Did Pope Leo get Mexico to pay for it. Could he have built this same wall now? After all it would be un PC!
===
===
Obama's economic recovery charts!
Now that I have finished Dennis Ross' book I have restarted reading
"Lawrence in Arabia" and came upon the part where on October 31, 1917,
Britain sought to repay the help given them by Chaim Weizmann, a chemist
and ardent Zionist, by creating The Balfour Declaration which stated: "His
Majesty's Government views with favour, the establishment in Palestine of a
national home for the Jewish people,and will use their best endeavors to
facilitate the achievement of this object."
Some few years later, Weizmann and Faisal ibn Hussein, with Lawrence as
their intermediary, joined forces at The Paris Peace Conference and
called for a combined Arab-Jewish state in Palestine. This effort was
ultimately sabotaged by Britain and France.
The Big Four - Britain, France, Italy and The U.S met in Paris and prior to
President Wilson's arrival, George of Britain and Clemenceau of France
made a secret pact to divide up The Middle East.
Lawrence was opposed to a Jewish State believing Arabs would be
exercised. Weizmann understood and was very mindful not to proceed as
long as the war was ongoing. However, Weizmann knew in time, should
the state come to exist, it was critical that Jewish settlers be mindful
of the need to protect the sites of special interest to Arabs and Christians
and as the purchase of land began that too would become a sensitive
matter.
Who knows what would have ensued if The Balfour Declaration has been
implemented in support of Weizmann and Hussein's understanding?
The same issues that were of concern then remain as much today.
The only difference is that America is now left to confront and help clean
up the mess the Europeans created. (See 1 and 1a below.)
===
We have a run off (March 29) for Sheriff between Harris and Wilcher (my
candidate.)
Fortunately, unlike the 2016 presidential election, whomever wins the
election for sheriff, Savannah will be O.K.
===
I am no political pundit but I do believe if the Establishment undertakes a
concerted effort to defeat Trump, as rumored, it will cause the party to
lose worse than were Trump to be the candidate. Why? Because Trump
supporters are die hards, hate the Establishment and will feel justifiably
shafted and thus, will sit on their hands and probably represent more votes
than do those Establishment Party people. (See 2 and 2a below.)
If you listened to the above and Mitt Romney on Thursday,, as I did, I do not know whether you came to the same conclusion that I have but I believe he had every right to say what he did. However, i believe he was both late and probably unjustified.
Romney ran a terrible campaign, one he should have won, so it does seem a bit hypocritical for him to criticize the one Trump has run. Trump is doing a lot better at getting people, who believe America is heading in the wrong direction, energized.
Admittedly, when Trump speaks I wince but at least he brought to the fore that which has been in the back of people's minds and who were afraid to say it for fear of being called out by the elitists among us, the ones who promised they would turn matters around and confront Obama and then proceeded to bob and weave and never delivered. I find it somewhat disingenuous for them to be rising to the occasion now. If truth be told, their lack of effort their betrayal helped to create Trump. They greased the tracks so Trump could slide in under the radar while they were looking the other way and sitting on their hands.
Did Romney's attack on Trump include some kernels of truth. Yes! A resounding yes.
That said, was Romney wise to be the stalking horse for The Establishment? In my book he was not and , in the end, he will, in my unscientific opinion, do more harm than good because he will gain more adherents for Trump now yet, weaken him when the election rolls round. Should Trump lose, much of his loss will be because of the inside attacks on him by those whose track record has been less than sterling.
Maybe Trump has gone about his campaign in a most inelegant way but he stood up and fought the Establishment Crowd, he confounded them and he called into question their failed leadership or lack thereof. For this he should be congratulated not ridiculed but then whoever said politics was a nice profession and those who pursue it always appeal to our better instincts.
Finally, for Romney to simply be critical of Trump and then find himself incapable of supporting someone is another action I find reprehensible. Did he purposely seek to ding everyone else as if he was a more righteous and gifted candidate?
Carson's apparent withdrawal from the race probably helps Rubio
and/or Kasich a little. Carson is a principled person, ran a campaign that he
can be proud of but lacked the fire and temperament and was never able
to capture enough votes but he did capture the hearts. Good man!
===
Ettinger concurs with Ross. (See 3 below.)
https://www.youtube.com/embed/BHGmmKDngtU
and
I seldom disagree with Sowell, but this time I believe he is wrong to support
Cruz. (See 4 below.)
===
Dick
==========================================================
1)Michele Bachmann Reveals Prophetic Fulfillment in Current Events in Russia, Middle East
“And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the Kohanim the Leviim. And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them.” Deuteronomy 17:18-19 (The Israel Bible™)
"Lawrence in Arabia" and came upon the part where on October 31, 1917,
Britain sought to repay the help given them by Chaim Weizmann, a chemist
and ardent Zionist, by creating The Balfour Declaration which stated: "His
Majesty's Government views with favour, the establishment in Palestine of a
national home for the Jewish people,and will use their best endeavors to
facilitate the achievement of this object."
Some few years later, Weizmann and Faisal ibn Hussein, with Lawrence as
their intermediary, joined forces at The Paris Peace Conference and
called for a combined Arab-Jewish state in Palestine. This effort was
ultimately sabotaged by Britain and France.
The Big Four - Britain, France, Italy and The U.S met in Paris and prior to
President Wilson's arrival, George of Britain and Clemenceau of France
made a secret pact to divide up The Middle East.
Lawrence was opposed to a Jewish State believing Arabs would be
exercised. Weizmann understood and was very mindful not to proceed as
long as the war was ongoing. However, Weizmann knew in time, should
the state come to exist, it was critical that Jewish settlers be mindful
of the need to protect the sites of special interest to Arabs and Christians
and as the purchase of land began that too would become a sensitive
matter.
Who knows what would have ensued if The Balfour Declaration has been
implemented in support of Weizmann and Hussein's understanding?
The same issues that were of concern then remain as much today.
The only difference is that America is now left to confront and help clean
up the mess the Europeans created. (See 1 and 1a below.)
===
We have a run off (March 29) for Sheriff between Harris and Wilcher (my
candidate.)
Fortunately, unlike the 2016 presidential election, whomever wins the
election for sheriff, Savannah will be O.K.
===
I am no political pundit but I do believe if the Establishment undertakes a
concerted effort to defeat Trump, as rumored, it will cause the party to
lose worse than were Trump to be the candidate. Why? Because Trump
supporters are die hards, hate the Establishment and will feel justifiably
shafted and thus, will sit on their hands and probably represent more votes
than do those Establishment Party people. (See 2 and 2a below.)
If you listened to the above and Mitt Romney on Thursday,, as I did, I do not know whether you came to the same conclusion that I have but I believe he had every right to say what he did. However, i believe he was both late and probably unjustified.
Romney ran a terrible campaign, one he should have won, so it does seem a bit hypocritical for him to criticize the one Trump has run. Trump is doing a lot better at getting people, who believe America is heading in the wrong direction, energized.
Admittedly, when Trump speaks I wince but at least he brought to the fore that which has been in the back of people's minds and who were afraid to say it for fear of being called out by the elitists among us, the ones who promised they would turn matters around and confront Obama and then proceeded to bob and weave and never delivered. I find it somewhat disingenuous for them to be rising to the occasion now. If truth be told, their lack of effort their betrayal helped to create Trump. They greased the tracks so Trump could slide in under the radar while they were looking the other way and sitting on their hands.
Did Romney's attack on Trump include some kernels of truth. Yes! A resounding yes.
That said, was Romney wise to be the stalking horse for The Establishment? In my book he was not and , in the end, he will, in my unscientific opinion, do more harm than good because he will gain more adherents for Trump now yet, weaken him when the election rolls round. Should Trump lose, much of his loss will be because of the inside attacks on him by those whose track record has been less than sterling.
Maybe Trump has gone about his campaign in a most inelegant way but he stood up and fought the Establishment Crowd, he confounded them and he called into question their failed leadership or lack thereof. For this he should be congratulated not ridiculed but then whoever said politics was a nice profession and those who pursue it always appeal to our better instincts.
Finally, for Romney to simply be critical of Trump and then find himself incapable of supporting someone is another action I find reprehensible. Did he purposely seek to ding everyone else as if he was a more righteous and gifted candidate?
Carson's apparent withdrawal from the race probably helps Rubio
and/or Kasich a little. Carson is a principled person, ran a campaign that he
can be proud of but lacked the fire and temperament and was never able
to capture enough votes but he did capture the hearts. Good man!
===
Ettinger concurs with Ross. (See 3 below.)
https://www.youtube.com/embed/BHGmmKDngtU
and
12-Year-Old Girl Latest Executioner for Islamic State
A 12-year old girl who is under the control of the Islamic State is the brutal terror group’s latest executioner.
Speaking on Wednesday, March 2, a local source in Ninveh toldAlsumaria News, “On the evening of March 2, a 12-year-old Islamic State girl executed five women including a doctor who refused to take care of ISIS fighters who were injured during an air strike conducted by the international coalition. She shot the victims in the El-Razalani (Ghazlani) camp [in Mosul, Iraq]. This was considered to be the first time ISIS used a young girl as an executioner.”
Mosul has been under the control of the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) since June 2014. Since the takeover, residents of the city have been suffering from a security and humanitarian crisis under the extreme strictures of the group.
===I seldom disagree with Sowell, but this time I believe he is wrong to support
Cruz. (See 4 below.)
===
Dick
==========================================================
1)Michele Bachmann Reveals Prophetic Fulfillment in Current Events in Russia, Middle East
By Adam Berkowitz (no relationship that I know about.)
“And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the Kohanim the Leviim. And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them.” Deuteronomy 17:18-19 (The Israel Bible™)
In an recent interview, Michele Bachmann, a four-term former member of the House of Representatives, reaffirmed her belief that the End of Days is near and revealed how current Middle East events mirror Biblical prophecy.
Bachmann has stated many times that the world is moving towards Armageddon, with grave implications for the future of Israel. Her opponents criticize her for framing political issues in Biblical terms, but her Biblical perspective allows her to view imminent catastrophe in a positive light, accepting it as part of God’s plan.
A devout Evangelical Christian, Bachmann views world events through a Messianic lens, a perspective she describes as “a Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other”. Like many rabbis, she sees Russia’s involvement in Syria as the precursor to the prophesied War of Gog and Magog. In a radio interview on the Olive Tree Ministries website earlier this month, she spoke passionately about the situation in Syria in the context of Biblical prophecies about the end of days.
Bachmann interpreted Russian intervention in Syria as the precursor to Putin’s more complex regional aspirations, explaining, “They would partition it so that Eastern Syria will effectively be considered disputed occupied territory by the Islamic State (ISIS). The world is about to grant legitimacy to the Islamic State, which will have control over Eastern Syria and Iraq.”
Noting the recent discovery of massive natural gas reserves in the Mediterranean and shale oil in the Golan, she speculated that Putin intends to control Western Syria. “If [Russia] can control that Eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, so that they can have that port, that’s what they’re really interested in: the potential offshore energy.”
She also predicted that Putin would invade Israel in partnership with Iran and supported by China. This move will give Russia a power base in the Middle East to control the world supply of oil and natural gas, thereby creating what Bachmann calls “a global world order”.
This, Bachmann said, is a fulfillment of Ezekiel when he describes the apocalyptic battles of Gog and Magog in chapters 38 and 39. She identifies Russia as Magog, described in Ezekiel as being “Rosh” from “the far north”. As a Christian, Bachmann bases her beliefs on the Bible, saying her theory about Syria “lines up with scripture.”
Her platform on social issues is firmly rooted in the Bible and the belief that “Biblical basis for society is the key to happiness.”
Bachmann mentioned Isaiah 12:3, a key Biblical verse which is the basis of much support for Israel. “Any nation that accepts God and his principles is blessed, and those who push away are cursed. That’s what we’re seeing happen to the United States,” she said in the interview. “We will suffer the consequences as a result.”
Her strongest criticisms were saved for the Obama-brokered deal with Iran over its nuclear program. She saw the unanimous UN Security council vote in support of the deal as fulfilling the Zechariah 12:3, which prophesied that the nations of the world will unite against Israel. She cited the UN vote as fulfilling that prophecy, being the first time the entire world has gone against Israel.
Bachmann argued that Obama’s agenda threatens the world and will bring about the prophesied end of days. Obama’s plan, according to Bachmann, is to become Secretary General of the UN, expanding its power in order to actively bring the US under its authority. For Bachmann, this is “foretold”, as she cites Acts I and Acts II from the New Testament.
“If we were smart enough with our Bible, we would know that,” she said with absolute certainty. “This is about the Lord speaking to the world, saying, ‘I am coming soon’”.
Obama responded by mocking her. At the White House Correspondents Dinner last March, the President scoffed at Bachmann’s prediction he would “bring about the Biblical End of Days.”
“Now that’s a legacy,” he quipped. “That’s big. I mean Lincoln, Washington, they didn’t do that.”
Despite viewing current events in an apocalyptic framework, she remains optimistic. According to Bachmann, grim world events herald in the messianic era. In an interview on One Place last April, she expressed this in no uncertain terms.
“We see the destruction, but this was a destruction that was foretold,” she said. “The prophets in the Old Testament, they longed to look into the days that we live in, they longed to be a part of these days. That’s why these are not fearful times. These are the most exciting days in history.”
1a)Israel to launch one of the most advanced missile defense systems in the world, with U.S. help
1a)Israel to launch one of the most advanced missile defense systems in the world, with U.S. help
Israel will soon begin to deploy one of the most sophisticated missile defense systems in the world. (TWP)
By Ruth Eglash and William Booth
TEL AVIV — A joint exercise now being conducted between thousands of Israeli forces and the U.S. European Command represents a final test before Israel begins to deploy one of the most sophisticated missile defense systems in the world.
When it is complete, Israel’s multibillion-dollar rocket and missile air defense system will be far superior to anything in the Middle East and will likely rival, and in some ways surpass, in speed and targeting, air defenses deployed by Europe and the United States, its developers say.
The United States has provided more than $3.3 billion over the past 10 years to support the defensive system, which will be able to knock down not only ballistic missiles but also orbiting satellites.
[Israeli leaders condemn Iran deal, ‘one of the darkest days in world history’]
Though Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Obama have had a strained relationship, rubbed raw by their deep disagreement over the Iran nuclear deal, U.S. spending on Israel’s air defenses has soared in the last decade, from $133 million in 2006 to $619 million in 2015.
A photograph provided by the Israeli Ministry of Defense shows a launch of the David’s Sling missile defense system. (Israeli Ministry of Defense/Associated Press)
The Israeli defense establishment and its American partners have designed a layered system that will allow the Jewish state to respond to simultaneous attacks from multiple fronts — the relatively crude homemade rockets lobbed by Hamas from the Gaza Strip, the mid-range rockets and missiles fired by the Shiite militants of Hezbollah from Lebanon, and the long-range ballistic missiles being developed by Iran that could carry conventional or chemical warheads.
In addition, Israel’s new X-Band radar will allow its forces to detect incoming missiles 500 or 600 miles out, vs. 100 miles, the current limit of their radar tracking systems, according to summaries of the systems provided to Congress.
[Congress seeks better deal for U.S. contractors on Israeli Iron Dome system]
“I define the system as pioneering,” said Uzi Rubin, former head director of Israel’s missile defense program. “Even the United States doesn’t have anything as complex, as sophisticated.”
The system will also be able to prioritize incoming rockets and missiles by calculating their trajectories. Some missiles may not be intercepted, if their targets are fields and farms, but projectiles that would hit populated areas or important infrastructure — such as military bases, oil refineries and nuclear facilities — would be stopped.
The Israeli missile defense system is being built in partnership with U.S. defense contractors, including Raytheon, Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
The Israelis are planning to start deploying their coordinated system of radars, launchers and interceptors over the coming months, though there have been delays in the past, they warn.
In December, Israel and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency celebrated successful tests of two new ballistic missile defense systems — David’s Sling, which is designed to intercept short- and medium-range threats, and Arrow-3, which is intended to stop long-range attacks and knock out enemy targets in space by deploying “kamikaze satellites,” or “kill vehicles,” that track their targets.
The David's Sling and Arrow-3 will join Iron Dome and the existing Arrow-2 in coming months.
The Iron Dome batteries were responsible for intercepting 90 percent of their targets during Israel’s war with Hamas in the summer of 2014, according to Israel Defense Forces, when Hamas fired 4,000 rockets and mortars at Israel from the adjacent Gaza Strip.
On Tuesday, the Defense Ministry announced that major components of the David’s Sling defense system will be delivered to the Israel Air Force “over the course of several weeks.”
Israel called David’s Sling “the world’s most revolutionary innovation in the family of interceptor systems.” The system is designed primarily to handle the kinds of rockets and missiles, built by Iran and Russia, and now in the possession of the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon and the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad.
Beyond the threat posed by the splintering of Syria, Israel is worried that Syrian missiles could be transferred to Hezbollah or acquired by the Islamic State or al-Qaeda.
In a recent speech, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened that his militia’s missiles could strike ammonia storage tanks in Israel’s Haifa port in a future showdown with Israel, warning that the damage would be equivalent to an atomic bomb and could kill 800,000 people.
Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon, the Israel Defense Forces head of operations, said Hezbollah could have upward of 100,000 rockets and missiles stored in Lebanon.
In 2006, before the deployment of Iron Dome, Hezbollah fired about 4,000 projectiles at Israel’s northern cities, causing some 40 civilian deaths and significant damage.
Israel’s military leaders warn civilians that no air defense system is perfect — or even close to it.
“There is no hermetic defense or total security that will intercept everything fired at Israel. In the next real war, rockets will fall on the State of Israel,” said Brig. Gen. Zvika Haimovich, commander of the Israel’s Aerial Defense Division.
Haimovich briefed reporters last week in the middle of “Juniper Cobra,” a biennial U.S.-Israel air defense drill, scheduled to end on Thursday.
More than 1,700 U.S. soldiers and sailors, alongside American civilians and contractors, are taking part in the exercise, which is focused on computer simulations of coordinated and sustained air attacks on Israel from multiple fronts.
In such a scenario, U.S. air defense probably would come into play, and the drill is designed not only to test Israel’s soon-to-be deployed systems, but also to improve how well U.S. and Israeli assets can communicate and coordinate their response.
“The purpose of this exercise is to improve interoperability of our air defense forces and our combined ability to defend against air and missile attack,” said Lt. Gen. Timothy Ray, U.S 3rd Air Force commander.
“And just as important,” Ray said, “it signals our resolve to support Israel and strive for peace in the Middle East.”
================================================================================
2) GOP Establishment Going 'All In' to Stop Trump
The GOP establishment is going nuts. Super Tuesday didn’t go well for Marco Rubio, and it didn’t go well for any of the old guard in the GOP who hoped voters would somehow “come to their senses” and not support Donald Trump. Instead, Trump had an amazing night, and conservative Ted Cruz won three states to add to the establishment frustration.
2a) Is Romney Ramping Up to Run?
Is Mitt Romney ramping up for a long shot third party bid in an effort to stop Trump?
=======================================================================
3) Is the Palestinian issue the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict?
#1 The two-way-street, mutually-beneficial US-Israel: http://bit.ly/16FP01N
#2 The Jewish-Arab demographic balance: http://bit.ly/1I60R9h
#3 The US-Israel strategic partnership: http://bit.ly/1RniWWB
2) GOP Establishment Going 'All In' to Stop Trump
The GOP establishment is going nuts. Super Tuesday didn’t go well for Marco Rubio, and it didn’t go well for any of the old guard in the GOP who hoped voters would somehow “come to their senses” and not support Donald Trump. Instead, Trump had an amazing night, and conservative Ted Cruz won three states to add to the establishment frustration.
As noted in the Associated Press story running on GOPUSA, “Republican leaders searched on Wednesday for a last-chance option that could derail Donald Trump’s momentum fueled by seven commanding Super Tuesday victories.”
Overshadowed by Trump’s wins, Ted Cruz came in a close second in the night’s delegate haul, thanks to a win in his home state of Texas. The strong showing bolstered the senator’s case to be the party’s Trump alternative, even as rival Marco Rubio vowed to continue his fight.The unrelenting division represents the biggest crisis for the GOP in decades, with the party seemingly on track to nominate a presidential candidate it can’t control. Some party leaders are considering the once unthinkable option of aligning behind Cruz, whom many dislike, while others are talking of a brokered convention. Some influential outsiders even raise the option of forming a new party.
In the story, liberal Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who is no fan of Cruz, even suggests he’d support Cruz if it meant stopping Trump.
“Ted Cruz is not my favorite by any means,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, a former candidate whose disdain for his Texas colleague is well known, told CBS News. “But we may be in a position where rallying around Ted Cruz is the only way to stop Donald Trump and I’m not so sure that would work.”
And how about this from GOP blogger Erick Erickson:
“It may be necessary for men and women of principle within the party to set the self-detonation sequence as they escape the ship to a new party,” wrote conservative blogger Erick Erickson. Erickson was among those calling on the party to coalesce around Cruz.
John Nolte at Breitbart.com covers a recent interview that GOP pundit Bill Kristol had on MSNBC. In the interview, Kristol says that it would be better for Hillary Clinton to win than Donald Trump.
KRISTOL: You have to beat him in Florida and Ohio, the first two winner-take-all states, which means there has to be a de facto agreement between the opposition candidates — between the resistance to Trump, which I am proud to be a part of, because I think he’d be a terrible nominee and a terrible president…SCARBOROUGH: You have the authority to broker that deal right now?KRISTOL: Well, they need to. They need to defer to Rubio in Florida and probably to Kasich in Ohio, and say, or imply, that if you are a Cruz voter in Ohio, and if you look up the day before the primary and it’s Trump 42%, Kasich 35% — vote for Kasich. And the truth is if Trump doesn’t win Florida and Ohio, it remains very much of an open race. …Donald Trump [so far] has 35% of the popular vote and 47% of the delegates. That’s a lot better than having 24% of the popular vote and 25% of the delegates, granted. …JOHN HEILEMANN: Just to go a little further on this topic of what Bill’s advocating: As you talk more and more to Republicans, who will say to you privately and sometimes publicly, that they would rather vote for Hillary Clinton than for Donald Trump, [these are the] people who are going to try to stop him — their attitude is: We know that would happen at a contested convention if we took the nomination away from a Donald Trump [who has won through] a plurality of delegates.What would happen is that we would likely alienate his supporters and we would likely lose the presidential election. But their position is that it would be better for us to lose the [general] election than to have Donald Trump tear the Party in half as the nominee.Now you can say that’s suicidal, but that is the posture of people [worried] about the negative effects down ballot.
2a) Is Romney Ramping Up to Run?
Is Mitt Romney ramping up for a long shot third party bid in an effort to stop Trump?
Mitt Romney, the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 2012, will deliver an address Thursday on "the state of the 2016 presidential race."
In a news release sent to press, no further details on what he will say were provided. But Romney, no fan of Donald Trump, has been inserting himself into presidential politics recently. He has taken to Twitter to challenge Trump to release his tax returns, saying that the returns will contain "a bombshell."
Will this work, or will voters reject Romney like they did in 2012?
=======================================================================
3) Is the Palestinian issue the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict?
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”Please clique: http://bit.ly/1LW4hKD
1. Erroneous assumptions produce erroneous policies, as has been the case of all US initiatives towards the Palestinian issue, which has been erroneously perceived – by the US foreign policy establishment – to be the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
2. For example, the first 1948/49 Arab-Israeli War was not launched, by Arab countries, on behalf of Palestinian aspirations. TheArabs launched the war in order to advance their own particular – not Palestinian - interests through the occupation of the strategic area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. In fact, the Palestinians blame Arab leaders for what they term “the 1948 debacle."
3. Moreover, the 1948/49 War was aimed to prevent the establishment of an “infidel” Jewish entity on a land, which Muslims believe is divinely endowed to the “believers” (Waqf). The Secretary General of the Arab League, Abdul Rahman Azzam, stated: “The establishment of a Jewish state would lead to a war of extermination like the Mongolian massacre and the Crusades….”
4. Jordan joined the 1948/49 War, in order to expand its territory to the Mediterranean. Egypt wanted to foil Jordan’s ambitiousstrategy, and therefore deployed a military force to the Jerusalem region to check the Jordanian advance. Iraq wanted to control the oil pipeline from the Kirkuk oil wells to the Haifa refineries, and Syria aimed at conquering some southern sections of so called “Greater Syria.”
5. At the end of the 1948/9 war, Iraq occupied Samaria (the northern West Bank), but transferred it to Jordan, not to the Palestinians.Jordan occupied Judea (the southern West Bank), and annexed both Judea & Samaria to the Hashemite Kingdom on the East Bank of the Jordan River, prohibiting Palestinian activities and punishing/expelling Palestinian activists. Egypt conquered the Gaza Strip, imposed a nightly curfew, which was terminated when Israel gained control of Gaza in 1967, prohibited Palestinian national activitiesand expelled Palestinian leaders. Syria occupied and annexed the al-Hama area in the Golan Heights. In 1948, the Arab League formed the “All Palestine Government” as a department within the Arab League headquarters in Cairo, dissolving it in 1959.
6. Independent of the Palestinian issue, the 1956 Sinai War was triggered by the megalomaniacal aspirations of Egyptian President Nasser who concluded a major arms deal with Czechoslovakia and a joint Egypt-Syria-Jordan military command against Arab rivals and Israel. He nationalized the British-French owned Suez Canal, supported the Algerian uprising against France, blockaded Israel’s southern port of Eilat, and unleashed Gaza-based terrorism against Israel, aiming to occupy parts of southern Israel (the Negev).
6. Independent of the Palestinian issue, the 1956 Sinai War was triggered by the megalomaniacal aspirations of Egyptian President Nasser who concluded a major arms deal with Czechoslovakia and a joint Egypt-Syria-Jordan military command against Arab rivals and Israel. He nationalized the British-French owned Suez Canal, supported the Algerian uprising against France, blockaded Israel’s southern port of Eilat, and unleashed Gaza-based terrorism against Israel, aiming to occupy parts of southern Israel (the Negev).
7. Irrespective of the Palestinian issue, the 1967 (Six Day) War was launched by Israel in response to Egypt’s aggression(blockade of Eilat, the oil port of Israel; Egyptian deployment of troops into Sinai, deployed toward Israel in violation of the demilitarization agreement; the Egypt-Syria-Jordan Military Pact aimed at Israel’s destruction); the Syrian shelling of Israeli communities below the Golan Heights; and Jordanian shelling of Jerusalem.
8. Regardless of the Palestinian issue, the 1969-70 Egypt-Israel War of Attrition along the Suez Canal was an extension of the 1967 War.
9. Unrelated to the Palestinian issue, the 1973 War was initiated by Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq, in order to destroy Israel and advanced their own goals.
10. The 1982 PLO-Israel War in Lebanon - pre-empting a grand scale PLO assault on northern Israel -was the first war with no involvement of Arab military forces. The war erupted on June 6, but the Arab League convened an emergency session only in September, after the PLO had already been expelled from Beirut.
11. The 1987-1992 and the 2000-2003 First and Second Palestinian Intifada were not transformed into an Arab-Israeli war. Arabs shed rhetoric, but no blood nor resources, for the Palestinians.
12. The 2008/9, 2012 and 2014 Israel’s wars against the Gaza-based Palestinian terrorism were not top priorities for Arab leaders, most of whom blamed Hamas for the eruption of the 2014 war.
13. The erroneous assumption that the Arab-Israeli conflict was triggered by the Palestinian issue has led to erroneous policies. It’s time for Western policy-makers to disengage from over-simplification and reengage with the complex reality of the Mideast.
#1 The two-way-street, mutually-beneficial US-Israel: http://bit.ly/16FP01N
#2 The Jewish-Arab demographic balance: http://bit.ly/1I60R9h
#3 The US-Israel strategic partnership: http://bit.ly/1RniWWB
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, Jerusalem, Israel, "Second Thought: US-Israel Initiative"
========================================================
4) Last Chance for America? Part II
By Thomas Sowell
The worst political blunder of all time, according to scientist Freeman Dyson, was the decision of the emperor of China in 1433 to cut off his country from the outside world. In the wake of that decision, China lost its position in the forefront of human achievements and fell behind, over the centuries, to become a Third World country.
Before the end of this month, the United States of America may break that record for the worst political blunder of all time. Professor Dyson attributed the Chinese emperor's blunder to "powerful people pursuing partisan squabbles and neglecting the long-range interests of the empire." That can be our path to disaster as well.
After the results of "Super Tuesday," we find ourselves with front-runners in their respective parties who each could, as President of the United States, take the decline of America under the Obama administration, even further down, to a point of no return.
As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was in charge of the foreign policy that destroyed governments in Egypt and Libya that were no threat to America's interests or allies, and plunged both countries into a turmoil from which only Egypt managed to rescue itself, while Libya has become another hotbed of terrorist activity.
Yet Secretary Clinton is running on her "experience" -- even though it is an experience of unmitigated disasters for America, around the world. Her e-mail scandals and lies are important mainly as symptoms of her utter disregard of anything other than her own financial and political interests.
While Hillary Clinton seems, for all practical purposes, to be unstoppable in her quest for the Democrats' nomination, Donald Trump is by no means inevitable on the Republican side. But he may become unstoppable after the next round of primaries, especially if he wins in winner-take-all states.
Most of Trump's wins in various state primaries have been achieved without winning a majority of the votes. Yet these wins can create an impression of great victories, even when most Republican voters voted against Trump. The fracturing of the majority vote among numerous other candidates is the key.
What prevents the anti-Trump majority from coming together in support of one candidate who can defeat Trump? Only the kinds of narrow political squabbles that ruined China.
Senator Ted Cruz has the best track record against Trump, having beaten him in three states, even with the majority vote split among several candidates. But the Republican establishment would prefer Senator Marco Rubio, who has won only one state and is trailing in the polls in his home state of Florida.
Perhaps most important of all, there are signs that -- if push comes to shove -- the Republican establishment would prefer Trump himself to Ted Cruz.
Why? Because, despite Trump's reckless rhetoric and shallow reasoning, he is a deal-maker who will not let principles stand in the way of anything that promotes the ego of Donald Trump.
Senator Cruz, on the other hand, has repeatedly defied the Republican leadership in the Senate. Whatever the merits or lack of merits of his actions in particular cases, he has clearly shown himself not to be one of those who go along to get along.
Former president Jimmy Carter has criticized Senator Cruz for not being "malleable." No one was more "malleable" in the face of America's enemies than Jimmy Carter, both when he was president and after he left office, and cozied up to Communist dictators in Cuba and North Korea. We don't need that kind of malleability in a President of the United States.
Even if we accept the criticism of Senator Cruz's political enemies and critics that he is "opportunistic," that charge loses some of its sting if he becomes President of the United States. What greater opportunity is there for him at that point? Becoming a great president, which is certainly what this country needs.
Perhaps a political near-death experience thus far will sober up both Cruz and his opponents into a realization that their cooperation is the only thing that makes sense for the country.
But politicians do not always do things that make sense for the country, whether in 15th century China or 21st century America. But we will know the answer to that question by the end of this month. And generations yet unborn may have to live with the consequences of that answer.
=========================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment