely not.” One would be justified in believing that Israel was in solidly with both Great Britain and the United States, and they would be completely wrong.

 

President Donald Trump & British Prime Minister Theresa May

President Donald Trump & British Prime Minister Theresa May

 

Currently Israel is in a period of grace with both nations and this will continue very probably for as long as the two parties, the Republican Party in the United States and the Conservative Party in Great Britain, remain in power. For the United States that means holding the Presidency and in Great Britain it gets a little more complicated and requires being the major Party forming a coalition which requires giving money and other favors to other parties sometimes leading to altering the government position on issues. But there will eventually be a change in which a party holds the office of power in both nations, then what? All we need do is look at what the opposition parties and the leaders currently believe and extrapolate. Almost every nation in the developed world is facing a similar problem of the polarization of their electorate with the sides growing ever further apart and heading to their respective extremes. The more liberal parties are being controlled and populated with ever more leftists holding extreme leftist positions, the conservative parties are moving further right, and there are ever fewer people seemingly occupying the middle ground. It is getting to the point that what used to be a liberal and what used to be a conservative have become united as the center with the rest of the electorate at the fringes of the left and right having left the others behind. What would be most interesting would be the founding of a centrist party which held moderate views with a collection of liberal and conservative points with the emphasis on the few ideas both sides could agree to hold in uniting this party and allow things to play out from there. The other choice is for the electorate to be so far apart that whichever party wins an election is looked upon by the members of the other party not as just the other party but as their enemies as is the apparent situation with many leftists concerning President Trump.

 

Let us begin with the British and their Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn. He too made some comments addressing the centennial commemoration of the Balfour Declaration. His commentary was quite different from the words of Prime Minister May. Leader of the Opposition Corbyn stated as quoted by the British media, “Let us mark the Balfour anniversary by recognizing Palestine as a step towards a genuine two-state solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, increasing international pressure for an end to the fifty-year occupation of the Palestinian territories, illegal settlement expansion and the blockade of Gaza.” We will not address the mistakes and errors in his statements and instead offer this article Reflections on the Balfour Declaration to stand as the correcting statements of Jeremy Corbyn and numerous others who took to the media to spread falsehoods about the Balfour Declaration, a common practice in this world concerning the history around the founding of Israel. The single misstatement commonly made which we wish to correct is that Israel was designed to be a British colonial implant in the Middle East. Israel was the nativist dream of the indigenous Hebrews who were renamed by the Greeks and Romans after their largest remaining Tribe, the Tribe of Judah, which was eventually shortened from Judean to Judan to Ju, currently spelled Jew but pronounced as the original Roman spelling. Back to Mr. Corbyn, a man who has at times in his political career faced charges of anti-Semitism and who has admitted to being an anti-Zionist. Well before taking the leadership of the Labour Party, back in 2009 Jeremy Corbyn stated, “It will be my pleasure and my honor to host an event in Parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I’ve also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well. Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here so it’s going to be only friends from Hezbollah. The idea that an organization that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labeled a terrorist organization by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.” The fate of British-Israeli relations should Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters ever become the leadership of Britain was made obvious back in 2009 with this statement from which he has never distanced himself. So, Israel can count on the support of Britain likely for as long as the Conservative Party remains leading the ruling coalition and will face a hostile Britain should the Labour Party ever be the leasing party of a coalition.

 

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn

 

The United States is not very different than Great Britain, but let us investigate anyway. The Democrat Party had two politicians who sought that party’s nomination for President, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. We will start with Bernie Sanders, the one who lost the primaries but made an impressive showing despite his loss. The most telling facts about his positions concerning Israel were his appointees to critical positions. The first was his choice for Jewish outreach, a position considered important in Democrat politics, as it can be responsible for considerable funding opportunities. Bernie Sanders chose Simone Zimmerman who is a supporter of the extremist Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) – which the ADL named as one of America’s top 10 anti-Israel hate groups. This may not have been as critical a choice since many of the modern American Jews, especially the younger and more assimilated Jews, no longer have the close feelings for Israel which was the root of the Jewish community in previous elections as was notable in the Jewish support for President Obama in his reelection after there had been ample proof of his lack of support for Israel and obvious animosity for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. The other appointments made by Bernie Sanders which gave such insight were his two selections which he placed upon the Platform Committee. One of his appointments was Professor Cornel West, he has called the Israeli Prime Minister a war criminal but openly supports the BDS movement (boycott, divestment, and sanctions). Professor West has made his position on Israel clear and has been rumored to hold similar views concerning Jews. Mr. Sanders other choice was the longtime pro-Palestinian activist James Zogby. Mr. Zogby’s view of Jews and Israel are well documented and need not be referenced here. Bernie Sanders has proven repeatedly through actions and statements made his antipathy for Israel obvious.

 

Democrat Front Runners Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders

Democrat Front Runners
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders

 

The other Democrat was their candidate for President, Hillary Clinton. Max Blumenthal, the son of Sidney Blumenthal, both longtime Clinton friends, both have a history of questionable to outright malignant and vicious views concerning Israel. Then there are numerous others from the administration of President Obama and other friendships which could easily call any comments she has made to AIPAC and other Zionist Jewish groups into question. Still haunting Hillary was the reported quote which Paul Fray, then manager of Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful campaign in Arkansas, has verified (search text for Paul Fray) that she referred to him with an anti-Semitic curse despite Paul Fray not being Jewish, thus it was intended as an insult and not a comment on his personhood. There have been rumors for years about Clinton references to minorities using disparaging terms considered to be remnants from the “Old South” over the years which, as they were from the good party and not the evil party, were disregarded as inconsequential. The ugliest of these rumors came in a book by one of the former Secret Service who had served on her security detail before leaving the Secret Service.

 

The clinching condemnation of the Democrat Party and their Israel position came at the 2012 Democrat Convention. The easiest means of providing the evidence is the video below. They actually did refuse to accept Jerusalem as the Capital City of Israel and refused to include The Almighty in their Party Platform and had to resort to simply ignoring the feelings of the floor and place it in the platform over their rejections.

 

It is fairly obvious that except for a few of the old time Democrats, the new Democrat Party does not support Israel. This is something also greeted with enthusiasm by the new number two person in the Democrat Party, Keith Ellison. When Haaretz has a problem with a Democrat, that Democrat has an obvious Israel problem, and Keith Ellison earned that problem. We will clearly grant that Democrats such as Senator Chuck Schumer still support Israel, but many of the new, far left Democrats, not so much. Should the Democrats once again take the White House, Israel might be seeking some new friends.

 

The extremely delicate condition of the political support Israel faces in the world today is the very reason we keep insisting that Israel already be designing their next generation fighter and the facilities in which to manufacture said aircraft. The same foes for rifles, sidearms, ammunition, helicopters, ships and even submarines as none of the current Israeli suppliers should be considered as safe continuing into the Twenty First Century. Any nation which is dependent upon its military for its continued existence should not permit itself to ever become dependent upon foreign providers for its defense requirements. This has always been part of the policies of the United States, China and Russia and should become the policy for Israel as well. Israel most certainly does not lack the brain trust to design and produce all of her weapons requirements, and she has an economy easily sufficient for the manufacture of her entire military needs. The sooner the leadership in Israel recognizes these vital requirements and the facts making them all the more necessary, the brighter the future of Israel will become.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.