So, Where Do We Stand?

So, Where Do We Stand?

I always like it when I don’t have to read all the way to the last paragraph to get to the bottom line, so today we begin with the bottom line – actually a number of them covering everything from the Middle East to the Congressional elections in November, 2006.

Beginning with the Middle East, it seems clear that the Hezbollah offensive recently staged in Lebanon for the entertainment of the Muslim ummah (worldwide community) had the principal goal of re-establishing a pro-Syrian-Iranian regime in Lebanon. The Iranian-Syrian strategy to construct a third wing to the Tehran-Damascus axis, a third wing which successfully encloses Israel with hostile Islamic military and terrorist forces, was an unmitigated success.

Israel’s retaliation for Hezbollah’s cross-border-incursion and the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers and killing eight others (responding to the bait) ended once again in Israel’s portrayal as the aggressor. Israel has withdrawn from Lebanon, a tentative one-sided compliance with a unanimous anti-semitic United Nations resolution - but without recovery of their missing soldiers and without maintaining control of the ground for which they shed considerable Israeli blood.

Predictably, Iran and Syria will not be held accountable for the most recent conflict and will pay no price for their sponsored aggression.

It quickly became clear that Israel’s military response into Lebanon was tactically questionable (inept). With the knowledge that there was nothing to fear from the United States or Europe, Arab nations quickly changed sides in the conflict – supporting Hezbollah and Hassan Nasrallah. The United States was the biggest loser in the tide change of Middle East sentiment, losing all believability, either as a credible force or a deterrent in the Arab world.

The United Nations cease-fire resolution, described more accurately as a pause-fire resolution, has been hailed by the main stream media as a monumental success. The Internet blogosphere expressed profoundly the opposite reaction. While the United Nations resolution was not passed under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter and does not have the authority of international law, it does expose Israel to condemnation if Israel attempts to respond to, or defends itself from, future Hezbollah provocations. Probably the most alarming fact, from an Israeli perspective, is who in the United Nations has been given the responsibility for determining compliance. That gem of negotiation has been placed in the hands of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, a man historically and notoriously anti-Semitic.

Inexplicably, the UN resolution, which the United States both sponsored and voted to adopt, makes no mention of either Syria or Iran. Without their support, Hezbollah would not exist let alone wage war against Israel. By ignoring Hezbollah's sponsors in the conflict, the UN resolution sends an unambiguous message to Iran and Syria that they can continue to equip and command terrorist proxy armies in Lebanon, the West Bank, Iraq and anywhere else with impunity, and foment violent unrest without fear of economic or military consequences. History has already been written that Hezbollah's aggression against Israel, and Israel's military action in defense of its sovereign territory, were morally equivalent.

The fate of the two IDF soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, was relegated to one paragraph in the UN resolution preamble, which links the return of the Israeli soldiers to the release of Lebanese terrorists held in Israel. The resolution all but eliminates any possibility of the soldiers returning home.

Then there is the question of an arms embargo and disarming Hezbollah, which the resolution puts off to some future date when Israel and Lebanon can agree to the terms of a "permanent cease-fire." Should that ever happen, it places the power to oversee an arms embargo against Hezbollah in the hands of the Lebanese government, of which Hezbollah is a prominent member. Can you see anything wrong with this picture?

Remember, the United States sponsored this UN resolution.

The UN resolution goes on to legitimize the claim of Lebanese sovereignty over the Shaba Farms, or Mount Dov - a vast area on the Golan Heights that separates the Syrian Golan from the Upper Galilee. The Shaba Farms area, long disputed between Israel and Syria, has now been placed on the UN negotiating table. By doing so, the UN rewarded Hezbollah's aggression by giving international legitimacy to its demand for territorial aggrandizement via acts of aggression. It must be an established law of the known universe - Israel can never expect the world to recognize any of its borders as final.

The diplomatic world refuses to acknowledge what should be obvious, i.e., Hezbollah and Syria are one in the same (appendages that have the same Islamic head - Iran), and Hamas and Syria will soon be one in the same, after remnants of the Palestinian Authority have been absorbed into Hamas - all with a unity of purpose and action. Since Hezbollah will neither disarm voluntarily, nor permit a search for hidden weapons stockpiles in Lebanon, it is hard to imagine – inconceivable more likely - that Iran and Syria will not reinitiate the conflict after re-supplying Hezbollah and Hamas.

If one needs proof of the inevitable, there is the nagging fact that no Islamic militant force, throughout recorded history, has ever voluntarily disarmed. In fact, no rational human being voluntarily disarms, particularly in the face of adversity or religious quest. In the Islamic case, Muslims are entirely rational. Muslims consistently make rational decisions in their own self interest. Prophet Mohammad is a profound unifying force and the Qur’an is their roadmap to the afterlife. No Muslim will ever voluntarily or willingly abandon fervent core beliefs, or give up the ability or forsake the tactics, to wage war against infidels. Any opinion to the contrary is worth what you paid for it. You would have better luck getting a “Born Again” Christian to forsake Jesus Christ – and that day will come if Islamic fascism is not stopped.

Military historians may someday show that Israel emulated the failed politically correct warfare strategy of the United States in Iraq (arguably the right war, but the wrong tactics). Modern intellectuals, political opportunists and those without military training have lost sight of history and the inviolate facts - all wars, without exception, are won with and by massive collateral damage, not by avoiding collateral damage. Battles can occasionally be won by precision strikes, but not wars – and particularly not wars for survival. The last man standing wins. It has always been and always will be, and the Islamic Wars will not end until the last man is standing. Muslims see their conflict, first with Israel and then Europe and the West, in exactly that light, supremely confident the last man standing will be a Muslim. Someday, liberals will realize that Islamic terrorism cannot be stopped with political correctness, only by overwhelming remorseless force. Until such a day that realists instead of opportunists warm the seats of Congress, U.S. State Department and the Kinneset, thousands if not millions will die at the altar of secular liberal fantasies.

War between Islam and Israel has but one purpose - to eliminate the nation-state of Israel. Ten thousand square miles of Jewish nationhood, established by the UN in 1948, has been under relentless assault by five million square miles of Muslim dominance, not counting Iran. It would be a really good thing if the Israeli sleeper were to awaken.

The logical extension of the United Nations' cumulative actions, after Israel has become a footnote in history, is to acquiesce to (foster) the eventual Islamic subjugation of France, Spain and Great Britain. If you reside in Europe, you’re next. Hopefully what remains of European civilization is paying attention. Those who are not concerned today can avail themselves of the southern United States border tomorrow or at their convenience. It is probably already too late for France, themselves descendants of Muslim occupiers centuries ago.

Equally troublesome is the speculation that the United States’ State Department must have intended by their actions to give the advantage and ultimate victory to Islam (Iran). Lacking additional information, why else would the United States sponsor a UN cease-fire resolution before Israel had the opportunity to dismantle or seriously degrade Hezbollah’s military capabilities? Assuming Israel is an ally, why did the United States of America not do more – much more? Having failed that test, why would the U.S. State Department orchestrate an unprecedented defeat for Israel at the hands of the United Nations? It is doubtful a U.S. government spokesman would frame the events this way, but they are just about the only ones in the world who would not.

Iran’s stated desire to annihilate Israel remains intact as a viable objective.

When all is said and done, Iran has accomplished its strategic objectives, i.e., reinvigorating Syrian dominance, isolating Jordan, reaching out and absorbing Hamas, rebuking the Arab League, fermenting Iraq’s collapse in a civil war of Iranian-instigated internal strife, undermining the internal stability of the governments of Great Britain and Europe, and ultimately unleashing Iran’s nuclear plans to establish a Muslim caliphate over the entire region by force of nuclear arms.

Can you think of any reason, other than wishful thinking, why Iran’s nuclear plans will not prevail?

Iranian strategic planning seems to have accurately calculated that Hezbollah would briefly lose control over southern Lebanon in the current military engagement. Iran had every reason to expect that with the help of the United Nations, Hezbollah would later reacquire and strengthen its control over Lebanon in traditional Islamic fashion, this time with UN legitimacy. Hezbollah will have sacrificed only a few hundred square miles in southern Lebanon which can easily be reacquired at a later date. In the interim, Iran and Syria will consolidate their gains. Hezbollah will set about to eliminate any remnants of the Lebanese Democracy movement known as the Cedars Revolution. Once Hezbollah has purged Lebanon of its remaining Christian influences, Shia Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere will carefully prepare for a wider and bloodier war with Israel, from all sides- and from within.

Iran and Syria correctly anticipated a lack of support for Israel in the main stream media and had no fear of a United States Congress consumed with self-interest - not unlike a pig at a trough of fresh slop. The European Union remains gripped in self-loathing and Islamophobia. At last sighting, the European Union, led by France – was seen flying in ever decreasing concentric circles in the process of assimilation by the Islamic Borg, only one small step by mankind behind Lebanon.

The outcome in Lebanon was all but inevitable. Even if the United States or Europe had seriously considered interfering in the conflict initiated by Hezbollah with Israel, Iran had every intention of using Muslim proxies embedded in European and United States populations as a distraction.

The European Union, to this day, will not label Hezbollah a terrorist organization.

The terrorist plot to take down numerous commercial airline flights over the Atlantic Ocean, and its timing, was unlikely a coincidence, regardless of what we’ve been led to believe about its homegrown origins. The terrorist plot was fortunately foiled, but from Iran’s perspective, as it turned out, it really wasn’t necessary and the distractions served their purpose. Muslims will rampage none-the-less to keep Great Britain preoccupied and cause the uninformed to question every government anti-terrorist move in self-doubt.

No one has to imagine the worst case scenario for western civilization. It is becoming a reality in our lifetime - a nuclear-armed Iranian-Syrian-Lebanese Islamic axis complete with international legitimacy, which completely envelopes Israel and is brazenly dedicated to Israel’s elimination (annihilation), and an axis of Islamic fascism whose hegemony now directly or indirectly controls Middle Eastern oil supplies.

Only one of two alternative explanations correlates easily with UN actions:

a. The United Nations has no intention of intervening in any conflict between Israel and Islam except as necessary to prevent Israel from gaining the upper hand, or

b. UN member nations choose to believe the imposed Hezbollah-Israeli ceasefire will somehow forestall a wider conflict in the Middle East, and that acquiring most of Lebanon will somehow magically satiate Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas.

It appears the Iranians closely studied the history of WWII, learning from the successes and mistakes of the Third Reich. If Adolph Hitler were still with us, he would commend Ahmadinejad.

Red State Patriot

Posted August 19, 2006 12:56 AM
Read more on Articles - Red State Patriot ~ Israel and Middle East