Why I am not a Christian Zionist

I sometimes watch the "Disciple Dojo" YouTube channel hosted by James-Michael Smith, a Biblical scholar (or scholarly pastor; certainly his knowledge of the Scripture and the Biblical languages go much deeper than mine).  

Not so long ago he posted a video discussing one of the reasons he is not a Christian Zionist.  As with many theological terms, there will be different understandings of that one, but most Christian Zionists see the modern nation state of Israel as equivalent to Israel, the covenant people and kingdom in Scripture.  As such, the promises of God to Israel in Scripture - specifically the promises of ownership of the Holy Land - should be understood as applying to the modern nation-state of Israel.  This has significant geo-political or foreign policy implications. 

In practice, many Christian Zionists feel it is their duty to God, as Bible-believers, to support the state of Israel no matter what.  

I have long felt that there were significant problems with this approach.  Not least among them is the fact that the modern nation-state of Israel was created in part by the UN (resolution 181 in 1947), and orthodox Jews have always held that only the Messiah could re-constitute the nation of Israel.  Yet, ironically, many American Evangelicals who hold to Christian Zionism are often deeply suspicious of the UN.

The larger problem, however is that Christian Zionism simply ignores what the Bible teaches about the Church - both Jew and Gentile - being the covenant people and the Israel of God.

That is what J.M. Smith discusses in this article that I do recommend.  For those who are Christian Zionists, you may not agree with Smith's conclusions, but I suspect you will go back to your Bible wrestling with new questions, and that is no bad thing.   

I should also say, I think the instinct of the Christian Zionist is to see prophetic significance in the creation of the modern state of Israel, and on some level I also share that instinct. 
It would be strange indeed if there was no connection at all between the purposes of the God of the Bible and the re-emergence of a Jewish state in the Holy Land. 

But I wonder if the connection is not about the modern Nation of Israel simply being the continuation of Biblical Israel as such, but rather a place where Jews can be more easily reached en masse for the Gospel of Yeshua Messiah (as I am hearing reports is in fact happening in these days).  

I am intrigued by his suggestion at the end of his article that there are other forms of Zionism that might be more compatible with Scripture, and I'd love to learn more about what those possibilities may be.  

In any case, I will continue (as Psalm 122 says) to pray for the peace of Jerusalem - both the physical city on the other side of the world, but also the Heavenly Jerusalem, which is the true home of all the faithful believers in Christ (Hebrews 11; Rev. 21-22).

I couldn't resist this cartoon

OK, this is (like all political cartoons) obviously over the top, but when I saw it I had a great laugh - the kind that is literally out loud - and felt compelled to share.

I don't know too much about the 'nuclear deal' with Iran yet, but from what I have heard
1) we get to inspect their nuclear facilities...but only after giving them 2 weeks prior notice (enough time to hide weaponizing equipment??), and also
2) we did not get any of our citizens back who are imprisoned in Iran (including Christian missionaries)
3) I worry about how Israel will respond if it goes forward - though they may accept it in the end
4) Also, some analysts are already saying that this deal does not actually prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, but at best postpones it (presumably until the next Presidential administration, or maybe the one after that).

If all of this is correct (and I hope this is all overly pessimistic), then it sounds like a bad deal to me.  No doubt some will argue - as the administration has done - that what we got was as much as could be realistically hoped for and that almost any deal reduces the likelihood of war.  They are probably exactly right; certainly the diplomats have far more detailed knowledge than I (or the cartoonists) have on all this, and more knowledge of the major players in Iran as well.  And obviously averting even the possibility of a war with Iran or (yet another) conflict in the Middle East should indeed be a high priority.
One does wonder though if we might have been able to "realistically" get a better deal if American foreign policy and international influence did not look so sheepish in recent years.

In any case now the President will try to "sell" Congress on the virtues of this deal.  May the Lord give wisdom and insight to our Congress as they consider ratification.

Recommended Reading Round-up

1) The significance of ritual in and out of church:
This PIECE from a Lutheran blogger reflects upon the importance of ritual and formality in light of a firefighters' memorial ceremony and in light of the ways that "worship wars" are playing out in his own denomination.  Good stuff here that I wish more American Christians would consider.

2) The rise of the Intolerant Left:
Many have been commenting in recent weeks about how 'illiberal' liberalism seems to have become in our nation.  Was all that talk about tolerance and inclusion and respect for all peoples was just a smokescreen to disarm critics until the Sexual Revolution had gained enough power to simply impose its views and silence all dissenters?  Or will an empowered left reclaim the classic "progressive" values of freedom of thought, speech, and expression along with freedom and protection for dissenters and minorities?  A Christianity Today article explores these issues HERE.

3) Jeb Bush's comments on Religion and Freedom:
In connection with #2 above, THIS article at The Federalist discusses Jeb Bush's comments about the positive contributions that Christianity has made to American culture (quoting everyone from Chesterton to MLKjr) and the importance of freedom of religion, as he tries to court evangelical voters at Liberty University.

4) Memorializing a good Oak Tree:
THIS piece at the ever-thought-provoking Front Porch Republic site explores our human condition in connection to place and time as it reflects on what to do when an historic oak tree at the center of town dies.

5) Finally, Why ISIS is winning:
And what the world should be doing to stop it, HERE.  I've been saying in conversations and on this blog that I believe ISIS and its allies form the most purely demonic political and military movement in our world since the days of Hitler and Stalin.  What is perhaps even more shocking than the rapid rise and expansion of ISIS - which by some estimates now has some 100,000 fighters and controls a territory the size of Indiana - is the halfhearted response of the West.  I understand the reasons for caution.  Our ill-conceived adventures in the Middle East are likely one factor that contributed to the rise of ISIS to begin with.  Yet surely the world's most powerful nation cannot stand by wringing its hands while the Islamic State establishes itself as a permanent 'state of Terror,' founded on the blood of tens of thousands of innocents, and implacably opposed to human rights for anyone and everyone who does not share their own ideology of militant Islam?

Cardinal and Anglican bishop pray for martyred family

In what may be a more common occurrence in the future, more and more Christians are coming together across denominational lines to pray and speak out on behalf of our persecuted brothers and sisters.  Recently a Muslim mob in Pakistan burned to death two young Christian parents and their unborn daughter as well (the mother being pregnant), for allegedly insulting Islam.

After these despicable acts, acts that do indeed cause many in the civilized world to look at contemporary Islamic culture with suspicion to say the least, a Roman Catholic cardinal and an Anglican Bishop joined together, not to hurl stones at Muslims, but to pray for the victimized family and speak out for the rights of religious minorities everywhere.  I hope and pray that as we become more aware of atrocities against Christians around the world we will see more and more unity among the church in prayer, in compassion, and in advocacy for freedom of religion and freedom of conscience and speech around the world.
I hope that statesmen and political leaders will be invited to these events to be reminded of the great needs and injustices that exist in these days and their duty as leaders to address them.

You can read the full story here.

Christians persecuted in chaotic Iraq

The CNN headline from this week: Facing fines, conversion, or death, Christians flee Mosul.

A couple years ago our media and political leaders were rejoicing at the "Arab Spring" that - everyone quite naively said - would bring a wave of (Western-style) freedom and democracy across the Middle East.  Instead we've got violence in Lybia, Egypt, and Iran, and all out civil war in Iraq and Syria.

Today there is much suffering among the civilian populations of these countries, but especially among our brothers and sisters in Christ, who have often been singled out for violence, and have been forced to flee their homes.  In the case described in the CNN report, Christians are compelled to convert to Islam, or pay a fine, or leave town.  Most seem to be choosing the last option (since they don't really know how safe they will be if they stay under the ISIS regime if they do pay), but it seems their homes and all their possessions are being stolen from them by ISIS.  This situation is all the more outrageous since Christians were living peacefully in these communities centuries before Mohammed or Islam were ever born.

What can we do who believe in Christ when we hear of such stories of persecution in the news?

First of all, we should pray for our brothers and sisters in Christ.  Pray that they will be safe; that the hearts of their enemies will be turned away from violent ideologies; pray especially that the followers of Christ will be strengthened by the Holy Spirit to boldly hold fast to the Savior of our souls, even in the face of persecution.  Pray that they will not respond to hate and violence with more hate and violence, but will dedicate themselves to truly following the Prince of Peace.

We should also remember that Jesus warned his disciples repeatedly that we would be hated on account of his name, and we shouldn't let platitudes about "the progress of freedom in the 21st Century" distract us from the fact that his words are proving true all around the world - and there is no immutable guarantee that we too, who currently live in free countries, will not one day face similar situations.

We should also urge our elected officials to speak out and seek to uphold freedom of religion and freedom of speech all for all peoples around this world (including right here as they pass laws that affect us).  I am trying to get in the habit of writing more actual 'stamp and paper' letters to my representatives - what good is having a voice, after all, if I don't use it to speak up?

I think that we should also urge our elected officials to take a less hawkish and more cautious approach to foreign policy goals - just because a tyrant is oppressive it does not necessarily follow that the country will become a haven of peace and freedom if we forcibly remove that tyrant from power.  Today we might seriously ask the question of whether the Iraqi people would have been better off had we left Saddam Hussein in power.  Without any doubt, the Christians of Iraq would have been (not to mention the tens of thousands of Iraqis who died in the war).
To be clear, I do not stand for isolationism, I do not hold that we should give up engagement altogether, or stop advocating for the God-given rights of all people (see above) - but it seems to me that we have been far too optimistic about what can really be accomplished through military means, and far too optimistic about the ability of the West to impose our values on other cultures, or the willingness and ability of Islamic culture to welcome our Western-style free democracy, since even the best real world examples have a questionable record when it comes to protecting minorities, and especially religious minorities.

We can also urge our church leaders and church mission organizations to respond - as best they can - to the needs of refugees in all of these countries, as in fact The United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR) is actively doing in the Middle East.

Any more ideas that you have?  What else can we do?

Whelby supports Bartholemew on ancient cathedral

I was saddened to hear that the ruling party in Turkey is pushing forward plans to again convert the Hagai Sophia into a Mosque.  The Hagai Sophia was built after the Roman Emperors converted to Christianity in ancient times.  It is a huge and beautiful church building that served for a Millennium as the cathedral for the Patriarch of Constantinople, the leader of Eastern Orthodox Christians in the world.  Around AD 1500 the city was conquered by Muslims - Ottoman Turks (thus, 'Turkey') - who converted the great church into a mosque and white washed all of the beautiful mosaics.  In the 20th Century a secular government came to power which converted the building to a museum.  Across town is the Blue Mosque which copies the architecture of Hagai Sophia, and also makes one wonder how another mosque of that size would be needed in the city.  Converting the cathedral into a mosque would seem to be an attempt to make a statement about the power of an expansionist Islam over Western/Christian culture.   

In any case, I am heartened to hear that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Whelby has lent his support to the Ecumenical Patriarch in this matter, stating that Hagai Sophia should not become a mosque.  I, for one, think that the cathedral should be returned to the Eastern Orthodox community in Istanbul from whom it was forcibly taken; a Christian community which has certainly not thrived under Turkish rule.  There are several petitions to that effect floating around the Web.

The Plight of Middle-Eastern Christians

Here is a good article (from the British 'Telegraph') about the plight of Christians in the Middle East, following in particular the story of St. George's Anglican Church of Baghdad (the only Anglican church in Iraq).  In previous times ruthless dictator prevented mobs of Muslims or groups like al-Qaeda from targeting churches and Christians (or anyone) with violence.  Then came the social unrest that Western journalists (quite naively) dubbed "the Arab Spring" (the Western intellectuals and journalists that I was listening to on NPR believed they would see an opening up of the Middle East to democracy, freedoms, human rights...basically working from the assumption that every culture in the world must inevitably be progressing toward becoming like us).

Now the "Arab Spring" has turned into an Arab winter, a nightmare with tens of thousands of civilians being  killed in continuous unrest and violence because of the power-vacuum left by the fall of repressive dictators. In the midst of all of this, tiny Christian communities struggle for their very survival as many are targeted by their Muslim neighbors.  As the Telegraph article highlights, with quotes from the well-known Rabbi, Lord Sacks, this crisis amounts to a religious form of "ethnic cleansing" but has not been given the attention it deserves among Western journalists and policy-makers, instead it has gone "almost unremarked" (like the Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks?).

I have spoken about the plight of our Middle-Eastern brothers and sisters in Christ from the pulpit (and online) and I believe we all need to be speaking out and praying on behalf of Middle Eastern Christians, while there is still time. 

I am praying not only for their safety and an end to the violence (which will help everyone, not just Christians) but also that believers may make a good witness to the love of Christ in the midst of the chaos: as one of the Easter litanies of our Book of Worship (397) puts it,
"In the peace of the Risen Christ, let us pray to the Lord...that isolated and persecuted churches find fresh strength in the Gospel..."

Israel, Palestine, and the elusive peace

I recently read this editorial in the Wall Street Journal by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. You should read it carefully, because it seems to reflect exactly what I saw on the ground there in the Holy Land when I visited over two years ago.

Both sides say they want peace, but neither seems to actually be willing to do the hard things that make for peace. Israel, being by far the stronger party, especially has hampered the process by continuing to build walls and settlements on the Palestinian side of the borders (that is to say, the state of Israel, despite repeatedly agreeing not to do so, continues to steal the best and most fertile of the precious little land left in the Palestinian territory).

It seems clear to me that the United States can and should apply far sharper pressure on Israel to end this process than we so far have done. Israel is, after all, dependent upon us for military support and aid. We should attach some more concrete conditions to our continuing to supply it. However, we do not yet have the political will to solve this thing - perhaps due to the wide influence of ardently (even blindly?) pro-Israel segments of our population (many are devout Christians and Jews). But what does it truly mean to be pro-Israel? To give the state of Israel support, even as it commits human-rights abuses, is not to truly help or care for that nation - since such actions must eventually have negative consequences of one kind or another for that people.

I must point out to my fellow believers in Christ the special consideration that we owe to our own family of faith: virtually all of the Christians in the Holy Land are Palestinians and we in the American Church have too often been willing to see them (and treat them) as enemies. And if one part of the body suffers, we all suffer - even if we don't yet percieve how.

Canterbury calls for Christians to visit Holy Land

In response to a "deepening humanitarian crisis" in Bethlehem and other parts of the West Bank since the election of Hamas leadership, Rowan Williams the Archbishop of Canterbury has called for more Western Christians to visit the Holy Land:

'Pilgrimages are a practical way of showing solidarity and helping to sustain the livelihoods of vulnerable communities in the Holy Land,' he said. Dr Williams urged Christians to continue to 'support and pray for those working for peace and reconciliation in the region, including through the provision of humanitarian aid.' click for more

Indeed, the West Bank economy needs all the help you can get. I hope you'll go to Bethlehem, and when you do, I hope you'll stay at the Star Hotel or some other place INSIDE the West Bank. It will be quite safe for an American and you'll get to see first hand the kind of crap they have to put up with from the Israeli government on a daily basis, as we did in January. In addition to helping others economically and being energized to try to help them politically, you can also see the Holy Places for yourself and grow in your own faith. It's win-win.

And yes, I know I need to comment on the turmoil in the Anglican Communion, but right now there is too much to say.

Afghan government seeks way to drop case against Christian convert

The Court system in Afghanistan has dropped its case against Abdul Rahman, who was charged with converting from Islam to Christianity, a "crime" that may be punishable by death in the Muslim state. The court sited lack of evidence. Since Rahman claims he was prepared to die for his faith in Christ, it seems that someone could just ask him for a confession of faith if they needed more evidence. In other related news the court also considered claiming that Abdul was mentally unfit to stand trial in apparent desperation to find some reason to dismiss the case.

One now wonders what will become of Afghanistan's most famous apostate. If even his family turned him over to be executed (didn't Jesus say something about that?), I doubt he will be welcome anywhere in that country. No doubt he could go on a speaking tour in the Bible Belt for a while if he knows any English.

But I hope that the Bush administration, and leaders of other Western nations, the UN and other Human Rights advocates will not celebrate this dismissal as a victory for Human Rights. It may have been quite the opposite. In siting "lack of evidence" Afghanistan avoided the whole issue whether people are free to convert - it never went to trial, and so as far as the law is concerned, they still are not. This decision then may only pave the way for more persecution of Christians in the future, perhaps when the government is less directly dependent upon the US and other Western nations who are paying to rebuild its infra-structure after the much-forgotten war in Afghanistan.

One other related thought: the only reason that this man appears to have gotten off is that his country was dependent upon Western aid money. So before we gripe about giving away so much foreign aid to undeserving countries - or on the other hand before we pat ourselves on the back for being so generous to the rest of mankind - let us remember that financial aid given to foreign countries = influence over their policies. The same applies to Federal dollars given to State governments (or to "Faith-based Organizations" for that matter).

Afghan may be executed for converting to Christianity

Remember before the "war" in Iraq, there was that whole thing with Afghanistan? Taliban?

Well if you recall, we succeeded in overthrowing the Taliban regime that had supported Al-Qaida and set up a democracy. And now everything there is wonderful: women are going to school and learning to read for the first time, men are allowed to shave their beards without fearing an arrest, people who convert to Christianity are punished for their crimes...

Wait a second. What was that last one? An Afghan judge says that since the new constitution says that Afghanistan is an Islamic State, this is the proper punishment for such a crime. Though the Afghani constitution also mentions international standards of human rights, including freedom of religious belief, that part of the constitution has been rejected as a "Western" notion.

It is good that the media has taken note of the persecution of people who have faith in Christ Jesus, which is worldwide problem for millions and millions of believers EVERY day, but this is particularly unsettling example for me as a citizen of the US since we helped set up the current Afghan government.

Now this in my mind begs the question of whether democracy is really such a good thing. Maybe OUR sort of democracy (which is actually a Republic most of whose delegates are democratically elected rather than a pure democracy) is good not because it is democratic but rather because it is democratic AND the people share certain ideological values about the importance of liberty, even religious liberty. After all, if nobody in Afghanistan believes in such things, it won't be a part of their state if that state is a democracy.

Contrary to what I was taught growing up in America, I have come to believe that democracy is not a good in and of itself. In fact, Plato said it was the 2nd to WORST sort of regime (the absolute worst was a tryannical monarchy, perhaps like Stalin's Russia - the best was a philosophical monarchy, perhaps like the Kingdom of Jesus Christ). Now as long as we live in a fallen world, until the Kingdom really does come in fullness, we will need some kind of human government, and a democratic republic has served the US more or less well for a couple hundred years, but that doesn't mean it will work equally well for all others. And I am continually suspicious that any democratic system that is not "under God" must assume a form of secular humanism - we collectively become God.

While studying Political Science at LSU, I was told that one of the most democratic systems in history, if we measure in terms of elligable voter participation, was the Weimar Republic in Germany. They are supposed to have had 90%+ elligable voter participation (as opposed to the US which has around 50% for the really big elections), and yet they elected Hitler!

You see, good ideology and good cultural values are crucial to a good democracy for obvious reasons. If we go around dumping democracies on societies where most of the people are radical Muslims, guess what sort of regime they will elect?

American Democracy is a bit of a fluke historically. This country was settled by people who were fleeing from religious and ideological persecution and our founding documents were written by people who had just won independence from (what they saw as) a tryannical power (some historians suggest that it really wasn't all that bad and in fact the standard of living in the British American colonies was the highest in the world, much better than back in England).
So built into the "DNA" of our country were and still are certain commitments to and attitudes about ideological freedom (within reason of course, as those darn commies found out during the Cold War) and separation of Church and State (which a casual comparison with both Europe and the Middle East will demonstrate has been good for both), hard work and equity and many other things. American democracy was "home-grown" and was an outgrowth of existing cultural attitudes, values, and mores. It was not thrust upon us by a conquering foreign power.

What am I suggesting? That just because we go around conquering truly horrid and evil regimes (lets not forget that part either) and set up democracies in their places, doesn't mean we have done any good thing, since democracy is only as good as the ideological values of the people who vote.

Right now, I do not have any suggestions or really good alternatives: it may be that in the long run the good ideologies will win out on the free market of ideas (assuming that the voting majority will decide to allow free speech). Or it maybe that some kind of puppet interim government (with a very short leash) that is slowly replaced by a real democracy would be appropriate while the people are indoctrinated to hold the sort of values that make for a good democracy (such as, perhaps, a respect for Human Rights as opposed to dismissing them as a "Western notion," having originated in Western Christian cultures). Though I doubt that would be popular, and it might not even be as "utilitarian" as it promises (though no doubt, Machiavelli would approve if it were). Maybe there is a middle way between controlling a newly liberated people and totally cutting them loose to make their own decisions?

I know "indoctrination" is a dirty word, but we might as well call it what it is. Certainly, all people who ever grow up in any society are indoctrinated with certian values that are important to that society and necessary for it to function as it does, this is just part of living together. So the question I am asking is simply this: what sort of cultural values have the people in these countries whose regimes we are changing already been indoctrinated to have and are they conducive to a good and healthy democracy? If not, what should (or can) be done?

"Paradise Now" movie causes debate

A group of Israelis who have lost children to suicide bombings have asked that the Academy Awards drop the movie "Paradise Now" from consideration for any awards according to a new report. Those who lost loved ones feel that the movie fails to condemn and may even encourage such attacks that have been used by Palestinian and Islamic extremists to attack Israelis. Such an allegation may seem ironic since Warner Independent Pictures is billing Paradise Now as a call for peace.

As someone who actually watched a screening of this film IN the Palestinian West Bank a few weeks ago; I thought I might make a few comments. This is a very intense, extremely well-made (and low budget at that!) film. Does it deserve any Acadamy Awards? Well I am not sure...probably more than some of the other contenders.

Does it encourage suicide bombings or is it a call for peace? Honestly, I think people could take either message from the film, it is very ambiguous - just like the actual situation on the ground in the West Bank. A little Palestinian girl that watched the movie with us said she thought it showed that there were better ways to address the conflict than violence - but, I should probably add, she is a Palestinian Arab Christian (like virtually all of the Christians in the Holy Land).

This film does a very good job of showing the Palestianian people in the way that many of them actually feel: trapped. Trapped in a downward spiral of violence and death. The making of this movie demonstrates that there REALLY IS a will for peace among the Palestinians, yet it is not especially optimistic. There is only one answer for the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, and we see it when we look at the Cross of Christ: forgiveness. Only when people are willing to say "Father, forgive them," only when people consiously choose that they will not strike back though they have been wounded unjustly, only when people let go of their "rights" (to hate or seek revenge in response to evil) can there ever be peace there. It will be hard. It will be especially hard for those who do not value that kind of radical forgiveness.

I can not imagine the pain of losing a child in a terrorist bombing, and I hope I never know it; but I am certain that behind every bombing there is a bomber. And it would be easy to dismiss him as some less-than-human monster. And to keep doing so every time that it happens. That would be easy, but it would not be honest. The truth is he is actually very much like you or I would be in his situation. Maybe that is the scariest part of this film. By the end you really FEEL the moral ambiguity of it all: you see very clearly that violence will only continue the downward spiral, and yet you sense why a bomber would see it as the only place left to go, you feel trapped with him.

U.S. to continue aid to Palestinians

The United States will continue giving humanitarian aid to Palestinians in spite of the formation of a Hamas government, according to a Yahoo news report.

As someone who was in the Palestinian West Bank last month, I am very relieved to hear this. The people there are simply desperate and they see the U.S. as one of the major reasons for their situation since we give so much (military) aid to Israel, who is subjugating the Palestinians.

These issues should also be important to Christians because pretty much every single member of the Church, the Israel of God (Gal. 6:16), in the Holy Land is an Arab/Palestinian.

Bethlehem sees more Pilgrims

About 30,000 people converged on the little town of Bethlehem this year to celebrate Christmas in the city that is the birthplace of Jesus Christ. This figure is roughly twice that of last year and the most since the outbreak of the current Israeli-Palestinian violence in September of 2000.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179708,00.html

There had been concerns about safety after a group of armed gunmen captured Bethlehem's City Hall just days before Christmas, but later left the area, hurting no one.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10542632

Concern about Iran and Israel

Today we read that, in another overtly anti-Semitic public statement, Iranian President Ahmadinejad has (after the manner of a neo-Nazi) called the Holocaust a myth claiming (presumably on no evidence at all, but for ideological reasons) that it never happened. Ahmadinejad's remarks have incited yet another wave of international criticism, but as yet, no action.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051214/ts_nm/iran_holocaust_dc

Now as I read that story, it called to mind another that made the headlines just a few weeks ago when Iran's hardline president said that Israel should be "wiped off the map." Remember that?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20051026-0711-iran-israel.html

Now of course, this sort of radical rhetoric, unhelpful as it may be, may all still be just chest thumping on the part of the (Shi'ite) Islamic Theocracy (Iran) who has more fully implemented "shariah" (Divine law) than any other Muslim country. But then, as I thought a little more, I remembered two other recent headlines that have been focused on Iran. One was just a few days ago: Russia sells an advanced anti-aircraft missile system to Iran.

Why Russia is allied to Iran, while other places like Afghanistan hate Russia, why Russia is building a nuclear reactor on Iranian soil, and why Russia is selling her advanced weaponry to Iran (more advanced than our own anti-aircraft systems, since our own new weapons development slowed down so much during the 90's) are all beyond my comprehension. But they are. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051202/ap_on_re_eu/russia_iran_arms_1

And we all know about the international concern that Iran is actively seeking nuclear weapons.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,430649,00.html

In other words, we may very soon (or already?) have an explicitly anti-Semitic Islamic Theocracy with nuclear weapons and mid-range delivery technology "just across the way" from Israel. This should be more than a little bit troubling, even for those of us who are not "blind supporters" of whatever Israel does.

It should also be remembered that Israel's military is nearly as advanced as our own (since we sold it to them) and is both experienced and effiicient. And of course, they too are rumored to have nuclear weapons. I think we should also keep in mind that Isreal, not so long ago, has shown a willingness to engage in pre-emptive attacks (and with great effectiveness) when they feel greatly threatened (does anyone remember "The Six-Day War"?).

I wonder just what would happen if Israel confirmed that this hostile regime in Iran was indeed poised to strike with nuclear weapons? Would a pre-emptive strike (even a nuclear strike) be on the table? What would happen if Israel decided to launch it? I suspect that Iran would be unprepared and pretty much decimated. But then, I wonder what the other (mostly Sunni Muslim) Middle Eastern nations in the area would do? How would they respond? It is a pretty scary situation that is developing right now.