Such An Hour As Ye Think Not
Vol: 93 Issue: 13 Saturday, June 13, 2009
I’m not sure yet, but it appears that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has trounced all opponents in yesterday’s presidential election.
I say I’m not sure yet, because although Ahmadinejad claims victory by an almost 2 to 1 landslide, his next closest opponent, Mir Hussein Moussavi declared himself the winner and charged that the election was rigged.
I don’t know, but it would seem to me that Moussavi’s claim lines up better with what we think we know about Iran than does an Ahmadinejad landslide.
Ask anybody and they’ll tell you that we have no quarrel with the Iranian people. Three-quarters of the Iranian population is under thirty-five. Most of the revolutionaries who stood with Ahmadinejad during the embassy takeover in 1979 later died on the battlefield during the 1980-88 war with Iraq.
After the war, there were few surviving revolutionaries to come home and radicalize their kids and keep the revolution alive. Therefore, say Western analysts, it isn’t the Iranian people that hates the West — just its leadership.
Consequently, the preferred Western strategy has been to wait and try to outlast the mullocracy. Eventually, they hope, the radicals will all die off and be replaced by more moderate candidates from the next generation.
If Ahmadinejad’s claim to a landslide victory is actually true, then that entire line of reasoning needs a rethink. The Iranian FARS news agency is reporting that Ahmadinejad got more than 24 million votes out of a possible voter universe of less than forty million cast.
Was the vote rigged? That seems both unlikely and unnecessary. Elections in Iran are generally rigged beforehand by banning candidates from the start or closing opposition newspapers well in advance of the vote.
All four of the candidates in the Iranian election were selected by the mullocracy and approved by Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameini. All four candidates were equally hard-line.
The major difference between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi is that most Western observers thought Moussavi was less likely to go out of his way to antagonize the West.
But it is really more a question of diplomacy than worldview.
Moussavi would be more likely to say nothing, but no less likely than Ahmadinejad to actually do it.
If Ahmadinejad actually got two out of three votes cast, then the whole myth of the gentle, youthful and Western-looking Iranian student population under the thumb of hardline Islamists is exposed.
Ahmedinejad turned the election into a referendum on the continuation of Iran’s Islamic revolution. The allegedly moderate student voters took to the streets shouting chants like “Death to all those against the Supreme Leader” followed by traditional Shia rituals and elegies.
Officials in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and U.S.-allied Persian Gulf sheikdoms watched in horror as Iranian students handed Ahmadinejad another four years of power.
“The continuation of Ahmadinejad certainly poses challenges for the U.S. and the Gulf states,” said Hady Amr, director of the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar.
Still assuming the election was legitimate and its results stand, four more years of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not something Israel can afford. The majority of Israelis recognize that if Israel doesn’t attack Iran before it goes nuclear, Iran will attack Israel after it does.
For the Israelis, the choices are ‘between the devil and the deep blue sea’, as the saying goes.
Israel has to measure the current risks to its survival against the longer-term existential threat a nuclear Iran represents. For that reason, while all the options for action are unattractive, the option of doing nothing is even worse.
Israel Vice Premier Silvan Shalom reacted to the election news by saying, “The Iranian election results are a slap in the face of those who believed Iran was built for real dialogue with the free world and would halt its nuclear program.”
“Ahmadinejad’s victory sends a clear message to the world that there is wide support for the current policy, and it will continue unchanged. The United States and the free world must reevaluate the policy on Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.”
Iran’s presidential term limits mean that no matter what, Ahmadinejad is now a lame duck. He can’t run for election again, and is therefore freed from whatever political restraints he was forced to operate under during his first term.
Obama, who DOES have to consider the politics of it all, is now facing off against a guy who has nothing to lose, politically speaking. And ironically, Ahmadinejad is obliquely crediting Obama for helping him win.
Ahmadinejad claimed credit for bending the will of the West, forcing the U.S. into a dialogue with the Islamic regime, and elevating his country to the status of a global power.
Obama played right into that claim with his ‘unclenched fist’ speech.
I said yesterday that if we are as far along the prophetic timeline as I suspected, it would mean a new Iranian president. Remember, for any of the Bible’s post-Church age scenarios to play out, the starting point is always with Israel living in a state of false peace and security.
The antichrist’s confirmation of the 7 year covenant begins a period of peace and safety for Israel that lasts for the first half of the Tribulation (Daniel 9:26-27) until the abomination of desolation (2nd Thessalonians 2:4) causes him to break the treaty.
Both Ezekiel’s Gog-Magog scenario and the Apostle John’s Tribulation scenario begin from the peace and safety position. The Apostle Paul says that it isn’t until “they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. ” (1st Thessalonians 5:3)
For most of the past couple of decades, students of Bible prophecy has been watching Israel’s wars and her skirmishes, sifted through statements from her enemies, and tried to see how it all lines up with Bible prophecy.
The Bible points to the constant state of war between Israel and ‘the many’ as evidence that we are approaching the end of the Church Age and the onset of the Tribulation Period.
But as we get closer to the end of this present age, the Bible’s focus changes from that of Israel in a constant state of war to that of a false peace. As Daniel prophesied, it is by peace that he shall destroy many. (Daniel 8:25)
The Bible says that the Tribulation begins under a delusion of peace. At the moment, the most probable future scenario is not peace, but war. Israel cannot afford to trust that the same Iranians that handed victory to Ahmadinejad are really a moderate majority under the thumb of the ruling mullocracy.
Ahmadinejad’s election would seem to move us closer — but the reality is that it suggests we may have a bit more time to accomplish our mission here on this earth.
When it looked like a new Iranian leader might have held out the possibility of peace, the Rapture seemed closer. Now, with Ahmadinejad’s re-election holding out the portent of hot war with Israel, it appears that maybe the Rapture may actually be further away than we thought.
But even that possibility may be misleading. Jesus said it would be impossible to calculate the day and hour.
And now that it looks less likely for the near future, we have this Scripture to consider: “Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.” (Matthew 24:44)
And here I sit, thinking; ‘Not!’