Dale said in post 29:
Thank you for your compliment on my Land Tax signature. It's unusual for anyone to say anything about it.
Especially in Congress, which may be bought and paid for by donors with huge landholdings.
Dale said in post 29:
24 When the richest provinces feel secure, he will invade them and will achieve what neither his fathers nor his forefathers did. He will distribute plunder, loot and wealth among his followers. He will plot the overthrow of fortresses—but only for a time.
Daniel 11:24 New International Version (NIV)
Every Arab Sheikh distributes plunder among followers who took part in a battle. This is not the same thing as a managed economy or the State taking care of the poor.
Daniel 11:24 He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches . . .
Regarding "he shall scatter among them the ... riches", note that the original Hebrew word translated as "them" (hemmah: H1992) doesn't mean "his followers" (NIV), but can instead be translated as "how many soever they be" (2 Samuel 24:3). And note that this can be what "his fathers have not done", i.e. distribute the extreme, hoarded wealth of the Arab Gulf states ("the fattest places") to all the Arab masses, from Oman to Morocco, most of whom are extremely poor. It is in this way that the (Baathist/Socialist) Antichrist could make all of the Arab masses his devoted followers, so that he becomes the supreme leader and founder of a future, United Arab States, stretching from Oman to Morocco, as a first step in his eventual world takeover (in Revelation 13:7b-18).
--
Regarding the Antichrist being a
Baathist Socialist, and what could prepare the way for his Arab (and then world) takeover, he may not appear on the world stage until after the horrible, future, tribulation-starting war of Revelation 6:4-8 and Daniel 11:15-17 has resulted in the total defeat and occupation of Israel, and Egypt, and the death of 1/4 of the world. It could be this war which will help open the way for the Antichrist to arise on the world stage as a great man of peace and antitypically fulfill the "vile" person of Daniel 11:21-45.
One way this war could happen is the U.S. could undertake a massive buildup of the Iraqi Army, initially to prevent the Islamic State militant group (also known as ISIS, or ISIL, or Daesh) from taking over Iraq, and Syria, and all the rest of the Middle East, and eventually so that the Iraqi Army can serve as a proxy army, for the U.S. and Israel, for an all-out ground invasion of Iran, in order to end Iran's nuclear weapons program and extremist regime. As part of the buildup of the Iraqi Army, the U.S. could reinstall much of the former Iraqi Baathist military hierarchy (i.e. that which existed under Baathist Saddam Hussein), to run the present Iraqi Army more efficiently and ruthlessly.
And if the current, Shiite-dominated government of Iraq balks at any return of a Baathist-dominated military (which cruelly suppressed the Iraqi Shiites under Saddam Hussein's rule), or balks at any invasion of fellow-Shiite Iran, this could lead the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad to bring about a Baathist coup d'etat in Iraq. For they could see a well-run, Baathist Iraqi Army and government as the only way to keep ISIS/ISIL under control, and the only way to eventually invade and defeat Iran, which invasion the Iraqi Baathists could agree to perform, for they see meddling, non-Arab Iran as a great enemy of Arab autonomy.
To help get the Iraqi masses and the world behind the idea of an all-out Iraqi invasion of Iran, "false flag" operations could be managed by the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad by which it will be made to seem that (non-Arab, Persian) Iran is attacking the Iraqi Sunni Arabs and their little children terroristically with "dirty bombs" made from Iranian-enriched uranium, so that the Iraqi Arab masses will become enraged and begin to call for all-out retaliation against (what they could call) "the vile Persians". And the world could see an Iraqi invasion of Iran as being completely justified by self-defense.
But then, right when Iraq is all ready to invade Iran, the ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel (who by that time could be led by a great miracle-working false Messiah: cf. Matthew 24:24) could completely destroy the Muslim Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque (the 3rd-holiest sites in Islam) on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, to clear the site for the building of a 3rd Jewish temple (Revelation 11:1-2, Matthew 24:15, Daniel 11:31,36; 2 Thessalonians 2:4). This could so enrage Muslims worldwide, including the (Muslim) Iraqi Army, that the Iraqi Baathist Generals could see it as a perfect excuse to abandon the plan to invade huge Iran, and instead (pretending that they are doing so in the name of Islam) turn and send their vast army against the little territory of Israel, completely defeating and occupying it (Daniel 11:15-17; in verse 17, the original Hebrew word translated as "daughter" is "bath").
But this wouldn't be the ultimate reason for the Baathist attack, which could continue on south to also defeat and occupy Egypt (Daniel 11:15). For Egypt is ruled by the U.S.-supported Egyptian Army, which the Baathists could see as being a puppet of the U.S., just as they could see Israel as being a colony of the U.S. Baathism's ultimate aim is to unite all Arab lands from Oman to Morocco into one massive, powerful United Arab States free of all foreign hegemony.
The all-out Iraqi attack on Israel could be joined by the entire (Baathist) Syrian Army (with all of its missiles, many still secretly tipped with nerve agents), as well as by all of Iran's long-range missiles and all of Hezbollah's and Hamas' missiles and guerrillas. Israel could find itself suddenly attacked from 3 directions at the same time, with tens of thousands of missiles raining down on its cities and military bases, and tens of thousands of Iraqi tanks (meant to defeat and occupy huge Iran) pouring across its borders. As Israel starts to see its little sliver of land completely overrun, and sees that its total defeat and occupation is imminent and assured, in retaliation it could drop nuclear bombs on Baghdad, Damascus (Isaiah 17:1), Tehran, and other major cities of Iraq, Syria, and Iran.
There could be so many nuclear explosions sending so much radioactive dust and ash so high into the atmosphere that it could be blown eastward and fall on hugely-populated South Asia, ruining so many crop fields and immune systems there with radiation that 1/4 of the world's population could end up dying from the war and its aftermath of famines and epidemics. This could fulfill the horrible war which will begin the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, which war will, with its aftermath of famines and epidemics, end up killing 1/4 of the world (Revelation 6:4-8). The "great sword" of this war (Revelation 6:4) could be Israel's nuclear weapons. This war could be blamed not only on the religious fundamentalism of Islam and Judaism, but also on religious fundamentalism in general, and so could lead to a worldwide crusade against all forms of religious fundamentalism, including Christian fundamentalism, i.e. the (correct) idea that the Bible is wholly true (2 Timothy 3:16, Matthew 4:4) and that all other religions are cursed (Galatians 1:8-9, John 14:6, John 3:36, Acts 4:12).
After an Iraqi Baathist General who could lead the defeat and occupation of Israel and Egypt mysteriously disappears from the scene (Daniel 11:19), the Antichrist, who could be an Arab, could arise peacefully out of Lebanon (from the modern city of Tyre: Ezekiel 28:2; cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:4), and he could take up the mantle of Baathism and vow to (in his words)
"complete the great work of Arab liberation and unification". The first thing the Antichrist could do once he is given control (Daniel 11:21) of a Baathist federation of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and a "United Palestine" (i.e. a defeated and occupied Israel), is to perform a small and localized attack against an army of ultra-Orthodox Jews holed up in the walled Old City of Jerusalem and led by an ultra-Orthodox Jewish false Messiah (Daniel 9:26a, Daniel 11:22).
These ultra-Orthodox Jews could have managed to hold off the first Baathist attack even as it overran the rest of Israel, because the walled Old City of Jerusalem is considered holy to the Muslims, and so it is not to be bombarded or destroyed. The Antichrist could manage in some way to take the Old City without doing it much harm (such as by incapacitating its Jewish defenders with huge clouds of tear gas while tens of thousands of Arab soldiers wearing gas masks take control of the city by climbing over its walls on thousands of tall ladders).
But then, instead of imprisoning or executing all the ultra-Orthodox Jews and their false Messiah, the Antichrist will do an amazing thing. He will "cut" a peace treaty with them and their false Messiah (Daniel 9:26a, Daniel 11:23), permitting them to keep a 3rd Jewish temple (Revelation 11:1) which they will have built on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem, and to keep control of the Old City, for at least 7 more years (Daniel 9:27a), so long as they give up the outer court of the temple (Revelation 11:2a) to the Muslims so that the Muslims can rebuild the Al Aqsa Mosque on the southern end of the Temple Mount and resume worship there. By this peace treaty, the Antichrist could present himself to the world as (in his words):
"A reasonable man, a man of peace. I am no Hitler. I do not desire a second Holocaust. I am willing to give the religious Jews in the Old City seven years to show that they are willing to live peacefully with others, that they are different than the Zionist Jews who have just destroyed the world with their nuclear weapons".
And if the Antichrist gets flak from his fellow Baathists for letting the ultra-Orthodox Jews keep the Old City of Jerusalem, he could explain to them privately that (in his words)
"It is all a temporary ruse, meant to keep world opinion off guard while we consolidate our position". The Baathists could consolidate their position by becoming so well dug-in, and so well-equipped and -advised militarily by the Russians (in the name of "Arab self-determination"), that a U.S. counter-attack to "restore" (i.e. to take back) Israel and Egypt could fail, and leave the Baathists in control, and in a position to extend their power over all the rest of the Arab nations. For if the Baathists defeat and occupy Israel, they will be hailed by the Arab masses across the Arab world as magnificent heroes, so that the Baathists could have no problem persuading the Arab masses to support them. And the Baathists could justify their defeat of the Egyptian military regime, and then their subsequent defeat of other regimes such as in Jordan, by railing against them as being (what they could call):
"These vile cronies of the Americans. These cronies pretended to be for the Arab people while in fact they were taking American bribes in the billions, completely selling out our Palestinian brothers to the endless cruelties of the Zionist occupation, and keeping you, the great majority of the Arab people, in poverty. These cronies, like the Zionists themselves, were the American bulwarks against our glorious Arab unification and return to world power. Join now with us, the Baathists, that we might bring about the long-awaited Arab Renaissance, the long-awaited Arab Resurrection [the Arab word 'Baath' can mean 'Renaissance' and 'Resurrection'], that we Arabs might all rise up together and unite, from Oman to Morocco, into one great United Arab States, one great Arab Empire, shaking off completely all the shackles of the West, placed upon us so long ago, and return to our former glory as we had during the Middle Ages, when we were free and far superior to the West".
The Baathists could also rail against the kings and sheikhs of the Arab Gulf States for (in their words)
"Hoarding the huge oil wealth given by Allah to all the Arabs, and keeping the Arab masses in poverty and subjugation to Western interests". The Baathists are socialist, and so could call for the distribution of the Arab oil wealth to the Arab masses (Daniel 11:24). In this way, and by their defeat and occupation of Israel, the Baathists could easily turn the masses to their side in every Arab nation.
During the first few years of the 7-year peace treaty referred to earlier, the Antichrist could employ Baathism as the means by which he will gradually and peacefully put together a United Arab States, or Arab Union, stretching from Oman to Morocco. Once he has accomplished this, he could then begin to downplay Baathism and start speaking of "World peace and the unity of mankind". He could convince an oil-thirsty European Union to let the oil-rich Arab Union join it, thereby forming a massive Mediterranean Union, which he could manage to peacefully gain control of and use as his base of power to eventually exert his hegemony over the entire earth (Revelation 13:7b).
Then, only some 3.5 years after making the peace treaty, the Antichrist will break it, attack the 3rd Jewish temple in Jerusalem, stop the daily Mosaic animal sacrifices offered in front of it, and sit (at least one time) in the temple and proclaim himself God (Daniel 11:31,36, Matthew 24:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:4). He will then rule the whole earth by the power of Lucifer (Satan, the dragon: Revelation 12:9) for 3.5 literal years (Revelation 13:4-18, Daniel 7:25, Daniel 12:7, Revelation 12:14), or 1,260 literal days (Revelation 12:6).
The return of Jesus Christ from heaven (Matthew 24:30, Revelation 19:11-21; 1 Thessalonians 4:16) may not occur immediately after the 1,260 days of the Antichrist's worldwide reign, but could occur 75 days later, on the 1,335th day after the Antichrist and his followers set up the abomination of desolation (possibly a standing, android image of the Antichrist) in the holy place (the inner sanctum) of the 3rd Jewish temple (Daniel 12:11-12, Daniel 11:31, Matthew 24:15). The 75 days could be taken up by the vials of God's wrath which will be poured out on the Antichrist's worshippers (Revelation 16).
When Jesus returns, he will completely defeat the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) (Revelation 19:20; 2 Thessalonians 2:8-9), and he will have Satan bound in the bottomless pit (Revelation 20:1-3). Then the returned Jesus and the physically resurrected church (including those in the church who will have been beheaded by the Antichrist) will reign physically on the earth for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11, Zechariah 14:8-21).
--
Some possible objections to the Baathist war scenario outlined earlier:
1. "Wouldn't the Baathists be deterred from attacking, by Israel's nukes?"
Even though Iraq and Syria know of Israel's nuclear weapons and its tendency to retaliate in huge measure against attacks, Iraq and Syria could still decide to make an all-out attack against Israel, for a couple of reasons. First, by that time Iran could have successfully built (or secretly purchased from North Korea) and tested its first nuclear weapon, and have claimed to have built a few more to (in its words) "Serve solely for defensive purposes against Israel's nuclear threat". Iraq and Syria could then think that Israel won't use its nuclear weapons against them, even if they do attack Israel with all of their conventional forces, because Israel would then have to fear Iran retaliating against Israel with nuclear weapons.
Second, the destruction of the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque could so enrage the rank and file of the (Muslim) Iraqi and Syrian Armies that they could demand an immediate invasion of Israel, and threaten an all-out revolt against their generals if they refuse to lead them in the attack. Fearing for their own lives at the hands of their own soldiers, the generals could initiate the attack against Israel, figuring that even if Israel goes ahead and nukes Baghdad and Damascus in retaliation for the total defeat of Israel, by that time the Iraqi and Syrian armies will all be in Israel, out of harm's way from Israel's nukes, for Israel isn't going to nuke its own land.
But what good would it do the Baathists to gain "Palestine" and Egypt while losing Baghdad and Damascus to Israeli nukes? The Baathists could figure that the loss of Baghdad and Damascus (which they could evacuate ahead of time) is worth it in order to completely defeat Israel and Egypt, thereby removing much of the foundation of U.S. hegemony over the Arab world. And by the time that the U.S. makes its counter-attack to "restore" (i.e. to take back) Israel and Egypt, the Baathists could have become so well dug-in, and so well-equipped and -advised militarily by the Russians (in the name of "Arab self-determination"), that the U.S. counter-attack to restore Israel and Egypt could fail, and leave the Baathists in control, and in a position to extend their power over all the rest of the Arab nations.
--
2. "Wouldn't the awesome Israeli Air Force be able to take out any hostile forces streaming toward Israel?"
The Israeli Air Force could be unable to hit enough of the massive Iraqi invading force to prevent the little territory of Israel from being overrun. For between Baghdad and Israel is a lot of flat desert across which massive numbers of Iraqi tanks, armored personnel carriers, and rapid-fire, rapidly-moving tracked howitzers could stream west toward Israel in very wide and staggered formations, which Israel's Air Force could have difficulty taking out quickly. And interspersed liberally among the Iraqi forces could be large numbers of highly mobile and technically advanced (U.S.-made) Iraqi SAM (surface-to-air missile) units, which could manage to take out most of Israel's Air Force as it is attacking the Iraqi forces. Any Iraqi force configuration which the U.S. will have provided to the Iraqi Army, with the idea of making sure that Iraq could defeat all of Iran's air and ground defenses and overrun Iran's relatively huge territory, could also be capable of (instead) defeating Israel's air and ground defenses to the point of Iraq being able to overrun the little territory of Israel.
--
3. "What about the U.S. forces in Iraq, or Kuwait?"
There could be relatively few U.S. forces in Iraq when the war happens, just as there are relatively few now. And even if significant numbers do return to Iraq before the war happens (such as to help Iraq contain ISIS/ISIL), they, just as the U.S. forces in Kuwait, would have a hard time justifying to the Iraqi masses the U.S.'s killing of Iraqi troops (starting on their way across the desert to defeat Israel). Also, if the Iraqi Army vacates Iraq in order to defeat Israel (with a promise from Israel-hating Iran not to invade Iraq in the meantime), then if all of the U.S. forces in Kuwait (and any which may have returned to Iraq) went chasing westward after the Iraqi Army to attack and weaken it before it reaches Israel, the U.S. would then have to fear Iran invading and occupying a completely-defenseless Iraq (which occupation Iran could justify by saying that it is just there to defend the Iraqi masses from any retaliation by U.S. forces until the Iraqi Army can return from its defeat of Israel), not to mention that it would also leave the U.S.'s own flank in Kuwait dangerously exposed to an Iranian invasion and occupation.
--
4. "Wouldn't the U.S. be able to counter-attack with its forces in the West and restore Israel and Egypt?"
If the Baathists defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt, the U.S. could begin a counter-attack to "restore" (i.e. to take back) Israel and Egypt by attempting a huge amphibious assault on occupied Egypt. But the Baathists could cut the invasion forces to shreds in the sea by firing tens of thousands of rockets and missiles (well-camouflaged and -dispersed on flat roofs in densely populated areas close to shore), resulting in the loss of something like 30,000 U.S. military personnel in a single day. This anti-Inchon could cause a huge uproar among the U.S. public, which could cry out:
"What are we doing over there? Who cares about Egypt? And why in the world do the Israelis have to live in that awful region surrounded by so many hateful and powerful enemies? Let all of the Israelis come over here to America and live in freedom and peace with us. Why should any more of our precious young men be slaughtered over this madness in the Middle East?"
And so the U.S. could withdraw from attempting any more counter-attacks to restore Israel and Egypt. Also, a bankruptcy of the U.S. government at this same time because of a massive run on the U.S. dollar after its disastrous failure in the counter-attack could render the U.S. unable for a time to finance any more huge military invasions overseas. The U.S. could instead blockade the Baathists with its huge Navy and call an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council to address the situation. But Russia and China could veto any votes to send in outside forces, saying:
"What right does the world have to interfere in this act of Arab self-determination? How is Arab Iraq and Syria invading Arab Palestine and Egypt to establish a free union of Arabs any different than the American North invading the American South during the American Civil War to establish a free union of Americans? Should the U.N. authorize outside forces to invade the U.S. to restore the Confederacy? And how is the Arabs occupying the Jews' ancestral land any different than the U.S. occupying the American Indians' ancestral lands? Should the U.N. authorize outside forces to invade the U.S. to restore the American Indians to their ancestral lands?"
The U.S. could then turn to the U.N. General Assembly, only to have its spokesman hooted and shouted from the podium by a world which is jealous of America's power, and which could say (in its words):
"Ha! Ha! Great America is defeated! And no one wants to help it restore its hegemony over the Middle East!" The U.S. could then turn to NATO, only to have the Europeans turn down its request to send the armies of Europe (as they could say)
"into the jaws of death, and for what?" Russia and China, seeing America's isolation, could then send in military "advisers" into an ever-expanding "United Arab States" and shore it up with massive amounts of military hardware and training. Oil-thirsty China could do so in exchange for cheap oil, and oil-rich Russia could sell its military hardware in exchange for huge amounts of cash (and just to be able to thumb its nose at a defeated U.S., and keep the U.S. from taking back hegemony over the Middle East).
Ultimately, after the Baathists have completed taking control of the entire Arab Middle East and North Africa, the U.S. could find itself completely blocked out of these regions and all of their oil, but could say that it is those regions which are blockaded by the huge U.S. Navy. To get around the U.S. naval blockade, China could lay an oil pipeline from the Middle East to a point on the coast of the Indian Ocean (where oil tankers could get the oil) beyond the blockade. (Also, if most of the U.S. Navy gets deployed to blockade the huge region controlled by the Baathists, China could see that as the time for it to make an all-out attempt to restore Taiwan to mainland Chinese control, and also to take control of every disputed island -- and every oil- and gas-rich undersea territory -- in the South China Sea and the East China Sea.) Russia could get around the U.S. naval blockade by sending into the Middle East and North Africa any military hardware sales it would have delivered by ship, by delivering them instead via rail and trucks crossing the Caucasus and western Iran. And Europe could get around the blockade and obtain oil from the Middle East and North Africa by building a large pipeline across the Bosporus, and possibly even by digging a pipeline tunnel under the Strait of Gibraltar.
--
5. "Wouldn't God letting the state of Israel be ended by the Baathists break his promises?"
No, God's promises won't be broken, even if the Baathist scenario comes to pass. For just as God allowed the ancient state of Israel to be ended by the Babylonians in 586 BC, but then restored the state of Israel in 538 BC; and just as God then allowed the state of Israel to be ended again by the ancient Romans in 70 AD, but then allowed the state of Israel to be established again in 1948 AD; so God could allow the state of Israel to be ended again by the Baathists at the start of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, but then restore the state of Israel again at Jesus' 2nd coming, which will occur immediately after the tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31).
Jesus' kingdom is Israel (John 1:49, John 12:13-15, John 19:19, Luke 22:30). And at Jesus' 2nd coming, he will sit on the earthly throne of David (Luke 1:32-33, Isaiah 9:7), and restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6-7, Acts 3:20-21). Jesus is, in his humanity, the son of David (Matthew 1:1, Matthew 21:15-16, Romans 1:3), of the house of David (Luke 1:69). So at Jesus' 2nd coming, he will restore the tabernacle, the house, of David (Isaiah 16:5, Amos 9:11) to its royal glory (2 Samuel 5:12), which it had lost (2 Kings 17:21a). And Jesus will fulfill the prophecy and prayer of 2 Samuel 7:16-29. And he will bring salvation to all the still-living, unbelieving elect Jews of the house of David. For they (along with all other still-living, unbelieving elect Jews) will come into faith in him when they see him at his 2nd coming (Zechariah 12:10-14, Zechariah 13:1,6, Romans 11:26-31). And so they will all become part of the church at that time, for now there are no believers outside of the church (Ephesians 4:4-6).
After Jesus' 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:3, Zechariah 14:3-5) will occur the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6, Zechariah 14:8-21), during which time the Gentile nations will come to seek the returned Jesus ruling the whole earth (Zechariah 8:22, Zechariah 14:9, Psalms 72:8-11) on the restored throne of David (Isaiah 9:7) in the earthly Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:1-4, Zechariah 14:8-11,16-19). And the physically resurrected church will reign on the earth with Jesus during the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29). For the church is Israel (Romans 11:1,17,24, Ephesians 2:12,19, Galatians 3:29, Revelation 21:9,12; 1 Peter 2:9-10).
--
6. "Didn't Iraq fail to defeat Iran the last time?"
Yes, but the U.S. could build up a present-day, Baathist Iraqi Army until it is much more powerful than it was under (Baathist) Saddam Hussein, to the point where the U.S. could become convinced that another stalemate-war (like in the 1980's) between a Baathist Iraq and a theocratic Iran will be avoided, and that Iraq will be able to completely overrun and occupy Iran. (But then Baathist Iraq could decide not to invade Iran at all, but to turn and defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt instead.)
--
7. "Why would the U.S. create another, and even stronger, Baathist, Saddam Hussein-type military leader of Iraq, knowing full well that he could attack Israel instead of Iran?"
For a couple of reasons. First, the U.S. could figure that it really doesn't have any choice about having to build up and trust a new Baathist, Saddam-type military ruler of Iraq, because the U.S. has no other viable option regarding how to put an end to Iran's nuclear weapons program and extremist regime. The war-weary U.S. public won't support an all-out ground invasion of Iran by U.S. soldiers, which could result in many thousands of them being killed and tens of thousands of them being seriously wounded. So the U.S. needs a proxy army; it needs cannon fodder made up of a large number of foreign (i.e. Iraqi) soldiers.
Second, the new Baathist, Saddam-type military ruler of Iraq (who could be put in place in the future by the U.S.) could be extremely shrewd, in that he could be very careful to always assert (even in the privacy of his bedroom, talking alone with his wife; or speaking privately to his son on his smartphone) that he has no interest whatsoever in ever invading any other country but Iran. For he will know that the NSA, the CIA, MI6, GCHQ, and the Mossad will be secretly listening in to everything that he says to anyone at any time in any place, via electronic eavesdropping, e.g. by the tapping of all of his smartphone signals, and via listening devices hidden throughout all of his offices, cars, homes, favorite restaurants, etc.; and via very well-bribed and/or blackmailed double agents among his closest aides and confidants. So the U.S. and Israel could begin to feel very confident that he is "their man", someone they can trust to take out Iran for them, and not cause any trouble anywhere else. (But then he could decide not to invade Iran at all, but Israel and Egypt instead.)
--
8. "Why not just let Israel bomb Iran into submission?"
A senior Israel Defense Forces officer told the Israeli cabinet in 2011 that the IDF doesn't have the ability to hit the Iranian nuclear program in a "meaningful way". This could be because some of the key Iranian nuclear facilities are buried so deep underground (i.e. under mountains) that no bombs dropped from the air (not even the best bunker busters) can get down to them. The only way to end Iran's nuclear weapons program is to send ground forces into Iran which can fight their way down into the facilities and blow them up with hand-placed plastic explosives. But there are so many different facilities scattered in so many different places across Iran, it would take an all-out ground invasion to be able to reach all the facilities, and also to take out Iran's extremist regime, which if it isn't removed will simply rebuild any facilities which are destroyed. But, in an awful irony, the preparations for an all-out ground war against Iran, to prevent the destruction of Israel by Iranian nukes, could result in the destruction of Israel during a different war, by the very ground forces which had been built up (by the U.S.) to invade Iran.
--
Some possible objections to the Baathist, Arab political unity scenario outlined earlier:
1. "Isn't there no political unity, but only much divisiveness, in the Arab world?"
There is no unity now, when the Arab masses are unnaturally divided by rival military dictatorships, many supported by the U.S. and Israel. But all of the current political divisiveness in the Arab world could be overcome if Baathism is able to ignite Arab nationalism as the cause celebre among the Arab masses, who could overthrow any Arab governments insistent on keeping the Arab world splintered up into petty, political fiefdoms. Take out the different dictatorships and replace them with one popular, charismatic, Arab-nationalist, Baathist dictator (i.e. the Antichrist), who distributes the Arab oil wealth to the Arab masses (Daniel 11:24), and you will get political unity in the Arab world in a heartbeat.
--
2. "Isn't the Arab world hopelessly divided by religion (Sunnis vs. Shiites), killing its own without batting an eyelid?"
The beauty of Baathism (from a Baathist's point of view) is that it downplays religion and focuses on Arab nationalism. The Baathists could point to Sunni vs. Shiite terrorism to show that religious extremism is only hurting the Arabs themselves, and that the Arabs need to assert religious moderation across the board. Almost all Arabs are already religiously moderate; they are just too scared of the religious extremists to speak out publicly against extremism. But if the Baathists squash the extremists militarily, the Arabs can unite politically under Arab nationalism and a moderate Islam into one, powerful United Arab States, regardless of the majority religious sects within its various states.
--
3. "Isn't Arab unity and power impossible because they aren't Western thinkers; they don't have Western intellects?"
The Arabs won't have to become Western thinkers (in the sense of embracing democracy or women's rights) in order to become united, like they were united at times during the Middle Ages, when for centuries Arab intellectual endeavors far excelled those in Europe. The Arabs are in no sense stupid intellectually. Their masses have just in recent centuries been suppressed intellectually, not educated in any matters beyond religion. Dubai shows that, once educated in a modern fashion, the Arab mind is more than capable of developing a modern, technological society like that in the West. Imagine the level of development in Dubai spread across the Arab world, from Oman to Morocco, and you can begin to grasp the potential power of a United Arab States.
--
4. "Aren't the Baathists history after Saddam ruined their image?"
Note that Baathism isn't history in the minds of most of the Sunni Arabs of Iraq, or in the minds of millions of the people of Syria (which is still Baathist). And the rest of the Arabs could easily be swayed to join the Baathists if they defeat Israel, and also distribute the Arab Gulf states' oil wealth to the Arab masses. For Baathism's true raison d'etre is to raise up all of the Arab people themselves into a mighty and prosperous Arab Empire, free of all Western (not to mention Shiite Iranian) tyranny.
