Sound The Trumpet : What Will History Record

Must Listen

Must Read

What Art Thinks

Pre-Millennialism

Today's Headlines

Sorry... Not Available

Locally Contributed...

Audio

Video

Special Interest

Daily News

6623

“What Will History Record”
by Jerusalem Watchman
May 29th, 2009

That in mid-May, 2009, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appealed to the United States to make a priority of stopping Iran from pursuing the nuclear bomb that threatens Israel’s existence.

That the Obama administration refused.

And that just over one week later, America was standing on the edge of a potential nuclear conflict with North Korea, which test-fired an atomic warhead and launched a handful of surface-to-surface missiles in a defiant show of force.

Let me be clear: I do not claim that what I am about to write is “a word from the Lord.” Some of the thoughts I will express here have simply “dropped into my head” over the last 24 hours; they came without any leading from a third party and, while they resonate in my spirit, they have not been confirmed by two or three witnesses; or even one. Nor have I had any dreams or visions about this.

On May 18, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met in the White House with the president of the United States, Barack Obama.

Both the run-up to and aftermath of that much anticipated meeting have been spun every which way by the media, with a solid majority of columnists and talk show hosts focusing in on “the relationship,” on “reading between the lines” and on analyzing the “body language” between the two.

Some harked back to the days when frigid winds blew in the Clinton White House after a Netanyahu visit during the Israeli’s first tenure in office. Would “Bibi” again forget his “place?” Watchers saw a nervous “regional power medium weight” sitting opposite a self-assured “global superpower heavyweight,” and they gave the American kudos for not allowing Netanyahu to “deflect” him from the “real obstacle to peace,” that is, Jewish settlements. To other observers,Netanyahu strongly withstood the not inconsiderable pressures an American administration can bring to bear. He stuck to his guns, refused to subscribe to the “two-state solution” and should have been welcomed home as a hero. (He wasn’t.)

There was more; much more analysis, from serious reporters and from the fringe, underscoring why the profession is often referred to as a media circus.

But let’s put aside the fluff of press predilections and spinmeister speculations, and get to the substance of what’s really taken place.

It’s a matter of gravest consequence.

Netanyahu didn’t go to the White House seeking a photo opportunity. He went to ask for American leadership and support in dealing with the out-of-control Iranian nuclear threat that is primarily directed against the Jewish state.

From the day of his inauguration on March 31, Netanyahu has been looking for Washington to take Iran seriously.

“If you don’t stop Iran, I’ll have to,” he messaged Obama, just hours before being sworn in.

Instead of responding appropriately, the American dissembled. Get going with the two-state solution, Obama shot back, and we’ll be better able to deal with Tehran.

This was Obama’s response too when the two leaders spoke to the press after their May 18 meeting.

Netanyahu said “the worst danger Israel faces is that Iran would develop nuclear military capabilities.”

“Iran openly calls for our destruction, which is unacceptable. It threatens the moderate Arab regimes in the Middle East. It threatens US interests worldwide. But if Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, it could give a nuclear umbrella to terrorists or worse, could actually give them nuclear weapons. And that would put us all in great peril.”

Netanyahu’s position was that it was necessary to deal with Iran first, and with the “Palestinian” question later.

Obama publicly disputed him.

“If there is a linkage between Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, I personally believe it actually runs the other way,” the American said. “To the extent that we can make peace with the Palestinians — between the Palestinians and the Israelis, then I actually think it strengthens our hand in the international community in dealing with the potential Iranian threat.”

The president went on to suggest that he might reassess his “let’s talk” approach to Iran if, by year’s end, there was no sign it was having an affect. Netanyahu expressed his appreciation, but administration officials “close to Obama” later quickly emphasized that no deadline had been set.

What, in fact, do we have here?

Israel’s leader has asked the US to help stop Iran from acquiring the means to inflict a holocaust on the Jews.

America’s leader is not willing to go that way. On the contrary, as The Jerusalem Post’s Caroline Glick wrote, the Obama “administration has made its peace with Iran’s nuclear aspirations. Senior administration officials acknowledge as much in off-record briefings. It is true, they say, that Iran may exploit its future talks with the US to run down the clock before they test a nuclear weapon. But, they add, if that happens, the US will simply have to live with a nuclear-armed mullocracy.”

Two days after Netanyahu met with Obama, Iran successfully test fired a ‘Sajil’ surface-to-surface missile with a 1,200 mile range. Israel is less than 1000 miles from Iran.

Two days later, on May 22, a public survey indicated that one in four Israelis is so fearful of the specter of a nuclear Iran that they plan to leave their homeland forever if the mullahs get their hands on the bomb.

On May 24 Iran’s former Revolutionary Guards chief Mohsen Rezai warned that his country “understands missiles and tanks as well as foreign policy and knows exactly where Israel’s sensitive spots are. It could stop them forever with one strike.”

On May 25, a grim-faced Bibi told his cabinet: If we don’t deal with Iran, no one will.

On May 27, a new poll found that 51 percent of Israelis want the IDF to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities now. This despite Bibi’s warning to expect a large number of Israeli casualties if a strike goes down. Iranians have boasted that they have the capability to destroy Israel within just 11 days.

Also on May 27, Iran deployed six warships and other vessels into international waters in what Fox News called a “saber-rattling” move.

For five days this coming week the world, and specifically the United States government, will watch the Israeli nation ready for full scale war in the largest ever national military exercise since 1948.

But Netanyahu’s appeal for America to step up to the plate has fallen on deaf ears.

Instead, the Obama administration finds the idea of “reaching out to the Muslim world” more appealing just now.

And it knows that one of the most effective ways it can do that is by pushing Israel into compliance with the ‘Arab Peace Initiative.’

Thus did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emphasize Wednesday the American “expectation” that Israel would immediately comply with the Arab demand that it halt any and all settlement activity.

President Obama “wants to see a stop to settlements - not some settlements, not outposts, not ‘natural growth’ exceptions,” Clinton said. “We think it is in the best interests [of the peace process] that settlement expansion cease. That is our position. That is what we have communicated very clearly. … And we intend to press that point.”

Do they?

How interesting then, that exactly one week after spurning Israel’s appeal, the United States this week suddenly finds itself confronting a nuclear-detonating, missile launching North Korea?

Is it really just happenstance that Hillary Clinton Wednesday evening, at the same news conference, in almost the same breath, was leveling stern warnings at both Jerusalem and Pyongyang?

Or is Someone Else fighting for Israel?

History will tell.

Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13