Showing posts with label Hezbollah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hezbollah. Show all posts

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Syria's Assad Threatens to Rain Missiles on Tel Aviv

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/ or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.


With the death of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, things have gotten terribly uncomfortable for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad—and his worry has led to serious threats.
Gaddafi was the latest Middle East dictator to fall in the wave of the Arab Spring. Fighting against his own people helped to bring NATO forces in to support the revolutionaries. Assad, who has violently clamped down on his own nation, fears similar intervention in Syria.
In early October, the Syrian leader threatened to set fire to the Middle East by striking Israel, stating in a meeting with the foreign minister of Turkey, a NATO member, “If a crazy measure is taken against Damascus, I will need no more than six hours to transfer hundreds of rockets and missiles to the Golan Heights to fire them at Tel Aviv” (quoted in “Report: Assad Threatens to Attack Tel Aviv in Case of NATO Strike,” Ynet News, Oct. 4, 2011).
He further “stressed that Damascus will also call on Hezbollah in Lebanon to launch a fierce rocket and missile attack on Israel, one that Israeli intelligence could never imagine. ‘All these events will happen in three hours, but in the second three hours, Iran will attack US warships in the Persian Gulf as American and European interests will be targeted simultaneously,’ Assad reportedly said” (ibid.).
According to the intelligence and security news service DEBKA file: “Israel reacted with a warning of its own: If a single Syrian missile explodes in Tel Aviv, Damascus will be first to pay the price, and if the missile offensive persists, one Syrian town after another will be destroyed. The Israeli message to Assad cited the warnings Defense Minister Ehud Barak and other government members addressed in the past year to Hizballah, that if Tel Aviv comes under attack from its missiles, not only Beirut but all of Lebanon would go up in flames. Assad was given to understand that Syria would go the same way as Lebanon if it engaged in missile belligerence against Israel” (“Turkish Military Exercise on Syrian Border. Assad Threatens Tel Aviv if Attacked,” Oct. 4, 2011).
Some see the building tensions as leading up to the fulfillment of a prophecy in Isaiah 17:1: “Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap” (Isaiah 17:1). The fulfillment of this prophecy is clearly yet future, as Damascus, while it has been overthrown in the past, has never ceased from being a city. (In fact, it’s reputedly the oldest continually inhabited city in the world.)
But the timing and cause of this destruction are not clear. While it could conceivably result from an Israeli retaliatory strike, there are reasons from other prophecies to place the destruction of Damascus in the same context as the judgment on others of Israel’s neighbors during the period of the Day of the Lord, just prior to Christ’s return.
In any case, a massive attack on Tel Aviv would certainly set the Middle East on fire—a fire that could well devastate Damascus and the rest of Syria.
For a broader overview of events to come in the region, send for or download our free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy (Sources: Ynet News, DEBKAfile.)

Tuesday, November 3, 2015

Russia's Geographic Outlook

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/ or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.


In 1939 England’s wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill famously said, “Russia is a riddle wrapped in mystery inside an enigma.” But considering the power in the hands of this nation, we should seek some understanding of what Russians call the Rodina or Motherland.
Russia is huge, spanning 11 time zones and thus stretching halfway around the world. It’s a rich land not only agriculturally, but in minerals, with enormous oil and gas reserves in Siberia. The discovery of Siberian oil fueled the Russian economy, but with the recent collapse of the price of oil, the Russian currency, the ruble, has turned to rubble.
In spite of its massive size, Russia has very poor access to the open seas and natural pathways to the rest of the world. This has played a critical role in the shaping of the Russian mind-set. In his book Peter the Great: His Life and World, author Robert Massie described 17th-century Russia this way:
“Like a giant closed up in a cave with only a pinhole for light and air, the great land mass of the Muscovite empire possessed but a single seaport: Archangel, on the White Sea. This unique harbor, remote from the Russian heartland, is only 130 miles south of the Arctic Circle. Six months of the year, it is frozen in ice.”
Peter the Great fought a war against the Swedes to gain another outlet to the world—seizing from them swampy land with access to the Baltic Sea and founding there St. Petersburg in 1703. However, even today ships from St. Petersburg must sail past Finland, Estonia and Poland, under a bridge connecting Denmark with Sweden, then past Norway and the United Kingdom to reach the Atlantic Ocean.
In the south, the Ottoman Turks long controlled the Black Sea. And when the Russians finally gained access to it, their ships still had to pass through the narrow Bosporus Straits, sailing under two Turkish bridges, then through the Dardanelles and the length of the Mediterranean Sea before passing through the Strait of Gibraltar to reach open seas.
Some of Russia’s greatest rivers flow nowhere. The Volga empties into the landlocked Caspian Sea. Great Siberian rivers flow north into the frozen Arctic. It’s a very awkward geography that has contributed to the frustration and aggressiveness of Russian rulers with ambitions of greatness on the world stage. (The geography of the United States and Britain, in contrast, is very different, with plentiful rivers and warm-water ports and harbors with full control of key naval gateways.)
These geographic shortcomings helped mold the Russian national psyche, fostering a xenophobic viewpoint—an intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Will Israel Attack Iran?

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/  or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.


Will Israel Attack Iran?



Printer-friendly version

Download Article

Download in MP3 Format


Worries about a nuclear-armed Iran are real, and Israel is in the crosshairs. Will the Israelis act, and if so, when?

Can you hear the time bomb ticking in the Middle East? If you flinch under the weight of the escalating price and humiliating dependence on foreign oil, if you hear the threats from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against Israel and the West and if you hear Ahmadinejad's defiant rejection of the West's oft-repeated demands for Iran to cease and desist from enriching uranium, then you do indeed hear the Iranian bomb ticking in the Middle East. Could it go off in the not-too-distant future?
Israelis cannot just wait for the bomb to go off; they live next door. Will Israel attack Iran and if so, when? Recently, Israel conducted an obvious military exercise over the Mediterranean Sea near Greece. The idea of this military exercise was to show that Israel's planes would fly the distance necessary to mount a mission to knock out Iran's nuclear facilities. Israel's implied threat is simple and direct: If enrichment continues, we could strike!

Israeli military exercises over the Mediterranean

Putnam Media Managing Editor Rick Pedraza wrote an insightful article for Newsmax.com titled "Bolton: Israel Will Strike Iran if Obama Is Elected." It addressed a recent Fox News interview of former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton. Pedraza commented on Israel's massive air force exercise over Greece, which the Greek, Israeli and U.S. forces later confirmed was a test run for a strike on Iran's main uranium enrichment plant.
The ordinary person may not have considered Israel's determined, strategic and geopolitical defense against Iran's covert and overt threats of nuclear warfare. Bolton has: "'I think if they are to do anything, the most likely period is after our elections and before the inauguration of the next President.' They'd have to make a judgment whether to [strike] during the remainder of President Bush's term in office or wait for his successor" (www.newsmax.com ).
Remarkably, and counterintuitive to what might be considered a public norm, "Bolton believes Arab countries will support an Israeli strike, effectively ending Iran's nuclear ambitions, while publicly denouncing it" (ibid., emphasis added).
Former Ambassador Bolton thinks that if Senator John McCain wins the presidential race, the Israelis might postpone the attack, offering, "McCain's stance on Iran 'is far more realistic than that of the Bush administration'" (ibid.). Mr. Bolton thinks that Iran would not respond immediately to a strike since they would fear an American reprisal.

Israel, a very tiny nation

With all the saber rattling, Israel has little recourse but to take a very strong military stand, no matter the threat. This small nation is surrounded by overwhelming numbers of Arab states. Israel occupies a pitiful pinch of real estate blanketed by its Arab neighbors, many within its own borders. Every inch of Israel's territory is seen as critical to its safety.
It's easy to discover why Israel is in such a precarious and highly dangerous geopolitical position, a tempting prize for its larger neighbors. Israel, with an area of about 8,000 square miles, is 1/20th the size of California. Israel is 260 miles long with a 120-mile coastline and is 70 miles across at its widest point. Israel is surrounded by more than 20 Arab nations equal to more than 630 times its size, more than 50 times its population—and the surrounding nations currently hold all the oil.

U.S. presidential influence in the mix

With only a few months until the American presidential elections, Israel should and likely will give the Bush administration one more chance to stop Iran's rush to enter the atomic and nuclear age. If nothing concrete happens before January 2009, it's possible that Israel will wait no more.
Will or can the United States do more than offer veiled threats to Iran, considering the U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan? The surge is working in Iraq, but Iraqi police alone aren't yet able to keep the peace. Taliban fighters are attempting to regain a foothold in Afghanistan. There is speculation that the United States may transfer troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to quell the Taliban surge.
The perplexing entanglement in the Middle East brings to mind Winston Churchill's 1939 radio broadcast in which he referred to forecasting the reaction of Russia to German aggression: "It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma [i.e., a puzzle, difficult to solve]; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."
Perhaps the key to the Iranian threat, counterintuitively, might just be the Arab nations' fear of Iranian hegemony right next door. Though they are overwhelmingly Muslim, the majority of Iranians are ethnically Persians rather than Arabs. The Iranians are also predominately Shiite Muslims (like the majority in Iraq), which makes the Sunni Muslims who control the rest of the Middle East's oil quite nervous.
If there's a military strike on Iran, either from Israel or the West, oil could spike to over $200 a barrel, further alienating the West from unsympathetic oil cartels. Gasoline could rise to $6 a gallon if not more.
It is clear that any U.S. intrusion into Iranian affairs would provoke a strong reaction from surrounding Arab countries, at least verbally. But would they do more? Consider that Iran's neighbors would not like Iran to have the bomb. Privately they would like a leveling of the playing field. An Iran with nuclear weapons would be a threat to the Arab nations, as well as to Israel. So don't assume that threatening rhetoric from nearby Arabic nations means that they are in league with Iran on this hot topic.
The U.S. presidential race is being weighed in the balance by both Iran and Israel. Both Iran and Israel will play out their hands based on how tough they think the next U.S. president will be on Middle Eastern geopolitics.

Will Israel survive?

Will Israel strike at Iranian nuclear facilities? If they conclude they need to, they probably will. It's a matter of self-preservation. With the recent announcement that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will step down after September elections, that seems more likely. Olmert has generally been viewed as a weak and ineffective leader, particularly in military matters.
What will be the outcome of all this? It won't be what most people would expect. Ironically, the Bible shows the Middle East and Israel being invaded by a European-based power described by Daniel as the king of the North (Daniel:11:40-41). Zechariah describes a terrible attack on Jerusalem, with half the city going into captivity (Zechariah:14:1-3).
But after all this, the inhabitants of the Middle East—Jews, Arabs and Iranians alike—will not be thinking about bombs but plowshares (Isaiah:2:4)!
To understand these prophetic events better, request or read online our free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy . WNP
Nobody has commented yet. Be the first to kick off the discussion!
Login/Register to post comments

Friday, February 27, 2015

Israel: A Nation in Constant Peril

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/  or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.


Israel: A Nation in Constant Peril





Hostility against the Jewish state, encircled by antagonistic countries, threatens to get completely out of control. How will Jerusalem cope with these anti-Semitic outbursts? What does the Bible reveal about this vulnerable nation's destiny?

Israeli flag
Source: Photos.com
Israel, a small democratic nation about the size of New Jersey, is virtually surrounded by 22 Islamic nations, some of which have regularly called for its total demise.
Typical of such statements is the most recent utterance of open hostility from Khaled Meshaal, leader of the terrorist group Hamas: "Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north. There will be no concession on an inch of the land. We will never recognise the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation" ( The Observer, Dec. 9, 2012).
"From the river to the sea" is typical Islamist shorthand for the territory between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea—meaning the entirety of the land of Israel. No "two-state solution" there!
Even more hostile statements have periodically come from the lips of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, who regularly threatens Israel with annihilation.
Recently installed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi has also joined in such calls. He presented himself as the arbiter of the cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hamas-ruled Gaza and in July 2012 called Israeli President Shimon Peres a "great and good friend."
But when interviewed on video in Arabic earlier in 2010 he called Israelis "bloodsuckers" and "descendants of apes and pigs." Morsi also argued for Muslim "military resistance" against Israel and referred to the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations as "a waste of time." In addition he firmly declared: "There is no place for them on the land of Palestine," adding that Jews "are hostile by nature—they have been fanning the flames of civil strife wherever they were throughout history. There should also be political resistance and economic resistance through a boycott, as well as supporting the resistance fighters.
"This should be the practice of the Muslims and the Arabs outside Palestine. They must not be given any opportunity, and must not stand on any Arab or Islamic land . They must be driven out of our countries" ( The Jewish Chronicle , Jan. 11, 2013, emphasis added throughout).
Morsi also stated on video in 2010: "Dear brothers, we must not forget to nurse our children and grandchildren on hatred towards those Zionists and Jews, and all those who support them. They must be nursed on hatred. The hatred must continue" (posted at the Middle East Media Research Institute [MEMRI] website, Jan. 10, 2013).
Has President Morsi softened his approach toward Israel since becoming head of state in Egypt? Time will tell, but his actions to date don't offer a great deal of hope. (For more on him, be sure to read " Winter Advisory: The Arab Spring That Wasn't ")
As foretold in the Bible, the Jewish state has been and will increasingly be a focal point of enemy rage and global conflict. What does this mean for Israel, and what lies ahead?

What the Bible reveals

The Bible remains an up-to-date, now book, continually commenting on current affairs with astounding accuracy.
You may be surprised to learn that some 3,000 years ago a psalm of "Asaph the seer" (2 Chronicles:29:30) was right on target with these prophetic words about Israel in the end time: "O God . . . Your enemies make a tumult; and those who hate You have lifted up their head. They have taken crafty counsel against Your people, and consulted together against Your sheltered ones.
"They have said, 'Come and let us cut them off from being a nation, that the name of Israel may be remembered no more.' For they have consulted together with one consent; they form a confederacy against You" (Psalm:83:1-5).
While Israel has faced its share of enemies throughout its turbulent history, this vivid description applies even more now. Today the Arab nations are partially divided among themselves, but they generally agree on one point—their fervent desire for Israel's demise. Today the ominous threat level has increased on all of its borders.
Truly Israel today remains a fulfillment of Ezekiel:5:5: "Thus says the Lord God: 'This is Jerusalem: I have set her in the midst of the nations and countries all around her.'" This passage reflects a lot deeper meaning than its historical context alone would indicate. Throughout Israel's history, God has always understood her fragile position in a hostile world. (For further historical and prophetic insight, see "A Biblical Prophecy of an Arab Confederation .")

A free world unfriendly to Israel

British author Melanie Phillips, also a Daily Mail columnist and contributing writer for The Jewish Chronicle, concluded a recent Internet piece with this stark statement about current world conditions—especially in the West:
"You are looking at the emergence of a new world order: the eclipse of the west, brought about by the unholy alliance between the Obama administration and death-wish Britain and Europe—and leaving Israel, once the forward salient of the west in the Middle East, emerging instead as the lonely and isolated defender of liberty in the face of a gathering Islamic storm" ("Into the Abyss," Dec. 12, 2012).
Britain and Western Europe have a history of often favoring the Arab countries over Israel. But the United States has long been a loyal supporter and ally of this tiny democratic state. That threatens to change, perhaps more radically than we could ever imagine.
Many observers have pointed out that President Barack Obama's recent choices for two key cabinet posts, State and Defense, do not have an encouraging history of support for the state of Israel. As Melanie Phillips, who also appears as a commentator on radio and TV programs in Britain, observed, "John Kerry, tipped to become Secretary of State, is an anti-war activist and left-wing fantasist."
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Kerry warned against "prejudging" the Muslim Brotherhood as it prepared to take power in Egypt. And he gave assurances that Egypt's President Morsi was committed to freedom and good relations with Israel and the United States—despite much evidence to the contrary ("Exclusive: Muslim Brotherhood Preaching Israel Destruction After Election," IPT [Investigative Project on Terrorism] News, June 27, 2012).
Phillips went on to remark: "The record of Chuck Hagel, is more troubling still . . . He has consistently voted against sanctions on Iran to stop its pursuit of nuclear weapons capability; he voted against naming Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization; and he refused to sign a letter calling on the European Union similarly to name Hezbollah—which has the blood of countless Americans on its hands—as a terrorist organization. Instead he advocates engaging with Iran."
A Wall Street Journal editorial adds that Hagel "has long advocated engagement with Syria's dictator [Bashar al-Assad] and the terror group Hamas" ("A Hagel Education," Jan. 9, 2013).
The Economist quoted Lindsey Graham, Republican U.S. Senator of South Carolina and a member of the Arms Services Committee as stating that Hagel is "well out of the 'mainstream' in his foreign-policy views" and, if confirmed, would be "the most antagonistic Secretary of Defense towards the state of Israel in our nation's history" ("Obama Picks His Soldiers," Jan. 12, 2013).
Texas Republican U.S. Senator Ted Cruz echoes this observation, stating: "His record on Israel strongly suggests that he views Israel not as a friend, but as a nuisance. The U.S.-Israel alliance is critical to our national security, but Hagel has been far too willing to undermine that alliance" ("Why I Expect to Oppose Hagel," USA Today, Jan. 9, 2013).
We should also recognize that President Obama's foreign policy has favored Islamists during and following recent uprisings (see " Puzzling U.S. Support for Islamists Over Moderates "). And Islamists are hostile to the state of Israel.

Israel's long history of encirclement

Douglas Murray stated in his article "Israel Under Siege" in The Spectator: "Since 1973 Israel has suffered a status quo of quiet enemies and even quieter friends. Now it is surrounded by disappearing friends and even louder enemies" (Nov. 24, 2012). He spoke of "the overarching movement that has been overlooked for too much of the [20th] century since its birth [in 1948]."
But Israel has faced many enemies since the nation left Egypt some 3,500 years ago. The late British theologian and historian F.F. Bruce tells us, "The departure of the people of Israel from Egypt marks their birth as a nation" ( Israel and the Nations, 1969, p. 13). He had observed earlier: "Yet Israel's national history was not lived out in isolation from other peoples. The Israelites were surrounded by nations greater and mightier than themselves, who impinged upon the life of Israel, at many points" (p. 11).
During Israel's early days as a nation, "it was not only Canaanite cities in the land that tried to reduce them to serfdom; from time to time they suffered from incursions from beyond Jordan, by their own kinsman of Moab and Ammon [descendants of Abraham's nephew Lot] and Edom [the descendants of Jacob's brother Esau], and more disastrously by the beduin [or Bedouin] from remoter parts of Arabia, who mounted on camels, raided their territory year by year at harvest time and destroyed their crops" (pp. 19-20).
Yet ancient Israel also had her share of national heroes and deliverers—Joshua, Gideon, King Hezekiah and King David, the latter conquering the city of Jerusalem and founding it as his nation's capital. In more recent times we think of Israel's modern founder David Ben-Gurion (1948), Moshe Dayan (of the 1967 War) and even of Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu.
Still, throughout too much of Israel's history its peoples have been in either actual or virtual captivity. In the eighth century B.C. the northern 10 tribes of the kingdom of Israel were taken captive into Assyria, followed in the sixth century B.C. by the southern kingdom of Judah being invaded and exiled by the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. In the days of Jesus Christ and His apostles and the early Church, the Jews were under the occupation of Rome.
After two failed revolts against Rome's might, the Jewish nation was crushed and its people scattered. Many centuries later the tragic experience of the Holocaust (with 6 million Jews perishing) was followed by the prophesied return of many Jews to their ancient homeland.
These hardy survivors were determined not to become slaves yet again. Thus we see the strong survival mentality of the modern state of Israel, again threatened by a host of enemy countries and now also hindered by waning friendships with key supporter nations.
The late historian Barbara Tuchman wrote in her book Practicing History: "With all its problems, Israel has one commanding advantage—a sense of purpose: to survive. It has come back. It has confounded persecution and outlived exile to become the only nation of the world that is governing itself in the same territory, under the same name, and with the same religion and the same language as it did three thousand years ago. It is conscious of fulfilling destiny . It knows it must not go under now, that it must endure" ("Israel: Land of Unlimited Impossibilities," 1981, p. 134).

What Bible prophecy clearly reveals

So what does Bible prophecy tell us about what will happen to Israel and Jerusalem in the years ahead? One specific prophetic passage in the Bible becomes supremely important at the time of the end of this age of human misrule, which will be followed by the utopian, millennial reign of Jesus Christ and His saints (Revelation:20:4-6). This key scripture is found in Zechariah:12:2-3, where God says:
"Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples, when they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. And it shall happen in that day [of God's direct intervention] that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it."
Although Jerusalem (often meaning not only the city itself, but the nation of Israel as a whole) has been a source of contention throughout much of its history, this prophetic passage primarily speaks of the time of Armageddon (see Revelation:16:14-16). This occurs just prior to the second coming of Jesus Christ. (For a detailed account, read the article, "Armageddon: The End of the World? ")
But what decisive geopolitical events lead directly to this most crucial of all benchmarks in future world history? In brief, a new European-centered superpower will arise and take control of Egypt and the Holy Land. The leader of this power is identified in Bible prophecy as "the king of the North."
Another end-time leader referred to as "the king of the South" (most likely leading an alliance of Islamic Middle Eastern nations, possibly a restored Islamic caliphate) will attack or "push at" the king of the North. This will provoke the North into a blitzkrieg-like invasion of Egypt and neighboring lands, with northern forces also entering the "Glorious Land"—the Holy Land (Daniel:11:40-42).
But then what happens to these conquering enemies? Zechariah:14:3-4 gives us the answer with a basic prophecy about Christ's return to the earth: "Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations . . . and in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east." These nations will have been gathered together at Armageddon to fight the Messiah, Jesus Christ, at His coming.
Shortly before that time, "half of the city [of Jerusalem] shall go into captivity" (verse 2). So the clear indication is that Israel will once again be occupied by foreign armies, coming under gentile control for 3½ years just before Christ's second coming (Revelation:11:2).
As mentioned at the outset of this article, a number of surrounding nations are already intent on destroying the nation of Israel. Yet in spite of all the troubles they may inflict on Israel, Bible prophecy indicates that these Middle Eastern nations will not be able to eliminate the Jewish state.
Ultimately Israel's captivity and occupation is destined to come from an unexpected source—the aforementioned prophesied European-centered superpower. Then the peoples of Israel will finally learn how dependent they are on God for safety and security (these peoples being more than just the Jews—see "Where Are the 'Lost 10 Tribes' Today? "). Then they will welcome the Anointed One, their-long-sought-for Messiah.

Christ will rescue Israel

An encouraging, yet-to-be-fulfilled prophecy of Christ enters this end-time picture: "'Behold, the days are coming' says the Lord, 'that I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; a King shall reign and prosper, and execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In His days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell safely; now this is His name by which He will be called: The Lord Our Righteousness'" (Jeremiah:23:5-6).
The fulfillment of this prophecy will be so important to Israel's future that it is repeated almost verbatim in Jeremiah:33:15-16.
The context of this particular prophecy makes it even more intriguing. These wonderful, inspiring words are uttered by Jeremiah in the midst of a series of prophecies relaying the terrible news that the nation of Judah was going into Babylonian captivity at that time.
Yes, even in the most discouraging of circumstances, God keeps His plan of ultimate rescue and deliverance fully in mind.    
Whatever troubles the peoples of the tiny Middle Eastern nation of Israel may have to endure before that ultimate outcome, we may be absolutely sure that God Himself will come to Israel's rescue through the direct intervention of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Our Creator keeps His eyes on Jerusalem and Israel. And so should we!

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Why Is Israel the Focus of Muslim Hostility?

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/  or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.


Why Is Israel the Focus of Muslim Hostility?





At the heart of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is ongoing hatred among Muslim nations toward Israel and the Jewish people. What are the underlying causes? 

Why Is Israel the Focus of Muslim Hostility?
Source: Wikimedia
The conflict between the Israelis and surrounding Muslim nations has been raging since the Jewish state's inception —and the origins go back much further. Today the hostility is growing in openness and intensity, making the prospects for peace in the Middle East dim.
The Arab Spring uprisings throughout the region are allowing the wider expression of popular sentiments among the Muslim masses—inflaming the ancient animosity.
While not all Muslims feel antipathy toward Jews and Israel, there is widespread dislike and resentment by the majority, as repeatedly borne out in polls and surveys. The Pew Global Attitudes Project survey conducted last summer found that almost no one in the Muslim Middle East thinks positively toward Israel and the Jewish people.
"Ratings of Jews are dismal in the seven predominantly Muslim nations surveyed" (Pew Research Center, Common Concerns About Islamic Extremism: Muslim-Western Tensions Persist, July 21, 2011, p. 22). In the six of these nations that are in the Middle East or adjacent to it, only 2 to 4 percent express favorable opinions of Jews.
It is amazing that the small nation of Israel, composed of only about 8,000 square miles of land—roughly two times the size of Rhode Island—generates so much ill feeling.
Israel's territory is only about one-sixth of one percent that of the 22 hostile Arab nations that are 640 times her size. And they have 45 times more people than Israel—340 million Arabs versus 7.7 million Israeli citizens (more than a million of whom are themselves Arab).
Yet fiery rhetoric calling for the destruction of Israel can be heard in political speeches and mosque sermons throughout the Muslim world, from Iran to Libya and in other places around the globe—including Western nations.
An example of the growing hostility toward Israel can be found across its southern border in Egypt with the increasing influence there of the Muslim Brotherhood. This organization has sired 86 branches across the Islamic world since the 1920s. The more dominant ones are in Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Palestinian territories (the branch in the latter being the terror group Hamas, which now runs Gaza).
Comments like the following from Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Kamal al Halbawi, made while speaking at an official visit to Iran in July 2011, are all too common: "Both nations [Iran and Egypt] underline the necessity for Muslim nations to maintain solidarity and unity to annihilate this cancerous tumor (Israel) . . . Every night when I go to bed, I pray to wake up the next day to see Israel is wiped off the map" (quoted by "ADL [Anti-Defamation League] Report: Muslim Brotherhood's Open Hostility to Israel Could Play Destabilizing Role In Egypt And Region," ADL.org, Sept. 19, 2011).
Let's consider the root causes of such widespread Muslim animosity against Israel.

Indoctrination and propaganda

Conflict between Muslims Jews, and Christians has been around since Islam began in the seventh century A.D. But it's been exacerbated in recent times by an indoctrination of religious intolerance and anti-Semitic propaganda in the Muslim world.
The indoctrination is led by Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam, which has been asserting itself as the world's authoritative voice for the religion. An important avenue for its gaining influence has been through Saudi charities funding Wahhabi madrassas (schools) and mosques in many nations (Wahhabism being an extremist form of Islam embraced by terror groups like al-Qaeda).
An illustration of the ongoing indoctrination is furnished by a 2006 study by theCenter for Religious Freedom and the Institute for Gulf Affairs: "As demonstrated by excerpts from the dozen current Islamic studies textbooks analyzed in this report, the Saudi public school religious curriculum continues to propagate an ideology of hate toward the 'unbeliever,' that is, Christians, Jews, Shiites, Sufis, Sunni Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine, Hindus, atheists and others.
"This ideology is introduced in a religion textbook in the first grade and reinforced and developed in following years of the public education system, culminating in the twelfth grade, where a text instructs students that it is a religious obligation to do 'battle' against infidels in order to spread the faith" ("Saudi Arabia's Curriculum of Intolerance," 2006, p. 10).
That's what the study found after the Saudi Arabian government said it had reformed its school system and textbooks to be more tolerant. The study goes on to provide numerous excerpts that make the point, like these from an eighth-grade schoolbook:
"'They [the Jews] are the people of the Sabbath, whose young people God turned into apes, and whose old people God turned into swine to punish them.' 'As cited in Ibn Abbas: The apes are Jews, the keepers of the Sabbath; while the swine are the Christian infidels of the communion of Jesus'" (p. 24).
With such ideology exported to madrassas around the world, a great many Muslims everywhere have been using textbooks with the same perspective and approach.
One might wonder why the Saudi government would sponsor the radicalization of Islamic education. It appears the strategy has been to direct the hatred of the native populace toward Israel and Western nations and away from dissatisfaction with the local national government, which might lead to rebellion.
The same has been true in other Muslim states, where government-controlled education and press have incited populations against the Israelis, Americans and other Westerners. Again, the focus is thereby taken away from dissatisfaction with local regimes.
The Arab Spring has brought the focus back on local government, but the instilled misperceptions and hatred of Israel and the West remain (with many wanting to strike out in contrast to the inaction of past regimes).
On top of the damage of formal education in this regard is a steady onslaught of media propaganda poisoning Muslim minds against the Jewish people from a young age. Arab cartoons and other children's shows typically portray Jews as evil and bloodthirsty, and some present suicide bombing against them as heroic. A TV show for Palestinian children was hosted by a Mickey Mouse–style character calling for war against the Israelis—until he was depicted as being killed on the show by "terrorist" Jews!
Such incessant indoctrination and propaganda has had a real impact. In the Arab countries surveyed by the Pew Research Center, large majorities of Muslims who say some religions are more prone to violence consider Judaism to be the most violent religion by 77 to 97 percent (p. 23). This despite the fact that it's the Jewish Israelis who've been repeatedly attacked by Muslims and Muslims themselves who have killed hundreds of thousands of other Muslims in conflicts and wars during recent decades!
Add to all this a left-leaning media in the West that looks on the Jewish state as a past partner in perceived U.S. imperialism abroad, as a nation basing its right to exist on what they see as the antiquated and foolish notion of biblical authority, as an "occupier" and "oppressor" of the Palestinians, and as the intractable main obstacle to Middle East peace, and the hatred of Israel seems further justified to many of the Muslims in Western nations.
Then there's the semblance of legitimacy to condemning the Jewish state lent by the United Nations General Assembly, which has been anti-Israel for years. This body represents the nations of the world, but many of them are Islamic and thuggish dictatorships trying to direct focus away from their own atrocities and misrule—Israel providing a convenient target of scorn and censure.

Distortion of the refugee issue

No doubt, the principal issue over which the state of Israel has been criticized is that of the Palestinians—the refusal to allow refugees their "right of return" and the "occupation" of Palestinian lands both garnering region-wide and worldwide sympathy. Israel's supposed recalcitrance is blamed for the ongoing failures of the peace process—leading to widespread condemnation and bitterness.
Yet here, too, propaganda is a major factor. Ignored is the fact that this situation exists because the Arab states attempted to destroy the state of Israel at its founding in 1948 and later in the Six-Day War of 1967.
The League of Arab States, or Arab League, was formed in 1945—mainly to unite Arab countries in opposition to the emergence of a Jewish state. Then, in 1948, five nations of the newly formed Arab League took up arms against the state of Israel following its U.N.-mandated independence.
Arabs in territory allotted to Israel who joined the invaders at that time ended up fleeing or were driven out. They became refugees in surrounding Arab states, and these states have refused them settlement, preferring to keep them in refugee camps to maintain political pressure against Israel—to get the Israelis to accept their right to return.
The Israelis, however, recognize this is a strategy to destroy the Jewish state by flooding Israel with millions of descendants of those original Arab refugees who will use Israel's democratic form of government to transform it into just another Arab state.
Following the Arabs' blockade of Israel that led to the 1967 war, the Israelis took possession of the Jordanian territory known as the West Bank, of the Syrian territory of the Golan Heights, and of the Egyptian territories of Gaza and Sinai (eventually returning Sinai and withdrawing from Gaza). Besides the fact that the West Bank is really the ancient Israelite homeland of Samaria and Judah, the Israelis took over and have maintained control of this territory principally as a defensive measure—since without this buffer territory Israel is less than 10 miles wide at some points.
It's interesting to note that it was in 1964, well before the 1967 war, that the Arab League established the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), whose charter states that "the liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national duty." This was before Israel's acquisition of the West Bank and other territories in the Six-Day War. While Israel had made small territorial gains in 1948, it's important to see that in Arab eyes, the intended area of "Palestine liberation" was the entire area of the state of Israel.
And just who has and has not been willing to negotiate? Following the 1967 War, the Arab League issued the Khartoum Resolution with its "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it."
For many years the PLO under its longtime chairman Yasser Arafat was basically a terrorist organization. After he and the group were eventually legitimized in the sight of the Western world, negotiations were entered into. But these did not lead to peace—only more intifadas or uprisings.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered extreme concessions, eventually 91 percent of the West Bank, but it was not enough for Arafat. It's been speculated that Palestinian leaders did not then actually want self-governance, as they would've needed to spend the large amounts of aid sent to them on national infrastructure and could no longer blame the plight of their people on the Israelis.
Not much changed when Mahmoud Abbas succeeded Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority. Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recalls a personal one-on-one meeting in 2008 with then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:
"Olmert started talking again. 'I know what he [Abbas] needs. He needs something on refugees and on Jerusalem. I'll give him enough land, maybe something like 94 percent with swaps. I have an idea about Jerusalem. There will be two capitals, one for us in West Jerusalem and one for the Palestinians in East Jerusalem'" ( No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years in Washington, 2011, p. 651).
In addition, Olmert was willing to put an international body in charge of holy sites and allow 5,000 Arab refugees to settle in Israel.
Rice says that while Abbas started negotiations right away, his insistence that a larger number of refugees and their descendants be allowed to settle in Israel under the right of return became a deal breaker.
Over the last few years the Palestinian Authority has, with one short exception, avoided direct talks with Israel. Instead, this past September Abbas took a request for statehood to the United Nations, effectively bypassing the direct negotiations required by the 1993 Oslo accords signed by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
So the idea that Israel is the hindrance to peace negotiations really doesn't hold water.

A worldview of expansion with no retreat

Key to all this is a critical factor many fail to understand. Underlying the Palestinian conflict and Muslim attitudes toward Israel is the fact that the very existence of the Jewish state is intolerable from the perspective of many Muslims.
The establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 and the ensuing defeat of the invading Arab armies was seen by the Arabs as a disastrous humiliation—known as the Nakba or "catastrophe." Later defeats and the fact that Israel still exists magnify the disgrace.
Yet it was not a mere nationalist humiliation. This was a catastrophe because it was a shaming affront to their religion—striking at the very heart of Islam.
What needs to be realized is that, in Islamic theology, the world is divided into two great spheres of influence. One is Dar al-Salaam, meaning "Abode of Peace," a term used to describe Muslim-controlled lands (sometimes also called Dar al-Islam, meaning "Abode of Islam").
The other is Dar al-Harb, meaning "Abode of Struggle" or "Abode of War." This term is used to denote all other lands. By this very terminology, all non-Muslim lands are defined as areas where Islam must struggle or war so that these areas may be converted to Dar al-Islam, lands ruled by Islam—the ultimate objective being the entire world brought under the rule of Islam.
It's important to understand that, in the thinking of millions of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims, it is an abomination for any land that was once Dar al-Islam, territory controlled by Muslims, to become Dar al-Harb, "Abode of Struggle," in which Muslims have lost control and seen it revert back to rule by non-Muslims (infidels). This goes directly against the Koran and other teachings of Muhammad, which avow that ultimately the entire world is to be under the control of Islam (see "Does the Koran Promote Peace and Cooperation?").
Because these concepts are so foreign to Western thinking, these distinctions are lost on most Westerners—and, tragically, particularly on their governments and leaders. Yet it explains why, in more than a dozen nations across the globe, Muslims are waging war along the edges of the Islamic world to convert more lands to Dar al-Islam.

Israeli territory claimed to belong to Muslims

It also explains why most Muslims in general, and Arabs in particular, are fundamentally opposed to the existence of a Jewish state of Israel. They don't want a two-state solution, unless it is only as a temporary measure. They want a single Palestinian state "from the sea to the sea" as they define it—from the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, with no place for Israel at all.
Israel, you see, is an "infidel" country sitting on land that was once Dar al-Islam, the land of Islam, and thus its existence is an abomination. We can see this ideology plainly set forth in the charter of the Islamic Resistance Movement, better known as the terrorist group Hamas (the same group that controls Gaza, from which rockets and mortar shells are regularly fired into Israeli towns):
"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine [which in Hamas' perspective includes not just Gaza and the West Bank but the entire state of Israel] is an Islamic Waqf [inalienable endowment] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.
"Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?
"This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement...This Waqf remains as long as earth and heaven remain. Any procedure in contradiction to Islamic Sharia, where Palestine is concerned, is null and void" ("Hamas Covenant," Aug. 18, 1988, Article 11).
Given this underlying ideology, it's no wonder that the Arab nations formed the Arab League to oppose the emergence of the Israeli state. This explains why the failure to prevent its establishment was viewed as a humiliating catastrophe. And we can clearly see why the "liberation of Palestine" is considered an Arab national duty. After all, the validity of Islam itself is at stake!
But there's more to it still. Worse than being a tiny infidel nuisance, Israel is a major power in the region—largely because of support from the West, particularly the United States and Great Britain. Indeed, Israel is seen as an agent of the United States in the Muslim Middle East. The Jewish state and Britain have been referred to as "the Little Satans," while America is labeled "the Great Satan." Thus, the Great Satan is perceived as having a foothold amidst Dar al-Islam.
According to a recent Zogby International poll conducted in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates—sponsored by the Arab American Institute Foundation—"when asked to choose 'the greatest obstacle to peace and stability in the Middle East,' once again the 'occupation of Palestinian lands' and 'U.S. interference in the Arab world' rank as the top two concerns" ("Arab Attitudes, 2011," p. 5). Probably the real concern is these posing a threat to Islam—upsetting the Dar al-Salaam ("Abode of Peace").
Indeed, as the United States and Britain are predominantly Christian, their interference in the Middle East and presumed use of Israel as a proxy are seen by many Muslims as, effectively, a continuation of the Crusades (fought a thousand years ago between professing Christians and Muslims for control of the Holy Land). Yet, while the Christian powers are next in line to be dealt with in the thinking of many, Israel, because of proximity and its occupation of formerly Muslim territory, is seen as the immediate threat in need of elimination.
All this is a major part of why Israel has had to fight five wars for survival in a little over 60 years of existence and suffers from continuing terrorist bombings and rocket attacks. And it's a big reason Israel's continued existence is an ongoing intolerable disgrace to fundamentalist Muslims around the world, with a number perpetually calling for it to be wiped from the map.
Yet the irrational hatred goes even deeper.

Ancient family feud and evil spirit influence

The origins of the strife we see today between many Islamic Arab people and the Jews in Israel can actually be traced back nearly 4,000 years.
The Bible records that God appeared to a man named Abram, later renamed Abraham, and promised him a son whose descendants would become a great nation. When his wife Sarai could not afterward conceive a child, she suggested that Abram take her Egyptian servant girl Hagar as a surrogate mother. And Hagar bore a son named Ishmael.
God gave Hagar this prophetic promise: "I will so increase your descendants that they will be too numerous to count . . . You are now with child and you will have a son. You shall name him Ishmael ['God hears'], for the Lord has heard of your misery.
"He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers" (Genesis:16:10-12, New International Version, 1984, emphasis added throughout).
Some 12 to 13 years after Ishmael was born, God appeared again to Abram with another promise: "As for Sarai your wife...I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her'" (verses 15-16).
God changed her name to Sarah. She had been barren all her life and was past normal childbearing age. Through God's miraculous intervention she bore a son, Isaac. His descendants would become the 12 tribes of the nation of Israel, which included the tribe of Judah—predominately today's Jews.
Ishmael, God said, would father 12 princes and become a "great nation" (verse 20), though God's greater blessings and covenant would be with Isaac. The Arabs acknowledge Ishmael as their progenitor.
Ishmael and his mother were eventually sent away from the family. And another divide in the family came when Isaac's son Jacob (later renamed Israel) schemed against his brother Esau or Edom. The divisions in the family—between Israelites and Ishmaelites and between Israelites and Edomites—would persist until the last days, with hostility increasing, as God foretold.
For more details on what happened and how this family division has continued over the ages, request or download our free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy .
And besides the family dynamic and specific prophecies God has given, another underlying reason for the hatred of Israel among Muslim nations is no doubt the same one that exists for virulent anti-Semitism around the world. As the level of hatred and antagonism is completely irrational, we should recognize in it a spiritual cause.
The world is ruled over and deceived by a spirit being, Satan the devil, and his demonic cohorts, who hate God. And they have incited people to hatred against God's people throughout history. Moreover, the preservation of the Jewish people and their return to the Holy Land to establish a state is a validation of the promises and prophecies of the Bible—a great frustration to enemies of God's Word.  

Hostility builds at the time of the end

What all this adds up to is these under-lying forces continuing to generate Muslim hostility towards the Jews and Israel, growing in intensity as we approach the end of this age.
Psalm 83 contains an intriguing prophecy that reveals this growing hostility will play out in a confederation of Muslim peoples determined to eliminate Israel as a nation:
"They have taken crafty counsel against Your people, and consulted together against Your sheltered ones. They have said, 'Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation, that the name of Israel may be remembered no more'" (verses 3-4).
This prophecy goes on to mention specific areas and peoples that will be involved. Our research reveals that some or all of the following will likely participate in this anti-Israel alliance—the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, northern Iraq, and Arab states throughout the Middle East and North Africa.
Out of this group of nations will likely come the end-time leader Daniel the prophet calls the "king of the South." He will arise from the Muslim world and set in motion a cascade of events that will lead to unimaginable carnage in the final world war before Jesus Christ returns (Daniel:11:40).
This confrontation begins with some aggressive move of the king of the South toward what Daniel calls the "king of the North," an end-time European-centered superpower that will then occupy parts of the Middle East, including Israel.
The entire world will eventually be pulled into this developing maelstrom. Jesus Christ called the time of this final world war the "great tribulation" and said He would have to intervene to save humankind from total annihilation (Matthew:24:21-22).
The good news is that peace between these hostile peoples will finally come as former enemies learn the way of peace from the Prince of Peace. Hatred and violence will at last be no more!