ISIS Fires Rockets from Gaza Into Southern Israel, The IDF Responds

Late last night Israel reported that rockets were fired from Gaza into the Southern Israel at Shaar HaNegev.  There were no injuries.

It has been comfirmed that it was indeed ISIS who fired the rockets.

The Israeli Air Force launched airstrikes on two military infrastructures belonging to Hamas in northern and southern Gaza.


Although an ISIS linked group fired the rockets, Israel like all rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip holds Hamas responsible.

Prelude to a Larger Conflict?

As the border with Syria turns hot its easy to imagine a connection between the incidents.  In this case they are unrelated.

With ISIS getting battered in Syria, their next focus will be either to use the Sinai to attack Egypt or cause problems in Southern Israel. Neither option will rescue ISIS from its demise, but that will not stop them from creating as much chaos as possible before they are finished.

Israel’s response was measured out of fear of triggering a war in the South at the same time as the Syrian regime and Iran approach the Northern border.

However, with Summer upon the Middle East anything is possible.  Even an all out war.

ISIS Strikes Jerusalem

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_btn title=”FOR $5/MONTH YOU CAN SUPPORT GAVRIEL’S WRITING” color=”primary” size=”lg” align=”center” button_block=”true” link=”|||”][vc_column_text]For the first time ISIS pulled off a coordinated attack in Israel.  Border policewoman Hadas Malka, age 23, was stabbed to death near Damascus Gate in the Old City of Jerusalem.  The attack was one of two in the area.

The Jerusalem Division chief said, “One attack was carried out at Zedekiah’s Cave. Two terrorists, one with a knife and one with an automatic weapon, attempted to harm police officers.”

“The officers responded by firing their weapons and killing the terrorists on the spot.

“About 100 meters from there, a third terrorist stabbed a policewoman, critically wounding her. The terrorist was shot on the spot by other policemen in the area.

“The injured policewoman fought for a few seconds with the terrorist who stabbed her, and tried to draw her weapon. The other officers realized what was happened and shot the terrorist, who later died.”


The Islamic State claimed three “Lions of the caliphate” committed the attack and promised, “more to come.” Hamas praised the attackers, bu did not claim it.

Although there have been Palestinian Arab attacks in and around Damascus Gate before, this would be the first official ISIS attack.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Are Post ISIS Alliances Already Taking Shape?

As the Raqqa operation gets underway, with the SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces) ploughing forward into the “capital” of ISIS, the terror group’s leaders and fighters are said to have already travelled to safe havens along the middle Euphrates.  With the American backed SDF bogged down in strett to street fighting, Iranian paramilitary units are pouring in from where they helped fight to free Mosul to Eastern Syria to destroy the heads of ISIS.

This struggle for land as ISIS collapses is forming the beginnings of regional boundaries that in essence brand new lines between ethnic units as well as defined frontiers of regional alliances.

Rising up from the rubble of ISIS are two clearly definied groupings.

The first consists of Russia, Iran, Syria (Assad), Turkey, and Qatar.  None of these countries trust eachother, but work together under a common interest in battling back America as well as seeking a piece of what they see as a rising Middle Eastern hegemony.

The second group is made up of the United States, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Kurds and Israel.  This grouping sees the first group as an existential threat and has been conjoled to work together by the Trump administration.

With the fall of ISIS a matter of weeks, the real battle will come after. Iran has used the chaos to reach to the Israeli border.  They have shown the ability to capitalize on the weaknesses of their enemies. Besides Iran, Hezbollah can now turn its sites on Israel.

The Middle Eastern alliances now taking shape even before the last of the caliphate are buried not only put Iran im the drivers seat, but increase the likelihood of war sooner rather than later.  The Syckes-Picot agreement, the document based colonialist and neo-colonialist pinciples set in motion by France and Germany is becoming irrelevant as a new set of states and mini states take shape.

As the chaos spreads throughout the region and beyond, the Saudis backed by Israeli tehnology will attempt to push back on the Shiite gains in order to create a buffer between the Kingdom and its enemies. The Kurds backed covertly by Israel and overtly by America will be encouraged to push forward in order to stabilize Northern Syria and Iraq and break the link between a power hungry Turkey and their allies in Qatar.

Be prepared the Great Game of the Middle East is about to begin. It could very well be far more destructive than the havoc ISIS has caused.

Did the US Create ISIS?

Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made the following statement yesterday:

“You (the United States) and your agents are the source of instability in the Middle East…who created Islamic State? America … America’s claim of fighting against Islamic State is a lie.”

Iran’s Supreme leader went on to claim that Iran has proof that the US did indeed create ISIS.

As I wrote last year, there is overriding evidence that this is indeed true.

Department of Defense documents that have been declassified in the last year confirm that the Obama administration encouraged the flow of weapons into the moderate rebel groups in Syria, knowing they would eventually fall into Jihadists.  This worked well as it helped grow an independent Sunni state in Eastern Syria and Western Iraq.  Of course, when this state, later to be renamed ISIS refused to play by the rules, the game had turned dangerous.  Far worse was the West’s Sunni Caliphate than Assad or Iran.  Now to destroy the Frankenstein they built, the USA is forced to work with its sworn enemies.

Furthermore, it was Qatar and Obama’s willingness to work with Qatar’s leaders in helping to sow chaos that makes the current conflict between the Saudis and their allies and Qatar, Turkey, and Iran so interesting. The theory has been that the Obama administration sought to create a new Al-Qeida that would pave way for a Muslim Brotherhood run Sunni Middle East, it has been Russia, Iran, and Turkey that has benefited most from the chaos.

Instead of an anti-Iran Sunni caliphate, the Iranians have used the chaos to reach the borders of Israel.  Turkey has attempted to use the chaos to wipe out the Kurds, who have successfully repelled Erdogan’s advances. In fact, one can see a pattern far more sinister at play.  Obama, knew that the chaos could be used to give a now friendly Iran the ability to create real stability in the Middle East.

What about the DOD document above?  For Obama and his pro-Iranian advisers, the reasons are not important.  They understood the DOD had their own reasons to build ISIS. Obama only had to encourage it in order to use its creation to give Iran the go ahead to create their version of “stability” in the Middle East.

Iran, their proxies, and Russia are now in control of the Northern Levant, a situation no one thought possible a few years ago. ISIS became Obama’s perfect foil to give the Shiites what they always wanted. The Middle East Obama handed Trump on January 20th became a region in chaos, whose only savior appeared to be Iranian hegemony.

Trump is Dismantling Obama’s Chaos Creation

President Trump understood that ISIS was a dual creation of NATO, mainly the US and Turkey, which is why he has spent weeks demolishing the ISIS network with serious bombing missions, which Obama never meant to carry out. More than this, the Trump administration is actively arming the Kurds to destroy ISIS, no matter the consternation felt in Turkey. There is no question ISIS is going down. The only question is if Obama’s true master plan, that of Iranian control in the region can rolled back or not.

With that, the Ayatollah is correct, but it is his country who has truly benefited from the America’s 44th President’s misguided world vision.


After Raqqa Falls, Can an Israeli Supported Kurdistan Reshape the Middle East?

With the battle for Raqqa about to get underway, those countries looking to pickup the scraps after ISIS is dead and buried are numerous, but essentially fall into two categories.  The first are Iran, Russia, Allawite Syria, and Turkey.  The second group is made up of the emerging Sunni alliance led by Saudi Arabia, Syrian opposition groups, the Kurds, and Israel.

The emerging strong man in the battle for Raqqa is the YPG, which is the American backed Kurdish militia of Northern Syria.  Just like the Peshmerga in Iraq, the Kurds in Syria fight with the same determination against ISIS.  Yet, with ISIS on the run and the Kurds fully backed by the USA a post caliphate Middle East is already emerging. It is clear as that the Turks have increasing nightmares of a Kurdish state rising on their border from the Mediterranean to Iran. Furthermore, this Kurdish state would be backed by the USA. the irony cannot be mistaken as the plan of the Shiites led by Iran has always been to create a corridor from Tehran to the Mediterranean.

The battle after Rakka will be an attempt to destroy the nascent Kurdistan by Turkish and Shiite forces.  The Turks opposed the US arming of the YPG a month ago.  One Turkish official said the the decision to arm the YPG was “tantamount to placing dynamite under Turkey-USA relations.”

Kurdistan – Image Source – PANONIAN

Israel Must Back Syrian Kurds

With Iran on the march and the US still trying to find its footing in the Middle East, the long standing covert alliance between Iraqi Kurdistan and Israel, must be applied to the YPG and the autonomous Kurdish cantons in Northern Syria.  The only force capable of providing stability East of the Levant are the Kurds. They, like the Jews, Druze, and Arameans have been systematically displaced over the 1400 year Jihad led by arabized Muslims who were only indigenous to Saudi Arabia until they pushed out of the Arabian peninsula after Muhammad died.

ISIS was conceived by the Obama administration, Turkey, and the Gulf States to hold back Iranian influence in the region.  The problem was that this entity turned on its masters and subsequently invited itself to be destroyed.  The Kurds, whom most of the players used and then abused over the years are the only stable option to holding back the rising Shiite influence in the area. The challenge is that Erdogan’s Turkey has decided that Iran is a far better partner than allowing a sovereign Kurdish entity from exposing the myth of Turkish control and historical continuity in the region.

The Trump Administration has clearly opted for the approach that backs a rising Kurdistan despite the threats from Turkey in doing so. The lines are being drawn.

Post Raqqa, the real war will begin.  Israel’s backing of a rising Kurdish state can ensure a totally different Middle East.

IRAN UNDER ATTACK: Multiple Targets Hit in What Appears to Be a Jihadist Suicide Attack

With news continuing to come out of Iran of multiple targets being hit in the country’s capital Tehran, the style and nature of the confrontation lends itself to a Jihadist attack, possibly done by ISIS.

What is known so far is the following:

  • Two Suicide vests were detonated. One at the shrine of Imam Khomeini Mausoleum and the other 18 km away at the Iranian Parliament (Majlis).
  • Attackers have killed seven people and injured many more.
  • The attackers are still inside the parliament building as security forces battle to neutralize them.

Who is Behind the Attack?

Although it is too early to confirm, the style for the attack lends itself to either ISIS or another Jihadist Sunni group who are known to use suicide vest.  Of course these groups have been acting as proxies for the Saudis in Riyadh for years.  This attack comes on the heels of the break in relations between Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states with Qatar over its connection Iran.  If this attack was planned and directed by the new Sunni Alliance, it would signal a shift in using radical Sunni proxies from attacking Israel and the West to their arch nemesis Iran.

When the gunfire stops, Iran will have two options.  The first will be to use the attack as a trigger to take the conflict directly to the Saudis.  The other option will be to cover it over in order to conceal the fact that Iran was hit in the heart of their capital.

Either way, the Sunni-Shiite conflict is about to enter a new phase, which means many more people will be killed.



Islamic terrorism has no religion even when it’s shouting, “This is for Islam.”

As Muslim terrorists rampaged around London, Met police debuted the new “Run, Hide and Tell” program. But instead some Londoners chose to stand and fight. They fought with pint glasses and barstools as the Muslim killers shouting, “This is for Allah” stabbed women in trendy eateries.

Some drivers tried to ram the killers. An unarmed police officer attacked the terrorists with a baton. An off-duty police officer tackled one of the Muslim terrorists. Both men were severely wounded.

Other unarmed police officers ran away.

Met counter-terrorism chief Mark Rowley sympathetically noted that, “If someone acts on instinct and perhaps decides to fight because they have no choice, we would never criticise them for that.”

It was kind of him not to criticize those Londoners who reacted with their base instincts and tried to fight the Muslim killers instead of running, hiding and telling, then reemerging for a vigil or a concert.

After the Manchester Arena attack, Rowley had urged, “Enjoy yourselves. We can’t let the terrorists win by dissuading us from going about our normal business.”

Going about our normal business has become the highest form of courage. Run, Hide and Deny.

Ariana Grande’s manager described her upcoming Manchester concert as representing, “courage, bravery and defiance in the face of fear”. “We’re going to go shopping’ – How defiant Londoners refused to bow to terrorists,” an article at The Independent boasts. Courage, bravery and defiance used to be found on the beaches of Normandy. Now they come from attending a concert or trying on a new blouse.

Londoners took Rowley’s advice. And then they found themselves running and hiding from Muslim killers. Video shows cringing diners lying on the floor of “London’s Coolest Bierkeller” as frantic Met police scream, “Get down”. In the Black & Blue Restaurant, the first “modern American steakhouse” in the city, some hid under the tables. Four friends jammed inside a toilet stall while the screams went on outside. A woman barricaded the door while other diners fled through the back.

At Elliot’s, an eatery “based in the inspiring environment that is Borough Market”, a Muslim terrorist stabbed a waitress hiding behind a partition. At El Pastor, where the tacos are “made from scratch in house every day”, a woman was stabbed before diners drove the terrorist away by throwing chairs at him and then barricaded themselves inside. Diners on lobster risotto at Applebee’s huddled in terror.

Pictures show courageous and defiant revelers trooping out with their hands behind their heads.

Bravely and courageously having butterfly prawns in crispy breadcrumbs or listening to a pop star trying to lip sync only works until grim men shouting about Allah come through the door. And then it’s time to try out the Met’s advice. “Hide: Turn your phone to silent. Barricade yourself in if you can.”

It is at these moments where the real courage of resisting Islamic terrorism is divided from the false courage of going out for a night on the town in “defiance” of terror.

There is no bravery or courage in denying reality. It’s just another form of cowardice.

The champions of nightlife courage mock those who warn of Islamic terrorism for “giving in to fear”. President Trump has been accused of “stoking fear” for calling for common sense migration reform in response to the attacks. Only fools and idiots aren’t afraid of a serious threat. The hollow courage of holding up candles at a vigil or heading to a trendy nightlife spot is no match for the reality of terror.

Denial is always cowardice.

When the UK PM claims that, Islamic terrorism “is a perversion of Islam”, that’s cowardice after an attack in which the Islamic killers made a point of proclaiming, “This is for Islam” and “This is for Allah”.

While the latest wave of Islamic terror swept across the UK, the University of London hosted the Muslim World League’s conference on “Tolerance in Islam”. The League is a Saudi group that has been linked to Al Qaeda whose employees included Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law and one of the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists. The Secretary General of the League has insisted that “terrorism has no religion”.


Meanwhile a friend of one of the attackers claimed that the terrorist had been influenced by the Islamic teachings of Sheikh Ahmad Musa Jibril: a Palestinian Muslim cleric in Dearborn who is popular with Al Qaeda and ISIS Jihadists. He has a degree in Sharia law from the Islamic University in Saudi Arabia.

Jibril was inspired by Salman Al-Awdah, a Saudi sheikh associated with the monarchy. Also inspired by Al-Awdah was a devout Muslim by the name of Osama bin Laden. Jibril’s site urged Muslims that their “heart must contain nothing but HATE to all kafers [non-Muslims]… Not just plain hate it must be the peak of hate”. And “Give them a knife and a bulletful of gun.”

And so the Muslim terrorists in London, inspired by Saudi Sharia scholarship, with hearts containing nothing but hatred for the non-Muslims dining out at trendy nightspots, gave them the knife.

But Islamic terrorism has no religion. Even when it’s stabbing you while shouting, “This is for Islam.”

Courage means running for cover when an attack happens and then denying the obvious. It means believing that what the terrorists really want is to prevent us from enjoying our dinner rather than forcing us to submit to Islamic law.

“We ran into the restaurant and tried to find a safe place but there wasn’t one,” an eyewitness to the attack said.

Run, Hide and Tell. We’ve been running away for generations. The Jewish and Christian populations of the Middle East have mostly fled to America, Europe and Israel. Now there are no more places to hide.

We’re swiftly running out of safe places. There are thousands of soldiers in the streets of London and Paris. German cities on New Year’s Eve are no-go zones. There are thousands of potential terrorists under investigation in every state in the United States. Thousands more in the UK and Europe.

We can stand up to Islamic terror migration. Or hide under the tables and hope they don’t notice us.

The Islamic terrorists are no longer just in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan. They’re here. They’re outside the room. They’re coming in with knives, guns and bombs. We’re running out of places to hide. And there’s nothing left to deny when the killers shout that they are murdering us for Islam and Allah.

Opposition to Islamic migration reform is support for Islamic terror. We can build walls and border controls. Or we can build barricades of tables in bloodied eateries and throw chairs at the attackers.

We can defend our countries at the border or desperately try to survive a night on the town.

We can acknowledge that the problem is Islam. Or we can courageously eat out while trying not to wonder if that grimacing man with his hand under his coat muttering about Allah is here to kill us now.

Originally Published in FrontPageMag.

Kurdistan Rising as ISIS Falls Apart

No matter whose propaganda one believes on the nature of ISIS’s demise, the wannabe caliphate is falling apart. With its collapse, their capital in Raqqa is under siege by the US backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which is dominated by the powerful YPG Syrian Kurdish militia allied with Syrian Arabs. The YPG’s forces are rapidly taking control of much of Northern Syria and moving to link directly with the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq.

This entire scenario is of course the opposite outcome that Turkey wanted when they unleashed ISIS into Syria and Iraq to start with.  Turkey wanted ISIS to create chaos so Turkish forces could go in and not only clean up the radical Islamists, but wipe out the burgeoning Kurdish entity in Iraq.  Not only has the KRG grown in strength, but the Syrian Kurds have become the main power broker in Syria.

With the US funding and training the YPG militias, Turkey has grown increasingly incensed with the Trump administration. Not only will a defacto Kurdish State arise along its Southern border, this state will essentially be backed by the US. Erdogan, the Turkish president has long opposed any Kurdish entity due to the inspiration it will give to the Kurds in Turkey, who form 10% of the Turkish population and a solid block in the country’s Southern regions.

The US appears aware of the inevitability of an independent Kurdistan.

It was reported in the news last week that the Director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Vincent Stewart told senators during a hearing that the question of independence for the Kurdistan Region is to be expected.

“Kurdish independence is on a trajectory where it is probably not if but when. And it will complicate the situation unless there’s an agreement in Baghdad,” Lt. Gen. Stewart said last Tuesday.

As Kurdistan continues to rise to fill the void left by the ravages of ISIS, a new conflict is about to begin.  Turkey will not sit idly by and allow the very people they have oppressed for generations rise up against them.  The Trump administration will have to choose between a pseudo ally in Turkey or rectify past sell outs of the Kurds committed by both George Bushes and Bill Clinton by allowing a free Kurdistan to solidify its control over its ancient homeland.

United Kurdistan (Image source: Ferhates/Wiki)



Ticking time bombs from Syria to North Korea.

Democrats inherit the foreign policy crises of a thousand Republican presidential fathers, but the foreign policy crises inherited by incoming Republicans in the White House are always orphans.

Or at least that’s how the media likes to spin it.

If you believe your random mainstream media outlet of choice, North Korea and Syria were crises freshly spawned by this administration with no prior history. But these ticking time bombs are the direct result of the two terrible terms of his predecessor.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner’s years in the White House were the most dysfunctional, schizophrenic and senseless eight years of our national foreign policy. His domestic policy was a disaster, but it was a radioactive toxic waste dump with clear and consistent goals. ObamaCare, the abuses of the Justice Department, the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency were the naturally terrible outcome of left-wing policies being implemented with inevitably terrible results.

But Obama’s foreign policy was a wildly inconsistent mess. The Nobel Peace Prize winner couldn’t quite decide if he was a humanitarian interventionist or a pacifist non-interventionist. He couldn’t make up his mind if he wanted to take the side of the Sunnis or the Shiites in their Islamic unholy war. He didn’t know if he wanted to appease Russia or sanction it, to pivot to Asia or run the other way, to play another round of golf or replace his defense secretary for the fifth time.

Obama could be consistent on domestic policy because there were few hard choices to make. Government had to be constantly expanded and every arm of it enlisted in pursuing left-wing goals. Republican opposition was largely hapless. The “Irish Democracy” of the public response to ObamaCare was more effective at sabotaging it, but by the time anyone understood that it was far too late.

The world stage was a much more dynamic place with players who didn’t fit into Obama’s ideology. The Islamist democracy proponents got Obama to kick off the Arab Spring. When Gaddafi shot the Islamists in the streets, the interventionists got him to sign on to regime change in Libya. But then Syria boiled down to Sunni and Shiite Islamists shooting each other and interventionism hit a roadblock.

Obama stopped at his own Red Line and couldn’t figure out what to do next. His foreign policy had somehow boiled down to helping Shiites kill Sunnis in Iraq and helping Sunnis kill Shiites in Syria.

He was bombing and arming the same Islamists at the same time to improve relations with them.

Even a guy who thought they speak Austrian in Austria and celebrated Cinco de Cuatro had to know that something had gone horribly wrong with his foreign policy. When the Russians stepped in and promised to clean up the WMD mess in Syria, he was happy to take them up on the offer without looking at the fine print.

Like a badly programmed computer, Obama locked up in Syria because Islamists fighting Islamists didn’t fit into his left-wing code. He feared alienating either Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood. Meanwhile appeasement not only failed to defuse the growing conflict with Russia, but poured more fuel on the flames. And bluffing China with a hollow pivot only sent the message that America was impotent.

Obama’s tenure was marked by two inexplicable wars; a surge in Afghanistan that failed to accomplish any of its goals while killing and crippling thousands of Americans, and an illegal regime change operation in Libya that left the country looking like Iraq. Obama and his fans don’t talk about either of these wars. And you can’t blame them. They make ObamaCare look like a shining success story.

But they’re not the biggest Obama disasters that President Trump inherited.

President Bush left Obama a largely stabilized Iraq. All he had to do was keep the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds working together. It wasn’t a cakewalk, but it was far from the mess that it had been or would be again. A decade ago though Democrats had been as obsessed with Iraq as they would be with Russia. Obama, like the leading non-Hillary candidates, ran on being against the war. So he pulled out instead.

Pulling out alone might have been disastrous because it would encourage the Shiite majority to trample on the Sunni minority. But Obama combined a pullout from Iraq with backing for Sunni Islamists nearly everywhere else, including next door in Syria, who helped swell the ranks of ISIS.

The threat of ISIS and other Sunni Islamists helped Iran get a firm grip on Iraq and Syria. The Arab Spring wedged it deeper into Yemen. And Obama was too worried that Iran would walk away from a potential nuclear deal to do anything about it. The nuclear deal sealed the deal for a resurgent Iran.

And that means that Russia is the dominant power in the region.

Obama alienated Egypt by backing the Brotherhood.  President Trump has been trying to undo that disaster. Obama backed Turkey’s totalitarian Islamist tyrant even as he quarreled with and then sidled up to Russia. The only remaining strong ally in the region capable of defending itself is Israel.

Meanwhile possible alliances in Asia fell apart as Obama dithered. The Philippines has an anti-American government that Obama further alienated during his disastrous final months in office. South Korea has fallen back into political instability at a time when it can least afford it while Japan stands alone.

Obama’s Asia pivot was exposed as another gimmick when he proved unwilling to defy the People’s Republic in the South China Sea. His diplomatic efforts seemed to prioritize ideological gestures toward Vietnam’s Communist regime over meaningful strategic alliances. Aside from the risk of war over China’s expansionism, this failed policy was cutting off the non-military China route to resolving North Korea.

This is the route that President Trump is now struggling to reopen again by restoring leverage.

Perversely, Obama did more damage with his failed Asia pivot than he would have done by staying out of it. The non-military option, like so much of diplomacy, depends on the perception of what we might do. In Asia, as in Syria, Obama made it painfully clear that he would do nothing. And the average totalitarian regime has difficulty grasping that different American governments really are different.

The Iran deal once again sent the message to North Korea that nuclear weapons can only benefit it. And that, when combined with Obama’s failures in Asia, funnels us into the military option in North Korea.

Back in Syria, Obama’s Red Line stranded us in the middle of an Islamic civil war and credibility crisis. Obama had handed over the keys to the region to Iran and Russia. America is now stuck trying to get them back.

President Trump chose to do it by going back to the point of collapse and enforcing Obama’s Red Line. It was a controversial choice, but it made a clear statement that presidential promises mean something. It also sent a message to Syria, Russia and Iran that just because we don’t want yet another war, doesn’t mean that they have a free hand to do anything they want.

Obama saw foreign policy in the social justice terms of the left. Trump and his people see a geopolitical struggle. His predecessor believed that we had to atone for our historical crimes. Trump understands that at the root of local crises like Syria and North Korea is a larger contest with Russia and China. It’s the worldview that Obama had sneeringly dismissed as rooted in the Cold War in his debate with Romney.

And yet it’s far more useful than Obama’s incoherent foreign policy whose three pillars were Islamism, appeasement and global warming.

President Trump believes that global stability comes from the stability in the relationship between world powers. Syria and North Korea are just the ways that Russia and China test us to see how far they can push. His goal is to achieve stability from the top down by reaching an understanding with the other powers. And to do that he has to undo the credibility crisis that he inherited from Barack Obama.

Obama left behind plenty of domestic and international ticking time bombs, from ObamaCare to Iran, and Trump’s first years in office will be occupied with finding ways to keep the bombs from going off.

Published First in FrontPageMag.

Syria 101: The Simple Version

Syria is now in the news due to the latest atrocity – chemical weapons being used on civilians.

Due to the prevalence of fake news, I’m seeing a lot of confusion regarding the attack: Who did it? Why? Is it real? Many people don’t know what source to trust and/or do not know where to go to get a clear picture of what is happening and why they should care about it.

I hope to be able to present the reality in a way that is easy to understand. Please note that this is a simplified version, there are more ins and outs to this issue than I will cover. My goal is to give the main points and clear away the confusion.

Accurate sources

Question 1: Who can you trust to give you accurate information what is happening in Syria?

With the amount of obviously fake news flying around and news slanted for political purposes, I highly recommend being ultra-skeptical. Ask questions: Who is reporting the news? Why are the saying what they are saying? What is their source? Do they actually know what they are talking about?

Israeli news is a good source. We too have bias in our news but, in general, the audience is well aware of the bias and can take the reports with the necessary grain of salt.

Israel’s Middle Eastern Affairs analysts are probably the best in the world. They get information that sometimes never appears on American news. I will never forget hearing one of Israel’s older analysts explain on 9/11, as we were watching the towers burn, that it was probably Al-Qaeda who did it. How long did it take till Americans found out who attacked them?

Amongst all of our experts, I believe Tzvi Yechezkeli is the best. He is the creator of the groundbreaking series Allah Islam and Hijra.


Question 2: So, what actually happened?

About the latest atrocity in Idlib, Syria, Tzvi Yechezkeli reported that Assad deliberately, with Russian agreement, attacked Syrian civilians first with chemical weapons (Sarin gas) and then bombed the hospital in that area (which is where the wounded were seeking care).

Most of the people killed were women and children. The Syrians are reporting that 70 people died and hundreds were injured.

[the_ad id=”4690″]

Why did this happen?

Question 1:
Why would Assad attack his own people?

The purpose of this attack was to signal to all of the “rebels” standing against Assad that there is no way for them to win. The image of the lengths he is willing to go to was intended to be his “victory” image.

But why would a leader of a state bomb his own people? It is hard for people who live in democracies to comprehend what a dictatorship actually means. To the dictator, it is not the people that matter, remaining in power is the only thing that counts. This has been true throughout history, all over the world and is true today as well.

The other piece of this puzzle is the myth of Arab Nationhood. This is a European fantasy, created for the benefit of Europeans (ever heard of Lawrence of Arabia?). In reality, Syria (for example) consists of tribes. Assad’s “people” are the ones that belong to his tribe. Other people can be lived with, as long as they submit to him. If they do not, it is legitimate to fight them.


Question 2:
Why would the Russians agree to something so horrible?

The Russians gave permission to commit this attack because they are interested in keeping Syria intact as their base in the Middle East. Assad staying in power is the easiest way to do this. If the “rebels” win, Syria disintegrates into a number of tribal areas, not controlled by any one power.

The Russians view the “rebels” as terrorists whom they want to beat. Although not all of the people in the widely-varied group labeled “rebels” are terrorists, many are: there are ISIS fighters, Jabhat Fatah al-Sham a Syrian offshoot of Al-Qaeda in addition to others who simply seized the opportunity to rebel against Assad’s corruption. The Russians believe that in the war against terrorists, the end justifies the means. In other words, if committing an atrocious attack clamps down on terrorism, that’s a good thing.


Who are the “good guys”?

Question 1: Who is on Assad’s side?

Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah.
Support Assad and you get the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world – Iran.

This has led to the slaughter of Syrians who are not the right kind of Muslim, the mass migration to Europe and put the State of Israel in real danger. For us it is not ISIS on the border that is the real problem, it is Iran and their pet terror organization Hezbollah

The Russians are supporting the regime’s story that they bombed a rebel weapons cache that held the gas. In other words, they were trying to rid Syria of chemical weapons and it is the “bad” rebels who caused the horror of women and children gassed to death. This is an obvious lie but if enough people will fall for it or go along for the ride, they will be able to get away with it.

Interestingly, reports from Arab media sources say that the Russians made it clear to Assad that he was not to use chemical weapons on Israeli civilians.


Question 2: Who is on the rebels side?

ISIS, Jabhat Fatah al-Sham and miscellaneous fighters. In the beginning of the Syrian civil war, it was a video of a rebel fighter eating the liver of a Syrian soldier he had just killed that horrified the world. Who remembers that now?

The American government supported the Free Syrian Army, decided to train them and bring them weapons – before realizing that the same anti-Assad, “good guys” fought shoulder to shoulder with ISIS.

The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.



Since the beginning of the Syrian civil war, Israel has been helping wounded Syrians.

There is something about using Sarin gas that makes Jewish skin crawl. It doesn’t matter who is on the receiving end of the attack. Do you have to have had family members who were gassed to death to recognize the horror?

Our enemies are our enemies but they are also people. There are certain things you just don’t do.

Our Prime Minister was the only world leader I heard who immediately, loudly denounced the attack and demanded that the rest of the chemical weapons be removed from Syria.

Red lines need to be embedded in stone, not in the sand. Some things are just not acceptable. Obviously, women and children are not a legitimate target. Gassing anyone is horrifying. Bombing a hospital is wrong in more ways than I have words.

Thanks to Obama, Iran is on my doorstep. Hezbollah is more powerful than before the 2006 war and poses a direct, very serious threat to Israel. ISIS is also on our doorstep.

Thanks to Obama and Kerry’s lauded “diplomatic methods”, Syrians are being massacred, millions have been displaced, Europe is overrun with refugees and there are still chemical weapons in Assad’s hands.

It was American choices that destabilized the region, creating the environment in which Syria fell apart. It was American choices that left a vacuum in the region, making it possible for Russia to step in and open the door wider for Iran.

This is a proxy war.

God help us all.

Originally published in Inspiration from Zion.