The Kurdish Dilemma

History will judge and rejudge President Trump’s move to pull American forces out of the Kurdish region of northern Syria allowing a Turkish invasion. This move by the President is likely traceable to his main weakness, taking leaders of other nations at their word. In the situation with the Kurds, the word of Turkish President Erdoğan stating that he was merely going to keep the Islamic State and other terrorists from making bases and a home in Syria and leaving civilian Syrians at peace is worthless. President Trump and his advisors should know from history that President Erdoğan considers all Kurds to be terrorists. Further, they should have researched and found where Erdoğan claimed to be leading the reestablishment of the Ottoman Empire and desires absorbing Syria as far as Aleppo and Iraq all the way through Mosul and the Mosul oil fields. This would also place almost all the remaining Kurds outside of Turkey within the enlarged Turkey and thus facing genocidal efforts. We had discussed and revealed Erdoğan’s plans back on April 25, 2017, in our article Turkey Has a New Caliph Called THE President complete with a map of the Greater Turkey he envisions. We understood that the argument favoring Erdoğan’s expansionist plans was the fact that Turkey is a NATO member state and thus the United States is obliged to militarily support Turkey against perceived threats. If that is what NATO demands, then this we elucidated upon in our January 25, 2018, article, Time for United States or Turkey to Leave NATO. We discussed and proposed establishing Kurdistan numerous times including here, here and here. These should stand as providing a solid background and so now on to the current set of events.

We understand that President Trump promised on the campaign trail to disengage from all the Middle East squabbling and specifically the Arab on Arab fighting. This promise was his direct reference when announcing the pullout of American forces from the Kurdish regions of Syria and probably will soon be followed by the same in Iraq if our premises prove accurate. There are a few intractable facts which make the situation with the Kurds different and separate from President Trump’s campaign promise. The Kurds are amongst the very few peoples who refused to Arabize and thereby have kept much of their culture, kept their language and have distinct practices and are not uniformly following the Arab or Islamic dictates which have influenced most of the cultures which the Arabs have absorbed and destroyed. The Kurdish tribes include a large minority of Christians who the Islamic State had trapped and were set to annihilate them. These were the Yazidis of whom we spoke during our article of November 13, 2016, titled Erdogan Declares Border War on European Union, where the world, United States and her State Department included, ignored the plight of these largely unarmed civilians trapped on a mountain where ISIS promised to slaughter the men and use the women as they pleased. The Kurds of northern Iraq and Syria came to the rescue and pulled a majority of the Yazidis to safety. This is not an Arab on Arab fight but a Turk vs, Kurd war. We agree with President Trump when he complains that these wars between MENA tribes have been going on for centuries and the United States has fought in a few too many. We understand his not wanting to be dragged into another MENA conflict. We will even go so far as to understand his premise that the Kurds have received aid moneys, arms, training and support from the United States and it is time for them to stand on their own and emulate Israel, the one MENA nation to never have foreign troops defending them from her enemies. This begs one simple set of questions; can the Kurds be equated with the Israelis, does the United States owe the Kurds protections, and lastly, is there some means by which the United States can prevent a genocidal war by Turkey against the Kurds. We will take them one at a time.

Can the Kurds be equated with Israel? Actually, this is possible in a plethora of means. The first concerns statehood. When the Iraqi Kurds held their referendum and of those polled over 75% desired their declaring their independence, this was where the United States could have assisted the Kurds greatly. Instead, the State Department insisted that the United States would not provide them with support or even recognition as a new country insisting that this was not a good time for such a declaration. The State Department promised to let the Kurds know when it would be convenient. Read the top of this paragraph and instead of Kurds or Kurdish, replace it with Israel and Jewish and you have the reaction of the State Department to Israeli declaration of independence in May of 1948. Yes, President Truman recognized Israel and then the American government slapped an arms embargo on the entire region. As the Soviets were arming the Arabs, this embargo really only affected Israel. With the Kurds you have a heavily armed with American weapons Turkish military, one of the largest and presumed best armies in the world ranking within the top ten and the Kurdish militias who have limited armor and no air cover. Israel had far less equipped armies when the several Arab states augmented by militias attacking her on the very first morning of her existence. Israel received a fair amount of military aid from Czechoslovakia who sold Israel most of the arms remaining within their borders from the several armies of World War II. This aid included some armor and aircraft. The aid granted the Kurds had largely not included armor and had never included aircraft and minimal artillery. Any war between Turkey and the Kurds of either northern Syria or Iraq would be similar to Godzilla vs. Bambi. Israel was very fortunate to not be crushed in the 1948 Arab war to annihilate the Jewish State at her birth. Many feel it was nothing short of a miracle. Should the Kurds manage to throw off any Turkish attack, that too would be a miracle.

Next, we ask, does the United States owe the Kurds protections? The answer in realpolitik is an abrupt, “No!” According to realpolitik, no nation ever really owes another country or group anything just because they faced a common foe together. Britain used the animosity existing between Spain and France to their advantage by backing the weaker of the two turning the tables on the more powerful nation. When such a war ended, and during the lead-up to the next bout between France and Spain, Britain often was required to change sides as the other was not the weaker of the two. Britain never felt any debt to their last ally as for them, it was about preventing either France or Spain from becoming strong enough to challenge Britain. The United States never felt any debt to France for their aid in the Revolutionary War against Britain thus when the French Revolution erupted, the United States simply watched officially from the other side of the pond. If any nation has shown to be out of character and actually shown allegiance to former allies, that has been the United States who gives preference to things European, and particularly British. So, in the real-world of everyone out for number one, the United States does not actually owe the Kurds anything as they were fighting a common foe which the Kurds would have been required to face with or without any assist from the United States. This was proven when the Kurds went to the aid of the Yazidis and the world twiddled their thumbs.

And lastly, is there some means by which the United States can prevent a genocidal war by Turkey against the Kurds? The answer is that there is a means by which the United States can assist the Kurds, and not all of them require the use of any military force. Probably the most obvious would be for the United States to pressure Turkey such that they decide that it is not worth the sacrifice just to attack the Kurds of Syria and probably Iraq after them. President Trump honestly believes that economic threats and potential sanctions will be sufficient to persuade President Erdoğan to largely remain within his borders. One only need look at the collapsing economy and currency of Turkey to realize that Erdoğan does not care about these things anywhere near as much as he desires to reestablish the Ottoman Empire, or at least taking the initial steps, which he defines as taking northern Syria and Iraq south to Aleppo and Mosul along with the oil fields and the elimination of the Kurds. One would not be unfair to expect Turkey to follow up with the elimination of the Kurds within their current borders. They have carried out such attacks previously. The United States, had the Kurds been of any real importance, could have aided them far more greatly by aiding their declaring independence at least from Iraq after the resolution for independence. There are two means by which America could back their former allied Kurds at this late date. The first would be to threaten to remove Turkey from NATO, something which should have been done over a decade past. The other would be to provide air cover for the Kurds against Turkish air power which the Kurds have no ability to fight alone. This could be provided by providing them with anti-aircraft missiles, namely MANPADS. The other would be using American air-power to prevent Turkish raids on Kurdish villages, something we predict will soon be part of the Turkish offensive. Without such aid, the Kurds will prove to be sitting ducks falling victim to Turkish air attacks aiding their military thrusts into northern Syria and probably northern Iraq soon thereafter. President Erdoğan was completely serious when he claimed to be the new leader of the reestablished Ottoman Empire and his desire to capture Aleppo and Mosul.

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

Could there be a bright side to the presumed coming Turkish assault on northern Syria and Iraq? Yes, there is one positive in that Turkey will become a threat to the Iranians establishing their Shiite Crescent pictured above connecting Iran with the Mediterranean and placing them on the borders of Israel. The downside would be a conflict between Iran and Turkey which would bathe the entire region in blood. Such a conflict would greatly weaken one side while likely eliminating the military ability of the other. In case of a war between Iran and Turkey, the United States can expect to be drawn into a far more costly war in the Middle East as Turkey could call upon NATO to aid in any conflict with Iran. Should NATO members agree to intervene, their decision would mean that most of the fighting would be conducted by the United States with perhaps moral support from the remainder of NATO. American air power should be used either as a threat or, should it be necessary, as a hammer to crush any ability for the genocidal assault on the Kurds. Still, much of the problem the Kurds currently face comes down to two main factors. The first is the Kurds not following through and establishing their own nation of Kurdistan and the second the inability for the Syrian Kurds and Iraqi Kurds from being able to join together and form a political entity which both could endure. There are strong differences in their political outlooks with one favoring a democratic rule and the other a socialist government under a strong leadership. The coming conflagration between the Kurds and Erdoğan’s Turkey could result in a far greater conflict between Iran and Turkey which will result in a great loss of life and far reaching destruction. Such a conflict could result in one side initiating the use of nuclear weapons. We have stated often our expectation that Iran already had dozens of nuclear weapons and possibly a number of thermonuclear weapons while Turkey had a sharing agreement with NATO should they face nuclear attacks to utilize in their response, NATO willing. Should an Iran-Turkey war turn to nuclear weapons, it will be unavoidable for NATO to remain neutral as Turkey would most likely be the one attacked with such weapons which obligates the intervention of NATO and thus the United States. Such an escalation could pull Russia, amongst others, into the fray leading to escalation after escalation with nobody knowing what would be the end result.

Beyond the Cusp

President Trump Mishandles Turkey and Iran

 

Turkish President Erdoğan demanded that the United States move out of his forces way, enabling attacks upon the Kurdish regions in Syria and potentially beyond into Iraq. These were the Kurdish allies in the war against the Islamic State working with American advisors and air support. One would pray that President Trump would stand his ground and deny President Erdoğan’s demands and protect the Kurds who were there against Islamic State with the United States. Instead, President Trump once more showed his excessive reluctance to use any form of force if he can avoid any fighting. President Trump assured Erdoğan that the American forces would be removed enabling his assault on the apparently former American ally Kurds in northern Syria. It was back in last January that President Trump threatened to “devastate Turkey economically” should Turkey attacked the Kurdish forces. At that time, Erdoğan agreed to set up a safe zone where Kurdish forces and civilians would be safe from any Turkish attacks. Instead, Erdoğan plans to use the idea of a safe zone to eradicate the Kurds along the entirety of the southern Turkish border into Syria. We believe that Turkey will be absorbing these lands into Turkey to make good on former Erdoğan promises. Apparently, that agreement is no longer accepted by President Erdoğan as he now desires to attack the Kurds in Syria probably taking over Aleppo if possible and not stopped. The actual reason for these attacks is simply the Turkish leadership regard the Kurds as an enmity and scourge which Turkey insist must be eradicated.

 

President Erdoğan and President Trump

 

This is simply another all too obvious example that President Trump apparently lacks the intestinal fortitude to take on a fight which can be easily avoided with minimal blowback. Within the United States the bringing of military forces home is often met with great support. This time will be little different simply because the average American, J.Q. Public has little if any knowledge about who the Kurds are, where they reside and probably have forgotten the assistance by the Kurds in the fight with the Islamic State. Most are also unaware that much of the Turkish claims to be fighting the Islamic State (or ISIS) were more often than not fighting Kurdish regions where they killed fighters and civilians alike. One reason which may be forcing this decision by President Trump is since Turkey is a NATO ally, they may have used this alliance when insisting the United States desert the region under Kurdish rule and allow Turkey to do as they please. We predicted just such scenario where allowing Turkey to remain in NATO would force the United States to take on or desert a fight so their NATO ally Turkey could operate as they pleased. Still, President Trump has sent the message that he desires avoiding conflict and depending upon economic and social pressures to influence friend and foe alike.

 

Previous stories made President Trump’s avoidance of taking military action evident and in one case to an adversary in the Middle East. These have not been major stories as there have yet to be any direct repercussions from any of these actions. There was the rumored heated argument between the two men over use of force against Iran. When President Trump and John Bolton parted ways, the Iranian reaction was it simply proved that President Trump was too reluctant to defend anything if it required the use of military force. The Iranians had this idea reinforced when President Trump launched attack air craft after Iran had shot down an expensive United States drone presumably in international airspace and then cancelled the attack calling the aircraft back. This simply further emboldened the Iranians as they believe that Trump will always run and hide rather than actually use force and hold the line. We believe that with President Trump having a strong economic background has assumed a false concept, that everyone is concerned with finances and that this makes them vulnerable to economic pressures. Iran has proven repeatedly over time when sanctions have been placed upon them, they actually do not react as if it really matters until the situation shows signs of becoming volatile within Iran.

 

Because of this reliance on economic pressure to alter Iranian actions, President Trump has relied on ratcheting up sanctions despite their showing absolutely very little effect beyond Iran making false moves in attempts to hide their nuclear activities. But after realizing that President Trump would only use economic pressure and avoid any military actions, they have begun flaunting their breaking of the limits of the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) testing the European signatories who also refused to take any actions beyond threatening to act. President Trump has all but ignored the Iranian actions as if after placing more severe sanctions would eventually show progress in persuading Iran to forgo their nuclear weapons research. Meanwhile, as the Mullahs and other Islamist elites are eating well and living large, the Iranian unemployment is spiking, the economy is hurting from the sanctions and the Iranian Rial has crashed forcing prices higher as inflation sets in. The rulers in Iran have shown little concern for the problems their people are suffering because under their Islamic rule, only the desired end result matters and that is the total destruction of the United States, Saudi Arabia, Israel and eventually world conquest spreading Shia Islam to the entire world while maximizing violence and destruction in order to force the return of their messiah. Economic concerns are secondary to their religious commitment to spreading Shia Islam making it the only religion on Earth.

 

The possibility that President Trump will rely solely on economic pressures and avoid any military confrontation even with Iran will leave Iran free to spread their terror and control even further. Iran is already active in Yemen, Syria and Iraq and intending to continue these efforts against Saudi Arabia from within Yemen while threatening Israel using their proxy forces of the IRGC and Hezballah. Iran is also spreading their influence using terrorist forces largely in the Middle East but the real question is where does Iran plan on stopping their warfare. The truth is there is no conquest which would satisfy the Mullahs who honestly believe that Shia Islam will become the only true and allowed religion if they simply continue to follow their interpretation of the Quran. Their religious philosophy is based on the spread of Islam, for them Shia Islam as they consider Sunni Islam as a heretical cult despite ninety-percent of Muslims being Sunni and merely ten-percent being Shia. Their intent is to convert all Sunni Muslims to the real form of Islam, Shiite Islam. After this has been accomplished and they have also conquered all the oil assets in the Middle East, the Iranian leadership is convinced that with time their efforts will succeed in conquering the rest of the world replacing all other religions. Such beliefs allow for the true believers to suffer any hardships as all is reasonable in the pursuit of the promised end results if they simply continue on through all challenges. The leadership in Iran believe that they were chosen by Allah to spread his religion to the whole world. Their belief goes far beyond the world known by Muhammad as it includes the Americas and other lands unknown in his times. Western powers and governments need to address the Islamic threats which have been pressing to establish beachheads within Europe and the Americas. This is currently being pressed by two competing factions, the Iranians and Shia Islam versus the Muslim Brotherhood and Sunni Islam. Some of these efforts have been financed by Qatar backing the Muslim Brotherhood. Such efforts have to be either opposed even if force is required or surrendered to surrendering all free will, specifically religious freedom as under such a world all will be expected to live under totalitarian rule which demands complete compliance under pain of torture or death. That is the reality even if much of the Western world refuses to believe such thinking still exists today.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Iranian Nuclear War with Israel or the World

 

After reading Professor Louis René Beres’s article “Looking Ahead: Longer Term Prospects for an Israel-Iran Nuclear War” we found some additional aspects which were either dismissed or ignored. We decided that perhaps we could add some information by looking more closely at the Iranian perspectives and what these should mean to Israeli planners. The one item with which we took the most critical concern was his statement, “In essence, there are no conceivable experts on fighting a nuclear war, not in Washington, not in Pyongyang, not in Jerusalem, not in Tehran.” He also postulated that, “Insofar as a nuclear war has never been fought, what will be needed is more broadly intellectual guidance than Israel should ever reasonably expect from even its most senior and accomplished military officers.” The reality is that senior officers often have educations equal to that of many professors and their minds are just as keen and capable of any academic. We will grant that officers exist who are nowhere near the expert of some academics, but mostly those are junior officers and by the time an officer makes Full Bird Colonel they have at the least a Bachelor’s degree and probably a Master’s degree and many a General will have a Doctorate in at least one field from Military History to Mathematics, Physics and possibly Nuclear Physics. They will all have taken courses in Military Tactics, as even Noncommissioned officers are required to take such courses. They will have been required to take a number of command courses and often have attended some very rigorous military training courses which is how they get those impressive patches such as Ranger, Airborne and even Special Forces or Seals in the United States. So, to be honest, there are likely very few professors or other experts who would be better trained, educated and able to make the decisions and make plans to handle any threat including, or even especially, a nuclear standoff or even an actual nuclear exchange.

 

Professor Beres also said that there had never been a nuclear war, but that is technically not entirely valid as the War with Japan at the end of World War II was ended by the use of nuclear weapons which kind of means that the War with Japan did turn into the first, and thus far, only nuclear war. That was a completely one sided nuclear exchange as Japan had no nuclear weapons with which to respond which is what made the American use on Hiroshima and Nagasaki so effective. Fortunately, the Japanese did not know that the United States had used every nuclear weapon at their disposal and did not posses a third weapon. Had Japan tested the resolve of President Truman, the American’s next move was to build fifty additional nuclear weapons in the ensuing year and strike Japan with most of them in simultaneous strikes including Tokyo and a number of nuclear weapons into Mount Fuji in the hopes of causing a massive eruption. This was not much of a lesson for a nuclear standoff between two nuclear-armed adversaries. Such a standoff has limited lessons to teach us with only two which come to mind. The minor one has been the battle of the boasting idiots between President Trump and Kim Jong-un. Deciding which one is the larger idiot would be a difficult call but we would have to side with Kim Jong-un if he honestly believes he is a man-god and that his nation is as happy and well off as any other on the face of the planet. All he would need do is look southward to the Winter Olympics in South Korea to see that his nation is in dire shape and has some extreme problems. But then he knows this and this was what caused him to test President Trump and pressure the world with threats trying to force them to treat his temper tantrum by sending his beleaguered nation food and money. The more serious standoff between two nuclear powers was the Cuban Missile Crisis. This pitted the United States and President Kennedy against the USSR and Commissar Khrushchev. This standoff ended peaceably but not before nerves throughout the globe was frayed to the breaking point.

 

So, let us now look at what the future nuclear situation might be between Israel and Iran as well as Iran and the rest of the world. The first thing which can be stated, is, that Israel would not be the first to use nuclear weapons except in response to an attack using weapons of mass destruction (WMD) against Israel. Israel has made this their policy on nuclear weapons and their use such that they would only be used in response to a WMD attack. Now, such a nuclear response might be used on Iran if there were a massive WMD attack emanating from Syria or Hezballah which could be traced as being ordered by Iran. Should Iran launch a nuclear or other WMD attack on Israel then an Israeli nuclear response should be expected against Iran and for Israel to go on alert in case of an attack across the northern border from Hezballah or Syria. This covers every use of her nuclear weapons by Israel except for one rumored plan known as the Samson Option, used as the basis of “The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy,” a 1991 book by Seymour Hersh. The theory put forth presumably from an Israeli intelligence source who told of plans that should Israel be facing being overrun and destroyed by invading armies, then she would respond by launching her missiles at the main population centers of numerous Arab and Muslim nations which was hoped to prevent any attacks by Arab armies. The last organized assault on Israel by national military forces was the Yom Kippur War of October 1973, which was before Israel was assumed to have a nuclear arsenal. Since then the Arab world has not launched an assault on Israel using conventional forces and only through terror forces. There may be a question whether Hezballah, with there over one-hundred-thousand rockets and missiles could be considered to be a national type military force equating any attack by Hezballah into an attack by Lebanon and possibly their masters in Tehran thus including Iran? This is a conundrum for the heads of state and the military in Israel and we are not about to second-guess them and will wait for any announced policy. There has been some mention that should Hezballah attack Israel that Israel now considers Hezballah as being the governance of Lebanon and thus any attack by Hezballah would, at the least, be considered an attack by Lebanon.

 

This leaves Iran and what their leadership might be thinking about nuclear confrontations. It was reported by CNN on September 11, 2015, that the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said during a speech that week in Tehran, state-run media report, which translated as, “I’d say (to Israel) that they will not see (the end) of these 25 years.” That, in and of itself, is ominous enough to rattle nerves or it could be written off to bluster meant to impress the Iranian people. One thing people need to understand about the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is that his life revolves around the Quran and it is the Quran which provides him with his authority, gives him authority to make Iranian foreign policy decisions, and allows him great latitude concerning internal decision making within Iran. The Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is all but unopposable when it comes to decision making and his word is as good as law. If the Supreme Leader were to order a nuclear attack on Israel, the missiles would be launched within minutes with almost nobody even thinking of questioning these orders. What is unknown is who, other than the Supreme Leader, is able to order such an attack. This is not as well known and there are suspicions that there are some military high level officers who might also be permitted to give such orders including the leader of the IRGC, the special forces and most fanatical of the Iranian military. These are also the forces responsible for foreign operations including terrorist attacks. For our concerns, we will limit our concerns to address just the possibility for the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordering a nuclear strike on Israel or on any other nation.

 

First, let us look at what logic might be used by the Ayatollah. He would be aware that the United States has extended their nuclear umbrella to Israel which would imply that any nuclear attack upon Israel would potentially result in the United States striking back at the attacker. Between Israel and the United States, there is little comparison between their nuclear capabilities as the United States has a far more capable nuclear capability. The first question is whether or not the United States truly would respond as promised to a nuclear strike on Israel. The Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has witnessed a number of United States Presidents and has very probably noticed that the level of support Israel receives wavers from President to President, especially under the administration of President Obama. Thus, it is more likely that the Ayatollah would be more likely to consider taking any actions when the United States has a President who has shown preferably hostility to Israel or possibly only an indifference towards Israel and has pressured Israel over the ill-fated peace process. The real problem comes back to the one book which guides the Ayatollahs and much of the higher officers, especially those of the IRGC, which is the Quran. The one command from the Quran which has appeared again and again when it comes to relations towards Israel are two-fold, first, to kill the infidel wherever one finds them, and second, that the hour (end times) will not begin until you fight the Jews. The combination of these two concepts could lead to problems as the Iranian leading Imams and Ayatollahs have repeatedly proposed that Iran was chosen to bring on the coming of the Mahdi and the End Times. They have claimed that should they cause sufficient chaos and follow prescriptions written in the Quran, that they can cause the onset of the End Times and the coming of the Mahdi. This has often been stated to be solely the hope and ideas held by the Twelvers but some in politics have also adopted these ideas in order to gain greater acceptance by the ruling clerics. Many claim that Iran is not ruled by Twelvers though former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad brought this threat to a head and since then there have been more and more in the power structure who have been revealed as Twelvers. The prevalence of the Twelvers would make the leadership more aggressive which could be a problem, a definite problem.

 

Israel and Iran

 

What would possibly push a greater threat would be a Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah who came under some suspicions of impropriety or other weakness which might lead them to make a desperate grab at ending the rumors replacing them with a far greater news story. The Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah could be completely above all suspicion; but should the economic situations worsen leading to greater demonstrations and complete civil unrest and the regular military side with the people and the Ayatollahs believe they are losing control of the nation and may soon be deposed, then having nothing further to lose they might take equally desperate moves. Either threat could lead the Iranian leadership to throw everything they have in their arsenals at Israel and potentially also the United States. But no matter what the immediate future will bring, eventually the Ayatollahs will decide to use any weapons they have and in the not too distant future, that will mean nuclear weaponry. The Quran will eventually force the leadership who will be pressed by the IRGC commanders to press their revolution and Israel and Saudi Arabia are the two targets highest on their list. This means that sooner or later the Iranians will launch weapons at Israel. We will grant that this would not happen until Iran had struck Saudi Arabia and taken over Mecca and Medina, the two holy cities of all Islam. They also have desires to take over Egypt and would have to take Turkey so as to place somebody to rule there as President Erdoğan still has dreams to reestablish the Ottoman Empire and as he will support Iran, that will only last for as long as the Iranian dreams of reestablishing the Persian Empire do not interrupt his idea for the Ottoman Empire. There is no way for the two empires to coexist as the Persian Empire included all of Turkey and much of the Ottoman Empire plus, the Ottoman Empire also included Mecca and Medina, something the Iranians already have their own ideas about. The one place where Turkey and Iran will agree is on attacking Israel, providing that Israel will only be striking back at Iran and Turkey can remain unscathed. The problem is that at some point in the future the Iranian Supreme Leader and Grand Ayatollah will call for an all out attack to destroy Israel and should Israel see a fair number of ballistic missiles headed for Israel launched from Iran, Israel will no longer have time for diplomacy, Israel will need to reply anticipating that the Iranian missiles are tipped with WMD’s and most likely nuclear weapons. We can only hope that before such an eventuality comes to fruition that the people of Iran succeed in replacing their theocratic dictatorship with a true democratic governance which represents the people’s desires and write a constitution which will revitalize the Iranian economic situation and liberate the people from the Ayatollahs and their oppressive rule. We need remember that before the return of the Ayatollahs in 1979, Israel and Iran were friends with embassies and good relations and vital trade. A return to such would be good for Israel, good for Iran and good for both Iranians and Israelis as well as the rest of the Middle East.

 

Beyond the Cusp