The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Is Peace at Hand in the Middle East?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Having presided over the recognition of Israel by the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, President Donald Trump has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize amid talk of peace breaking out across the region.

Assuredly, this is a major diplomatic breakthrough, and Nancy’s Pelosi’s sour-grapes dismissal of the deal as a “distraction” testifies to that truth.

Recognition of Israel by the UAE and Bahrain will, it is predicted, be followed by recognition of Israel by Oman and other Gulf states, perhaps even Saudi Arabia. But the idea that peace is at hand appears to be, as Mark Twain said of reports of his death, premature.

Indeed, the Gulf Arabs could be signing up to recognize Israel because they see the Jewish state as an indispensable ally in the Arab Sunni clash with the larger and more powerful Shiite Iran.

In 1979, the Camp David Accords were signed in a land-for-peace deal whereby Israel returned the Sinai, captured in the 1967 Six-Day War, to Egypt. Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin both won the Nobel Prize for Peace. Yet, while peace was established between Cairo and Jerusalem, that did not inaugurate an era of peace.

Jordan’s King Hussein recognized Israel in 1994. Yet, since then, Israel has fought wars with Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Palestinians of the West Bank in successive intifadas.

The Palestinian issue also seems no closer to resolution.

What the Gulf Arabs are saying with these recognitions is that the seemingly irreconcilable Palestinian-Israeli conflict can no longer be permitted to interfere with the Arabs’ pursuit of allies in the conflict that more immediately concerns them — that of Iran against the Sunni Arab nations of the Persian Gulf.

The Palestinians are the losers here, having lost their veto power over Arab nations establishing ties to Israel. As for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it seems even further from resolution.

The “deal of the century” peace plan midwifed by Jared Kushner projected a Palestinian state on two-thirds of the West Bank. The rest of the West Bank, now occupied by half a million Jewish settlers, would be ceded to Israel.

Any Palestinian leader who signed away Jerusalem and a third of the West Bank to Israel would risk ending up like Matthias Erzberger, who signed the Versailles Treaty in Paris for Germany and was assassinated in the Black Forest in August 1921.

Other conflicts in the region contradict the notion of a coming era of peace. Syria’s civil war, where Russia, Hezbollah and Iran are supporting the Damascus regime of Bashar Assad is unfinished, though Assad has regained control of most of his country.

ORDER IT NOW

The Yemen civil war remains a bloody and inconclusive conflict between a Saudi-backed regime which was driven out of the capital by Houthi rebels five years ago. U.S.-backed Saudi airstrikes have made of the country a human rights catastrophe. There is even talk of war crimes charges being brought against Riyadh for its bombings, and the United States for having sustained and supported those airstrikes.

In Libya, a civil war is underway between the recognized regime backed by Turkey and rebels backed by the UAE, Russia and Egypt.

In the Eastern Mediterranean, there is a naval stand-off between NATO allies Greece and Turkey over who owns the oil and gas below the seas off Cyprus and the Greek islands closest to the Turkish coast.

Then there is the undeclared war being waged against Iran by Israel and to which the U.S. is contributing with the crushing sanctions it has imposed to weaken and to isolate the ayatollah’s regime.

U.S. military action against Iran, before Election Day, long advocated by hawks in this city and Israel, cannot be ruled out.

As for the Afghan civil war, in which the U.S. has been engaged for 19 years, it remains unresolved, though the Taliban have begun talks with the Kabul government. Then there is the endless Turkish-Kurd conflict inside Turkey that has spilled over into Iraq and Syria.

In establishing embassies in Israel, the UAE and Bahrain are taking a risk, making a wager on who will emerge as dominant in the Middle East.

While the UAE is a significant power in the Persian Gulf, Bahrain is a collection of islands of 300 square miles with a population fewer than two million people, a Sunni king and a Shiite majority.

Though home port to the U.S. Fifth Fleet, it is vulnerable.

A decade ago, the king was almost dethroned by a Shiite uprising sparked by the Arab Spring. Saudi Arabia had to send an army across the causeway to put down the resistance and save the regime.

Even Israel is not truly at peace today, with its drones, planes and missiles intermittently striking Iranian-backed militia in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. Still, all in all, this week brought good news on at least one front of the Middle East’s forever wars.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2020 Creators.com.

 
Hide 54 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Adûnâi says: • Website

    Fun fact: Bahrain is majority-Shia. Like Saddam’s Iraq, they are led by a Sunni government.

    Those two-state solutions are ridiculous, because they are lies. The only real two-state solution imaginable would involve the cessation of the Israeli occupation of those rump Palestinian territories. But even that is off the table! Could you imagine the dissolution of the USSR with Russian tanks on the western borders of Ukraine, and in Turkmenistan?

    The question is why the Israeli Jews should do anything at all if everyone loves them. In this grim scenario, the only good solution to the Palestinians would be a one-state solution, an integration into the Israeli society as equal citizens. But of course, nobody wants that.

    On the other hand, when you look at numbers, Egypt has reached a population of 100 million. The entirety of Palestine has 9.2+3.3+1.85=14.35 million. The moment Egypt wakes up…

  2. Does this mean America can stop giving Israel 4 billion bucks annually in foreign aid?

  3. anonymous[175] • Disclaimer says:

    Another of Mr. Buchanan’s favorite cliches — “regime” — is used five times in the second half of this say nothing column, twice with a personal reference to a leader currently targeted for removal by Uncle Sam:

    Syria (“the Damascus regime of Bashar Assad”)
    Yemen
    Libya
    Iran (“the ayatollah’s regime”)
    Bahrain

    He doesn’t use the term in discussing, in alphabetical order, eight other Middle East nations: Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates.

    Some in the first group have elected officials, while some in the second do not. Mr. Buchanan would never define “regime,” because doing so would make more apparent that he uses it in his role as a faux foe to help Washington justify its Exceptional! interference in the governance and lives of others. That’s how places like Bahrain that most Americans not only can’t find on a map but have never even heard of can be “home port to the U.S. Fifth Fleet.”

    • Replies: @Jim Brewer
  4. In 1979, the Camp David Accords were signed in a land-for-peace deal whereby Israel returned the Sinai, captured in the 1967 Six-Day War, to Egypt. Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin both won the Nobel Prize for Peace. Yet, while peace was established between Cairo and Jerusalem, that did not inaugurate an era of peace.

    It wasn’t a peace treaty. Egyptians were bribed. The cost to American taxpayers has been around $2 billion each year.

    The deal almost unraveled after Israel and South Africa had tested a crude nuclear device in the South Atlantic.

    El Trumpo, Pompeo and gang are effectively trying to use Gulf Arab states to push Palestinians into a corner so that they accept morsels. After reductions in U.S. funding, support from countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar has been crucial to Palestinians who are already under an Israeli blockade in Gaza.

  5. P.B. summarizes with:

    Still, all in all, this week brought good news on at least one front of the Middle East’s forever wars.

    When were the Gulf countries ever at war with Israel???

    They are only Oil Protectorates of the UK Banking elite and Israel is the same banksters founded NWO enforcer. So where’s the conflict to say that peace has been made?

    The matter that the Kushner-Netanyahu White House brought in a couple of their country managers to sign a deal that of course promotes the ever expansionist and demanding appetite of our Zio- Israel and our Israel First political henchmen, is a nice election time to ploy to get the Orange Lap Dummy of the Chabad Ventriloquist back in for another 4 years.

    Oh how far America has sunk.

    The W.H. has been turned into Comedy Theatre.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Curmudgeon
  6. Exile says:

    In decades past, Pat would have reminded us that an energy-independent West was the prize, not “peace in the Middle-East.”

    But now that Trump (a man who no less than the Bush family has called Pat a Nazi) is in the White House, we must focus on these ornamental 11th hour “achivements,” whose timing is an insultingly obvious electoral manipulation by Trump’s beloved & seemingly erstwhile homeland of Israel.

    The Gulf States have long ago Finlandized to Israeli & U.S. interests in basing the U.S. military in Muslim lands much as the Saudis have. A de facto peace has existed for years under previous administrations.

    But now that jignats in Israel are ready to make bold moves like annexation of the West Bank, the propaganda machinery must be harnessed to lionize Trump the bringer of peace in the same way Trump tried with North Korea as Pat cheered him on.

    But as with all things Trump, it’s a sideshow illusion – more carnival barking on Twitter and empty praise from empty GOP suits.

    Seeing Pat participate in the Potemkin charade is vastly disappointing.

  7. Pat Buchanan warns: “U.S. military action against Iran, before Election Day, long advocated by hawks in this city and Israel, cannot be ruled out.”
    It is important to add, the implications of such a move could stretch beyond the Middle East, turning a regional war into a global one. Two world wars have shown that when disputes are interconnected the fires spread to become a conflagration.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

  8. Rurik says:

    Yet, while peace was established between Cairo and Jerusalem, that did not inaugurate an era of peace.

    Cairo and Tel Aviv

    Pandering presidents to a criminal regime, does not a fait accompli make on the world’s stage and international law. Jerusalem is only the capital of Israel in the fevered imaginations of Jewish supremacists. The worst of them being the stupid goyim type.

    Yet, since then, Israel has fought wars with Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Palestinians of the West Bank in successive intifadas.

    The skirmish with Hezbollah was a war of sorts (more a battle, I’d say- the war rages on..),

    but the cruel savagery of Israel’s ‘Operation Cast Lead’, and other sadistic atrocities committed against the defenseless people of Gaza and the West Bank, were hardly wars. To have a war, both sides have to be able to fight.

    Was Deir Yassin a ‘war’? Or a massacre?

    that of Iran against the Sunni Arab nations of the Persian Gulf.

    Don’t you have that backwards Pat?

    Was it Iran that attacked and invaded Sunni Iraq in the 80s, or the other way around?

    Ever since Iran freed itself from zion’s dog the Shah, zion has done all in its formidable power to crush the peaceful people of Iran- for the temerity they showed by heroically freeing themselves from the death-grip of ZOG. We Americans could learn something from them.

    the Damascus regime of Bashar Assad

    what does it feel like to rhetorically lick the dingleberries of the people who hate your guts, Pat?

    The legitimate and internationally recognized, democratically-elected government of Bashar Assad, is not a regime, any more than Donald Trump’s administration is a ‘regime’. But you kowtow to the very people who hate your guts with your groveling characterizations. It must be grinding in a humiliating way, to constantly appease your enemies by using their kosher terms.

    U.S. military action against Iran, before Election Day, long advocated by hawks in this city and Israel, cannot be ruled out.

    well, if it happens, Donald Trump can eat shit and die. But I have more faith in the man than that.
    And he knows his base will vanish, and he and Chucky and Adam Schiff and Nadler can all dance the hora in a ‘one-term’ circle jerk.

    As for the Afghan civil war, in which the U.S. has been engaged for 19 years, it remains unresolved, though the Taliban have begun talks with the Kabul government.

    “millions of lives, because I view both sides, if that’s OK?’

    When’s the last time you heard a U.S. politician or journalist mention the millions of lives pointlessly slaughtered in the illegal and immoral wars in the Middle East?

    In establishing embassies in Israel, the UAE and Bahrain are taking a risk, making a wager on who will emerge as dominant in the Middle East.

    Perhaps so, but what are the chances (0), that those embassies will be in Jerusalem.

    I didn’t use a question mark because the question is rhetorical. Those embassies will be in Tel Aviv. Pat Buchannan’s disgusting pandering notwithstanding.

    Even Israel is not truly at peace today, with its drones, planes and missiles intermittently striking Iranian-backed militia in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.

    For over a hundred years the planet has been savaged by wars for zion, and Israel’s (Jewish supremacism Inc.) war on us all is ongoing and eternal. ‘For Europe to survive, it must commit suicide’. – ((Barbara Spectre and genocidal ilk))

    Still, all in all, this week brought good news on at least one front of the Middle East’s forever wars.

    I agree.

    Trump is trying to disengage from the Eternal Wars for Israel. These peace deals seem to be the only thing that can mollify the fiend’s insatiable demands for rivers of innocent blood engorging the ‘Holy Land’.

    Israel is there, at least for the time being. It’s a reality that must be dealt with in a sober and realistic manner. This seems to be what these Arab states are conceding, even if for the worst possible reason; (hatred of Iran).

    By Trump navigating these treacherous waters, in order (I believe) to end the Eternal Wars, he stands at the brink of becoming the greatest (only?) statesman the U.S. has had in over a century.

    End the wars. Put the military on the border. Restore sanity and the Rule of Law to the planet.

    • Replies: @KenH
    , @Curmudgeon
    , @Escher
  9. Rurik says:
    @Adûnâi

    the only good solution to the Palestinians would be a one-state solution, an integration into the Israeli society as equal citizens. But of course, nobody wants that.

    I do.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  10. anon[130] • Disclaimer says:

    The Gulf puppies will pass from time
    probably headless.

  11. Rurik says:
    @Tommy Thompson

    is a nice election time to ploy to get the Orange Lap Dummy of the Chabad Ventriloquist back in for another 4 years.

    Oh how far America has sunk.

    Yes, but have you seen the alternative?!

    As someone just pointed out,

    “U.S. military action against Iran, before Election Day, long advocated by hawks in this city and Israel, cannot be ruled out.”

    … such a move could stretch beyond the Middle East, turning a regional war into a global one. Two world wars have shown that when disputes are interconnected the fires spread to become a conflagration.

    Both World Wars were fought for global Jewish supremacy / Zionism.

    scores of millions of people were slaughtered, often in the most sadistic ways imaginable.

    All the post (((9/11))) wars have been fought for the exact same reason; global Jewish supremacy. Duh.

    Do you think professional politicians like Merkel or Macron or Trudeau or Biden are going to rein in this fiend?

    We’re at the brink, my friend, and ((they)) want, (oh my God do they fucking crave it!), for this century to be even more numbingly horrific and blood-spattered than the last one.

    They think of 60 million dead Gentiles, all slaughtered by other Gentiles, as their magnum opus. The accounts of Dresden are orgiastic to their black souls.

    And they want MORE of it! Do you think Biden and the ‘wokeness’ is the solution to resist their blood lust for war?

    Trump is their tool, no doubt. But he also wants a legacy beyond being just another war-mongering shitstain like Obama.

    If he can end America’s longest war, while the scumfucks are screeching

    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/17/mcmaster-rebukes-trump-over-taliban-talks-417342

    This is something that a Biden or Harris simply could never do in a million years.

    I’ll take it, warts and all.

    • Agree: Curmudgeon, gsjackson
  12. anon[403] • Disclaimer says:

    Jordan’s King Hussein recognized Israel in 1994.”

    “now learn from Barak that Ariel Sharon, who served as defense minister in 1982, actually planned to turn Jordan into the Palestinian State.

    Barak told Maariv that he used to think he was the only one aware that Sharon had this plan but the late Uri Avneri, who was the editor of the left-leaning weekly HaOlam Haze was also aware of the plan and wrote about it in his publication. “ Times of Israel .https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/barak-goal-of-first-lebanon-war-was-to-turn-jordan-to-palestinian-state-626608

    That was after Israel had shown pro Israeli sentiment and engaged into covert cooperations multiple times since 1970s. Long after Israel had committed to peace in Sadat- Begin

    long after Oslo has not moved much to the left of this original plan of Sharon .After 2002,its pain was to force Palestinian leave . Where will they go ? Jordan . 1982 will happen agin this time in Jordan to force Palestine take over Jordanian monarchy .

    Israel gratitude and Israeli idea of friendship are just like that – an ideologically camouflaged stealth ammunition or dagger wrapped in love and peace .

  13. Virgile says:

    Egypt’s peace deal with Israel did not create neither stability nor progress in Egypt. Egypt had to face the murder of Sadat and a violent revolution triggered by corruption and poverty. Only the intervention of the USA and Saudi Arabia stopped the Moslem Brotherhood from taking over the country and cancelling the deal. The deal with Israel was rescued, but for how long?
    Jordan’s peace deal with Jordan did not bring progress and the stability is imposed by force.
    The country is in an economical stagnation.

    Bahrain will probably face a worse crisis as the ruling class is Sunni and pro-US while the majority of the population id Shia and pro-Iran. As it did in Egypt, Israelis will stay away from Bahrain.

    Overall that deal is a gamble whose score is unknown

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  14. KenH says:
    @Rurik

    well, if it happens, Donald Trump can eat shit and die. But I have more faith in the man than that.

    I never thought Trump would assassinate Soleimani via drone but he did. And now Trump revealed that he wanted to assassinate Assad but was talked out of it by mad poodle Mattis. Neither men are threats to America but they are a thorn in the side of the bastard Israelis and Trump can’t whore enough for Jews and Israel.

    Trump is capable of anything but I’m beginning to think that if he takes military action against unexceptional Iran he’ll wait until after the election is in hand. I’m now starting to believing that the Soleimani assassination was undertaken to weaken Iran when war finally breaks out and leaves it without one of its greatest military tacticians.

    The (((Trump admin))) will lie and say that Iran was planning terrorist attacks on American soil so we have no choice but to go to war and install a pro-Israel puppet government.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Harold Smith
  15. @Tommy Thompson

    The W.H. has been turned into Comedy Theatre.

    It’s been Comedy Theatre for decades. Your brand of comedy hasn’t been playing.

  16. Rurik says:
    @KenH

    if he takes military action against unexceptional Iran he’ll wait until after the election is in hand

    That’s a powerful ‘if’, Ken.

    IDK, I don’t think Trump’s any kind of ideologue. I think it’s all ego, all day long. And if so, then nothing could possibly be more important to Trump (and his ego) than getting reelected.

    And if so, then I think the one way of accomplishing that with a certainty, would have been to oust Assad, by any means necessary. He says he wanted to assassinate him, but that’s what he says. No one (especially I) believe one word he says, but some might argue that that is part of his ‘charm’. That he’s unreadable, and of course, utterly dishonest. But yet he keeps his eye on the big picture- reelection. (and likely, his legacy).

    So if it was war he wants, and is only waiting to be reelected to start one or a few, then why wait?

    All he would need to do is start a war with one of ZOG’s myriad enemies; Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or ramp up ZOG’s war between Russia and Ukraine, (or Georgia, as it seems they’re poking the Russian bear as I write this), but it’s just sabre rattling, like with China.

    But if he’d just start a good, solid war and start slaughtering anti-Semites (all non-Jews) wholesale, then not only would he be guaranteed a second term, but the ((press)) would become his fanatical cheerleader. Heralding his greatness 24/7, as opposed to denigrating him 24/7.

    But he wasn’t started one. Yet.

    When doing so would accomplish what must be his most earnest desire; reelection.

    And starting one right before the election, would seem like a fool’s bet. Creating all kinds of scenarios that could spin out of control, and cost him everything – his second term, his base and his legacy.

    Murdering Soleimani was a cowardly act, and shamed Donald Trump. A blight on his name for all time. But none of us know the backroom pressures, like being told by people who’re really in power, that he either starts a bombing war on Iran, or commits an atrocity like assassinating the general, at least, or else. And ‘or else’ could mean anything.

    The stakes must have been very, very high for Trump to order such a heinous act. But the forces who assassinated JFK, (a far more heinous act, because it was his own countrymen who did it) are still in power. So when it comes to murderous treachery, no one beats out ZOG’s deepstate minions. Now, more than ever.

    At the end of the day, if he doesn’t start a war on Iran, I won’t go to the polls assuming that he will after the election. He might, but I doubt it. (leading possibly to a war with Russia- would be a very bad idea ; ) But I will go to the polls assuming Biden will do whatever ((they)) tell him to.

    And by now, I’ve become jaded vis-a-vis the tribe. I think they’d give anything in the world to see Europe (and especially Russia) in ashes, and North America as a new type of Gaza, where they can use their assorted orcs to torment the ‘anti-Semites’ and ‘racists’ to their black heart’s content.

    I just have no desire to see my extended family as the new Palestinians/Zimbabwe Whites. Under Joe/Kamala, I’d say that’s a certainty.

  17. @Rurik

    Was it Iran that attacked and invaded Sunni Iraq in the 80s, or the other way around?

    In an otherwise excellent analysis, the above is my only quibble.
    The narrative of ‘Iran hasn’t attacked anybody in 300 years’ doesn’t hold water. The Shah invaded Iraq to claim all of the Shatt al Arab. That was eventually sorted. However, post revolution, there were border skirmishes with Iraq instigated by Iran. At the time, each side blamed the other, but there were noises being made in Tehran about “liberating Iraq”. Depending on sources, there were claims that several Iraqi border towns were shelled regularly form Iran. It is important to note, that while Iraq did invade Iran, the invasion stopped, rather than was stopped not far from the Iranian side of the Shatt al Arab, despite Washington’s cheer leading. I suspect Saddam had no way of knowing whether the shelling was crazies from the revolution, or an actual directive from Tehran. However, irrespective of the reason, it seems clear that Saddam understood taking over Iran was never going to happen. Unfortunately, there were a massive loss of life on both sides, including the Iranian gassing of the residents of Halabja.
    Interestingly, prior to the US invasion in 2003, the countries had normalized relations and exchanged not only POWs but the remains of POWs and war dead. There were reports that Saddam had actually sent the remains of his US made air force to Iran as spares, knowing that the invasion was a guarantee. My guess is that they had figured out that the ZOG USA had played them both for suckers on behalf of a shitty little country.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  18. Rurik says:
    @Curmudgeon

    My guess is that they had figured out that the ZOG USA had played them both for suckers on behalf of a shitty little country.

    Thanks

    I more or less agree. I’d like to expound on that a bit, but I’ve run out of time.

    Be back in a few days.

    Cheers.

  19. The only wars Israel has fought since 1973 are the ones they started. There is no Israel/Palestine war. There is only one apartheid state with a Jewish master race and a subject Palestinian race in the West Bank and Gaza and a couple of million Palestinians in the old Israel who are the only ones allowed to vote for the Government that rules them.

    Half of all Palestinians aren’t even allowed to live in Israel/Palestine, even under Jim Crow. They’d make up two thirds of the population if that happened instead of half.

    Yanks talk nonsense about imaginary non-Jewish racist oppression in the USA (even Jewish racism there mainly affects acceptance by Jewish controlled universities of non-Jewish Europeans and Asians) but they do support real racist oppression by real racist Jews in Israel/Palestine. That support comes from Whites (Jews and non-Jews), Hispanics, Blacks and Asians. They all support Apartheid and Jim Crow, both worse than in old South Africa or the old Southern States, although there is some disagreement within part of the Democrat Party. Certainly, Biden and Harris are both cheer leaders, not opponents.

    In general, Yanks (particularly Antifa and BLM) hate imaginary racists and love real ones. It’s safer that way, better rewarded by the rich and powerful and praised by the US infotainment industry. [email protected]

    • Agree: Colin Wright
  20. @Adûnâi

    Bahrain, Kuwait, (Qatar), the Emirates, the Saudi oilfields …
    Shia lands under hated Sunni dynasties inthroned by the British are a rash on the region.
    Despite a Kuwaiti mariposa crown prince, Bahrain is the most fragile (and most heavily fortified); when it goes, all you are going to hear is the clatter of the Gulf becoming Persian again.

    So strategically the deal changes nothing – it is just a cynical US ploy to be able to sell advanced (and therefore controlled) but expensive arms to statelets with loads of $$$ but formally inimicous to the One and Only ™ ally and democracy (which is verbotten).
    Far from being “peace in our time” it makes war a certainty – depending on whether the foreskinners, the camel thieves or the States formerly known as United run out of other people´s money first.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  21. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Rurik

    > “I do.”

    What I meant was “neither of the two wants that”. The Palestinians want to drive the Jews into the sea. The Jews want and are able to continue their varna system. But the Christcucks who only want the best for everyone are now calling for the one-state solution. Which is as anti-Semitic and unrealistic as making the kittens of Israel drown. This is why the Palestinians don’t consider it – their solutions are fantasy anyway, why choose a worse fantasy?

    The only way for that to work would be if both Saudi and Egypt convert to Islam. Not implausible. Now they’re cucked slaves to Mammon, but they have the examples of al-Qaeda and of ISIS, even of the Muslim Brotherhood. This way, when the 100-million-strong Egyptian society goes to war of extermination, the scared Jews with their pathetic 300 atomic bombs might agree to a one-state solution of a collective suicide via the toleration of Arab cockroaches.

    Only power leads to a real change in the world. The military and political will. As long as Egypt remains alive, the future of Israel is in jeopardy. And all these “wars for Israel” did not change that fact…

  22. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @nokangaroos

    > “Bahrain, Kuwait, (Qatar), the Emirates, the Saudi oilfields …”

    Both Qatar and the UAE are majority-Sunni, aren’t they? Although 88% of their population are Hindu/Christian immigrants, hilariously enough. Kuwait, Bahrain and the Saudi Persian coast are substantially Shia, however, that is correct. But what’s about Oman? What is the percentage of their Shia demographic? And how do the Ibadi view Iran?

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  23. Gc says:

    USA-Iran war is more certain than death. So no, there is no peace at hand.

  24. @Adûnâi

    Oman?
    (well, there are a few highly interesting endemic cyprinodontids, and … 😀 )

    Muscat has always been more oriented towards India and at one time controlled Mombasa, Dar-es-Salaam (lit: “house of peace”, generic for islamic realm :: “dar er gharb” house of war, where us infidels dwell), Zanzibar and Gwadar, i.e. the swahili (coast people) are like everywhere else.
    Don´t know too much about the Harigites except Abd al-Wahhab condemned them explicitly (they “perish”) and they probably return that compliment.
    The former Sultan Qaboos bin Said (died in January), erm, forcibly retired his father in 1970 and started reforms (abolish slavery, constitution) and with British assistance subdued the Dhofar uprising of the hardcore (Imamite) Ibadi jebalis (mountain people), then supported by the People´s Republic of South Yemen = what is now the (Saudi-supported) al-Hadi faction.
    Iran half-assedly supports the Houthi despite being of the Zaidi abomination.

    Things are … complicated 😛
    But with heavy USraeli presence in the course of bottling up Iran I doubt their opinions amount to much.

    ( I LOVE the gasmasked cavalry charge 😀 )

    • Agree: Adûnâi
  25. “U.S. military action against Iran, before Election Day, long advocated by hawks in this city and Israel, cannot be ruled out.”

    Being that Iran has some ability to fight back and could likely do some serious damage, and being that Russia and China are Iranian allies (with whom Trump has raised tensions), this could be a mistake with incalculably catastrophic results, up to and including war with Russia and China, IMO.

    As I see it, whether of not war with Iran happens depends almost exclusively on Trump.

    And this brings me to a question that I never see being addressed anywhere but which is now more relevant than ever before IMO, and that is this: What was the reason that 70 year old non-career politician Trump decided to run for president in the first place?

    It seems there are only a few possibilities: (1) He saw that the “deep state” was destroying his beloved America and wanted to stop it? (2) He saw that the “deep state” agenda of world domination and control was stalled and he wanted to reinvigorate it, so he and his handlers plotted and carried out a bait-and-switch fraud against the people? (3) He just woke up one day and thought it would be cool to be president (but happens to have has a pro-Israel bent and does almost everything by impulse)?

    Are there any other possibilities?

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @anon
  26. anonymous[319] • Disclaimer says:
    @Harold Smith

    The DNC and/or Podesta documents published by Wikileaks included a strategy memo that named Trump, Ben Carson, and someone else as the three most highly preferred opponents.

    In 2015, mainstream media reported, citing unnamed but knowledgeable sources, that Bill Clinton had called Trump to encourage his candidacy for the Republican nomination. Trump ran soon thereafter, leading initially to speculation that he was doing so as a spoiler to take out or at least weaken Jeb Bush, et al.

    Of course, none of these people — including the mainstream media — is honest or credible. But since you asked …

  27. @KenH

    “I never thought Trump would assassinate Soleimani via drone but he did. And now Trump revealed that he wanted to assassinate Assad but was talked out of it by mad poodle Mattis. Neither men are threats to America but they are a thorn in the side of the bastard Israelis and Trump can’t whore enough for Jews and Israel.”

    I agree 100%.

    “Trump is capable of anything but I’m beginning to think that if he takes military action against unexceptional Iran he’ll wait until after the election is in hand.”

    This presents a good question. I believe that war with Iran is one of the main reasons that Trump was made president.

    “I’m now starting to believing that the Soleimani assassination was undertaken to weaken Iran when war finally breaks out and leaves it without one of its greatest military tacticians.”

    This is plausible IMO, especially as it comes amidst sanctions which are apparently intended to weaken and politically destabilize Iran, softening it up for eventual military attack. On the other hand, since the assassination could’ve started a war immediately, the other possibility is that it was an impulsive act, e.g. the product of “narcissistic rage” over the impeachment proceedings.

    • Replies: @Amon
    , @Vojkan
  28. anon[115] • Disclaimer says:
    @Harold Smith

    Ironic that RBG’s death may have changed the calculation, making war with Iran unnecessary for DT.

  29. Amon says:

    HahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAH

    There will be no peace in the Middle East so long as Israel is there to stir up trouble by engaging in assassinations, terrorist sponsoring and their fave past time event of genocide.

  30. Amon says:
    @Harold Smith

    On the other hand, since the assassination could’ve started a war immediately, the other possibility is that it was an impulsive act, e.g. the product of “narcissistic rage” over the impeachment proceedings.

    More likely it was carried out by someone else, possibly the order came from his son-in-law with Ivanka telling Trump to take credit for the hit job.

  31. There is no “Afghan civil war”. The U.S. has been trying to change Afghanistan’s government since the 1970s.

  32. Vojkan says:
    @Harold Smith

    “I believe that war with Iran is one of the main reasons that Trump was made president.”

    If Hillary Clinton had become president, she would have been highly unlikely to scrap the deal Obama had negotiated. The only Republican candidate who could beat her was Trump so it is indeed possible that war with Iran is the reason why the orange clown has been elected president. Except that he couldn’t afford to appear too reckless during his first term.

    On the other hand, Clinton would have escalated tensions with Russia to a point when a trivial mishap could trigger a major catastrophe. Trump definitely was a “lesser evil” than Clinton four years ago but today I think that it would be unwise to give him a second term. The only war that the US could start in the near future is one against Iran, there isn’t an opportunity for war anywhere else, and Trump seems more likely to do it than Biden / Harris, by a wide margin.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  33. Escher says:
    @Rurik

    While your argument is valid overall, Bashar Assad is not a democratically elected leader by any means.
    It’s one tyrant vs. another, but an internal Syrian affair.

  34. Bahrain has a restive Shia population who do not like their government. It is almost like Iraq when Saddam and his Sunni group dominated a Shia majority. As soon as he was taken down they turned toward Iran. Bahrain has chosen to clap down on the Shia the way Saddam used to. Even parts of Saudia Arabia has a Shia minority who they want to clamp down further on. So in effect – this is a lot like the Roman Catholic / Protestant issues of yesteryear in Europe.

    You also left out that the Saudi’s and UAE and Egypt hate Qatar now because Qatar won’t tow the line. Qatar is becoming even more independent in it’s foreign policy and is willing to work with Iran now. Likewise another client state of the Saudis – Pakistan – is being disillusioned with Saudi Arabia now and aside from working with China on it’s economy – is now more willing to work with Iran as well. So there are indeed a lot of variables.

    But at the end of the day – will it bring peace?? I though Trump’s team claim to know the bible…?? The fighting has gone on before Islam existed and can’t be fixed by man made efforts. The fight for Jerusalem will continue until Messiah’s return. I guess they don’t actually read or believe the bible though they claim to…

  35. @Virgile

    Egypt and Israel still watch each other in terms of what weapons the other has. Strange “peace”. In the same way Netaynahu doesn’t want the UAE to get advanced weapons from the US that were apparently promised in this deal. It’s all political games.

  36. @Adûnâi

    the only good solution to the Palestinians would be a one-state solution

    Yes – kick out the colonial power, give back the Palestinians their land!

    Simple.

    • Replies: @A123
  37. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    the only good solution to the Palestinians would be a one-state solution

    Yes – kick out the colonial power, give back the Palestinians their land!

    Simple.

    Yep. Kick out the non-Palestinian Muslim colonists that arrived ~600 AD.

    Return the land to Palestinian Jews!

    Simple.

    PEACE 😇

  38. @Vojkan

    “If Hillary Clinton had become president, she would have been highly unlikely to scrap the deal Obama had negotiated.”

    I agree.

    “The only Republican candidate who could beat her was Trump…”

    And yet he just barely beat her.

    (I still hold on to my view that if it wasn’t for the WW3 scare that Obama created by attacking the Syrian army at Deir Ezzor and escalating tensions with Russia, and perhaps also Comey’s fake “investigation” into Clinton’s email improprieties, Clinton might have beat Trump).

    In any case it seems to me that the last election (like the present one) was deliberately set up to be a contest between two pathetic losers.

    “…so it is indeed possible that war with Iran is the reason why the orange clown has been elected president.”

    Yep. I think the whole point of the orange clown presidency – the raison d’etre – is aggressive “foreign policy” to try to reinvigorate the stalled imperial agenda. And while orange clown pushes Russia, China and Iran into a corner, taking great risks, the other wing of the war party puts on a show to try to convince us that he really isn’t the deep state agent that he continually proves that he is.

    I think the Trump presidency is 100% psyop and Trump himself is extremely valuable to the “deep state” because he will take risks and do things that most career politicians won’t, while generating so much controversy over so many things so as to distract the masses from seeing the evil he’s doing and the risks he’s taking.

    “Except that he couldn’t afford to appear too reckless during his first term.”

    As I see it, Trump’s attack on the Shayrat airbase in Syria was quite reckless and his assassination of General Soleimani even more so. I could be wrong, but my present view is that if Iran had spilled blood in its response to Trump’s murder of Soleimani, that might have been what Trump and his handlers were hoping for in order to escalate to war. It’s hard to say for sure because although Trump and his handlers are calculating, there is also an impulsive element here, IMO.

    “On the other hand, Clinton would have escalated tensions with Russia to a point when a trivial mishap could trigger a major catastrophe. Trump definitely was a “lesser evil” than Clinton four years ago but today I think that it would be unwise to give him a second term.”

    I see it differently. I see Clinton as a self-serving political opportunist and of course a murderess but I don’t see her as a suicide bomber. I think when it comes to risk taking she has her limits. I believe this is why Trump was the deep state candidate of choice.

    “The only war that the US could start in the near future is one against Iran, there isn’t an opportunity for war anywhere else, and Trump seems more likely to do it than Biden / Harris, by a wide margin.”

    I agree that Trump is definitely more likely to start a war with Iran than Biden/Harris. But I don’t rule out Trump starting a war with Russia and/or China, either directly, or as a consequence of starting a war with their ally Iran. I think there are limits on how far he can push them and I think given the opportunity he will continue to push hard.

    • Replies: @Vojkan
  39. @A123

    I wouldn’t disagree with you but for the fact that under international law the Muslim claims to Palestine were long crystallised, whilst the Zionist claims to Palestine are not yet so.. another 100 years? Maybe. Nations removed themselves from their colonial possessions after 100s of years of occupation. Israel has not yet exceeded those terms!

    And I accept the monetary definition of an eye for an eye, so even with the deceitful method of acquiring Palestine through buying private property (not sovereignty) before 1947, and conniving during WWI to get legal claim to the land – if they can convince the Palestinian public to agree on a Jewish state on some of their land, fair dos.

    I still see the plan being more ethnic cleansing and/or genocide as the most favoured option for the Israeli nation.

    And in the end – the question is what does the nation of Israel want? A rock with some nostalgic feeling, or safety and comfort for their flock? Maybe the two go together, but how would it if surrounded by what they see as enemies?

    It doesn’t make sense. The Zionist cause would make more sense if the nation of Israel bought Bora Bora, or some other Paradise on Earth, and set that up as their sovereign theocracy – free from fear and enemies. Palestine could always wait – 2000 years it’s waited, why not 2000 more?

    Because the way the nation of Israel is now behaving – now that there is no excuse to blame ‘the host’ on their behaviour, will only cause their downfall.

    • Replies: @A123
  40. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    I wouldn’t disagree with you but for the fact that under international law the Muslim claims to Palestine were long crystallised, whilst the Zionist claims to Palestine are not yet so.. another 100 years? Maybe. Nations removed themselves from their colonial possessions after 100s of years of occupation. Israel has not yet exceeded those terms!

    Because the way the nation of Israel is now behaving – now that there is no excuse to blame ‘the host’ on their behaviour, will only cause their downfall.

    A PEACE treaty with the UAE is not downfall.

    A PEACE treaty with Bahrain is not downfall.

    There are more treaties in the pipeline. We will have to see how many materialize during Trump’s 2nd Term.

    The fiction that Israel will Fail has been wrong so many times no one believes the Jihadi doomcalling anymore. Objective evidence shows that Jewish Palestine is prospering.
    ___

    After ~70 years of pressure, Islam is coming to terms with the fact that it’s attempt to colonize Jewish Palestine has failed.

    Give it another generation and the colonial withdrawal will be under way. Muslim colonizers destroyed the aquifer that supplied fresh water to Gaza. The requirements for human survival will make it necessary for them to decolonize.

    Once the descendants of Jihadi colonizers see that they can return home and give their children better future — it will be a popular option.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
  41. @anonymous

    You don’t know Pat Buchanan. He is mostly characterizing how American policy makers think.
    He would share much of your skepticism but is probably tired of fighting that battle.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  42. Vojkan says:
    @Harold Smith

    “As I see it, Trump’s attack on the Shayrat airbase in Syria was quite reckless and his assassination of General Soleimani even more so.”

    Indeed but in public perception no more reckless than Hillary’s “we came, we saw, he died” chuckle.

    “I see Clinton as a self-serving political opportunist and of course a murderess but I don’t see her as a suicide bomber. I think when it comes to risk taking she has her limits.”

    Yes, but Clinton is a woman and in situations where men would back down, female leaders have the tendency to strive to appear as more manly than men.

    “I agree that Trump is definitely more likely to start a war with Iran than Biden/Harris. But I don’t rule out Trump starting a war with Russia and/or China, either directly, or as a consequence of starting a war with their ally Iran.”

    My fear is that Trump would do something that anybody but him would consider unthinkable, use “beautiful low-yield” nukes to force Iran to submit. If he does, anything goes.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  43. @A123

    The peace treaties are just deal making with the elites – offer them enough carrot and they sign for anything. The people are agains’t betraying the Palestinians however.

    Trump is doing well aligning the ME against Iran, sure. Leaders of the ME likely see the takedown of Iran as a bigger motivator than a takedown of Israel, and so are uniting and forming a front. Certainly it’s smart politics for their profit motives.

    But a European colony in the ME won’t stand for long – it’s been tried before during many crusades, and failed every time.

    • Replies: @A123
  44. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    The peace treaties are just deal making with the elites – offer them enough carrot and they sign for anything. The people are agains’t betraying the Palestinians however.

    Of course not. Recognizing that Palestinian Jews are the true Palestinians is the first step in ending their hostility against Palestinians. There is no reason to believe that people want to betray Palestinian Jews.

    Similarly, recognising that non-Palestinian Muslims are not Palestinian is also a significant step fowards. Ending the false concepts that support the colonization of non-Muslim land allows leaders to begin shaping public opinion towards non-violent solutions.

    At a physical level, the Muslim caused damage to the Gaza aquifer means that ~1.5MM non-Palestinian Muslims will have to relocate out of Jewish Palestine. Preparing the Muslim people for the reality of Muslim de-colonization is best done before the problem escalates to a violent crisis.

    But a European colony in the ME won’t stand for long – it’s been tried before during many crusades, and failed every time.

    We are talking about Muslim Arab colonists, so your statement has a language issue. You need to say, “it’s been tried before during many jihads, and failed every time.”

    You are correct that the non-Palestinian Muslim attempt to colonize Palestinian land will not stand. It has been failing badly for ~70 years. Muslims are tired of losing and are now accepting the TRUTH… Colonial jihadi conquest has failed.

    The only question is if the non-Palestinian Muslims will decolonize peacefully or violently. As a matter of physical resource limitations, non-Palestinian Muslim decolonization is inevitable.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
  45. @Vojkan

    As I see it, Trump’s attack on the Shayrat airbase in Syria was quite reckless and his assassination of General Soleimani even more so.

    Indeed but in public perception no more reckless than Hillary’s “we came, we saw, he died” chuckle.

    Being that “public perception” generally lacks nuance (IMO) you’re probably right about that. Of course there’s no doubt that she’s evil, and that statement of hers (re the death of Gaddafi) certainly evokes a powerful image of a malicious madwoman, but I would compare her to an enthusiastic mob “hitwoman” whereas I would compare Trump to a deranged serial killer. I know there are lots of people here who vehemently disagree with me on this but I believe that if Trump wasn’t born into privilege he’d be out strangling homeless people/drug addicts/prostitutes somewhere.

  46. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jim Brewer

    Your excuses for Mr. Buchanan don’t refute anything I’ve said, and scarcely exceed the level of gibberish. This “he’s really on our side, trying to work within the system” mindset in 2020 is pathetic and romantic. If he can’t muster the guts to tell the truth, he should hang it up and stop tarnishing his reputation.

  47. @A123

    http://thesaker.is/what-does-rabbinic-judaism-say-about-what-makes-jews-and-gentiles-different/

    Nah, Muslims are aware of the cult ideology of Talmudism – it’s not a belief system you can make peace with, because for it peace is genocide of every non Jew.

    Iran may be Shia, but Sunnies can live with people trying to be good, even if they see them making mistakes. The ME won’t live with a group that prides itself on believing in war Jews can kill Gentile infants, rape Gentile women, and generally act like beasts.

    Were Israel a Christian colony, it would have more hope – at least the Christian faith aims for peace.

    • Replies: @A123
  48. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    You are having trouble telling peaceful Jews from lying & violent non-Palestinian colonizers.

    http://muslimfact.com/bm/terror-in-the-name-of-islam/islam-permits-lying-to-deceive-unbelievers-and-bri.shtml

    Let me Fix That For You.

    Nah, Infidels (Christians and Jews) are aware of the Blood Cult cult ideology of the Satanic Veses of the Quran. Jihad is not a belief system that anyone can make peace with, because that peace would lead to the genocide of every Infidel.

    Palestine may be Jewish, but Palestinian Jews can live with people trying to be good, even if they see them making mistakes. The ME won’t live with a group that prides itself on believing in Jihad. Non-Palestinian Muslim occupiers frequently kill Infidel infants, rape Infidel women, and molest 9 year old girls like Aisha.

    ____

    Everyone, except for the most deranged extremists, are now coming to terms with the fact that the colonial conquest and occupation of Jewish Palestinian land has failed. Every violent act by non-Palestinian Muslims causes the Jewish Palestinian government to additional defensive steps to contain the violence.

    In the next 20 years or so, the non-Palestinian Muslim descendants of the Original Jihadi colonizers will be given a compensated and honourable opportunity to end their occupation of Jewish land. Muslim parents wanting to obtain a better life for their children will eagerly take the option to decolonize and leave the front lines.
    ____

    Your absolute commitment to violence and genocide leaves you in a tiny minority of most the extreme zealots. The civilized world is leaving your intransigence and irrational hatred behind.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
  49. @A123

    I read the Quran, the Sunnah, the Torah, the Talmud.

    Only one side strikes me as truly aggressive through its texts. Only one side shows this aggression practically through history.

    That is my opinion anyways.

    You say you are Christian, but the Talmud is so anti-Christ, that even I as a Buddhist, feel the iniquity it preaches.

    The Talmud is antithetical to all major faiths that currently exist in the world, perhaps aside from Hinduism, which has its supremacist issues too..

    As you say –

    The Talmud’s absolute commitment to violence and genocide leaves its followers in a tiny minority of most the extreme zealots. The civilised world is leaving their intransigence and irrational hatred behind.

    • Replies: @A123
  50. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    Judaism and Christianity share the Old Testament as a center of belief. Admittedly, translation and translation have altered the version in the Bible. However there is no way that you can say that the Old Testament (a.k.a. The Torah) is aggressive against Christians.

    Your Blood Libel an obvious Taqiyya deception.
    _____

    There is only one book that condemns all others to rape, slavery, rape, forced conversion, rape, and murder. That book is the Satan Verses of the Quran.

    The Quran’s absolute commitment to Jihad (enslavement or genocide of all Infidels) leaves its followers as the most dangerous extreme zealots on they planet. The civilized world is leaving Islamic intransigence and irrational hatred behind.

    If Islam is going to survive, it is going to have to open up the Quran to translation and modification so that it can step away from its violent, uncivilized dogma.

    PEACE 😇

  51. Jihad implies communal self defence against invaders. It is like the communal self defence within international law, but without the invitation.

    Jews do not follow the Old Testament. They follow their Rabbis, who claim themselves to be above God, if they agree on a rule as a majority.

    I’ll agree that Islam has its historical issues – even with Al-Baqarah 256, Muhammad forced Islam on pagan tribes, and Islam has suffered for this.

    But on the whole, Islam pails in comparison to Judaism. If Judaism had 1.8bn followers, the rest of the planet would have long been slaughtered.

    • LOL: A123
  52. @A123

    “Return the land to Palestinian Jews!”

    What exactly do you mean by Palestinian Jews?? So you are saying that only “Mizrahi” Jews should be allowed to live in Canaan (from Asia – including the Levant – and Africa) – while European/American “Ashkenazi” Jews need not apply?

    • Replies: @A123
  53. A123 says:
    @showmethereal

    ROTFLMAO….

    Congratulations…. That is the most pathetic and obvious attempt at diversion I have seen recently….. Keep up the comedy.
    ____

    Once 100% of the non-Palestinian Muslim occupiers leave…. There will be plenty of land and good will among those that share Judeo-Christian values to find a place for Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Christians.

    Those who believe in God have tolerance and the ability to compromise. It is very sad that Muslims hate God and follow Satan/Allah instead.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  54. @A123

    Actually it was a serious question… You obviously have zero clue about the history of the region so you couldn’t answer.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS