Three dead, and dozens hurt, the result of a suicide drone attack on a U.S. base in Jordan. It was just a matter of time before U.S. troops died, according to Gen. Keith Kellogg on Fox News. After 160+ attacks on U.S. troops in Syria and Iraq, added to assaults on shipping in the Red Sea, the Biden administration had repeatedly told Iran and its surrogates, “Don’t,” but they did. Still, administration spokespeople’s recurrent theme is, “We don’t seek a wider war.” 

Remember, as recently as 9/29/23, the national security advisor Jake Sullivan claimed the Mideast is the quietest in decades. Now, Anthony Blinkin says we face the most significant Mideast problem since 1973. Since the October 7th horrific attack, the hostilities have spread from Israel and Gaza to Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, the Red Sea, Yemen, and now Jordan. A war already rapidly widening. From the quiet of the Abraham Accords and a restrained Iran at the end of the last administration to the present mess, you can’t avoid the conclusion it’s the result of Biden’s policies.

Besides removing sanctions allowing a massive increase in Iran’s oil revenues and unblocking Billions of dollars, which allowed the Mullahs to finance the increase in the terrorist activities of their surrogates, the administration also re-instated aid to The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNWRA). Years ago, I pointed out in posts on the Middle East that this agency was far from being a force for good. It served only to prolong and deepen problems. 

Instead of facilitating Palestinian resettlement in the Arab world, it kept them in camps, with only their hatred and families increasing. UNWRA schools taught hostility to Jews. President Trump’s U.N. Ambassador, Nikki Haley, aware of its failings, successfully pushed the U.S. to defund the wayward agency. However, Biden restored funding and added even more discretionary funds.

Now we find UNWRA employees took part in Hamas’ ghastly attack on Israel. Evidence shows at least one in ten of its staffers have ties to the terrorist group. Believe it or not, the U.S. Taxpayers supported the terrorists. Even with UNWRA’s widely known flaws, Biden gave them funds, much of it ending up with Hamas financing its horrors.

I can’t prove my earlier idea that a quiet but robust alliance between Israel, the U.S., and the Kurds would’ve kept a lid on the Mideast caldron, allowing the area to evolve into modernity. Still, it couldn’t have worse results than we have now. Even in a limited form under Trump, maintaining the Harir airbase in Kurdistan and solid support of Israel allowed some Arab nations to join in the Abraham Accords, with others likely to follow. Wouldn’t it be better to have our own strategically placed proxies?

Events in the Gaza War show that my plan of systematic destruction of empty Gaza structures is a better idea. The displaced noncombatants, women, children, and infirm evacuated first out of harm’s way on ships after they unloaded aid. Faced with the inevitable leveling and depopulation of Gaza, Hamas would’ve faced a no-win circumstance with surrendering the hostages and tunnels a better option than an empty, destroyed Gaza.

The common complaint against this leveling plan is it destroys so much of Gaza. With over half of all Gazan buildings either demolished or severely damaged, this objection now seems quaint. Razing areas are taking place in Gaza, but not in the people-saving way, I suggested. 

Even at this late date, this plan could still work. With the big donors suspending payments to a discredited UNWRA, these funds could underwrite the sea aid shipments coordinated through a responsible agency. Someone has to organize incoming cargo and refugees leaving on the ships. All the aid may finally get to the Gazans.

Nikki Haley saw things clearly and overcame the State Department’s opposition to stop the flow of U.S. funds to UNWRA. She could be the realistic, no-nonsense leader to get us out of the chaos. With executive experience as a two-term governor and an understanding of the world as U.N. Ambassador, she’s looking more and more like Margaret Thatcher.

The media characterizes her as having no chance, but they look at the race all wrong. This race was never between several candidates starting on a level playing field, but it’s a contest between an incumbent and challengers. Grover Cleveland gained the presidency in the 19th century, losing and the only one regaining it. Even though he had a couple of challengers, his people controlled the party, resulting in an easy first-ballot convention victory. Back then, there were no primaries. Trump’s real comparison is with Cleveland. He has similar advantages.

Trump gained over half of the votes in the first two contests. While in an open field, this would be good, when judged as an incumbent, it is hardly impressive. For instance, in the 1992 New Hamshire primary, George Bush won 58% over Pat Buccana’s 40%, and the New York Times headlined “Bush Jarred in First Primary.” It indicated weakness, not strength. In the recent New Hamshire primary, Trump only received 54% to Nikki Haley’s 43%. Rather than strength, this is a danger signal.

On the other hand, Nikki Haley polled only 3% going into the 1st debate. She had just under 20% in the Iowa caucuses and 43% in New Hamshire. Now, that’s an upward trendline. More importantly, Haley swamps Biden in general election polls, while Trump, at best, narrowly defeats the President. The latest Quinnipiac Poll shows Biden ahead of Trump 50 to 44%, while Halel beats Biden 47 to 42%.

Curiously, numerous polls have shown how Republican candidates would fare against Biden, but no polls pitting possible Democratic other than Biden against Trump. Wouldn’t you like to know how Michelle Obama, Gavin Newsome, or Gretchen Whitmer compares with Trump? The results might frighten Republicans. That may be the reason.

With such an upward momentum, Nikki Haley against a weak incumbent has no reason to bow out. So long as she has the resources, continuing makes sense. It might become apparent Trump is likely to lose, causing those who realize the importance of winning to rally to her. After all, Trump has yet to do anything to widen his appeal. Trashing Haley and reading her backers out of the party pushes people away.

So far, Trump’s legal problems and general nastiness haven’t cost him. The legal issues making him the victim have been a significant help, but it’s getting old, and anything can happen to the generally unpopular ex-president.

We hear a lot about threats to democracy from both parties. Dictators like Putin still periodically stage elections, but they choose who they run against. It’s impossible to vote for someone besides what the ruling party puts on the ballot.

Most Americans desire to vote for someone other than Joe Biden or Donald Trump but can’t now. How Democratic are our parties? We can still change the course of this election if we follow Reagan’s rule and vote for the person who most closely expresses our goals and values that can win. This guideline is my reason for backing Nikki Haley now that DeSantis is out.

If the parties still won’t give us what we want, read my “The Future Party” series, and maybe you’ll consider a third party. Abe Lincoln did.