President Trump Is Not The Only One Who Has Noticed This

Yesterday One America News posted a quote from French President Macron:

The president of France says the Iran Nuclear Deal is no longer enough to contain Tehran’s aggressive behavior in the Middle East.

Emmanuel Macron made the comments Wednesday on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

The French president said Iran recently increased pressure on its neighbors, and has conducted several ballistic missile tests.

Macron went on to propose adding new components to the Nuclear Deal in order to contain Tehran’s de-stabilizing activities in the region.

The first thing President Macron needs to realize is that there are no components that could be added to the Nuclear Deal that would cause Iran to stop its de-stabilizing activities in the region–the purpose of the deal was to provide cover for those activities.

Iran is an Islamic Republic run by religious leaders. We need to remember that the Ottoman Empire, which was a Muslim Caliphate, existed until the early 1900’s. The one thing the Sunni and Shiite Muslims agree on is that they want to establish a Muslim Caliphate in the Middle East to replace the fallen Ottoman Empire. There are two principles in Islam that make it difficult for western nations to counter this effort–taqiyya and hudna. Taqiyya is the concept in Islamic law that translates as “deceit or dissimulation,” particularly toward infidels (Quran 3:28 and 16:106). Hudna is loosely defined as a ten-year truce, but historically was a peace treaty used to the advantage of Islam when it found itself in a state of temporary weakness. In other words, a break in which to rearm.

Unfortunately, I seriously doubt that western nations are going to be able to prevent Iran from having full nuclear capabilities. Israel, acting alone, may be able to achieve this, but would be (at least publicly) condemned by the rest of the world for taking action against Iran.

Probably the best thing western nations could do would be to immediately end the Iran Nuclear agreement and put full sanctions on Iran (with the understanding that Russia, China, North Korea, and a few other nations would ignore those sanctions). Until all of the world sees the danger of a nuclear Iran, a nuclear Iran is not only possible–it is likely. Meanwhile, enemies of the United States can use Iran as a weapon to keep America involved in a never-ending military adventure in the Middle East.

Congress Needs To Stop Any Further Releases From Guantanamo

Yesterday Front Page Magazine reported that President Obama has released Mashur Abdallah Ahmed al Sabri from Guantanamo Bay detention center and sent him to Saudi Arabia as a free man.

The article reports:

Walid bin Attash, a planner of the USS Cole bombing and who also played a role in the 9/11 attack, is still at Gitmo. His trial continues to drag on while he and his lawyers play games. Rahim Hussein al-Nashiri, another of the planners, is still awaiting trial. But Mashur Abdallah Ahmed al Sabri, one of the members of the USS Cole cell, has already been released by Barack Obama from Guantanamo Bay.

Sabri was rated as a high risk terrorist who is ”is likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies”, but that was no obstacle for Obama who had already fired one Secretary of Defense for being slow to free dangerous Al Qaeda terrorists and was browbeating his latest appointee over the same issue. 

The very paperwork that was used as the basis for the decision to free Sabri describes him as “a member of a Yemeni al-Qaida cell directly involved with the USS Cole attack”. This cell “conducted surveillance” on the targeted vessel and “prepared explosives for the bombing”. Sabri had been arrested in Yemen for his involvement in the attack before he managed to make his way to Afghanistan.

Now he is a free man and has been sent back to the homeland of terrorism, Saudi Arabia.

After praising the “beautiful religious tradition” of Islam, which the USS Cole terrorists had “twisted”, President Clinton had promised that, “America will not stop standing guard”. 

But under him, it never even started standing guard. 

I understand that President Obama made a promise to close down the detention center at Guantanamo before he leaves office, but his actions are putting American soldiers at risk. The recidivism rate of Guantanamo prisoners has been disputed–claims range from less than 20 percent to over 80 percent. Either way, the death of any American soldiers at the hands of former Guantanamo prisoners is totally unacceptable. Congress needs to take action against these continuing prisoner releases. American lives are at stake.

A Double Standard Abounds

For whatever reason, the Obama Administration seems to want to be Iran‘s best friend. The Administration is willing to disregard totally any human rights violations in Iran and dismiss any aggressive military action by Iran in an instant. This represents a major shift in America‘s Middle East Policy. The results are interesting. Saudi Arabia and Israel are beginning to form an alliance with other Middle Eastern countries that fear a nuclear Iran. The countries in the Middle East are much more aware of Iran’s military aspirations than the Obama Administration seems to be.

Tensions in the Middle East increased this past weekend as Saudi Arabia executed forty-seven people. Those executed included Shia cleric and political activist Nimr al-Nimr. The execution resulted in protests in Shiite countries in the Middle East and the burning of the Saudi embassy in Iran. The thing to remember here is that any protest in Iran that is allowed to proceed was sponsored by the government. Iranian citizens who don’t show up to approved protests can face unpleasant consequences.

CNN reported today:

Hillary Clinton said Sunday Saudi Arabia’s recent execution of 47 people, including Shia Muslim cleric Nimr al-Nimr raises “serious questions” that the U.S. needs to ask the country’s government.

“Clearly this raises serious questions that we have to raise directly with the Saudi government,” Clinton said in response to a Derry town hall question about how she would handle the situation as president.

“We have governments we work with on a number of issues whose policies and values are antithetical to ours, to be just blunt about it. And yet who also have certain interests with us that we are involved in,” she said.

Clinton said she joined other leaders in “statements of concern” about the executions, specifically calling out the Obama administration, European governments and human rights groups.

Our alliance with Saudi Arabia has been somewhat prickly. There are still twenty-eight pages of the 9/11 report that are classified, and many who have seen the report but are not allowed to discuss the content of those pages have implied that they do relate to our relationship with Saudi Arabia. The hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia.

When we form alliances with non-western countries, we always run the risk of supporting behavior that is contrary to our basic beliefs. Iran throws homosexuals off of buildings, Saudi Arabia refused to allow women to drive, and building Christian churches is not permitted in either Iran or Saudi Arabia.

As much as I feel that Saudi Arabia’s human rights record is deplorable and I feel that they are funding a large part of radical Islam, I do not consider it wise to shift our alliance from Saudi Arabia to Iran. Iran has been directly targeting Americans for decades. Saudi Arabia has simply turned a blind eye to the Wahabi Islam that has grown up within its borders.

In his first inaugural address, Thomas Jefferson stated the following:

Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations: entangling alliances with none.”

When I first encountered that statement, I totally disagreed. Now I see the wisdom of it. However, I would amend it to recommend that we form necessary alliances only with people who share our values. I don’t know how well that would work in today’s world, but obviously what we are currently doing is not working very well.

 

Who’s Who In The Middle East

CBN News posted a story today that provides a little bit of background about the continuing conflict in the Middle East. It seems rather ironic that ISIS and Iran, (Shia vs. Sunni) Islam agree on “death to America” and “death to Israel,” but are fighting each other to the death. So what is going on?

The article explains:

“The Sunni and the Shia now are very much at loggerheads,” he (Matthew Levitt, with the Washington Institute) explained. “And while they may share hatred of Israel, they may share hatred of the West — certainly, suspicion of the West, this sectarianism is the dominant issue right now.”

The main battleground right now for this intra-Islam conflict is Syria.

On the Sunni side, there are ISIS, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups. These groups, who’ve also been known to battle each other, have been supported to various degrees by Sunni governments in the region, such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

On the Shia side are Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, both of whom are propping up the regime of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.

This Sunni-Shia conflict is also raging in Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen.

Mr. Levitt explained that Sunni Muslims make up about 85 percent of the world’s Muslim population, while Shia make up about 15 percent.

Although the Islamic governments in the Middle East all tend to be repressive, not all of these governments support terrorism. One of the interesting consequences of the ongoing conflict between Sunni and Shia and of Iran’s continuing push to obtain nuclear weapons is the alliance that is growing between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Egypt has dealt with the Muslim Brotherhood, and Jordan and Saudi Arabia are in the sights of the Brotherhood. The plan the Brotherhood voiced a few years ago was to take down the dictatorships in the Middle East, then take down the governments ruled by royal families. That was to be the basis of the new caliphate which both the Sunni and Shia Muslims would like to establish. The debate is not about establishing the caliphate–the debate is over who will control it once it is established. All things considered, ISIS is no more brutal than the government of Iran–they are simply more pubic about it. It won’t matter whether the Sunnis or the Shia control the caliphate–the caliphate will be brutal.

Removed From The Terrorist Threat List

I am not sure how a group goes about getting removed from the Terrorist Threat List put out by the National Intelligence Agency, but Iran and Hezbollah have done it.

The Times of Israel reported yesterday:

An annual report delivered recently to the US Senate by James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, removed Iran and Hezbollah from its list of terrorism threats, after years in which they featured in similar reports.

The unclassified version of the Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Communities, dated February 26, 2015 (PDF), noted Iran’s efforts to combat Sunni extremists, including those of the ultra-radical Islamic State group, who were perceived to constitute the preeminent terrorist threat to American interests worldwide.

Iran has been funding terrorism in the Middle East since the 1978 revolution. They have provided IED’s to Iraq and Afghanistan, killing and maiming American troops. Hezbollah has never made any secret of the fact that they are terrorists.

The National Intelligence report states:

We believe that this results from a combination of diplomatic interests (the United States’ talks with Iran about a nuclear deal) with the idea that Iran could assist in the battle against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq and maybe even in the battle against jihadist terrorism in other countries,” the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center said in an analysis of the report (Hebrew PDF). It also noted the Iran and Hezbollah were both listed as terrorism threats in the assessment of another American body, the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) and Lebanese Hezbollah are instruments of Iran’s foreign policy and its ability to project power in Iraq, Syria, and beyond,” that assessment, also submitted to the Senate of February 26, said in its section on terrorism. “Hezbollah continues to support the Syrian regime, pro-regime militants and Iraqi Shia militants in Syria. Hezbollah trainers and advisors in Iraq assist Iranian and Iraqi Shia militias fighting Sunni extremists there. Select Iraqi Shia militant groups also warned of their willingness to fight US forces returning to Iraq.”

Israel, as well as Sunni allies of the US, has often warned that Iran, through Hezbollah and other proxies, has been sowing instability in the region. An escalating dispute between Jerusalem and Washington over the terms of an eventual agreement on Iran’s nuclear program has seen Israeli official rail against the relatively conciliatory tone adopted by US officials toward Iran, in light of the shared interest in combating the Islamic State.

When you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Looking Past The Present

Various news outlets are reporting that America is considering a political alliance with Iran in order to bring stability to the situation in Iraq. While that might work in the short term, there is no way it makes sense if you consider the history of the region and the recent history of Iraq.

Fox News posted a story yesterday reminding us of some of that history. The past problems between Iran and Iraq were based on the Sunni Shiite conflict within Islam. Saddam Hussein was a Sunni, the rulers of Iran (after 1978) were Shiites. The Iran-Iraq war was started in 1980 by Saddam Hussein. It was ended by a United Nations resolution in 1988. As a point of interest, that eight-year war is responsible for the fact that as of 2013 almost 90 percent of Iran’s population is under the age of 55. Almost 25 percent is under the age of 25. In America, almost 75 percent of the population is under the age of 55, and about 33 percent is under the age of 25.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, the current Prime Minister of Iraq is a Shiite. Almost immediately after taking office, he formed an alliance with Iran. He also persecuted Sunnis. Al-Maliki’s persecution of Sunnis and Iran’s destabilization of Iraq during al-Maliki’s rule have brought us to where we are now. They have created this mess, why are they offering to stabilize it?

The article at Fox News reminds us:

As reported by the Free Beacon, the report warned that Iran was working against U.S. goals in Iraq, by boosting Shiite militia groups — sectarian tensions are part of what allowed the Sunni Islamic State of Iraq and Syria to gain ground in the country’s north. The State Department report specifically said Iranian forces were working with Hezbollah to provide advisers in Iraq for Shiite militants “in the construction and use of sophisticated improvised explosive device technology and other advanced weaponry.” 

Further, the report said Iran has “remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al Qaeda (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody.”

The reason Iran is willing to help us ‘stabilize’ Iraq is that Iran believes a stable Iraq will be a step forward in forming a regional caliphate. The plan is to include Iran, Iraq, Syria, and part of Saudi Arabia in that caliphate. Eventual plans include the region (later the world), but for now, Iran wants Iraq, Syria, and part of Saudi Arabia.

Iran is an international sponsor of terrorism. It would be a serious mistake to align ourselves with them in any way.

In Case You Thought Egypt Would Quiet Down Now That The Muslim Brotherhood Has Been Removed From Power

This video appears on the website Gates of Vienna and on YouTube:

The comments made do not bode well for the future. The Muslim Brotherhood is Shiite Muslim. They are naturally aligned with Iran. The are part of the dream of a worldwide caliphate. If they are removed from power, part of Egypt’s economic problems will be solved with aid from Saudi ArabiaSunni Muslims who fear the increased power of Iran. Saudi Arabia is the home of the Wahabi branch of radical Islam, and also the original home of Al Qaeda. Frankly, the Egyptian military is the only possible pro-American and pro-Israel group in this bunch. This is going to be a nasty civil war. I seriously doubt the Muslim Brotherhood will go quietly.

Enhanced by Zemanta