Islamic Alert » Joel Rosenberg

RUSSIA BOMBS GEORGIA: And U.S. moves two new carrier groups to the Persian Gulf region

Joel C. Rosenberg — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:40:00 +0000

UPDATED: Are Russia and Georgia on the verge of all out war? Tensions have been growing for the last few years, but the situation has deteriorated rapidly in the last twenty-four hours and fighting along the border has broken out. Most serious so far: Russian fighter jets have bombed two towns in neighboring Georgia, killing and injuring innocent civilians, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili said Friday. [At 9:35am, Fox News reported that Georgia has shot down four Russian fighter jets. An hour ago, the New York Times reported that two Russian jets had been shot down, something AP reported as well.]

One critical issue to watch as the crisis develops: Who is really in charge in Moscow, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin or newly installed President Dmitry Medvedev? For the moment, it seems to be Putin who is calling the shots and speaking out most forcefully on the crisis with Georgia. Putin, of course, believes deeply in restoring the glory of Mother Russia. He certainly does not want to lose Russian territory and is determined to expand the Russian empire. As I have written about previously, he knows he cannot expand Russia westward because NATO is expanding eastward. Putin also knows he cannot expand Russia eastward because of China. He has claimed ownership of the North Pole, but the real opportunity for Russia is to expand southward, and that is where Putin has been focusing all of his attention in recent years. He is determined to control the Caucuses region, and South Ossetia -- though not a name or place most Westerners have ever heard of much less cared about -- is a key piece in Putin's southward strategy. Interestingly, a new poll finds that four times more Russians think Putin is the most powerful man in Moscow than Medvedev, and tensions between the two men have been growing all summer.

The Russian bombs allegedly fell on Gori and Kareli, two towns near South Ossetia, a volatile region smaller than the size of Rhode Island with a population of less than 70,000. South Ossetia broke away from the Republic of Georgia in the early 1990s and has been controlled ever since by Moscow-backed separatists. To effectively hold the territory for themselves -- or at least keep the territory of South Ossetia from being reclaimed by Georgia, Russia sent military troops designated as "peacekeepers" into the area several years ago and provides economic support to the rebels. Now Georgian military forces have just launched a major attack on those rebels in a bid to regain control of the territory.

Putin warned Georgia that her attack on South Ossetia would trigger a retaliation. Putin did not say precisely what form that retaliation would take, and as of this writing, Russia is denying that it has bombed Georgian towns.

"The Georgian leadership has launched a dirty adventure," the Russian Defense Ministry said on Friday. "We will not leave our peacekeepers and Russian citizens unprotected."

"Heavy weapons and artillery have been sent there, and tanks have been added," Putin told reporters this morning. "Deaths and injuries have been reported, including among Russian peacekeepers....It's all very sad and alarming. And, of course, there will be a response."

The Republic of Georgia is a democratic country that wants to join NATO, remove Russian troops and military bases from its soil, allow the U.S. to build a missile defense system on its territory, and become a full-fledged ally of the West. For those very reasons, tensions between Georgia and Russia have been growing steadily.

In April of this year, under intense pressure from Moscow, NATO decided not to invite Georgia and Ukraine join its 26-member alliance immediately, but promised to revisit the issue soon. This may prove to have been a serious mistake, inviting Russian provocation. Days later, Putin ordered the establishment of semi-official ties with the rebel "government" in South Ossetia, which Georgia charged was a violation of international law. A few weeks later, Russia began sending more troops to the border of South Ossetia, which NATO said was a provocation of Georgia. In July, Russian fighter jets penetrated Georgian airspace and flew a reconnaissance mission over South Ossetia in a show of force -- a warning, really -- designed to "cool hot heads in Tbilisi [the capital of Georgia]," the Kremlin said. The President of Georgia immediately recalled his ambassador from Moscow, all but cutting off diplomatic ties, to protest the aggressive Russian move.

Back in September 2006, as I wrote about at the time, Russia warned of dire consequences if NATO provided arms and continued building strong ties to Georgia. In October 2006, Russian forces blockaded Georgia from air, rail and ground transportation and Putin sent the Russian navy to maneuver off Georgia's Black Sea coast.

In January 2006, two explosions ripped through pipelines carrying Russian oil to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. The blasts effectively cut off Georgia's main supply of energy amidst a brutally cold winter. The Kremlin called the sabotage acts of terrorism, but Georgian President President Saakashvili, top Georgian officials, and even a number of Western analysts were not convinced. They accused Russian intelligence of triggering the explosions to send Georgia a chilling message: don't join NATO, don't insist that Russia give up its military bases in Georgia, don't keep criticizing Putin as he re-centralizes power and rebuilds the Russian military, don't oppose Russia's application to join the World Trade Organization, stop calling for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to “internationalize” peacekeeping operations in the troubled southern Russian regions Abkhazia and Ossetia, and stop promoting pro-democracy movements throughout the former Soviet Union.

The pipelines were eventually fixed, and oil began flowing again, but tensions were never defused. "Russian-Georgian relations have deteriorated to the point that some Kremlin officials are seriously weighing a military operation, which they hope will hand Georgia a military defeat and topple President Saakashivili," wrote Heritage Foundation Russia expert Dr. Ariel Cohen in March. Cohen quoted one veteran Russian foreign policy as saying, "It’s springtime -- a time to start a war with Georgia." Cohen noted that Kremlin political strategist Gleb Pavlovsky actually called for Saakashvili to be assassinated, and that Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s Liberal Democratic Party issued a statement in February statement saying the call for assassination should be seen as a warning to the Georgian leader. “Saakashvili is out of control, and needs to be brought to heel,” said one Kremlin insider, quoted by Cohen. “If Georgians keep quiet and behave, we may even tolerate their joining NATO, but if they are loud, we’ll take measures.”

ALSO WORTH NOTING: Observers of Biblical prophecies such as Ezekiel 38 and 39 will note that directly or effectively controlling Georgia would be key when Moscow one day begins moving Russian military forces through Turkey and into Lebanon, Syria and eventually against Israel.

KEY HEADLINES TO TRACK:

* Jerusalem Post: '2 US aircraft carriers headed for Gulf'

* Kuwait Learns 2 US Aircraft Carriers Headed For Gulf

* Israel considers military option for Iran nukes

* Time magazine: Israel Preparing for Iran Strike (including buying 90 new long-range fighter jets and two new German submarines)

* Israel slams Turkey over Ahmadinejad plan to visit

* Secretary of State Rice says U.S. doesn't have a veto over Israel's decision to strike Iran

* Georgia Says Russian Planes Bombed Georgian Villages

* Heavy fighting as Georgia attacks rebel region

* Bush spokeswoman: Russia, Georgia should cease hostilities, engage in talks to end conflict

* FLASHBACK: RUSSIA-GEORGIA CRISIS WORSENS: Putin begins deporting Georgians, Russian expert predicts military coup in Georgia soon (October 2006)

* FLASHBACK: PUTIN THREATENS NEIGHBORING DEMOCRACY [Georgia]: How far will the new Russian Czar go? (October 3, 2006)

* CNN: Man held for alleged Obama assassination threat

* Olmert questioned for 5th time on corrupiton affairs

--------------------------------------
* "60 Ways To Bless Israel At 60"
* Would you consider signing up to make a monthly donation to The Joshua Fund of $25, $40 or $60? All donations are tax deductible. For more information on how to make contributions by mail -- or by secure on-line credit card transactions -- please click here.
* What is The Joshua Fund?
* Sign up for Flash Traffic, free email alerts from Joel C. Rosenberg
* Dead Heat: A Novel (34% off at Amazon)
* Epicenter: Why The Current Rumblings In The Middle East Will Change Your Future (32% off at Amazon)
* Epicenter documentary film on DVD

IS WAR WITH IRAN “UNAVOIDABLE”? Yes, says the man who could be Israel’s next leader

Joel C. Rosenberg — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:20:00 +0000

"If Iran continues with its programme for developing nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The sanctions are ineffective."

-- Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz, June 2008

Most Americans have never heard of Shaul Mofaz. But those interested in the future of the Middle East ought to take note. Mofaz is currently Israel's Deputy Prime Minister. Tuesday, he announced his candidacy to lead the Kadima Party, the party of current Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Mofaz now squares off against Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni in Kadima's September 17th primaries. He is behind in the internal Kadima polls, but he has been gaining. Should he win next month, he will have the chance to put together a national unity government and become Israel's next premier, without having to face voters in a new round of national elections. There are five things you should know about Mofaz. First, he was born in Tehran, Iran, in 1948 before his family eventually fled to the new State of Israel when he was nine years old. Second, he is a military man, rising to become the Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces in the late 1990s under Netanyahu, and later served as Defense Minister under Ariel Sharon. Third, this native Farsi speaker says war with Iran appears to him "unavoidable," and he vows he will not allow the Jewish State to suffer "a second Holocaust." Fourth, his campaign to become Kadima's next leader -- and thus potentially Israel's next Prime Minister -- essentially boils down to this: "If Iran strikes first, or if Israel must launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran, who would you rather have as commander-in-chief, a diplomat like Tzipi Livni, or a military man like me?" Fifth, as a lifelong military leader, he is relatively new to the political arena, having been first elected to the Knesset in 2005. Yet even in this short period of time, he has been accused of flip-flopping on major political issues. As one Israeli media profile put it: "His political zigzagging was evident when he joined Kadima – a mere 48 hours after announcing to the world that the Likud was his political home forever and ever; or when he fiercely objected to the construction of the security fence – only to take charge of the operation; or when it came time to vote on the Gaza pullout – where he turned from one of the move's most adamant opponents to one of its most enthused advocates, almost overnight." That said, with the eyes of the nations increasingly on Israel and her neighbors, Shaul Mofaz is a man worth watching.

* Mofaz launches bid to head Israel's Kadima

* Ynet news profile: "Shaul Mofaz is ready to take Kadima, the government and Israel by storm. The man who beat the odds in every crucial point in his career believes his time has come. There's a vibe, he says, a victory vibe."

* Defiant Mofaz vows to beat frontrunner Livni in Kadima race

* Israeli official says Iran attack "unavoidable"

* IAEA slams Mofaz remark that attack on Iran seems 'unavoidable'

* Bush on Mofaz's threat: We must pressure Iran together

* Mofaz: Iran is the root of all evil, threat to world peace

GOOD NEWS FROM THE EPICENTER

Joel C. Rosenberg — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:46:00 +0000

Good news keeps pouring out of the epicenter. Oil prices are falling. Domestic gas prices are falling. Violence in Iraq continues dropping steadily. Moqtada al-Sadr, head of the Mahdi Army, is telling his forces to lay down their arms. And the U.S. just convicted one of Osama bin Laden's closest aides in the first military trial in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Are more tough times ahead? Undoubtedly. But let's take a moment to say a prayer of thanksgiving.

Excerpts from the AP story: A military jury reached a verdict Wednesday in the first Guantanamo war crimes trial. A spokeswoman for the military tribunals said the panel of six American military officers will soon deliver the decision in the case against Osama bin Laden's former driver. Salim Hamdan, a Yemeni, faced up to a life sentence if convicted of consipiracy or supporting terrorism after the 10-day trial, which provided the first demonstration of a special tribunal system for prosecuting alleged terrorists....Hamdan was captured at a roadblock in southern Afghanistan in November 2001 and taken to Guantanamo in May 2002. The military accused him of transporting missiles for al-Qaida and helping bin Laden escape U.S. retribution following the Sept. 11 attacks by driving him around Afghanistan. Defense attorneys said he was merely a low-level bin Laden employee."

------------------------

HEADLINES WORTH TRACKING:

* George Will describes Iraq war as "perhaps the worst foreign policy debacle in the nation’s history" -- fmr Bush aide responds

* [FLASHBACK: Pete Wehner: Responding to George Will's Realism (from 2006)]

* Iraq budget surplus could top $80 billion

* WSJ: Moqtada Packs It In

* Mahdi Army leader tells his forces to lay down arms

* Lower Oil Prices Ignite Big Rally; Dow Is Up by 331

* CNBC: Oil Prices Could Skid Below $80 a Barrel

DEAD HEAT, AGAIN

Joel C. Rosenberg — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 00:57:00 +0000

Senator Barack Obama's trip to the epicenter and Europe initially produced a large bounce in the polls. But all those gains have evaporated a week later. Today, the junior Senator from Illinois and Senator John McCain of Arizona are again in a dead heat. This, despite growing economic anxieties, including the loss of nearly a half-million American jobs this year -- bringing the unemployment rate up to 5.7% -- and GM losing $15 billion-plus in just the last three months, for a total of $51 billion in losses over the past three years. The only real good news in the economy at the moment: oil prices are down nearly $20 off the year's high, settling at the moment a bit around $122 a barrel. In turn, gas prices have dropped nearly 20 cents a gallon over the past few weeks. Worth noting: at this stage in the 1988 presidential campaign, Michael Dukakis was 17 points ahead of George H.W. Bush.

OLMERT TO RESIGN AFTER SEPT. 17

Joel C. Rosenberg — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:44:00 +0000

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will resign his office on or about September 17th. Suffering single digit approval ratings and haunted by numerous on-going corruption investigations, the Prime Minister just announced on national television that he will step down after the Kadima party primaries scheduled.

"I have decided I won't run in the Kadima movement primaries, nor do I intend to intervene in the elections," the embattled politician said just moments ago. "When a new (Kadima party) chairman is chosen, I will resign as prime minister to permit them to put together a new government swiftly and effectively....I want to make it clear – I am proud to be a citizen of a country where the prime minister can be investigated like a regular citizen. It is the duty of the police to investigate, and the duty of the prosecution to instruct the police. The prime minister is not above the law.... From my first day in office I was forced to ward off malicious attacks, even while dealing with far-reaching decisions affecting Israel's defense and existence. I continue to believe with all my heart that the achievement of peace, combating terror, strengthening our security, and the realization of a different type of relationship with our neighbors are all necessary goals for the future of the State of Israel."

It's not clear yet when new elections will be held. Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is currently well ahead of all contenders to replace Olmert, but Israeli politics are Byzantine, to say the least, and anything could happen. Israel's political crisis could not come at a worse time, with the real threat of war with Iran growing daily.

ALSO: Obama to House Dems: If Sanctions Fail, Israel Will Likely Strike Iran

VIOLENCE IN IRAQ CONTINUES TO DROP: Critics proved wrong

Joel C. Rosenberg — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:13:00 +0000

Remember all the nattering nabobs of negativism saying all was lost in Iraq? Remember the cynics and the skeptics who said the violence was spiraling out of control, and there was nothing the U.S. could do to win and should, therefore, just cut and run and leave the Iraqi people to fend for themselves?

If not, here are a few reminders: “I believe…that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) declared in April 2007. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) likewise insisted Iraq was a war we "cannot win." Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) said "invading Iraq has created a crisis of historic proportions" and that President Bush "misled, miscalculated and mismanaged every aspect of this undertaking and he has made the achievement of our objective -- a stable Iraq, secure within its borders, with a representative government -- harder to achieve." Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) said, "The reality is, we're losing Iraq" and added that "I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think...further destabilization will occur." On and on it went.

Well, the data continue to pour in. The news keeps getting better and better. The "surge" is working, the critics notwithstanding. Yesterday, USA Today published a story based on an interview with General David Petraeus, the senior U.S. commander on the ground in Iraq, slated later this year to become our CENTCOM commander.

A few excerpts are worth noting:

"U.S. combat deaths in Iraq appear headed to the lowest monthly total since the start of the war as the top U.S. general there said overall violence is declining toward 'normal' levels. Gen. David Petraeus cautioned, however, that the progress still could be reversed. Suicide attacks Monday in Iraq killed more than 50 Iraqis. 'If you could reduce these sensational attacks further, I think you are almost approaching a level of normal or latent violence,' Petraeus said in a phone interview Monday from Iraq. 'The fact that the levels of violence have come down so significantly and stayed down now for some two-and-a-half months … indicates there is a degree of durability,' Petraeus said. There have been six U.S. combat deaths so far in July, according to a USA TODAY database. The lowest monthly number was eight in May 2003, slightly more than a month after the invasion. Iraqi civilian deaths also have dropped. Although suicide attacks along with other violence has been declining, al-Qaeda retains the ability to bomb civilian targets and wreak havoc. Monday's attack was the deadliest in more than a month. 'Al-Qaeda, although significantly degraded … still can strap a suicide vest on an individual and push him or her into a crowd of Iraqis,' Petraeus said....Daily attacks during the past two months have averaged about 25 to 30, down from about 160 to 170 a little more than a year ago, Petraeus said."

We are winning. But let's be clear: we have not yet won. If we cut and run now, Iraq could still collapse into the hands of al Qaeda. Moreover, if we appear in anyway to be running from a battle with radical Islamic jihadists, we will embolden them to launch even more attacks against us.

While Iraq remains for now the central battleground in the battle between Radicals and Reformers, the Iran nuclear threat is growing. What will the U.S. do? What with NATO and the E.U. do? What will Israel do? Anything, before it's too late?

OTHER HEADLINES TO TRACK:

* Strike on Iran still possible, U.S. tells Israel

* Iran will not retreat in nuclear standoff: Khamenei

* Netanyahu still leading in polls to become next Prime Minister of Israel

UPDATE: WAR IN NOVEMBER?

Joel C. Rosenberg — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 02:47:00 +0000

Western intelligence analysts continue to look at the strong possibility that Israel could strike Iranian nuclear and military targets this fall, possibly in November. Now two new pieces of data need to be factored into the equation.

First, Iran now claims to have 6,000 operational centrifuges, feverishly enriching uranium. That is double the number operating at the beginning of the year. What's more, according to the Associated Press, "A total of 3,000 centrifuges is the commonly accepted figure for a nuclear enrichment program that is past the experimental stage and can be used as a platform for a full industrial-scale program that could churn out enough enriched material for dozens of nuclear weapons. Iran says it plans to move toward large-scale uranium enrichment that will ultimately involve 54,000 centrifuges."

Second, U.S. officials now believe Russia will not be delivering to Iran this fall a promised and paid for state-of-the-art ground-to-air missile system. The S-300 system was supposed to be delivered to the Iranians as early as September, and operational within 6 to 12 months of delivery, according to Reuters. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said: "We firmly believe, based upon our understanding of the situation, that the Iranians will not be receiving that Russian anti-aircraft system this year." This buys the Israelis more time, but also increases pressure on Jerusalem to strike the Iranians -- if they are going to strike at all -- before the Russian air defense system is delivered and operational, and probably while President Bush is still in office. That calculus has analysts looking to a possibly late fall or early winter preemptive strike. In many ways, the Israelis find themselves today in a situation somewhat like the spring of 1967 when Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser and other Arab leaders were vowing to "throw the Jews into the sea" and were surrounding the Jewish State with military firepower that posed an existential threat. Israel had to make a decision: strike first and hope to gain the advantage with the element of surprise, or wait to be hit, and risk being annihilated. Let's keep praying for peace, therefore. After all, the nations of the epicenter are clearly preparing for war.

OBAMA BACKS AWAY FROM PLEDGE FOR AN “UNDIVIDED” JERUSALEM: Calls his own AIPAC speech a “mistake”

Joel C. Rosenberg — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:58:00 +0000

Sen. Barack Obama made a surprise visit to the Western Wall in Jerusalem this morning, before leaving Israel for Germany. It was another good photo op for the junior Senator from Illinois. Nevertheless, many in Israel are feeling stunned by the Senator's statements in recent days backing away from a pledge he made in June supporting an "undivided" Jerusalem. Last night on ABC News, the Senator actually called his clear and powerful defense of Jerusalem -- delivered just last month at a conference of the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) -- a "mistake."

Consider the following string of statements:

* June 4, 2008:

"Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Arlington, Virginia)

* June 5, 2008:

Candy Crowley, CNN: "I want to ask you about something you said in AIPAC yesterday. You said that Jerusalem must remain undivided. Do Palestinians have no claim to Jerusalem in the future?"

Sen. Obama: "Well, obviously, it's going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues." (Interview with Sen. Obama, CNN's "The Situation Room," June 5, 2008)

* July 22, 2008:

Katie Couric, CBS News: "You said not too long ago that Jerusalem should remain undivided. And then you backtracked on that statement. Does that play into the argument that some believe that someone more experienced would not have made that kind of mistake?"

Sen. Obama: "Well, if you look at what happened, there was no shift in policy or backtracking in policy. We just had phrased it poorly in the speech. That has happened and will happen to every politician. You're not always gonna hit your mark in terms of how you phrase your policies. But my policy hasn't changed, and it's been very consistent. It's the same policy that Bill Clinton has put forward, and that says that Jerusalem will be the capital of Israel, that we shouldn't divide it by barbed wire, but that, ultimately that is a final status issue that has to be resolved between the Palestinians and the Israelis." ("Obama: Surge Doesn't Meet Long-Term Goals," CBS News, July 22, 2008)

* July 23, 2008:

Charlie Gibson, ABC News: "And then there's the issue of Jerusalem. You've said in the speech, to AIPAC, Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel. And it must remain undivided. When you said that did you not realize the significance that that has for so many people in this region?"

Sen. Obama: "Well, number one, the fact is that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. And so I was simply saying a fact, with respect to --"

Gibson: "You said 'must remain undivided,' (crosstalk) those are code words."

Obama: "Well the issue of it being undivided, I have said and I said immediately after the speech that that word was poorly chosen, that what I was referring to is making sure that we're not setting up barbed wire across Israel --"

Gibson: "But Senator, it was a very simple, declarative statement. It must remain, and you started the paragraph by saying, 'Let me be clear'--"

Obama: "Charlie, the day after, or the day of making the speech I conceded that the wording was poor, and it's immediately corrected --"

Gibson: "Rookie mistake?"

Obama: "Well I wouldn't say rookie mistake, I think that veterans make mistakes as well." ("Gibson Interviews Obama," ABC News, July 23, 2008)

OBAMA IN THE EPICENTER

Joel C. Rosenberg — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:18:00 +0000

The race for President of the United States is currently in a dead heat. I have absolutely no idea who is going to win this thing, and anyone who tells you they do is just guessing. Remember: a year ago, the pundits said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was a "sure thing" to win the Democratic nomination, and Sen. John McCain was a "sure thing" not to win the GOP nomination. The pundits were wrong then. I wouldn't put much stock in them now....That said, Sen. Barack Obama faces a very real and daunting hurdle to victory in November. Only 48% of Americans think he would be a strong and decisive enough Commander-in-Chief to lead the U.S. through what could be a tumultous next four years, according to a poll released last week by ABC News. Another 48% are convinced Sen. Obama would specifically not be a good Commander-in-Chief. By contrast, 72% of Americans believe Sen. John McCain would lead our military forces well, while only 25% say he would not. Understand that gap and you'll understand precisely why Obama this week is in the epicenter....With all eyes fixed on Israel and her neighbors and the conflicts that consume them, the junior Senator from Illinois realizes his international record does not inspire confidence. He has no military experience and precious little foreign policy experience, certainly none to compare with to Sen. McCain, a bonafide war hero who has been engaged in every major foreign policy debate of the last quarter century. To win in November, Obama has to close that perception gap. He has to convince more Americans that he is ready for whatever comes next, be it more terrorism from al Qaeda, or an orderly transition of power in Iraq, or -- heaven forbid -- a full blown war with Iran. So he is meeting with foreign leaders as well as U.S. military commanders on the ground in Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan and Israel and hoping at the very least that the pictures Americans see on TV and in the newspapers from his whirlwind tour will cause them to begin to see him as a world leader and ease their many doubts....While it's true that a picture is worth a thousand words, even a week's worth of photos may not be enough. After all, the Senator's core problem is not simply that he lacks the requisite experience. It's the widespread perception that he lacks the necessary judgment when it comes to the most troubling issues of the Middle East. Consider two examples, Iraq and Iran.

-----------------------------

IRAQ -- From the moment President Bush announced that he was taking Sen. McCain's advice to send more U.S. troops to Iraq to crush the insurgency and restore order, Sen. Obama has been a fierce critic of the "surge," arguing not only that it would not help, but that it would actually make the situation worse. "I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are going tosolve the sectarian violence there," Obama said on January 17, 2007. "In fact, I think it will do the reverse." Eighteen months later, the results are in: the "surge" has been an astounding success. Things didn't get worse. They got better. Much better. Violent attacks against U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians are down 80%. More than 90% of Iraqi terroritory is now quite safe. More than 70% of combat operations in Iraq are now led by Iraqi forces, with U.S. assistance. Yet Sen. Obama struggles to acknowlege the success and refuses to describe his decision to vote against the "surge" as a mistake. Consider this exchange yesterday with Terry Moran of ABC News.

Moran: "'[T]he surge of U.S. troops, combined with ordinary Iraqis' rejection of both al Qaeda and Shiite extremists have transformed the country. Attacks are down more than 80% nationwide. U.S. combat casualties have plummeted, five this month so far, compared with 78 last July, and Baghdad has a pulse again.' If you had to do it over again, knowing what you know now, would you -- would you support the surge?"

Obama: "No, because -- keep in mind that -"

Moran: "You wouldn't?"

Obama: "Well, no, keep -- these kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult. Hindsight is 20/20. I think what I am absolutely convinced of is that at that time, we had to change the political debate, because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with."

Moran: "And so, when pressed, Barack Obama says he still would have opposed the surge."

----------------------------

IRAN -- In May of this year, Sen. Obama told a town hall meeting that he thought of Iran as small and relatively harmless country, hardly a major threat to the United States, Israel or our allies in the Middle East. “I mean think about it.," he told a group of supporters. "Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us....You know, Iran, they spend one-one hundredth of what we spend on the military." His aides and advisors were horrified. Even Sen. Clinton conceded Iran was a major threat -- particularly given the regime's lust for nuclear weapons --though she refused to offer a plan to neutralize the threat. So the next day, the Senator flip-flopped. He told a new audience a new story, that he actually does believe Iran is a threat. But Obama's original, unscripted remarks were telling. In his heart, Sen. Obama does not actually believe the regime led by the Ayatollah Khameini and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are deeply and inherently dangerous. He sees Iran as a nuisance, not a forthcoming nuclear-armed power. That is why he is so adamant about wanting to sit down and negotiate personally with Ahmadinejad, without preconditions. His official website actually boasts about this position. "Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions," it reads. But to what end?....Has Sen. Obama actually studied the speeches of Khameini and Ahmadinejad? Has he studied their eschatology, or end times theology? Has he been properly briefed on how this eschatology is driving Iranian foreign policy? No one who truly understands what the current Iranian leadership believes could honestly conclude that they can be successfully negotiated with, much less deterred. Ahmadinejad, after all, believes it is his God-given mission to annihilate the U.S., Israel and Judeo-Christian civilization as we know. Why? To create the conditions that will bring the Islamic Messiah known as the Mahdi or the "12th Imam" to earth. Ahmadinejad is not just another power-hungry dictator in the mold of the Soviet or Chinese leaders of yore. He is a Shia Islamic fascist. He believes his life destiny is to kill millions of Jews and Christians and usher in an Islamic caliphate. He believes he is a John-the-Baptist, a forerunner, of the Islamic Messiah. If he dies, he believes he will spend eternity in paradise with 72 virgins. But he doesn't really believe he's going to die. He believes he has been chosen for a divine appointment, and that nothing can stop him. That is what makes him so dangerous. Unfortunately, too many Washington politicians -- Sen. Obama included -- do not understand this.

---------------------------

Bottom line: I am glad Sen. Obama and his team are traveling through the epicenter this week. My prayer is that aside from all the lights and cameras and political stagecraft, the Senator is able to hear and discern true wisdom about the actual conditions and trendlines in the region. I hope he is able to come away with a new sense of the high stakes of American failure or success in Iraq, and a palpable sense of the rising threat from Iran. The eyes of the nations are riveted on the Middle East for a reason. The future of the world increasingly depends on what happens there, and the future of America depends a great deal on having a President who understands the times and knows what the U.S. should do.

----------------------------------

* "60 Ways To Bless Israel At 60"

* Would you consider signing up to make a monthly donation to The Joshua Fund of $25, $40 or $60? All donations are tax deductible. For more information on how to make contributions by mail -- or by secure on-line credit card transactions -- please click here.

* What is The Joshua Fund?

* Sign up for Flash Traffic, free email alerts from Joel C. Rosenberg

* Dead Heat: A Novel (34% off at Amazon)

* Epicenter: Why The Current Rumblings In The Middle East Will Change Your Future (32% off at Amazon)

* Epicenter documentary film on DVD

REMEMBERING TONY SNOW: A column he wrote for Christianity Today

Joel C. Rosenberg — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:18:00 +0000

From the editors of Christianity Today: Commentator and broadcaster Tony Snow announced that he had colon cancer in 2005. Following surgery and chemo-therapy, Snow joined the Bush administration in April 2006 as press secretary. Unfortunately, on March 23 Snow, 51, a husband and father of three, announced that the cancer had recurred, with tumors found in his abdomen—leading to surgery in April, followed by more chemotherapy. Snow went back to work in the White House Briefing Room on May 30, but resigned August 31. CT asked Snow what spiritual lessons he has been learning through the ordeal.

Cancer's Unexpected Blessings
When you enter the Valley of the Shadow of Death, things change.

By Tony Snow

Christianity Today

July 20, 2007

Blessings arrive in unexpected packages—in my case, cancer.

Those of us with potentially fatal diseases—and there are millions in America today—find ourselves in the odd position of coping with our mortality while trying to fathom God's will. Although it would be the height of presumption to declare with confidence What It All Means, Scripture provides powerful hints and consolations.

The first is that we shouldn't spend too much time trying to answer the why questions: Why me? Why must people suffer? Why can't someone else get sick? We can't answer such things, and the questions themselves often are designed more to express our anguish than to solicit an answer.

I don't know why I have cancer, and I don't much care. It is what it is—a plain and indisputable fact. Yet even while staring into a mirror darkly, great and stunning truths begin to take shape. Our maladies define a central feature of our existence: We are fallen. We are imperfect. Our bodies give out.

But despite this—because of it—God offers the possibility of salvation and grace. We don't know how the narrative of our lives will end, but we get to choose how to use the interval between now and the moment we meet our Creator face-to-face.

Second, we need to get past the anxiety. The mere thought of dying can send adrenaline flooding through your system. A dizzy, unfocused panic seizes you. Your heart thumps; your head swims. You think of nothingness and swoon. You fear partings; you worry about the impact on family and friends. You fidget and get nowhere.

To regain footing, remember that we were born not into death, but into life—and that the journey continues after we have finished our days on this earth. We accept this on faith, but that faith is nourished by a conviction that stirs even within many nonbelieving hearts—an intuition that the gift of life, once given, cannot be taken away. Those who have been stricken enjoy the special privilege of being able to fight with their might, main, and faith to live—fully, richly, exuberantly—no matter how their days may be numbered.

Third, we can open our eyes and hearts. God relishes surprise. We want lives of simple, predictable ease—smooth, even trails as far as the eye can see—but God likes to go off-road. He provokes us with twists and turns. He places us in predicaments that seem to defy our endurance and comprehension—and yet don't. By his love and grace, we persevere. The challenges that make our hearts leap and stomachs churn invariably strengthen our faith and grant measures of wisdom and joy we would not experience otherwise.

'You Have Been Called'

Picture yourself in a hospital bed. The fog of anesthesia has begun to wear away. A doctor stands at your feet; a loved one holds your hand at the side. "It's cancer," the healer announces.
The natural reaction is to turn to God and ask him to serve as a cosmic Santa. "Dear God, make it all go away. Make everything simpler." But another voice whispers: "You have been called."

Your quandary has drawn you closer to God, closer to those you love, closer to the issues that matter—and has dragged into insignificance the banal concerns that occupy our "normal time."
There's another kind of response, although usually short-lived—an inexplicable shudder of excitement, as if a clarifying moment of calamity has swept away everything trivial and tinny, and placed before us the challenge of important questions.

The moment you enter the Valley of the Shadow of Death, things change. You discover that Christianity is not something doughy, passive, pious, and soft. Faith may be the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. But it also draws you into a world shorn of fearful caution. The life of belief teems with thrills, boldness, danger, shocks, reversals, triumphs, and epiphanies. Think of Paul, traipsing though the known world and contemplating trips to what must have seemed the antipodes (Spain), shaking the dust from his sandals, worrying not about the morrow, but only about the moment.

There's nothing wilder than a life of humble virtue—for it is through selflessness and service that God wrings from our bodies and spirits the most we ever could give, the most we ever could offer, and the most we ever could do.

Finally, we can let love change everything. When Jesus was faced with the prospect of crucifixion, he grieved not for himself, but for us. He cried for Jerusalem before entering the holy city. From the Cross, he took on the cumulative burden of human sin and weakness, and begged for forgiveness on our behalf.

We get repeated chances to learn that life is not about us—that we acquire purpose and satisfaction by sharing in God's love for others. Sickness gets us partway there. It reminds us of our limitations and dependence. But it also gives us a chance to serve the healthy. A minister friend of mine observes that people suffering grave afflictions often acquire the faith of two people, while loved ones accept the burden of two people's worries and fears.

Learning How to Live

Most of us have watched friends as they drifted toward God's arms not with resignation, but with peace and hope. In so doing, they have taught us not how to die, but how to live. They have emulated Christ by transmitting the power and authority of love.

I sat by my best friend's bedside a few years ago as a wasting cancer took him away. He kept at his table a worn Bible and a 1928 edition of the Book of Common Prayer. A shattering grief disabled his family, many of his old friends, and at least one priest. Here was a humble and very good guy, someone who apologized when he winced with pain because he thought it made his guest uncomfortable. He retained his equanimity and good humor literally until his last conscious moment. "I'm going to try to beat [this cancer]," he told me several months before he died. "But if I don't, I'll see you on the other side."

His gift was to remind everyone around him that even though God doesn't promise us tomorrow, he does promise us eternity—filled with life and love we cannot comprehend—and that one can in the throes of sickness point the rest of us toward timeless truths that will help us weather future storms.

Through such trials, God bids us to choose: Do we believe, or do we not? Will we be bold enough to love, daring enough to serve, humble enough to submit, and strong enough to acknowledge our limitations? Can we surrender our concern in things that don't matter so that we might devote our remaining days to things that do?

When our faith flags, he throws reminders in our way. Think of the prayer warriors in our midst. They change things, and those of us who have been on the receiving end of their petitions and intercessions know it.

It is hard to describe, but there are times when suddenly the hairs on the back of your neck stand up, and you feel a surge of the Spirit. Somehow you just know: Others have chosen, when talking to the Author of all creation, to lift us up—to speak of us!

This is love of a very special order. But so is the ability to sit back and appreciate the wonder of every created thing. The mere thought of death somehow makes every blessing vivid, every happiness more luminous and intense. We may not know how our contest with sickness will end, but we have felt the ineluctable touch of God.

What is man that Thou art mindful of him? We don't know much, but we know this: No matter where we are, no matter what we do, no matter how bleak or frightening our prospects, each and every one of us, each and every day, lies in the same safe and impregnable place—in the hollow of God's hand.