Name Your Poison; Mark Begitch or Don Sullivan

Alaska’s race for U.S. Senate this year pits an extremist incumbent against an extremist challenger and I suppose Sen. Lisa Murkowski is to blame. She defeated the Republican primary winner in the last election forsaking the Republican Party to run as an independent and defeated the Yale Law, Univ. of Alaska Economics, Federal Judge and Army officer Bronze Star winner Joe Miller with cross-over Democrats and women of both parties.

She ought to have let Miller go-ahead and win the Senate seat and run against Begitch this year. The Republicans would have two winners instead of at best an extremist or two. I suppose Alaskans can write in Sean Parnell for Senate-he is running for re-election as Governor yet if elected perhaps he could name a replacement and move east.

Lisa Murkowski is a natural Democrat supporting abortion and homosexual marriage as does Sen. Begitch. Don Sullivan is an active Marine Reserve Colonel who might light to tell the civilian populace what to do as well as control the military. That leads to another point-America’s Middle East policy is ineffective. Bulls want to attack every Red Flag they can see in each and every Muslim terror group as if there was a purely military remedy to the borders, cultures and religious affiliation issues plus oil and security; there isn’t.

Syria has three or four distinct population groups with different interests thrown into one nation not by consent but by the power of the allies diving up the former Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War. The idea of a democracy working in that context is rather silly. Only if a Dictator beats down the people enough would they submit to a uniform nominal Democratic rule with a dictator for life winning 100% of the votes each Democratic election cycle in the People’s Republic.

If ISIS were ‘defeated’ or dispersed by alliance of the willing bombing other terrorist organizations will fill the void of power in Syraq. ISIS cadre will infiltrate in to other groups-probably the ones being trained by Americans in Saudi Arabia in order to take over the new moderates who are removed from their posts as ‘shop-keepers’ and ‘clerks’ to fight against the extremists.

Washington D.C. legal literalists don’t want to change the boundaries of Syria and partition the country between Sunni and Shi’a-Christians or have the Israelis go over the Golan Heights to take a chunk of land on the Iraq border. The idea is that legalism is the answer to everything. Litigation and law-every legal pretense is the right excuse for bad or unjust policy implementation-and all the government retards like to go ahead on the 2 dimensional notion of rational international law regarding borders as sacrosanct.

Thus the right way for the Obama administration to circumvent the idea of international border sovereignty to implement regime change is to support international terrorist cadre training, or rather freedom fighter or revolutionary training in some other country so they can cross borders and leave the legal fiction of respect for the international boundaries intact. I perhaps didn’t write that plainly. It is something like the paradigm of the old covenant of the law and the new covenant of the Lord Jesus Christ that transitioned in the first century a.d.

The Jews had been given the Mosaic Law and followed it as well as possible. Not only the Ten Commandments were presented-there were Levitical priesthood rules and other instructions given for social behavior. The laws of God were liberating to a very corrupt society amidst corrupt societies and the chosen people were always straying. The Jews as the rile models for a perfect society tended to fail and God’s corrections through international affairs of Jewish society were tough on the people. Original sin and a fallen human nature needed more than laws to cohere within. They needed the Lord Jesus Christ.

It was said by God to the prophet Jeremiah that the laws of God would be written on the hearts and minds of the faithful one day. Jesus Christ saw that the legalists of the major Jewish groups failed to have the right heart in applying the law as the end-in-itself. It is quite possible to apply the law in social and international affairs and go wrong. We see that situation in Syria today and it existed in the first century and day of the Lord too. The technical boundaries of Syria may be respected yet the people within and without suffer from war. Though the abstract legal border is respected by governments they flank the boundary sovereignty principle and fund terrorists to cross through it as if it were thin air-it hasn’t that much substance actually.

The United Nations may need to develop a facility for recognizing the relation of people to international borders in order to serve the people and not just governments and elites. If it is necessary to partition people and redraw a border such as in Syria where each major groups should have its own independent legal power for self-rule then it should. The old borders created by a prior legal body rather than the people just might need to be changed to reflect the new social reality.

It is very easy to imagine Hezbollah or some other groups expanding into a part of Syria-or for Al Qaeda to continue to develop relations with Wahhabists and other extremists that would radically influence local political evolutions. It is more difficult to imagine a police and security presence unaffected by and able to control the militarized citizenry of Syraq without being under the influence of a terrorist groups like Hamas. Hamas or another version may be the next Syrian government if the Obama administration policies continue to undermine the Assad Government and the U.N. does not support a partition.

It is challenging however to see stability in the Middle East with a Syria governed by the Muslim Brotherhood with a purge of Christians and Shi’a or if even a more radical government were to take power. There are a number of political conflations possible. Thus I believe a partition and some sort of stability reinforced with international supervision in each part of the former Syria would be the better policy. Of course the U.S. Government just doesn’t have rational Middle East policy oftimes, so there isn’t much to hope for in that regard.

Whoever wins in the U.S. Senate, they ought to ask for replacement of America’s present U.N. Ambassador in order to install someone with a competent, independent point of view.  There are several international affairs involving this heart versus legal pretense issue-especially in Ukraine were Russia’s 1200 year patrimony was disregarded by the cheesy Clinton era swiping of Ukraine from a distressed Russia. Law is important-yet equally so is truth. Hitler was legally elected-yet we know where that went.