"Israel ready to destroy LAF in 4 hours"
The US warned Lebanon that if it did not prevent any recurrence of the border-fire incident that occurred earlier this month, the IDF would destroy the Lebanese Armed Forces within four hours, Israel Radio cited a report by Lebanese newspaper A-Liwaa on Friday.
According to the report, Frederick Hoff, assistant to US Middle East Peace Envoy George Mitchell, told Lebanese Army chief of staff Jean Kahwaji that Israel was ready to implement a plan to destroy within four hours all Lebanese military infrastructure, including army bases and offices, should a similar confrontation occur in the future.
"Report: Israel to attack Hizbullah weapons stores in Syria"
Israel is preparing a military strike against Hizbullah weapons depots in Syria, Kuwaiti newspaper Alrai reported on Saturday.
The report cites European military sources as stating that Israel has increased flights of unmanned aerial reconnaissance vehicles over the border with Syria and that such activity is a sign of an imminent attack.
According to the report, the sources added that in response to Israel's preparation for an attack, Syria's anti-aircraft defenses are in a state of high alert.
"France willing to arm Lebanon with 100 missiles"
France has expressed willingness to provide the Lebanese army with helicopter missiles as part of a deal which has yet to be signed, the London-based Arabic-language al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper reported Thursday, quoting an official French source.
According to the report, French Defense Minister Herve Morin sent a letter to his Lebanese counterpart Elias Murr informing him that Paris is "willing to equip the Lebanese Army with 100 HOT missiles to be installed on French-made Gazelle helicopters which the Lebanese Armed Forces owns."
Earlier this week, Lebanese President Michel Suleiman asked Iran for help in arming the Lebanese military.
So what we have here, is Lebanon continuing their arms build-up in a very public way, and Israel threatening to destroy these arms in a very public way. The brinksmanship can continue for a while, but like any fight sooner or later violence is going to erupt - and when it does it will do so in a big way...A very big way.
In related news, I have been waiting for Caroline Glick to weigh in on recent developments with Iran and their nuclear progress. She didn't disappoint:
"Our World: Accepting the unacceptable"
Last weekend the mullahs took a big step towards becoming a nuclear power as they fueled the Bushehr nuclear reactor.
Israel’s response? The Foreign Ministry published a statement proclaiming the move “unacceptable.”
So why did we accept the unacceptable? When one asks senior officials about the Bushehr reactor and about Iran’s nuclear program more generally, their response invariably begins, “Well the Americans...”
BEFORE GOING into the question of whether Israel’s decision-makers were correct in opting out of attacking the Bushehr reactor to prevent it from being fueled, it is worth considering where “the Americans” stand on Iran as it declares itself a nuclear power and tests new, advanced weapons systems on a daily basis.
Riedel’s reason for deeming an Israeli strike unacceptable is his conviction that such an operation will be met by an Iranian counter-strike against US forces and interests in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan. While there is no reason to doubt he is correct, Riedel studiously ignores the other certainty: A nuclear-armed Iran would threaten those same troops and interests far more.
Thats all bad enough, but perhaps the worst aspect of Iran's accomplishments is the following:
Moreover, Riedel ignores what any casual newspaper reader now recognizes: Iran’s nuclear weapons program has spurred a regional nuclear arms race. Riedel imagines a bipolar nuclear Middle East, with Israel on the one side and Iran on the other. He fails to notice that already today Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan and Turkey have all initiated nuclear programs.
And if Iran is allowed to go nuclear, these countries will beat a path to any number of nuclear bomb stores.
And in truth, there is no reason to believe that a Middle East in which everyone has nuclear weapons is a Middle East that adheres to the rules of MAD. A recent Zogby/University of Maryland poll of Arab public opinion taken for the Brookings Institute in US-allied Arab states Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the UAE shows that the Arab world is populated by jihadists.
Now we see the possibility that the glaring obvious is becoming apparent to even the most blind:
All of this should not be beyond the grasp of an experienced strategic thinker like Riedel. And yet, obviously, it is. Moreover, as an alumnus of the Clinton administration, Riedel’s positions in general are more realistic than those of the Obama administration. As Israeli officials acknowledge, the Obama administration is only now coming to terms with the fact that its engagement policy towards Iran has failed.
To close, she identifies the central problem Israel faces, and it's not even the U.S.
Only one possibility remains: Netanyahu must have opted to sit on his hands as Bushehr was powered up because of opposition he faces from within his government. There is only one person in Netanyahu’s coalition who has both the strategic dementia and the political power to force Netanyahu to accept the unacceptable.
That person is Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
Barak’s strategic ineptitude is legendary. It was most recently on display in the failed naval commando takeover of the Turkish-Hamas terror ship Mavi Marmara. It was Barak’s idea to arm naval commandos with paintball guns and so guarantee that they would be attacked and forced to use lethal force to defend themselves.
Predictably, the U.S. is involved in Israel's inability to take definitive action:
Barak is the Obama administration’s favorite Israeli politician. While Netanyahu is shunned, Barak is feted in Washington nearly every month. And this makes sense. As the man directly responsible for Israel’s defense and with his stranglehold on the government, he alone has the wherewithal to enable the entire Middle East to go nuclear.
How’s that for unacceptable?
The prophetic table is being set, and we see evidence of this daily.
The preparations that are being made, both by Israel and by Israel's enemies are leading directly to the epic wars described in biblical prophecy.
The world is on the brink. But so is The Church. We are both on the brink of very big things, but different things. The world is on the brink of seeing the most epic period of destruction that he world has ever witnessed.
And The Church is on the brink of something even more epic. Something FAR better than the world will face.
Jack Kelly weighs in on this, and this article is most definitely worth reading:
"As it was in the days of Noah"
His conclusion sums it up:
The Bible declares that the Holy Spirit is sealed within believers as a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance (Ephes. 1:13-14). Paul wrote that the Holy Spirit will be withdrawn from earth sometime before the anti- Christ is allowed to trigger the judgment known as the Great Tribulation (2 Thes. 2:7). Withdrawing the Holy Spirit without removing the Church would break God’s promise to us since it would require “unsealing” the Holy Spirit from within us. That’s something that God can’t do. “What I have said, that will I bring about,” He declares. “What I have planned, that will I do.” (Isaiah 46:11)
If Enoch is indeed a model of the church and if the Lord’s prophecy of Matt 24:37 is meant to describe the sequence of end times events, as seems likely, then one day soon we will be taken alive (raptured) from earth like Enoch was, and the Holy Spirit will be withdrawn. Man’s behavior will quickly become unbearably wicked and the judgment will come, all in that order. As it was in the days of Noah. Selah 08-21-10.
Amen. Come quickly Lord.