HATRED AT ITS MOST INTENSE  

It is so important to watch this 5 minute clip from MEMRI to understand the depth of the hatred.

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/5098.htm

MAKE IT GO VIRAL.

Arlene Kushner writes:

Just in case you imagine that it is only the radical jihadists in Gaza that are supporting terror, I share this as well –which also needs to be publicized widely:

“The Palestinian Bar Association — which receives major funding from the United Nations and European Union — has decided to award an honorary law degree to Muhammad Halabi, the 19-year-old Palestinian [Arab] law student who stabbed two Israelis to death in Jerusalem’s Old City on Oct. 3 before being killed by Israeli security forces, according to a report published by the Middle East Media Research Institute on Sunday.

“The Palestinian Bar Association decided in its meeting today [Oct. 10] to award an honorary law degree to themartyred hero Muhammad Halabi and to hold its next [bar] swearing-in ceremony in [his] honor,” a Palestinian Bar Association statement said.”

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=28833

The Palestinians’ Death Culture Is Responsible for Recent Terror Attacks  OCTOBER 14, 2015  Tibor Krausz

Alaa Abu Jamal was dying to be a martyr — literally. So on Tuesday, October 13, he rammed his car into a crowd of Jewish pedestrians at a bus stop in Jerusalem’s Geula neighborhood, which is home to mostly ultra-Orthodox Jews. He then jumped out and proceeded to hack at two injured Jews with a meat cleaver. This Palestinian Arab terrorist murdered an elderly rabbi and severely wounded other Israelis before he was shot by an alert security guard. The entire attack was captured on a security camera.

What could have driven Abu Jamal to do such a beastly thing? Surely, it couldn’t have been desperation born of poverty and unemployment (the media’s favorite justification for Palestinian terrorism). Abu Jamal, it so happens, worked for Bezeq, the Israeli telecommunications company whose uniform he wore during the attack.

A clue about the Arab man’s true motivation emerged soon enough. Abu Jamal was a cousin of the two terrorists, Uday Abu Jamal and Ghassan Abu Jamal, who murdered four ultra-Orthodox Jewish men and a Druze police officer who came to their rescue at a synagogue in Jerusalem last year. Both terrorists were shot dead before they could kill more Israelis.

In an interview broadcast on Israeli TV shortly after that attack, Alaa Abu Jamal recalled how elated his family was to hear of the killing. “There were calls of joy among us and they passed out candies to the visitors who came and there was support for the two martyrs,” he explained. One of the cousins, 32, had been married with three children, but martyring himself while murdering Jews clearly took precedence over raising his children, who will doubtlessly be encouraged to emulate their “martyred” father. “Thank Allah for someone who dies as a martyr, that’s a great thing,” Alaa Abu Jamal said.

On Tuesday, Alaa decided to accomplish his own “great thing.” His friends and relatives must be passing out candies happily as we speak.

That’s what Israelis are up against: cold-blooded murderers who consider butchering random Jews to be the greatest accomplishment of their lives and a great honor to their family. It’s this culture of death and destruction that has left Palestinian society mired in a medieval mindset of martyrdom. In what other culture do family members celebrate relatives who murder random people? Is this what’s going to be the Palestinians’ unique gift to the world?

Many of the other stabbings have taken place in land that is clearly Israeli territory — from western Jerusalem to Ra’anana to Tel Aviv — so the media’s narrative about Palestinians fighting “settlements” and “occupation” also won’t wash.

The attackers — males and females alike, many of them teenagers — have routinely been described as “lone wolves,” but that’s a misnomer. They have hardly acted alone. Taught to hate Jews through poisonous cradle-to-grave incitement, they have the support of Palestinian society at large. On television channels, in mosques, and on social media, Palestinians have been calling on their brothers and sisters to murder Jews, along with giving detailed instructions on how best to stab them to death.

They’re allegedly acting in defense of the al-Aqsa Mosque, which is — of course — under no threat from Israel. The meme of al-Aqsa being attacked by Jews dates back at least to 1929, when the odious Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (one of Hitler’s closest allies) used the same excuse to incite murderous violence against the Jews of the British Mandate.

Nearly 100 years later, the spirit of the mufti is alive and well. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (who many claim is a “moderate”) frequently echoes him. “We bless every drop of blood spilled for Jerusalem, which is clean and pure blood, blood spilled for Allah,” Abbas said recently on the Palestinian Authority’s official television channel. Peace in our time? It looks as though for many Palestinians, “peace” will come only when all the Jews are dead. The Grand Mufti would be proud.

UNDERSTANDING SYRIA.... THIS IS INPUT FOR CONSIDERATION, NOT ANSWERS

Understanding Syria

At one time my official duties required me to study the delicate mosaic of Syria….. a complex set of balances. Now, all I can do is offer you competing views as to the current situation and what the United States should do about it.

Below are two articles with very conflicting views and thus very conflicting recommendations as to US actions. 

 1.“Putin's model of success” by Jackson Diehl,

published Oct. 12, 2015. This article is reproduced as it appeared in Jewish world review a very useful republisher  of key articles. The publisher,Binyamin L. Jolkovsky, is dedicated and diligent and Jewish world review should be a must-read for anyone interested in the Middle East.  

2.     “Russia's Syrian entanglement: Can the West sit back and watch? “ Pavel K. Baev | October 9, 2015. This article is  reproduced as it appeared in Brookings' publication and is more likely the official understanding/position of the Obama administration.  

1.     Putin's model of success 

By Jackson Diehl  Published Oct. 12, 2015

Western officials who pronounce themselves puzzled about Vladimir Putin's intentions in Syria are missing some big clues. There is a clear model for the campaign Russia is pursuing on behalf of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, a legacy that is Putin's pride: Chechnya.

The Muslim republic in the North Caucasus and the decade-long war that Putin launched there in September 1999 have mostly been forgotten by the outside world since the dictator installed there by Putin, Ramzan Kadyrov, consolidated control in the late 2000s. But the Kremlin regards it as a "good, unique example in history of (the) combat of terrorism," as Dmitry Medvedev, Putin's prime minister, put it. Chechnya, Medvedev said last year, is "one of the business cards of Russia."

What are the components of this winning formula? First, define all opposition to the prevailing regime as terrorist, indistinguishable from the most extreme jihadists. That enables a fundamental political aim: to eliminate alternatives. In Syria today, moderate and secular opposition forces arguably are getting harder to find. That wasn't the case in Chechnya in 1999. The country's nationalist president, Aslan Maskhadov, had won a democratic election, defeating an Islamist opponent by 59 to 23 percent. His predecessor, Dzhokhar Dudayev, was so secularized that he was unaware how many times a day Muslims pray.

Russia killed them both, along with every other moderate Chechen leader it could find, both at home and abroad. One was murdered in Vienna; another in Dubai. When Western leaders pressed Putin to negotiate with Maskhadov and other secular moderates, he invariably responded angrily. "Would you invite Osama bin Laden to the White House . . . and let him dictate what he wants?" he demanded of one group of Western visitors.

It should be no surprise that Russia's first Syria bombings have been aimed at the remnants of the moderate opposition. It's not just that they are backed by the United States; they represent a viable alternative to the Assad regime, and so, under Chechnya rules, must be eliminated. "He doesn't distinguish between (the Islamic State) and a moderate Sunni opposition that wants to see Mr. Assad go," President Barack Obama said after meeting Putin at the United Nations. "From their perspective, they're all terrorists."

The first stages of the Russian military campaign in northern Syria have followed a familiar pattern. Heavy bombing and shelling of civilian areas preceded scorched-earth sweeps, just as in Chechnya. According to a report on Chechnya by the International Crisis Group, "war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by (Russian) troops" included "indiscriminate shelling and bombing, secret prisons, enforced disappearances, mass graves and death squads." One common tactic, the report said, was "taking insurgents' relatives as hostages, subjecting them to torture or summary execution and burning their homes."

In short, Assad's forces and their Lebanese and Iranian allies may have to step up their already-notorious brutality to match Putin's tactics in Chechnya. But they may have expert help: Kadyrov has asked Putin to send his 20,000-member personal army, known as the "kadyrovtsy," to Syria. The state propaganda outlet Russia Today quoted him as saying he wanted "to go there and participate in special operations."

Kadyrov and his relationship with Putin offer another lesson to those wondering whether Putin is prepared to dispose of Assad - a prospect that Obama has repeatedly bet on. The Chechen strongman is, if anything, more sinister than the soft-spoken Assad; Kadyrov is known to do his own killing and torturing on occasion. He has solidified a cult of personality in Chechnya, extorts tribute from every business and citizen, and brazenly orders hits on his critics, from journalists and human rights activists to Russian politicians. Many believe him responsible for the murder of Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov, gunned down near Red Square last winter.

Putin's response has been to offer Kadyrov not just tolerance but full protection. The Crisis Group reports that senior Russian security officials tried to undermine the Chechen by arresting his gunmen for the Nemtsov murder. Putin rebuffed them, awarding Kadyrov a medal immediately after the hit. "Unless President Putin's reputation is seriously damaged by his protégé, the rules of the game are unlikely to change," concluded the report. The same rules will apply to Assad.

Obama's principal response to Putin's new offensive has been to predict that the result will be "a quagmire." But Putin has heard that before. For years Western leaders warned him that the war in Chechnya was unwinnable, that the only solution was political. Putin nevertheless persisted through a decade and more of bloody fighting that cost Russia at least 6,000 military casualties and Chechnya uncounted tens of thousands. The result was the pacification he now trumpets as a "calling card." Don't expect him to give up anytime soon on a similar result in Syria.

 ***********

2.     Russia's Syrian entanglement: Can the West sit back and watch?  Pavel K. Baev | October 9, 2015 

• 
  

For observers who are confined by the boundaries of conventional strategic sense, every day of Russia’s military intervention in Syria brings fresh surprises. Indiscriminate strikes against Turkey-backed and CIA-trained opposition groups (which could not possibly be mistaken for ISIS) were followed by deliberate violations of Turkey’s airspace, and then by the spectacular cruise missile salvo from warships in the Caspian Sea. More astonishing turns are almost certain to come, prompting more reevaluation of the power projection capabilities that Russia brings to bear in this high-risk enterprise.

Good morning, Latakia

The intervention, which President Vladimir Putin preferred not to announce in his address to the U.N. General Assembly on September 26, could become an exemplar of achieving maximum political effect from very limited application of force. The three dozen or so combat planes deployed to the hastily prepared airbase outside Latakia perform 20 to 30 sorties a day. That would not have made much of a difference in the U.S.-led air campaign against ISIS that has been going on for more than a year. What makes a difference is targeting opposition groups of various persuasions that were not anticipating such treatment. This tactical surprise is by definition short-term, and in order to continue making a difference—and for the campaign to really resonate—Russia needs to escalate. 

The intervention...could become an exemplar of achieving maximum political effect from very limited application of force.

This will be very hard to accomplish. The composite air regiment on the no-frills airbase includes fighters and helicopters of at least five different types. That creates a logistical nightmare, since all supplies have to be shipped by the several naval transports from Novorossiysk and Sevastopol. Several transport aircraft can add only so much to this stretched supply line, so the intervention has to be aimed at achieving some tangible results as soon as possible. The deployment to Latakia of a squadron of Su-25 light fighter-bombers and a squadron of Mi-24 attack helicopters indicates that the main task of this force is not medium-range strikes on high-value assets (on which Russia has scant intelligence data) but close air support. Such a high-risk mission only makes sense if the government troops and Alawite militias launch an offensive operation, most probably aimed at securing the Latakia province from the attacks from the north, where the Nusra Front has been active.

A key condition for such an offensive is that the government forces—together with Hezbollah troops—can stabilize the front around Damascus, where Russian squadrons dare not to show up. Damascus remains the center of gravity in this mutating civil war, even if Latakia is of particular importance as the home-ground for the Assad Alawi clan. What makes control over Damascus more precarious than ever is the possibility that Russian intervention would compel various opposition forces—who until now have focused on fighting one another as eagerly as they fight the government—to unite against the “infidels”.

Sapogi in the sand?

The burning issue for the coming days is whether the lack of meaningful results from the air strikes would prompt the Russian leadership to deploy ground forces. This would follow the “mission creep” script typical of ill-conceived interventions. Putin’s denials of such plans only increase suspicions that under the guise of “volunteers,” units of special forces and then regular battalions would engage in a ground offensive. 

Two obstacles stand in the way of such rapid deployment. Firstly, despite the effective ceasefire in eastern Ukraine, the best troops in the Russian army remain concentrated in or near the Donbass war zone. The approaching autumnal draft cycle will deliver the usual sharp decline in the combat readiness of the ground forces, as the better-trained half of soldiers in every unit goes home and raw recruits fill the ranks. Secondly, transporting and supplying tanks and heavy weapons for even one battalion tactical group of about 1,000 soldiers would be an extremely hard challenge for the already-stretched capabilities for strategic air- and sea-lift. In domestic military exercises such as Tsentr-2015, troops and equipment were moved around primarily by rail. There is obviously no such connection to Syria.

[G]round forces...would follow the “mission creep” script typical of ill-conceived interventions.

Putin also knows that placing Russian military boots (or sapogi) in the Syrian sands would be very unpopular, and no amount of propaganda spin placed on the telegenic air strikes can secure a shift in public opinion. The Russian High Command can certainly try some other means of delivering strikes, for instance by the air-launched cruise missiles from the Tu-160 strategic bombers cruising at a safe distance from the battleground. A nuclear submarine can deliver a salvo of long-range cruise missiles from the Mediterranean, primarily in order to show the versatility of Russian power projection. But the role of ground forces most probably will remain limited to immediate protection of the Latakia base.

Calibrating counter-moves

For the United States, avoiding the temptation to over-react is still the key guideline. It stands to reason that the best response, when your opponent is sinking deeper in a blunder of its own making, is not to interfere. This past summer, the Russian Air Force had a dismal record of crashes caused by poor maintenance, and the high stress of the Syrian air campaign is certain to bring more of those. A series of terrorist attacks may shatter the security of the Latakia base, which makes it a very attractive target indeed. Rebels may also use Katyusha missiles for hitting the over-crowded airstrip. 

It makes perfect sense to let such disasters arrive in their due course, but there is one significant exception to this indifferent approach: Turkey. Turkey is deeply upset with Russian direct support to the Assad regime, outraged by the violations of its airspace, and threatened by the air war so close to its borders. Statements of support from NATO headquarters are not enough; at the very minimum, the decision to withdraw the batteries of Patriot surface-to-air missiles must be cancelled. When Estonia and Latvia came under Russian pressure last year, NATO gathered the resources and political will to bolster their security—and Russian air provocations on the Baltic theater have practically ceased. Turkey has every right to expect nothing less.

Finally, the United States and its allies could deliver a series of airstrikes on the Hezbollah bands around Damascus. That would be less confrontational vis-à-vis Russia than hitting Assad’s forces. Hezbollah has already suffered losses in the Syrian war and is not particularly motivated to stand with Assad to the bitter end, away from own home-ground in Lebanon. (Israel would appreciate such punishment, too.) 

Moscow will be hard-pressed to find a way out of its Syrian adventure. Order will not be imposed through force by dictators in the Middle East. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet shows there is another, and ultimately more effective, way. As order continues to erode in Syria, it wouldn’t be wrong for leaders in Washington to just let the Russians entangle themselves. But the United States has allies to worry about, too.

Pavel K. Baev
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe

Pavel K. Baev is a research professor at the Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO) and nonresident senior fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at Brookings. Before joining PRIO in 1992, he worked at the Institute of Europe in Moscow. His current research includes Russian military reform, Russia's conflict management in the Caucasus and Central Asia, energy interests in Russia's foreign, and security policy and Russia's relations with Europe and NATO.

When Terror Is At Your Doorstep

by Noga Gur-Arieh

Stone-throwing Palestinian youths stand next to a fire during clashes with Israeli police in Sur Baher east Jerusalem on Oct. 7. Photo by Ammar Awad/Reuters

I want to talk to you about fear. The kind that paralyzes you when, in the midst of a working day, you hear ambulances from outside the window, and everyone's phone starts beeping with Breaking News alerts, saying 5 people were stabbed, only two streets away, by a terrorist with a screwdriver.

This is when fear takes over, after a week of horror, with back-to-back terror attacks, when it happens right outside your window. First, you make sure everyone you know (and who live nearby) is okay, and not planning on walking home alone. Then, you wish your co-worker, as they leave the office to go home, to "stay safe," instead of "have a lovely weekend." And you can't work, and you can't think, because what you read about in the newspaper just got real.

You think about the dozens of families who lost their loved ones, who were merely walking down the street, in seconds. Their whole world turned upside down. And you can't help but think: "what would it be like if tomorrow, it's me, or someone I know?" You want to console, but you can't find the words, so you turn outside, trying to use every little bit of online power you have, to spread the word and make sure people know what's been happening here, so that they can put pressure on their leaders to stop encouraging terrorism by keeping silent.

Sadly, it doesn't happen. The attacks do get global coverage, but the kind that no one would be okay with if it happened in his or her country. "Palestinian shot dead after terror attack killing two." (True, but what did he do to deserve being killed?! Maybe committed that terror attack?) "3 killed in attack" (An act of God? How were they killed? Who attacked them? Why?) And then, you hear that UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon condemn the attacks, but did not say a word about the victims - Jewish Israeli who were brutally murdered, just for being Israeli Jews.

After a week of attacks, they're still being framed as "lone wolves who attack out of despair from the 'occupation'." But it's really not that. It is a wave of terror, perhaps a third Intifada even. It's just a new age of terror attack. The kind that looks "better" in the eyes of the media. Softer ("Just" 1-5 murdered,) and seemingly unorganized.

There you are. Sitting at the office, trying to plan your safe way home, thinking of the worst, and reading reports that make your guts turn inside out.  This is fear, true fear, of the possibility that it'll never end, because it is, in the most twisted way, being backed up by important figures and media outlets. Not literally, but in a way that leads the way for more, with no attempt to stop it.

Then, the fear mixes with rage, and all you want it so scream to the world: Stones can kill. Screwdrivers, too. And Israelis are under a wave of terror attacks. Ideology, despair, boredom- the reason doesn't matter. All that matters is the result. Terror must be called for what it is, firmly and confidently, with no hesitation.

This experience of uncertainty, of fear from the possibility of a next time, of the shock and the worrying that threatens to stop your heart from beating-all feelings we're already familiar with, and could never get used to.

May the memory of the victims be of blessing. 

AP Reporter Challenges State Department on Double Standards for Civilians Killed in Combat (VIDEO) http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/10/07/ap-reporter-challenges-state-department-on-double-standards-for-civilians-killed-in-combat-video/

OCTOBER 7, 2015 

State Department spokesman Mark Toner squirms as he answers the AP reporter’s question about U.S. double standards in relation to Israel. Photo: Screenshot.

The Associated Press’ Matt Lee tripped up State Department spokesman Mark Toner on Monday for appearing to hold the Israeli military to a higher standard than that of the U.S.

The challenge on the part of the journalist came in the wake of last weekend’s tragic U.S. air strike in Kurduz, Afganistan, which hit a Doctors Without Borders facility, leaving 22 dead.

Lee questioned Toner over a 2014 State condemnation of an Israeli strike over Gaza, which hit a U.N. shelter, saying that the U.S. was “appalled” by such “disgraceful shelling,” and that “the suspicion that militants are operating nearby does not justify strikes that put at risk the lives of so many innocent civilians.”

Toner tried to address Lee’s question by stating that the airstrike in Afghanistan was clearly unintentional, and that Lee should give him “a pass” until the investigation is carried out. At this point, Lee reminded Toner that the U.S. condemnation of the IDF strikes was issued before an investigation.

Lee asked whether the U.S. would call last weekend’s air strike “appalling and disgraceful,” to which Toner deflected and stressed the importance of carrying out an investigation.

Watch a video of the exchange below:

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/10/07/ap-reporter-challenges-state-department-on-double-standards-for-civilians-killed-in-combat-video/

Obama surrenders the Middle East to Russia, and it matters

by DR. ROBIN MCFEE September 29, 2015 (Reproduced from Israpundit}

Putin asserts it is difficult to defeat ISIS without the current Syrian government. Whether that government is a puppet of Iran and Russia, is currently irrelevant. Putin is correct. Syria could act as a magnet to draw in ISIS fighters, and a kill box within which to defeat them, or at least eliminate a not insignificant number of their fighters.

Putin has doubled down on Syria in recent days. No news there. He has had bases in that beleaguered nation for years. He is in a good position to weaken ISIS in the process – to a far greater degree than the US has been willing to do.

Speaking of which, Obama, not having learned anything from his many foreign policy misadventures in the region, has decided to invest in Syrian “rebels” who somehow have become virtuous patriots – instead of merely another assemblage of Jihadists, former mujahideen, current members of the various Al Qaeda franchises, and to be clear, NOT friends of democracy or freedom fighters. Obama just doesn’t get it. There are no freedom fighters or prodemocracy plays in that region. It is a war of the roses based upon religion, anti-West sensibilities, adherence to Sharia, tribal power skirmishes, and territorial control. The old saw ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ is both tired, misrepresentative of the landscape, and a dangerous game for amateurs to play.

Syria is an important place – geographically and geopolitically. Putin knows this. More importantly, Assad is his ally. Putin – spy master, politician, businessman, diplomat, quasi-dictator, martial artist, energy expert, possible assassin, and global force to be reckoned with – recognizes the importance of supporting your allies. We could learn something from him, as we continue to abandon our friends, and give benefits to our enemies. Reputations matter. Consider this….If you had to select a second for a street fight, would you pick Putin or Obama? A sad reality, but who does the world trust more? Not who does the world use more, or misuse more, or abuse more, but trust or fear more.

Like Assad or not, he has created a vortex within which ISIS is being drawn in. Al Qaeda is in play there as well. We ought to think of it as an opportunity to let savages kill each other, and their teams become severely degraded. Instead we are arming, at ridiculous expense, a handful (think meaningless) of jokers to represent our interests over there.

Yes Assad is an unsavory fellow, using chemical weapons. He isn’t alone. And to his credit – even bad guys have their good points – he has protected Christians far more than any other dictator in the region.  Putin is supporting Assad. And?

As an aside, think Christians have had any political patronage in Iraq lately? Or Iran? How are Christians faring in other Moslem nations with few exceptions, like Morocco? A bit closer to home, how are Christians treated in the US? While Obama is yammering about human rights, and taking in refugees from the Middle East (let us not forget much of this mess is his fault), he is about to deport Christian refugees, and has been hesitant to allow Christians under siege in Iraq to enter the US. Double standard anyone?

Like it or not, the world is one big Stratego ® or Risk ® game board. It is winner take all. The good guys can choose to be benevolent victors, and good trade partners, even good neighbors, but at the end of the day it is all about which team controls the natural resources, the transit routes, influences decisions, trade deals, and leads globally with manufacturing and distribution infrastructure that wins the game.

We are losing the game, and badly. This is not to be gloom and doom, but to remind that our future, and that of our children depends upon the economic and security future we create and pass along. The two are inextricably intertwined. One cannot separate the economy, energy, immigration, and security issues. Within that construct, the Middle East matters to our economy and security – unfortunately.

We blew Iraq – which has been and remains an extremely important nation in the history of the Arab and Middle Eastern world. Located in a strategic crossroads, and a former ally we misread (thank you Barack Obama), and abandoned a vital piece of real estate. Not to mention our feckless behavior has emboldened the behaviors of radical Islamists, including ISIS.

As for ISIS or Assad or Libya or…There are no consequences that our enemies face when doing barbaric acts against Americans or our interests. Obama’s laughable lines in the sand, and threats aimed at ISIS, ISIL, Russia, Assad or fill in the blanks, they are as fragile as a sand castle near the ocean during a tropical storm.  And as meaningless!

Could you, would you trust Obama if your life depended on it? Ask Pastor Saeed, who languishes in Iran, when he and 3 other Americans could easily have been ransomed for, say $150 billion dollars?! That is what BHO is giving Iran. Ask the Iraqis who risked their lives to provide intelligence to our military, and are now isolated, hunted, alone. Ask the Christians who are being butchered by ISIS and other Islamists in the region. Where is Obama? Where is the United States? Russia has provided more moral clarity on the issue than we have. Wow, the world is upside down, when that can be said!

The vacuum created when Obama placed politics over patriotism and popularity over leadership by removing our military from Iraq, and then added stupidity to idiocy, by reaching out to Iran to help us fight ISIS (tacitly giving Tehran the political cover to enter, and likely capture much of Iraq), and capped it off with a moronic two year diplomacy play that has been a major financial and political coup for Tehran, and completed the process of colossal foreign policy failures by mishandling Syria, betraying Israel, ignoring Egypt as well as Morocco, the Kurds, and screwing up North Africa, has set the stage for a new sheriff to emerge…Putin.

All small entities need a big brother. Whether it is Israel, or Bahrain, or the Kurds (Putin supports), Libya or Syria or the Falklands, most countries recognize it is a dangerous world with unsavory neighbors. Even the vaunted Israeli military recognizes it cannot control the region alone. It needs an ally. It used to be the United States without question. Now Israel has to play Oliver asking for more soup every time it needs something from Obama’s United States. Putin recognizes this, and has reached out to most of the countries in the Middle East, and starting with North Africa, establishing or reestablishing affiliations and alliances. Consider for a moment how Putin treats Netanyahu and Israel with more concern, and respect than POTUS; a deft, radical departure from prior Russian/Soviet strategy. And Vladimir has, in at least small ways, used his powerful influence to stem some of the attacks from Iran’s proxies.

Make no mistake about it – Iran, Syria, Turkey are all critical to Russia’s energy, security, and geopolitical strategy. Poking the US in the eye in the process is just a bonus for Putin. Israel offers potential for Russia, too. Keep a watch on that.

Obama has surrendered leadership of the Middle East to Russia. Pure and simple!  And we should not blame Putin for that. He is doing what the leader of Russia is supposed to do – look out for the interests of his nation.

Putin may not be Teddy Roosevelt or Ataturk, but he arguably has been their best leader since the days of shoe bangers, and mass murderers.  Looking at the world through the prism of a Westerner, it is tempting to vilify Putin. The media and Obama supporters sit and denounce Putin’s limits on free speech, making Russia dangerous for journalists and dissenters. To be sure corruption and censorship remain in the Russian Federation. But this does not change a few facts. Putin enjoys a very high approval rating among urban and rural citizens. And while the old Russian axiom – it matters not who casts the votes, only who counts them might be true – it is hard to deny Putin is very popular. Putin has helped improve the national standard of living, and elevated many of the poor out of poverty. He is a nationalist. He is highly educated, and an effective statesman, diplomat, as well as willing to color outside the lines. Except here’s the thing – he doesn’t think he is coloring outside the lines.

Years ago Putin lamented the fall of the USSR as the greatest calamity of the 20^th century. Putin is not subtle – his mission is to reestablish the USSR; in the form of a more egalitarian and practical nation, but a superpower none the less. Then there’s his graduate thesis – how to turn an energy rich nation into an energy hyper-power. Putin has told us his plans, and every action over the last 10 years has put him closer to it. Rebuild the military. Reestablish by diplomacy or military action old components of the USSR. Control major energy sources – in the ground, under the sea, through pipes and ships (LNG) and innovation. Which is why asserting the Arctic, and placing a military presence in Iraq, Iran, and Syria should not surprise, except of course to the Oval Office.

If you listen to Josh Ernest, the DNC supporting media, Democrats, and the State Department, Russia woke up all of a sudden, and decided to place a powerful military presence into Syria, in defiance, mon Dieu, of President Obama. How unsporting of them! And Team Obama has a strategy – to chastise, disrespect, and lecture Vladimir Putin. This is madness, and stupid.

And there’s where POTUS continues to play stupid with Putin. He insults or ignores him. Consider the recent televised insult Josh Ernest gave to Putin – the substance of which Obama was disappointed in Putin, and Russia should not lead in Syria, but fall in behind the US in our strategy to support the rebels. Putin leads an almost superpower. Our team just doesn’t get it! You don’t insult a proud race led by an unapologetic nationalist eager for their empire again. Putin is not Obama’s butler or trainee or lapdog. On the contrary; Obama could learn a lot from Putin.

In “Risk ^TM game” terms check out where the US flag is located as key ally and where is the Russian or Chinese flag planted? In just a few short years the United States went from being a major influence worldwide, with our flag in lots of places, to now having the Russians, and Chinese, challenge us.

Discussion

Energy is the key; it is the lifeblood for every nation – fossil fuels, NOT alternative energies. Whoever controls energy controls the world. Doubt me, why do we kowtow to Saudi Arabia? If Riyadh controlled wheat fields instead of oil fields we would ignore them. Doubt me, why did Europe capitulate to Gazprom/Russia? Because it is cold in the winter without heating fuel.

Until the United States fully utilizes our enormous natural resources – fossil fuels – from the Gulf to the Arctic, we will forever be wedded to the Middle East. Held hostage might be a better term for it. The importance of that region geopolitically, strategically, tactically and economically cannot be overstated.  Instead of vilifying Putin, we should learn from him. He is in our backyard, and on the doorstep of our allies, vying for position. It is a game we must always play, but have under Obama, surrendered.

Even without oil and natural gas, that region is the 21^st century maritime equivalent of the Silk Road – with canals, and waterways serving as major transit routes for shipping of important products and materials. Which is why it boggles the mind that the titular leader of the free world would do so precious little to protect the critical crossroads represented with Turkey, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Bahrain, North Africa, and well you get the idea. This region is vital to US interests, and that of our allies. Our so called “coalition partners.” That by the way is laughable. There is NO coalition, but more on that in a later article. It is, as we’ve recently seen with the lifting of the sanctions on Iran – every country for themselves….except of course the US under Obama, who continues to give away the store, largely to our adversaries, like….Russia.

From the moment Obama took office, he has squandered any advantage the United States possessed internationally. His foreign policy failures, and that of his JV diplomatic team of Clinton and Kerry, had diminished the stature of our great country, and disadvantaged us geopolitically, especially in the Middle East. The Arab Spring – better named the Arab Winter or Arab Disruption – ushered in a level of chaos and destruction not seen in the region since the bloody days of Black September, the ill-fated attacks from Egypt, Syria and Lebanon against the Jews which resulted in more real estate for Israel, and the USSR-Afghan war.

In just seven short years the Middle East now belongs to Russia. Putin has reestablished workable bases – air and sea – in Syria, relationships with Turkey, reestablishing historic ties in spite of Putin’s support of the Kurds, tenuous so it is. Putin has reached out to Israel, long a near exclusive protectorate and partner of the US. Though Israeli sensibilities still better align with the United States, Putin recognizes a need by and opportunity with Netanyahu. Netanyahu will have to be very careful walking the tightrope between a weak leader (Obama)of a longstanding ally, and a strong leader (Putin) of a questionable enterprise.

With the 2016 elections fast approaching remember this when selecting candidates regardless of party….Once upon a time in the world before Obama, the skies above the Middle East belonged to the United States and Israeli Air Forces. Once upon a time in the world before Obama, the Mediterranean, the Gulf of Aden, and much of the Oceans near the region, were all virtually the US Navy’s private waterway.  Once upon a time the Middle East was held together tenuously but with the United States as the key honest broker, authority figure, and, well we spoke softly and brought lots of battle carrier groups. Once upon a time the energy industry was considered a value not a villain to US interests. Once upon a time oil/gas exploration were important not incidental to the US. Once upon a time most people earned their living, not lived dependent upon entitlements. Once upon a time we valued our veterans; now we pay welfare recipients more than we pay the average enlisted man or woman in the military.

What the left seems to overlook – the power grab and battles being fought in the Middle East are not a pillow fight, or debate between academics. ISIS is playing to win. Iran is playing to win. Russia is playing to win. China is playing to win. Israel is playing for survival. Syria and Jordan are playing to win. The only nation/team that is more than happy to cede leadership, and defeat seems to be the United States, poorly led by Barack Obama and his supporters who give each other awards and kudos for illusionary successes when none have been realized in actuality.

Doubt me? Consider Libya. We ousted Gaddafi. We supported his adversaries – rebels who are more dangerous than the dictator’s regime. And the Libyan revolutionaries were so grateful that they killed our ambassador and Americans trying to protect him.

Consider the misnamed Arab Spring – Egypt awash in flames, and the historic center of the Arab world perilously close to being ruled by the Moslem Brotherhood, were it not for a less Jihadist second revolution that wrestled power from the extremists.

Consider the peril Obama’s policies inflicted upon Israel – the temporary control of Egypt by radical Islamists reinstated the tunnels into Gaza, allowed open military resupply to Hamas, and allowed attacks of Jewish enterprises along the border, including previously peaceful Eilat.

Having been in Bahrain during the Arab debacle, they remain in a tenuous position, as Iran, and its Revolutionary Guard Corps try to foster chaos and unrest in the tiny island nation – an ally with the US, and where significant intelligence and Navy assets remain.

Consider Iraq – when Obama ordered the US to precipitously leave the region, against military expert advice, it set the stage for Iran and ISIS to carve up the country, much to the peril of Christians and Kurds. Interestingly the people most likely able to defeat ISIS – the Kurds – have been left largely to their own devices, as we use them as bargaining chips, or sacrificial lambs in our failing diplomacy with Turkey.  Putin by contrast has stood with the Kurds, and still managed to build a closer relationship with the folks in Ankara.  Turkey and Russia are far closer during the Obama years than during the Bush years militarily, in geopolitical terms, in trade and energy.

In terms of economics, national security, energy policy, and regional stability, the United States has allowed the Middle East to fall into chaos. And we will pay the price for it in the US in terms of vulnerability to OPEC, bad trade deals, increased vulnerability to ISIS, which clearly is NOT the JV, in energy, and homeland security.

Conclusion

Syria is an important strategic crossroad. Nestled near Turkey, Israel, Lebanon and Jordan, with strategically and tactically important military and naval bases, Putin would have been foolish to not double down on his investments in the region. Putin is now the go to guy in the region who has demonstrated loyalty to those who trust him.

Putin in Syria is nothing new. And quite frankly had Putin not made another strong move into the region, Obama’s inaction would leave that area up in flames, and continue the refugee crisis.

There is no doubt if Syria falls to ISIS, which appears to be Obama’s strategy, Israel will be far more in danger than if Assad remained.

Putin knows ISIS is more dangerous to his interests, and ours, than Assad. Putin knows Syria is a strategically important area that cannot be allowed to fall into the growing radical Islamic caliphate, or become part of ISIS control. Putin knows the power of loyalty. And Putin understand the mistakes Obama has made, and will continue to exploit them globally. Syria is merely another place where Putin has planted the Russian flag, and outplays Obama.  And as we speak I can hear the Russian national anthem playing in Baghdad, and Tehran as Russia’s version of the red, white, and blue gets raised.

If you want to know where in the world something important is going on, just follow Putin.

And until the United States elects a strong, effective leader, we are left with Obama surrendering the Middle East to Russia. It won’t be the last region Russia takes from us. Stay tuned…

Dr. Robin McFee, MPH, FACPM, FAACT, is medical director of Threat Science – and nationally recognized expert in WMD preparedness, who consults with government agencies, corporations and the media. Dr. McFee is the former director and cofounder of the Center for Bioterrorism Preparedness (CB PREP) and bioweapons – WMD adviser to the Domestic Security Task Force, numerous law enforcement and corporate entities after 911, as well as pandemic advisor to federal, state and local agencies, and corporations during the anthrax events, SARS, Avian and swine flu epidemics. Dr. McFee is the former chair of the Global Terrorism Council of ASIS International, and is a member of the US Counterterrorism Advisory Team. She has delivered over 500 invited lectures since 9-11, created graduate level courses on WMD preparedness for several universities, authored more than 100 articles on terrorism, health care and preparedness, and coauthored two books: Toxico-Terrorism by McGraw Hill and The Handbook of Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Agents, published by Informa/CRC Press.

• 
  

The Iran Nuclear Deal Means War Between Israel and Hezbollah Jonathan Schanzer  8-21-15

The debate over President Obama's Iran nuclear deal has grown increasingly bitter inside the Beltway. The acrimony is unavoidable, and not just because of the hyper-partisanship that is ripping Washington apart from within. Rather, it's because the deal is being painted as the only thing standing in the way of war. But this characterization is not only unfair, because it is binary and fails to account for creative scenarios. Lost in this debate is whether the deal could itself cause a war.

To be sure, war could erupt if Iran cheats. That is a real possibility, given Iran's history of nuclear mendacity. But Iran may actually abide by the deal. If the regime simply waits a decade, it will be in possession of a legitimate industrial-sized nuclear PROGRAM. As one seasoned Israeli reporter recently noted, a new Israeli strategy document released by Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot is planning for other conflicts. This squares with conversations I have had with several senior Israeli officials in recent months. The Middle East war that is most likely to erupt first, as a result of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, is one between Israel and the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is Iran's most prized non-state proxy. With Iranian weapons, cash, and training, the group has dedicated itself to war with Israel since the early 1980s. Today, ACCORDING to a senior Israel official I met in July, Hezbollah is pointing 100,000 rockets south at Israel. These rockets, furnished almost entirely by Iran, are dispersed across Lebanon, with many launchers strategically placed in high-density population areas to ensure that Israeli reprisals will be met with charges of war crimes. Hezbollah also now has "precision weapons" (the official wouldn't say more), as well as SA-22 anti-aircraft systems, Yakhont anti-ship missiles, and drones.

One needn't look very far to find Middle East analysts suggesting that the beleaguered Lebanese public is preventing Hezbollah from unleashing this formidable arsenal on Israel, for fear of yet another fierce military response that causes billions of dollars in damage to Lebanon's infrastructure. But concern for Lebanon's well-being has never deterred Hezbollah in the past. What is truly preventing the next torrent of rockets from raining down on Israeli population centers is the terror group's current quagmire.

In a bid to prop up its valued allies in Syria, Iran has dispatched 6,000 to 8,000 Hezbollah fighters to fend off the Sunni militants seeking to topple the Bashar al-Assad regime. The war has taken its toll on Hezbollah, as body bags draped in the group's yellow flags CONTINUE to stream back from the front. An estimated 1,000 Hezbollahis have fallen since the group first began fighting there in 2013.

The Iran deal may soon give Hezbollah an exit strategy. Tehran is set to receive upwards of $100-$150 billion in cash (frozen funds plus funds released from escrow accounts holding oil proceeds that were only to be spent on approved foreign goods). Even more is coming to Iran in the form of increased oil, petrochemical, auto and gold revenues. The Assad regime could become a major beneficiary. This means that the regime could soon have more cash to pay its fighters and to buy more weapons to TARGET the Sunni rebels waging war against it.

In that event, Hezbollah's services may no longer be in demand and the group could redeploy its troops fighting in Syria. How long that takes depends on how quickly Iranian cash and weapons help the Assad regime consolidate. But once its fighters are safely HOME, Hezbollah will soon benefit from the same Iranian sanctions relief windfall. As Iran's most important non-state proxy, Hezbollah stands to gain considerably -- from advanced weaponry to cash and training.

But even without a withdrawal from Syria, Hezbollah's battle-hardened fighters may not be content with quiet on their southern front. The group's rhetoric certainly has not mellowed; Hezbollah has been bruising for a fight with Israel since the guns fell silent from the last encounter in 2006. More importantly, Hezbollah views the nuclear deal (like the rest of the region) as a sign that its patron Iran is a burgeoning regional power, and that the military advantage is shifting away from Israel in the Middle East. It may not take long before the first provocation on the border.

And for Israel, it will not take much to be provoked. The Israelis have been quite clear about their frustrations, after having been negotiated into a corner by the P5+1 world powers that ironed out the nuclear deal. Should Israel carry out a military strike on Iran under the shadow of the deal, the country would risk becoming a world pariah.

But Israel is under no such constraints with Hezbollah. In fact, Washington openly acknowledges the possibility of a conflagration between the two, and the White House is now openly touting the fact that it wishes to help arm the Israelis to handle Iran-sponsored regional aggression of this sort.

With the perception that its deterrence is shriveling amidst the very public spat with the Obama White House, Israel will almost certainly wish to make an example of Hezbollah. A victory against the strongest Iranian proxy in the region could make the kind of unequivocal statement Israel believes it needs while it waits to see if Iran holds up its end of the nuclear deal.

However, a war with Hezbollah would not be just another war in the Middle East. It could be the war to end all wars between these two bitter foes. The Israelis are not eager to settle for a partial victory or a bloody tie, as it has in the past. To establish deterrence in the age of an empowered Iran, Israel may seek total victory.

Hezbollah, for its part, will also not stand down. Armed with 100,000 rockets, a deadly arsenal of other ordnance, and now the deep pockets of Iran, it's hard to imagine a negotiated ceasefire.

To be sure, a conflict between Hezbollah and Israel falls short of the nuclear conflict that President Obama seeks to prevent. But it's difficult to say that the choices are between the nuclear deal and war in the Middle East. Should Congress approve the nuclear deal, the Obama Administration will need to determine how to best diffuse this brewing conflict. And should a war erupt, given Washington's obligations to both Tehran and Jerusalem, it may prove challenging to call for calm - on either side