The Middle East rarely gets a break from conflict. In recent decades, it seems there is nothing but strife in the region. As one armed conflict is suppressed, another flares up. The latest potential conflict is between Saudi Arabia and Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon. This one has all the ingredients necessary to lead to the biggest war the region has seen in decades.
It could even lead to war for the rest of the world.
Late last week, Lebanon’s Prime Minister Saad Hariri shocked the world when he resigned, citing a “plot to target his life.” The announcement was made from Saudi Arabia where Hariri accused Hezbollah of being a militant arm beholden to Iran.
Hariri announced his resignation from Saudi Arabia, saying he sensed a “plot to target his life” as he accused Iran and its Lebanese Shiite ally Hezbollah of taking control of the country and destablizing the region.
“Iran has a grip on the fate of the region’s countries… Hezbollah is Iran’s arm not just in Lebanon but in other Arab countries too,” Hariri said. “Iran’s arms in the region will be cut off. The evil that Iran spreads in the region will backfire on it.”
On Tuesday, the Saudis accused Iran of “direct aggression” in the attack on Riyadh airport. They said Hezbollah and the Lebanese administration would now be “dealt with as a government declaring war on Saudi Arabia.”
He claimed Hezbollah’s actions “were considered acts of a declaration of war against Saudi Arabia by Lebanon and by the Lebanese Party of the Devil”.
Al-Sabhan said the message had also been delivered to Lebanese prime minister Saas al-Hariri, a Saudi ally.
Today, Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, accused Saudi Arabia of holding Hariri against his will, inciting Israel against Lebanon, and declaring war on the nation.
Mr Hariri said in a TV broadcast from Riyadh on Saturday he was stepping down because of an unspecified threat to his life. He also attacked Hezbollah and Iran.
However, Lebanese President Michel Aoun and other senior politicians have demanded his return, amid suspicions that he is being held by the Saudis under house arrest and forced to do their bidding.
Mr Aoun has not accepted Mr Hariri’s resignation.
What this means
This is more than just another potential conflict for Saudi Arabia. Ties between Hezbollah and Iran would add to the potential for the first armed conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran. They represent two of the three largest and most advanced military forces in the region with Israel’s being the third.
Saudi Arabia already believes Iran is the source of weapons for Yemen and Qatar, aiding them in their conflicts with the Saudis. Hezbollah believes the Saudis are going to attack by paying their “allies” in Israel to do it for them. Israel is never far from conflict with Hezbollah or Iran.
If Saudi Arabia decides it’s had enough with Iran’s meddling, it may choose to preemptively strike their Lebanese proxies. If Iran wants to provoke the Saudis without direct involvement (a path they’ve demonstrated they prefer), they could instruct Hezbollah to attack the Saudis through proxies in Yemen and Qatar.
There are other scenarios in play, including an unlikely direct attack from Iran or giving Lebanon direct access to Saudi Arabia thorough Syira down to Iraq. Nobody can predict exactly how this will play out. All we know is that every action, every moment brings us closer to war.
The longstanding conflict between Shiites and Sunnis may be due for for a massive regional war. Iran and Saudi Arabia are the champions of each sect. The difference is that there are enough potentially militant Shiites in Saudi Arabia – a population estimated around 20 million – that could be brought into the mix by Iran and Hezbollah.
Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations have already called for their citizens to leave Lebanon. We are one or two triggers away from war. In fact, there may already be plans in place to escalate at any moment.
The United States has interests in Saudi Arabia, Israel, and troops in various countries in or near the region. Russia is backing Iran and Syria. It’s not too hard to see the potential of bringing the rest of the world into a regional conflict if it does erupt into war.
It’s time to stop pretending like this is just another problem in a region known for constant problems. This is the closest we’ve been to full-blown war involving multiple nations in the region since 1967. Since none of the three nations have any intentions of backing down, it may no longer be a question of if war will break out. We should be asking, “when?”
Video Double play: Busting the gun grabber’s musket myth.
Two videos that eviscerate the Liberty Grabbers ‘One shot’ musket myth.
It is a bedrock principle (if they have any) of the Liberty grabber Left that back during the ratification of the US Constitution the only weapons in existence were flintlock musket that took 5 minute to reload. Thus there wasn’t any school violence because it would have taken too long for the perpetrator to kill anyone.
As it typical of the lore of the national socialist Left, this is a lie of the first order. A previous video celebrated the “Assault Weapon” tricentennial, which was bit of the tongue in cheek variety since there were other repeating “Military Style” weapons in existence before this time period. These will be detailed in future articles. Meanwhile we present two videos that also bust the ‘Musket Myth’, one a short presentation from the Royal Armouries on the Jover and Belton “Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket”
Published on Aug 30, 2017
Curator of Firearms, Jonathan Ferguson, gives us a peek at the Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket, by Jover and Belton (1786)
This is a very relevant piece since the inventor Joseph Belton corresponded with the Continental Congress in 1777:
May it Please your Honours,
I would just informe this Honourable Assembly, that I have discover’d an improvement, in the use of Small Armes, wherein a common small arm, may be maid to discharge eight balls one after another, in eight, five or three seconds of time, & each one to do execution five & twenty, or thirty yards, and after so discharg’d, to be loaded and fire’d with cartridge as usual.
“It was demonstrated before noted scientists and military officers (including well known scientist David Rittenhouse and General Horatio Gates)”
This destroys the mythology that the founders had no knowledge of this type of repeating firearm technology that existed already.
The second is a humours dissertation on the subject from video raconteur Steven Crowder https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/
from a few years ago that also eviscerates this bit of Leftist mythology.
Published on Feb 10, 2015
People have been telling us for years that the 2nd amendment was written in a time of Muskets, and that it doesn’t apply to the evolved weapons of today. Is it true?
So why is this important?
Two primary reasons. One that these factual examples demonstrate that the founding fathers knew of these technological advances. Therefore, they destroy any Leftist pretences that the 2nd amendment be confined to muskets. Second that, school violence is something other than an issue of guns.
Memorial Day – Remembering those who gave their lives for freedom
As Americans, it’s important to acknowledge the sacrifices of the men and women in uniform that died to defend her. Civil society only survives in a world of violence and tyranny if there are those willing to do violence on our behalf.
In his 1982 Memorial Day speech at Arlington National Cemetery, President Ronald Reagan reminds us of the ultimate cost of freedom:
“Yet, we must try to honor them—not for their sakes alone, but for our own. And if words cannot repay the debt we owe these men, surely with our actions we must strive to keep faith with them and with the vision that led them to battle and to final sacrifice.
Our first obligation to them and ourselves is plain enough: The United States and the freedom for which it stands, the freedom for which they died, must endure and prosper. Their lives remind us that freedom is not bought cheaply. It has a cost; it imposes a burden. And just as they whom we commemorate were willing to sacrifice, so too must we—in a less final, less heroic way—be willing to give of ourselves.”
Scripture tells us in John 15:13 (New Living Translation), “There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” While Memorial Day is considered the official kick-off of summer, I hope you’ll take a moment to remember those who paid the ultimate sacrifice by giving their lives to protect and defend our liberty. Freedom only exists in America because of them.
Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.
David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.
Video: Celebrate the “Assault Weapon*” Tricentennial!
How time flies, it’s been 3 Centuries [1718 – 2018] since the invention of the Puckle gun – one of the many early “Assault Weapons*”
Image Credit: littlegun.be
When they aren’t spouting nonsensical lines such as “30 magazine clip in ½ a second”, Liberty grabber Leftists love to parrot the lie that back before the ratification of the Constitution, (1788) they only had one shot muskets that took 5 minutes to reload. The reality is that repeating and other early versions of ‘automatic weapons‘ were in existence long before this time period. Imagine that, the national Socialist Left lying about an important historical fact that furthers their agenda?
This is a full video exposition of this historic gun from Forgotten Weapons
The Puckle Gun, or Defense Gun as it was also known, was invented and patented in 1718 by the London lawyer James Puckle.
This was an early ‘automatic weapon’ was capable of firing 63 shots in 7 minutes in 1721.
It utilised a revolving cylinder to bring a projectile and powder charge to the breach of the gun. In essence, it was a manual revolver, but it was in existence 70 years BEFORE the Constitution was ratified. So much for the ‘One shot musket Lie’. One could have several of these revolving cylinders loaded and ready to be placed on the gun – making them something akin to the first “High capacity magazines*”.
*Yes, we’re playing it a bit fast and loose with these terms, but since they have no set definition, that doesn’t matter. In point of fact, that term (and others) were made up by the Liberty grabbers as a way of destroying the basic human Right of self-defense while maintaining the fiction supporting it. The tactic is to use a term such as this so it’s an easy progression to destroy any civil or natural right. In the case of the Liberty of self-defense, the definition is simply expanded to include just about every gun in existence.