Living in a Dream

Submitted by Michael S (United States), Feb 15, 2016 at 15:33

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Pipes demolishes the Muslim claim to Jerusalem as entirely political rather than historical or religious. "Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion (which usually means Jerusalem) 154 times. In contrast, Jerusalem appears as frequently in the Koran as in the Hindu Bhagavad-Gita, the Taoist Tao-Te Ching, the Buddhist Dhamapada and the Zoroastrian Zend Avesta — which is to say, not once.""
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's worth repeating.

Meanwhile, the situation in Israel's neighborhood is probably more complex now, than at any time in it's modern history. The main adversaries, at the moment, appear to be:

Side I:
Egypt, Saudi, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Barzani Kurds, Al Nusra Turkey and Ukraine. Da'esh is de facto on this side as well in Syria & Iraq, as is Israel (in Gaza, Sinai and against Hizbullah)

Side II:
Putin, Assad, Iraq, Syrian Kurds, Iran, Hizbullah, Gaza & Houthis of Yemen

Side III:
NATO, led by Obama

Even the US Presidential candidates seem to be lined up in the mess: Trump and Putin seem to be on the same page, as are Hillary and Obama, and Cruz is likely to stand with Israel. I'm not confident that Sanders would stand with Israel; and Hillary doesn't appear to have a genuine position on anything. She will do whatever the corporations tell her to do, as probably also will Rubio; and I think those corporations are prejudiced in favor of Iran. I think Netanyahu came close to burning his bridges with Trump, a month or so ago, so he will have to do penance if The Donald wins. While we're on the subject, will anyone take Hillary's security breaches seriously? It seems that right, wrong and national security are all just matters to be decided by the press and popularity polls. None of this looks good for Israel, or for the rest of the world.

I guess I got spoiled by the Cold War, knowing who was on which side in these things. Since Obama has gotten in office, the big question has been which side the US Administration (and de facto dictatorship) will be on, during any particular week. Is he still with the Iranians this week? or with the Russians? The President of Turkey would certainly like to know; and the South Koreans and Japanese cannot be at all sure if, when they are attacked by China or North Korea, Obama will be deeply engaged in golf.

With all this high-stakes hanky-panky going on in the Middle East, it's hard to get enthusiastic about one shifting "side" or the other. Meanwhile, the real drama seems to be waiting in the wings, in the form of the TPP and TTIP trade deals -- which, if ratified, will great an empire comprising Europe, the US, Japan and more, run by the 1% of the 1% of the world's business leaders.

Turkey has been hiding behind NATO's skirt lately, taking pot shots at Russia and its allies in Syria. That's a situation that won't go unanswered for very long. I expect the response to come through Kurdish proxies. Meanwhile, NATO seems to be getting sucked into several situations it is not really interested in: Libya, the Turkish-Syrian frontier and the Aegean islands. In this and all other matters, the "European defense alliance" of the EU has laid its hand on the table -- five jokers -- and the Swedes are starting to look to the Americans to cover their behinds if the Russians get pushy up north.

The New York Times, meanwhile, posts an article entitled, "Is Humanity Getting Better?" (apparently, with the answer being a "Yes") while blustery but weak and empty John Kerry falsely proclaims that Syria is an "unfolding humanitarian catastrophe unmatched since World War II." (Give me a break -- the Rwanda Genocide was far worse, as was the Great Leap Forward in China, not to mention the Cambodian killing fields and something Kerry ought to be an expert on -- the Vietnam War). We are all living in a dream, which I don't think we'll awake from until Messiah comes.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".