Replies

Let’s suppose the US wants Israel to attack Iran but wants to shield itself from any blame due to its close ties to Israel.

Therefore, it pretends to have a public falling out with Israel and appears to turn its back on that country.

Israel attacks Iran and the Muslim world is, of course, outraged. Also, condemnation comes from all over the world.

Given its pretense, the US has to join in the condemnation. That leaves Israel totally isolated, but with “secret” allies in the US and anyone wishing to curry favor with the US.

What do you think? Does it fit any scenario you have imagined?

“Let’s suppose the US wants Israel to attack Iran but wants to shield itself from any blame due to its close ties to Israel.”

The latter part of your speculation is pretty much a given. The weenie in the WH deflects blame/criticism all the time by pointing his fingers at others. Why would any sensible person expect him to man up and suddenly take responsibility for the bold actions sometimes required to face down international thugs?

The only residual question is whether he wants Israel to take action. Hard to say, but it’s a fair bet they wouldn’t want this strike occurring just before the election, since that might well remind voters of the failure in U.S. leadership that forced Israel to take action.

I think what’s new in this story is the explicit tie to the November elections. That in essence is a veiled threat to Obama to support the Israeli action behind the scenes or else be left out of the decision-making when it comes to timing. It’s going to be a little dicey planning this operation if the Israelis essentially have no idea whether to expect to be given unimpeded flyover rights across Iraq. It’s not like they get a do-over if they guess wrong about this.

It's fairly close. If you carefully map out the Gog/Magog war, you find that not only are there no Arab nations in on the attack on Israel, but "Sheba, Dedan"--which are in the Arabian Penninsula--"Tarshish, and the young lions thereof" all issue protests against Gog.

I've overlapped that set of prophecies with those of the Kings of North and South in Dan. 11 (I believe that all of the prophecies surrounding Antiochus Epimanes will play out again, not just the one "Abomination of Desolation" line), and a few others and come to the tenative conclusion that the "Red Horse" war is a war between a Russian/Iranian/Turkish/European alliance and the Arabs, with Israel caught in the middle. In this scenario, America (tentatively identified as a young lion of Tarshish and as "Kittim" in Dan. 11) would be on the Arab side.

This scenario begs the question of why the Arabs protest against an incursion into Israel and why the "King of the North" makes an early covenant with her. One possibility that presents itself is that the standoff we're now facing is not the direct lead-in to Gog/Magog. Rather, its the pre-game show.

Your scenario where Israel's strike is publicly excoriated but privately supported by America, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, and everyone else threatened by the possibility of Iran getting nukes is one that I've considered likely for a long time. The Arabs hate Israel, but they know the Jews aren't going to threaten them the way Iran currently does. At the same time, they've spent so much resource and credibility setting up the Jews as the boogyman with their own populations that they can't turn around and embrace them now.

So one could easily end up with a situation in which Israel becomes the unofficial, unrecognized, secretly-funded guardian of the Middle-east. Suddenly, the need for a person from the north to make some kind of covenant with Israel as a gateway to expanding his power into the Middle-east makes a kind of sense.

Of course, this idea is subject to continual revision as my understanding of prophecy and events on the ground grows, so take it with a whole box of kosher salt. Acts 17:11 definitely applies here.

Shalom.