Return of the Neocons! – Update

This post is a follow-up to this past post.

The news is out that Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon-Mobil, is to be named the candidate to be Secretary of State. His political leanings per neocon vs. non-neocon are unknown, but obviously he is an oilman. However, to seemingly hammer the final nail into the coffin giving us the neocons, the news also has it that his deputy will be none other than super-neocon John Bolton.

Bolton will run the operations of the State Department day-to-day.

Things may change in the official announcement to come out next week, but there it is.

Of all the news and op-eds I’ve read, I believe none says it better of the situation than Durden at ZeroHedge about these choices being made of Trump’s cabinet:

“To summarize: a cabinet run by Wall Street and big oil (with a neocon backstop), and a handful of veteran generals thrown in. The writing should be on the wall as to what comes next.”

I don’t believe Durden knows about the Four Signposts. Many of you, however, do know. I believe Durden has it right that the writing is indeed on the wall (ironically, also from Daniel, as are the Signposts) and it seems to be pointing to a particular path to the Second Signpost.

America, founded as a Christian nation, has allowed the killing of over 50 million unborn human beings, and has paraded sinful lifestyles on the streets calling it good and normal. Would God not judge America?

The Second Signpost all by itself would cause judgment on America. The question I have is, what path will America take to get there? This is pure speculation on my part, but the path chosen would also involve judgment, where judgment begins with the house of God.

Were we to go the Hillary route and have mounting persecution of Christians in America and growing secularism, and then one day Iran decides to start its invasion?

Or does America go the Trump route and mount an invasion of Iran, and whether actually going in or threatening to, Iran in desperation runs out and we lose a major chunk of our military?

It reminds me of the choice God gave King David in 2 Samuel 24:12-14 as to which of three judgments he would prefer as punishment for his sin.

Hmm…persecution or loss of an army – either way these choices are merely precursors to the events to befall America because of the Second Signpost itself. But American voters have already made their choice. I definitely could be wrong, and as I said I am only speculating here because the Bible does not tell us how the Second Signpost begins, but as Durden says the writing seems to be on the wall.

With Trump surrounding himself with Wall Street types and generals and neocons, the path to the Second Signpost may involve the involvement of the US military. And why not? That’s how we arrived at the First Signpost.

America was the force behind making the lion stand on its hind feet and changing its mind (Dan. 7:4).  It’s not out of the question for America to also be the cause for the command to go to the bear for it to gorge (Dan. 7:5).

Categories: America in the End Times, In The News, Signpost #2: Iran, The Signpost Perspective

Tags: , ,

2 replies

  1. Interesting speculations. I also read ZH articles for thought-provoking alternative and non-mainstream opinions, although I notice they tend to publish mostly pessimistic perspectives on issues and miss any silver linings in the dark clouds. I’m unclear on what you were thinking concerning “involvement of the US military.” The US already has drones taking out targets wherever the current administration policy dictates a threat to US interests. How would US interests be defined by our current and future leaders (in terms of a common denominator)? Follow the money, because that’s where the political power is. Problem: Define money or wealth in the eyes of individual nations. What makes geographical control of territory valuable to a political power base? Valuable how? I see two common denominators which are often written about by others who study these matters: 1> Crude Oil 2> The Petro-dollar as the medium of exchange between nations. I think whoever gets into the oval office has the facts of life (the two common denominators) explained to them in sufficient detail by the internal powers that be. So every decision they make (whether wise or foolish in outcome) is based on keeping the Petro-dollar the ruling force in world energy trade. They do have some latitude as to how to go about it, as we saw when Obama tried that whole failed Arab Spring thing in Egypt. As far as intervention in mid-east affairs, if war in the mid-east in general tends to strengthen the price of oil on the world markets, then US intervention where ‘boots on the ground’ is concerned, would seem to be unnecessary in the eyes of those who support the oil industry. I doubt that Trump would handle things– as commander-in-chief– the same as Bush or Obama did. Trump may want to stay in power for more than one term, and is smart enough to realize sending troops to fight in the Mid-east (either Vietnam style or house-to-house), is political suicide. On the other hand Trump is smart enough to put people in positions of power that look more hawkish than what Obama has now. Trump wants to present an image of strength to other leaders of nations. That doesn’t mean he would activate attack mode against Iran. But it wouldn’t surprise me to see him go after ISIS in cooperation with willing partner nations. I think it will be a few more years before Iran decides to make it’s move against its enemies. But the stage is certainly being set.

  2. Daniel,
    Military involvement would be anything up to and including a full invasion as was used to take out Saddam; a nightmare scenario. The stage is indeed being set, for whatever the play may be.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: