Pentagon Gearing Up for Space Warfare


 

Are you or have ever been a Sci-Fi fan? I was an enormous fan in my teens and early adulthood. Today I am more a Sci-Fi dabbler than an obsessed fan. Here is the reason I share this hobby predilection.

 

Any future global war will have a military venue that most people do not imagine in the present unless – you have been or are a Sci-Fi fan.

 

I just read a Bill Gertz article in which the phrase “Space Warfare” is a serious military subject in which current military rivals are central figures. Science Fiction is a heartbeat away from being Science Fact in the National Security interests for the United States of America. (Unless of course Snowflake Obamanites guide our foreign policy into oblivion.)

 

JRH 3/8/18

Please Support NCCR

*******************

Pentagon Gearing Up for Space Warfare

New policy warns of counterattacks against space attacks

 

By Bill Gertz

March 8, 2018 5:00 am

Washington Free Beacon

 

Under Secretary of Defense for Policy John Rood / Getty Images

 

The Pentagon is preparing for war should China, Russia, or other adversaries attack vital American satellites and other space systems, a senior Pentagon official told Congress on Wednesday.

 

John Rood, undersecretary of defense for policy, testified before a House subcommittee that the Trump administration’s new defense policy calls for conducting military and other operations in response to space attacks, mainly by China and Russia.

 

Rood said American space systems are essential for “our prosperity, security, and way of life.”

 

“And [Defense Department] space capabilities are critical for effective deterrence, defense, and force projection capabilities,” he told a hearing of the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces.

 

“Due to the critical importance of these assets, the national security strategy states, ‘any harmful interference with or attack upon critical components of our space architecture that directly affects this vital U.S. interest will be met with a deliberate response at a time, place, manner, and domain of our choosing.'”

 

The statement on space defense was the first clear policy announcement by a senior U.S. official outlining “declaratory policy” normally reserved for strategic nuclear weapons use.

 

The new policy represents a break from the policies of the Obama administration that sought to promote transparency initiatives and arms control agreements as a way to limit space weapons or conflict in space.

 

The policy likely will be opposed by arms control advocates, and by both China and Russia, which have been promoting agreements limiting space weapons at the United Nations while secretly building arms for space conflict.

 

Rood said the Pentagon has requested $12.5 billion in funding for the fiscal year 2019 that begins Oct. 1 for building up what he termed a “more resilient defendable space architecture.”

 

The request is $1.1 billion more than funding for last year on military space.

 

Rood, and Air Force Gen. John Hyten, commander of the Omaha-based Strategic Command, testified on the command’s budget request of $24 billion.

 

Neither elaborated on what space warfare capabilities are being developed. The Pentagon also has not said how it would deter and defend satellites from attack.

 

Space defense so far has involved development of intelligence capabilities to identify and assess if an incident in space is an attack, or the result of a malfunction or disruption due to collision with space debris.

 

Military space “resilience” also calls for the Pentagon to rapidly replace or restore satellites after attacks or other disruptions.

 

The Pentagon’s Defense Science Board, in a report last year, warned that the vulnerability of U.S. satellites to electronic attack was “a crisis to be dealt with immediately.”

 

The Joint Staff intelligence directorate warned earlier this year that China and Russia will have fully developed space attack weapons in place by 2020 that will threaten all U.S. satellites in low earth orbit—100 miles to 1,200 miles in space.

 

More than 780 orbiting satellites operated by 43 nations are currently in low-earth orbit and are vulnerable to electronic or kinetic attacks.

 

Satellites form the backbone of the U.S. military’s ability to conduct combined arms warfare over long distances. They provide communications, navigation, intelligence and surveillance, weapons targeting, and attack warning.

 

Analysts say anti-satellites attacks knocking out 12 Global Positioning System satellites, located in medium-earth orbit around 12,550 miles high, would be severely degraded military operations.

 

U.S. space weapons are likely to match anti-satellite weaponry developed by both China and Russia. That would include several types of weapons and capabilities, ranging from advanced missile defense interceptors modified for space attacks on satellites, cyber warfare capabilities to disrupt or destroy anti-satellite and space weapons systems both in space and on the ground, and lasers and electronic jammers.

 

A defense source said one of the more stealthy anti-satellite capabilities being considered is a laser weapon capable of overheating an orbiting satellite that would disrupt or destroy electronic components.

 

Small satellites with robotic arms capable of maneuvering and grabbing or crushing satellites also could be developed. Such satellites have been tested by China.

 

The experimental space plane known as the X-37B, that has been secretly tested on long-duration flights in space, is also said to be a potential platform for delivering weapons and fighting in space.

 

Hyten, the Stratcom commander, said in his prepared statement that the Pentagon and National Reconnaissance Office are implementing a “space warfighting construct.”

 

“This construct supports the national space policy and focuses on the forces, operations, and systems needed to prevail in a conflict that extends into space,” he said.

 

“Space is a warfighting domain just like the air, ground, maritime, and cyberspace domains,” Hyten said.

 

Currently, a defense and intelligence center called the National Space Defense Center [Blog Editor: NSDC info], located at Schriever Air Force Base, Colorado, runs 24-hour operations for rapid detection, warning, and defense from space attacks.

 

War games involving space war also are held regularly with U.S. military forces and allies, including Asian and European allies.

 

Hyten also revealed that U.S. adversaries will deploy hypersonic strike vehicles—that can travel at more than 7,000 miles per hour—in the next few years.

 

China has conducted at least seven tests of hypersonic vehicles and Russia as well has conducted several hypersonic missile tests.

 

The hypersonic vehicles are designed to defeat missile defenses.

 

Hyten urged speeding up U.S. development of hypersonic strike weapons as well as what he termed conventional prompt strike weapons.

 

“New long-range, survivable, lethal, and time-sensitive strike capabilities, such as a hypersonic (conventional prompt strike) weapon, will allow the U.S. to achieve its military objectives in these environments,” Hyten said. “This new weapon class prevents adversaries from exploiting time and distance and provides additional response options below the nuclear threshold.”

 

Rood said U.S. missile defenses currently are configured for countering missile threats from North Korea and Iran and are not capable of stopping strategic strikes from China and Russia.

 

The undersecretary described China and Russia as the “central challenges” for the Pentagon in an increasingly complex military threat environment. “Both Russia and China are seeking to reshape the world order,” he said.

 

Rep. Mike Rogers (R., Ala.), the subcommittee chairman, has been pressing for creation of a separate space corps within the Air Force.

 

Defense legislation passed last year calls for a study on the issue and for recognizing space as a warfighting domain.

 

“These were the first steps down a long path in the right direction,” Rogers said. “Much remains to be done here to ensure we’re postured to both successfully deter a conflict in space, and if need be, prevail over any adversary if a conflict extends into space.”

 

Rogers said for space defense, the Air Force has discussed the idea of shifting from large satellites to many smaller satellites. “But what I’ve seen so far in the FY ’19 budget isn’t convincing me we’re heading in that direction fast enough,” he said.

 

As part of the Pentagon’s budget for nuclear modernization, two modified nuclear weapons are planned.

 

One is a smaller warhead on submarine-launched ballistic missiles, to counter Russia’s development of a new nuclear cruise missile in violation of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Force Treaty.

 

A second smaller nuclear weapon will be a new sea-launched nuclear cruise missile designed to counter China’s large arsenal of medium and intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

 

The Pentagon also is bolstering the ground-based anti-missile interceptor force now located in Alaska and California. Twenty additional interceptors will be added to the 44 interceptors currently in place.

 

The added missiles are designed to counter North Korean and Iranian long-range missile threats.

 

Rood said the Pentagon is considering a third anti-missile interceptor base on the East Coast but has not made a final decision.

 

The third base will be part of the Pentagon’s forthcoming Missile Defense Review that is nearing completion.

 

Rood said recent disclosures of new strategic nuclear capabilities by Russia were known to the Pentagon. The statements were “not surprising but disappointing,” he said.

 

As for China, Rood warned that China is “developing a very large strategic offensive nuclear force.”

 

“Both countries are pursuing hypersonic weapons and other capabilities and their behavior in the cyber realm concerns us,” he said. “All of those things apiece are concerning and why in the national defense strategy we highlighted those two countries as our primary and central focus for our national security efforts going forward.”

 

Asked if the U.S. doctrine of mutual assured destruction used to deter nuclear conflict with China and Russia will endure, Hyten said: “I don’t think we have to worry about that for at least a decade.”

 

U.S. strategic nuclear capabilities will remain strong enough to keep the doctrine in place, he added.

 

Hyten said Strategic Command is interested in developing missile defenses capable of knocking out missiles in the early stages of flight.

 

Direct energy and cyber attacks are two possible weapons.

______________________

Bill Gertz is senior editor of the Washington Free Beacon. Prior to joining the Beacon he was a national security reporter, editor, and columnist for 27 years at the Washington Times. Bill is the author of seven books, four of which were national bestsellers. His most recent book was iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age, a look at information warfare in its many forms and the enemies that are waging it. Bill has an international reputation. Vyachaslav Trubnikov, head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, once called him a “tool of the CIA” after he wrote an article exposing Russian intelligence operations in the Balkans. A senior CIA official once threatened to have a cruise missile fired at his desk after he wrote a column critical of the CIA’s analysis of China. And China’s communist government has criticized him for news reports exposing China’s weapons and missile sales to rogues states. The state-run Xinhua news agency in 2006 identified Bill as the No. 1 “anti-China expert” in the world. Bill insists he is very much pro-China—pro-Chinese people and opposed to the communist system. Former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld once told him: “You are drilling holes in the Pentagon and sucking out information.” His Twitter handle is @BillGertz.

 

 Email Bill | Full Bio

 

© 2018 All Rights Reserved

 

About Washington Free Beacon

 

“How stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that: After 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.” —Ronald Reagan, Farewell Address, January 11, 1989

 

The Washington Free Beacon is a privately owned, for-profit online newspaper that began publication on February 7, 2012. Dedicated to uncovering the stories that the powers that be hope will never see the light of day, the Free Beacon produces in-depth investigative reporting on a wide range of issues, including public policy, government affairs, international security, and media. Whether it’s exposing cronyism, finding out just who is shaping our domestic and foreign policy and why, or highlighting the threats to American security and peace in a dangerous world, the Free Beacon is committed to serving the public interest by reporting news and information that is not being fully covered by other news organizations.

 

The Beacon’s chairman is Michael Goldfarb. Its editor in chief is Matthew Continetti. Sonny Bunch is the executive editor. Bill Gertz is senior editor. READ THE REST

Be Wary – The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend


Netanyahu-King Abdullah - Israeli Fighter Jet

John R. Houk

© November 19, 2013

 

Here is an interesting fact about the Quran and the Hadith: Jew-Hatred is encoded as truth in Islam’s holy writings.

 

005.060
YUSUFALI: Say: “Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by the treatment it received from Allah? those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;- these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!”

PICKTHAL: Shall I tell thee of a worse (case) than theirs for retribution with Allah? (Worse is the case of him) whom Allah hath cursed, him on whom His wrath hath fallen and of whose sort Allah hath turned some to apes and swine, and who serveth idols. Such are in worse plight and further astray from the plain road.

SHAKIR: Say: Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution from Allah? (Worse is he) whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine, and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse in place and more erring from the straight path. (AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD); Total Verses: 120; Revealed At: MADINA; Quran-USC.edu.org; Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement)

  

002.096
YUSUFALI: Thou wilt indeed find them, of all people, most greedy of life,-even more than the idolaters: Each one of them wishes He could be given a life of a thousand years: But the grant of such life will not save him from (due) punishment. For Allah sees well all that they do.

PICKTHAL: And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters. (Each) one of them would like to be allowed to live a thousand years. And to live (a thousand years) would be no means remove him from the doom. Allah is Seer of what they do.

SHAKIR: And you will most certainly find them the greediest of men for life (greedier) than even those who are polytheists; every one of them loves that he should be granted a life of a thousand years, and his being granted a long life will in no way remove him further off from the chastisement, and Allah sees what they do. (AL-BAQARA (THE COW); Total Verses: 286; Revealed At: MADINA; Ibid.)

 

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.” (Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 52 :: Hadith 177; Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihaad))

 

If you take the time to examine more Quranic suras and the Hadith you will find more encoded Jew-Hatred (AND also Christian-Hatred and general non-Muslim-Hatred). Honestly if you are outside the belief system of Islam, unless you are blind, Islam is as much an ideology as it is a religious guiding principle, perhaps even more so an ideology teaching adherents about a superiority. This is a superiority that says if you not in the club or if you insult the club you are worthy of death or forced humiliating submission.

 

Now I have imposed on your reading time to show you that the principle of the enemy of my enemy is my friend is alive and well. Can you imagine the Jewish State of Israel and the radical Islamic Wahhabist nation of Saudi Arabia are engaged in working out a deal that both nations consider an existential threat?

 

The common enemy is Iran. Yup, that’s right. The same radical Islamic Shia-Twelver nation that President Barack Hussein Obama is about to urge the Senate to approve a deal on drawing back sanctions under the delusion that Iran will slow down nuclear uranium enrichment under the next delusion that Iran will forsake WMD nuclear weaponization.

 

Either Obama is a complete Foreign Policy moron or he is engaged in finding any scenario of chaos to transform the globe (yes including the USA) into a Left Wing pseudo-Marxist New World Order.

 

Obama’s flirtation with Iran has convinced Israel and Saudi Arabia that the U.S. government is no longer dedicated to their actual Middle Eastern allies’ regional security.

 

Jew-Hatred from a nuclear armed Iran could easily lead to a nuclear WMD strike against Israel EVEN THOUGH Israel does have its own nukes to level Iran. The Twelver mentality of Iran’s Mullahs and Ayatollahs will not be deterred by the military doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). In essence the MAD doctrine states that regardless of who pushes buttons to launch nuclear warheads first, the retaliating nuke power will push buttons as well. Meaning that nations engaged in nuclear war will both loose because they will both be destroyed by mutual nuke WMD attacks. Twelvers believe dying in war is glorious and sends one straight to Muslim Paradise.

 

The problem between Saudi Arabia and Iran has its history in the ancient Islamic divide of Sunnis vs. Shias. Sunnis represent roughly 90% of all Islam. Even in that demographic difference both Islamic sects have both declared each other heretics. In the Muslim world heretics are worthy of death. So-called moderate-radical differences make no difference in how to adjudicate a Muslim heretic. It is an offense worthy of death. Wahhabi Clerics have often proclaimed Shia believers kafir. There is a Shia minority in Saudi Peninsula but the aim of Wahhabi fatwas against Shi’ites has a lot to do with a rally cry against the heretics of Iran. So you can see that a nuclear armed Iran is also an existential threat to Saudi Arabia whose Wahhabis consider themselves Sunnis. A large amount of Sunnis have a problem with the medieval puritanical Wahhabis.

 

If Israel and the Saudis cooperate against Iran, I would advise the Israeli government that Saudi Wahhabis are still their enemy and will turn on a dime to betray Israel once (if ever) there is a successful Israel-Saudi neutralization of Iranian regional aspirations.

 

Here is the article that got the old gray matter motivated concerning an Israel-Saudi team against Iran.

 

JRH 11/19/13

Please Support NCCR

Nuclear weapons replace depth of defense


Israel VS Arab Lands

Samson Blinded is one of those blogs you probably will not locate unless you specifically look for it. The posts at Samson Blinded are pro-Israel on the militant side of political incorrectness. The Jewish authors are not necessarily friendly to Christian Zionists as me; nonetheless the irony is I often agree with the Samson Blinded author. Below is a cross post with the theme of nuclear weaponry as a credible defense for little Israel to survive being surrounded by a sea of Jew-Hating Muslims that are actually acquiring sophisticated offensive capability thanks to both the USA and Russia.

 

JRH 2/11/13

Please Support NCCR

****************************

Nuclear weapons replace depth of defense

 

By Obadiah Shoher

Email sent: 2/8/13

Samson Blinded

 

Peace, and even neutrality, have protected no state, ever. Small irrelevant states are tolerated, but they are rolled over without remorse when military needs arise. Germany occupied Belgium, and Italy annexed almost all the lands of the Vatican. Belgium was neutral, and the Vatican was even culturally indispensable for Catholic Italy. Israel cannot hope to convince the Muslims of her peaceful intentions and enjoy peace with them.

 

Hong Kong and Switzerland provide different examples. The evil empires of Communist China and Nazi Germany tolerated them out of utter economic necessity. But Hong Kong and Switzerland were indispensable for their imperial neighbors only because the evil states were isolated from the rest of the world. Muslim oil economies are very open, and do not need Israel as their gate into the world. Muslims won’t hesitate to wipe Israel off the map.

 

Could Israel possibly rely on outside protection, such as a mutual defense treaty? No country rose to defend Poland in WWII. Protection—however unreliable—could only come from the US, but its behemoth army wouldn’t be able to deploy in Israel before the Muslims overran her forty-mile depth of defense and annihilated the Jews.

 

Whatever are the peace arrangements, Israel would have to maintain military preparedness. Israel cannot conduct a defensive war in the current borders. Arab enemies could repeatedly mobilize at Israel’s borders without attacking her; Israel could either respond by mobilizing every time and eventually ruining her economy, or gamble that the Arabs won’t attack—and only once lose the gamble.

 

A peace treaty with the Muslims won’t help. Every war violates a peace treaty. Muslims fight their brethren, and won’t hesitate to attack Israel if her military might dwindles.

 

Israel is left with two choices. One is to maintain military capability indefinitely. That path is economically unsustainable. Another is to discourage the Arabs from encroaching on Israel. For that approach to work, our threat of must remain extremely credible; bluffing does not work long in international relations. Arabs must be unable to test Israeli defenses to see how Israel would react to this or that provocation, or to look for the breach in the retaliation doctrine. Israel should treat any clearly dangerous acts as casus belli. Israel may not tolerate Muslim acquisitions of WMD, modern aircraft and air defense systems, tanks and anti-tank missiles, or mobilizations. Confronting Syria over its military upgrade now makes more sense that defending Israel from a fully revamped Syrian army a few years later. Israel won’t need to fight very often. Once the credibility of Israeli response is established, Arabs will stop provoking her.

 

Israel must maintain a credible threat, but not an expensive, economically unbearable army. How so? Nuclear retaliation is the answer. Israel should not hesitate to employ nuclear weapons. Extensive and costly bombing of Lebanon could be replaced with pinpoint strikes with 10kt nuclear microcharges. A weapon of that size won’t even destroy a medium-sized village, and would cause no fallout dangerous to Israel. Numerous nuclear mushrooms, however, would terrify our enemies.

 

Attacks by regular Arab armies should be similarly countered with 20–50kt nuclear microcharges. Even the small 20kt weapons would not endanger the Jewish cities ten to fifteen miles away from the battlefield; the populations that have been exposed to the moderate levels of radiation around Hiroshima and Chernobyl are not particularly unhealthy. Israel could emulate the depth of defense by striking deep into the enemy’s territory. Large-scale bombing raids against Damascus, Cairo, or Tehran are prohibitively expensive, but 100kt nuclear bombs offer a practical solution: large enough to damage and frighten the enemy, yet small enough to avoid exposing Israeli cities to a radiological threat. Enemies will know that they cannot succeed even if they overrun narrow Israel.

 

Would the Muslims escalate in response to the Israeli nuclear threat? Yes, unless Israel proves the escalation to be a dead-end. During the Cold War, the US answered similar challenges with a doctrine of gradual escalation. Likewise, Israel would employ nuclear microcharges against the guerrillas, their supporters, and regular armies, and small bombs against the attacking enemy’s cities. If attacked with WMD, however, Israel would immediately demolish the Dome of the Rock, employ nuclear weapons against Mecca and Medina, and drop really large bombs on the enemy’s capitals.

That sounds like madness, but MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction, prevented the Cold War from becoming WWIII. Arabs won’t attack a dangerously mad Israel. A country prepared for total war will live in total peace. Besides, Israel has no choice economically other than to rely on nuclear weapons.

_____________________

Samson Blinded: A Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict, by Obadiah Shoher, abandons moralizing to view Israeli-Muslim struggle in terms of raw realpolitik. FREE BOOK DOWNLOAD

 

About:

 

Google banned our site from the AdSense advertising program for “unacceptable content,” “advocating against a group,” and “sensitive content.” Yahoo/ Overture restricted our ads to a few odd keywords. Adbrite closed our account. Amazon deleted all reviews to stop the discussion. Russian ad provider Begun rejected our ads as “extremist.” Many other sites and conventional media outlets refused our ads. China blocked our site. We depend on word of mouth. Please help us to bring Shoher’s message: tell your friends about this site. Link exchange suggestions are welcome. For the link code, please visit www.samsonblinded.org/banners.php If you only add text links, ours is www.samsonblinded.org/blog

 

Why Samson Blinded? Biblical Samson, blinded by the Philistines, killed thousands of them in suicide attack. Israeli nuclear weapons are aptly called the Samson Option.

 

Obadiah Shoher is a pen name for veteran politician. Obadiah lived in the USSR, and sufficiently hated socialism to emigrate. It was quite a disappointment to find that Israeli socialism is in many respects worse. Obadiah contends that socialism, combined with quasi-liberal leftism – the infamous political correctness – spells Israeli destruction, as it has destroyed other societies before. Shoher despises Israeli ostriches who keep their heads in sand preferring not to see the uncomfortable questions: changing demography of the ostensibly Jewish state, accumulation of nuclear weapons by hostile regimes, radicalization of Islamic societies, and the economic dead end of maintaining Israeli military capability regardless of paper treaties.

 

Why the pen name? Rav Kahane’s example is one obvious reason: he was kicked out of the Knesset for “racist” opinion that Jewish state cannot have Arab majority. Security is another reason: Obadiah receives plenty of threats.

 

Write us at nospam@samsonblinded.org

 

Legal stuff in plain text: Wherever this site or its authors advocates expulsion of Arabs from the Land of Israel, annexing Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and cruel retaliation against Israel’s enemies, it is implied that all such acts should be committed legally, by prior adopting the necessary laws. Our sole intention in regards to those acts is influencing the Knesset to adopt the necessary laws which would facilitate relocation of Arabs to Jordan, annexing the core Jewish territories, and retaliating in full force against Israel’s enemies. Neither this site, nor any of its authors advocates genocide.

 

America Might have to use a Little Tweaked MAD on Iran


Nuclear End Times

 

John R. Houk

© January 31, 2011

 

Dina Esfandiary and Harry White are geopolitical experts that focus on security issues such as nuclear proliferation. Esfandiary and White have tagged an article that has appeared in the Australian about their belief that a nuclear armed Iran is inevitable. Their conclusion is based on covert and overt activities have only served to slow down Iran’s nuclear aspirations rather than prevent them.

 

Their solution to a nuclear armed Iran then is not prevention, it is in deterrence. It seems the word “deterrence” is code for the old Cold War strategy between the old USSR and America of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). In no place in the article is there is specific to MAD strategy; however check this sentence out:

 

The most obvious answer is deterrence, and probably nuclear deterrence. It will have to be clear to Iran that the consequences of using of nuclear weapons will far outweigh the benefits. Security provided by deterrence is more frightening than security provided by accord, but …”

 

That sounds like MAD strategy to me, how about you?

 

The thing is the threat of MAD strategy with Iran will have to be tweaked if it has any chance of working. The Mullahs of Iran subscribe to a radical theopolitical ideology that proclaims the Twelfth Imam (i.e. the Mahdi) will return soon to begin a global conquest to bring Islam to the world. Politics and theology merge for Iranian Twelver Shi’ites that will bring little fear of reprisal from a nuclear armed kafir nation such as the USA or Israel. Indeed Twelvers believe that the hidden Twelfth Imam needs a little help to reveal his self to lead physical Muslim armies in global conquest. What is that help? Check it out: If a human factor causes global chaos, the Twelfth Imam will appear to set things straight.

 

The only way to tweak a MAD strategy with Iran is to actually utilize a surgical small nuclear attack to show America means business. There is no way Israel could get away with such a notion. The Western armed nuclear powers are too cowardly to sign off on such nuclear surgery. India is capable, but they have their own MAD strategy working between them and Pakistan. China would take a wait and see what happens and throw in with whoever provides the best for Chinese National Interests and Security. Russia will overtly support Iran but also will join in according to how it benefits them.

 

Let’s see. What kind of chaos is happening currently in the Middle East?

 

1.     Recently a Hezbollah backed man became the Prime Minister of Lebanon after Hezbollah forced out Prime Minister Saad Hariri. New Prime Minister Najib Mikati has given public assurance he is not in the pocket of Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. If you believe that I have some mythical swamp land in Florida I can sell you for cheap.

 

2.     And why did Hezbollah topple the fragile Lebanese government of Prime Minister Hariri? It is because the U.N. has taken the shocking uncharacteristic action of naming what many believe to be Hezbollah members. There is speculation that Ayatollah Khamenei of Iran issued the order to assassinate Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and might be on the indictment. You can see the Iran to Syria to Hezbollah to Lebanon connection, right? Rafik was the father of Saad.

 

3.     Who can count how many times Syria has issued alerts in preparation for war with Israel the last couple of years. Did I mention Israel bombed a Syrian stealth nuclear reactor not too long ago?

 

4.     Hezbollah is Iran on the Mediterranean with some extreme back-up from rogue nation Syria.

 

5.     Sunni Hamas is a military recipient of the psycho-Shias of Iran and a tool of the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

6.     In mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood, that Salafist Islamic organization has taken advantage of Egyptian unrest to thrust itself into a potential power vacuum the mob is causing. Indeed, there are reports that both Hamas and Hezbollah have dispatched agents into Egypt to tweak the mob. Muslim grassroots unhappiness has spread across North Africa and is now entering the Sunni Middle East as well.  

 

I am sure with a little more digging I could find some more Muslim African and Muslim Asia indicators of the kind of chaos that is having a global effect. You can’t tell me the Twelvers of Iran are not thinking of giving a Twelfth Imam nudge by pushing chaotic circumstances.

 

JRH 1/31/11