Confusing/Conflating “CEASEFIRE” With PEACE;

FOR time immemorial, King Solomon remains the wisest sage in Judaism. His prescient wisdom is summed up herein:

“There is nothing new under the sun”, Book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible, Kohelet Rabbah 

TIME and again, in absolute terms (as opposed to wishful, pie-in-the-sky thinking), western leaders have wrecked more damage upon the already fiery, tinderbox ground in the Middle East – as they chase a “peaceful” solution through a so-called “ceasefire!”

NOW, before this critical analysis proceeds, the following assessment takes into account the spectacular achievements via U.S. and Israeli forces; the likes of which will be studied by military historians for many decades. They can be found here and here.

PARADOXICALLY, it is directly due to the incredible military dominance and prowess of America and Israel – in conjunction with their combined abilities to run circles around the Hitlerite regime, strategically and otherwise – that President Trump’s insistence on a toothless/useless “ceasefire” is, frankly, a miscalculation of inordinate consequences, that is, in the long-term!

AT its base, strong western leaders – even President Trump who truly loves America – have yet to internalize the language, culture, and theo-political underpinnings of Islam. They are immutable; some of which can be studied within the below, July 10, 2015.

Islam’s Barbarism Sanctioned By Shariah Law: Its Cancerous Dictates. West In Denial, Despite MASSIVE Blow Back. 

RESULTANT, at its base, Islamic leaders (irrespective of locale) interpret a “ceasefire” as a “hudna“; wrapped up within the umbrella of “taqiyya“, “kitman“, “muruna“, and “tawriya.” Imbibe these Islamic mandates well. Life-saving.

LET’s commence with the aforementioned inviolate companions thereof, that is, before heading to the danger of all dangers: “ceasefire!”

AS such, in Jan. 2025 (a long time ago within the geo-politics of the Middle East), the following excerpt from “Islamists can’t be trusted” at American Thinker could not be more germane:

Time and again, westerners (who should know better) babble about the “democratic” opening of Islamic-ruled nations due to their so-called elections – more aptly, pre-ordained selections.

Since past is prologue, who recalls the brouhaha in Iraq (October 15, 2005), due to voter participation in a referendum for Iraq’s Constitution, purple ink-stained fingers and all?! Mind you, former President Bush’s delusional and toothless promise to “democratize” Iraq, with supposed knock-on effects to the Middle East, was nothing short of a bold-faced disaster. In fact, Saddam Hussein’s brutal regime was overtaken by yet another Islamic hydra. Six of one, half a dozen of another. In its stead, the pinnacle of Islamic monstrosity – Salafi Jihadists, in concert with Shia militant barbarians – became implanted/cemented.

Fast forward twenty years, and it is not accidental nor coincidental that the Middle East is a cauldron of hellfire with Israel in their crosshairs, America and Europe, alike.

Thus, for a dose of reality-based thinking, let’s take a deep-dive into Lebanon’s latest sham election on January 9, 2025 – with Joseph Aoun its designated President. His helpmate is Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. 

Before anything else, let’s be very clear: whichever figureheads stand at the helm, this or that vacuous promise to rein in Hezbollah is whistling past the graveyard. Ditto every other Islamic-driven nation and their ruling jihadist entities.

More specifically, a crystal clear, bulletproof understanding of what underlies Islamic authority and rule must be internalized.

The Koran, Islam’s Holy Book, governs all; theologically, culturally as well as politically. There is no deviation allowed or tolerated.

Though scores of mandates exist, the dictates within Chapter 33 are most revealing. Mohammad, the Islamic “prophet,” is deemed Allah’s messenger.

Among its passages, most prominently, stands a “Celestial Advisory.”  It mandates: “It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger, Mohammad, to have any option about their decision. If anyone disobeys, he is indeed on a clearly wrong path” (Koran 33:36).

…….

“Taqiyya” is, literally, deception. It is this act which will enable Islam-Submission- to rule over the entire world without exception.

“Kitman,” under the same pillar, translates as concealment/withholding.

In conjunction, “Muruna” and “Tawriya” round out the non-negotiable mandates of how a Muslim must comport, again, to submit all to Islam.

It is alongside this lethal and twisted terrain that so-called ceasefires are never worth the paper they are written on. For, in reality, they are to be considered nothing more than hudnas under Islamic law; the time and space required to regroup, only to emerge stronger and more lethal.

Not only that, many Israelis and westerners fail to internalize the real language of the Middle East, which is, “Strong Horses Rule!”

……

continue here.

INEXORABLY, “There is nothing new under the sun.”

ALL of which squares the circle, in a manner of speaking, leading to the GRAVE, dangerous miscalculation from a so-called “ceasefire!”

AS the Middle East Forum cogently analyzed:

The use by Westerners of the word hudna highlights an anomaly. Whenever journalists, diplomats, or commentators covering the Middle East use a non-English word, it will almost always be Arabic or perhaps Persian; seldom do they use any Hebrew words. Never has a U.S. or British newspaper, for example, used the Hebrew word for cease-fire (hafsakat esh). This is odd as Israel is the other side to these cease-fires. The majority of Arabic terms reproduced in Western language newspapers are concerned with either military topics (jihad, mujahideen, fida’iyin, shahid)[1] or religious affairs (fatwa, mulla, ulema, ayatollah, Shari’a, Allahu akbar).[2] There is nothing wrong with borrowing Arabic words. However, doing so without understanding the word’s nuance and historical development will render deficient any understanding of that word’s true meaning.

Here, it might be possible to consider hudna somewhat of an exception—it can be translated accurately as truce or cease-fire. Its contemporary usage — at least in English and other European languages — is exclusive to the conflict between Israel and its adversaries, whether Islamist terror groups in Gaza, the West Bank, or southern Lebanon, or states such as Syria. In Iran, it is used alongside the Persian term aramesh.[3] Still, hudna retains a historical context that colors its meaning, if not in Western papers, then in Arabs’ understanding.

The concept of hudna deserves a close look: It is not a Qur’anic term, nor is it the only Arabic word for a cease-fire or truce; others include: muhadana, muwada’a, muhla, musalaha, musalama, mutaraka, and sulh. But hudna is the most prominent. It is the first word used in Muslim history to mean cease-fire, specifically in the context of the seventh century Truce or Treaty of al-Hudaybiyya, often termed the Sulh al-Hudaybiyya (peace of al-Hudaybiyya).

Named after a village outside Mecca, the truce came six years after Muhammad and his followers abandoned Mecca for Yathrib, today’s Medina. This move, known as the hijra (emigration) is of enormous significance for the classical understanding of jihad, inasmuch as it sets a pattern of retreat followed by regrouping and rearming, which permits an attack on the territory previously left behind.[4] In March 628 C.E., Muhammad and his followers sought to return to Mecca to perform a pilgrimage. At Hudaybiyya, Muhammad “marched till he reached al-Hudaybiyya which lies at the limit of the Haram [sacred territory of Mecca] area at a distance of nine miles from Mecca.”[5] Muhammad and the rulers of Mecca, most of whom had yet to convert to Islam, negotiated a truce, the essence of which was to permit the Muslims to return unarmed on pilgrimage each year for the next decade. It came to an end two years later, however, following an infraction by a tribe allied to the Meccans. In 630, Muhammad entered Mecca with a small, armed force and took the city peacefully. Hudna, in other words, amounted to a temporary truce.

Today, radical groups and conventional Muslims alike often use the term hudna when they divide areas not controlled by Islamists into a realm of Islam (dar al-Islam) and a realm of war (dar al-harb),[6] or pagan ignorance (jahiliyya). The leading exponent of this latter concept was Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb (1906-66) who, in his 1964 treatise, Ma’alim fi ‘l-tariq (Milestones), wrote:

……

Over the course of history, hudna became the standard term to describe a cessation of hostilities during jihad. Muslims distinguished the hudna from other forms of disengagement, such as those applied to tribal feuds, clashes between city factions, rebellions against the monarch or his provincial governors, or fitna, sedition or civil strife. Fitna was the greatest fear of classical Muslim society, which aspired above all things for perfect order both under a caliph or sultan and under religious law as mediated by the ulema or religious scholars, and, more narrowly, the fuqaha or jurisprudents.[8]

continue here.

MIND you, with the Hitlerite regime on the back-foot due to America’s and Israel’s brilliant execution of military strategical- thinking, countless options should have {emphasis placed} been on the table.

WHILE there are several which veer into sharp focus, there is one which stands head and shoulders above the rest: regime change – or else!

EFFECTIVELY, the attached sets the stage, and can be gleaned within this writer’s analysis at Israel National News:

The abandonment of Iranians in 2009 vis-a-vis today

INSTEAD of cashing in on a glorious achievement, President Trump (let’s leave aside PM Netanyahu, for now), gifts the Hitlerite regime a life-line/life-boat….as he aids China’s aggression, too!

WHIPLASH INDUCING!