Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Getting us out of the endless Muslim civil war ids just one of the reason I support Bernie Sanders. Hillary and all the Republicans are the other reasons.
I suggest we get out of the entire region, including Israel, and let them fight until they settle the problem. Then we go in, kill the winner and get back to stealing the oil.
Lol...well I certainly agree with most of what you're saying.
Stability in the middle east depends on most of the nations there being led by strong men- dictators, generals, or kings.
The Arab Spring revolutions of 2010 wiped out a generation of them, along with our war in Iraq, which did away with one, and the natural attrition that comes from age, which killed off a few. Some are still living, and some rulers never faced a revolution at all.
In most of the countries that overthrew their leader, nothing has changed much since, 5 or 6 years later. Dictatorship is an easier form of government to live under than a democracy, especially when the dictators are all somewhat benevolent and don't seek to expand their territory. For the folks who live in them, it's like living in a loose caste system where most folks are able to get by, don't have expectations of ever doing much better or worse than what they were born into, and life is stable despite occasional social troubles that may come up and bump into anyone unexpectedly.
The return of the huge regional caliphate that once controlled all of the middle east is a desire to have one big strong man running the entire region again.Democracy is simply too hard to manage in an area where there is little or no democratic traditions.
Syria is one of the nations where the democratic revolution failed in 2010. Assad is a second generation dictator who took over after his father died, and the war reached a stalemate from almost the beginning, a perfect condition for any radical group that wants another strong man to replace the strong man that already exists.
If the middle east was central America, with nothing but jungle and small nations, it would not be such a big deal, but it's not jungle, and it's not small, and it's not unimportant to the rest of the world. Geographically, it's the central movement land hub that connects the Orient, Africa and Europe together, and economically, it's where most of the nations in the world get most of their oil supply.
We will never be able to avoid being involved there. We have tried to avoid involvement there for over 100 years, but America is always sucked in to a conflict there. The United States is the big man nation of the world. That's why we can never stay out forever.
Any politician who says he has the magic key to lock up the middle east so we won't ever have to go there again is either a fool or a liar or both. Any politician who says the United States should simply fly over the middle east and bomb the region into slag is also a fool and a liar. It can't be done for a hundred different reasons.
The politician who says he will be very, very cautious and try his best to avoid going to arms first, is being rational. Iraq taught us a lesson we once knew but had forgotten; the middle east is one big Pottery Barn. If you break it, you own it, and once broken, the mend will never be as good as when the piece was unbroken.
We cannot go back in the past and un-break Iraq. Like it or not, what our actions did there caused waves of instability that are still rippling through the region, affecting those who loved us and those who hated us equally.
The rest of the world will not allow the United States to simply walk out of that Pottery Barn and let us leave all the broken stacks we shattered behind. We cannot abandon the joint we wrecked out of our own self interests as well.
Those two things combined would drive the United States back into a recession worse than the one we went through, by far, and one that would be beyond our means of repair. Staying out is no option at all.
So- live with the fact. Make the wisest choice you can when you vote, as this is a dangerous time, and fools are dangerous leaders. Don't follow your fond wishes for a return of isolation. Isolation is more dangerous to us all than wise involvement.
Realize that our leaders have learned some deep lessons from our failure in Iraq, but more failure will be inevitable, some time, somewhere, because it's all a very complicated knot that must be carefully untied. Cutting the knot in half only doubles the complications because it creates two knots.
Don't buy into any statement from anyone who says they have a solution to the middle east.
There is no easy solution to be found, and such a statement only shows a lot of ignorance as to what the realities are there.
We won't be able to ever stay out of the region, period. No ifs ands or buts. The very best we can do is attempt to limit the instability a bit and hope our efforts work for a little while.
Eventually, there will be a new generation of strong man leaders who will more effectively stabilize the region. they will all be in it for themselves, and we will always have to deal with them, but the anarchy we're now seeing in Syria could happen anywhere there and and do away with years of our best efforts at any time.
And when anarchy takes over, it will always come knocking on our door right away. If you think Syria is bad, consider Egypt, which is over twice Syria's size in population. If you can think, such a thought should make you pale.
Choose a person who is alert, knows there are no simple solutions, and is able to keep a cool head. That's the best person for the job right now, whoever they may be.
Astute observation. That's my complaint too. I use to despise Pat Buchanan...now I'm one of his biggest fans although I can't buy into his social views.
That said, I'm not voting for anymore interventionist candidates anymore unless I'm forced to. I will vote for a non-interventionist Republican before I'll vote for an interventionist Democrat. That's how sick of our foreign policy I've become.
I'd vote for Pat Buchanan in a heartbeat if he ran.
Yes, I would too. We would be much better off today if Pat had been successful in his third party bid in 2000.
Stability in the middle east depends on most of the nations there being led by strong men- dictators, generals, or kings.
The Arab Spring revolutions of 2010 wiped out a generation of them, along with our war in Iraq, which did away with one, and the natural attrition that comes from age, which killed off a few. Some are still living, and some rulers never faced a revolution at all.
In most of the countries that overthrew their leader, nothing has changed much since, 5 or 6 years later. Dictatorship is an easier form of government to live under than a democracy, especially when the dictators are all somewhat benevolent and don't seek to expand their territory. For the folks who live in them, it's like living in a loose caste system where most folks are able to get by, don't have expectations of ever doing much better or worse than what they were born into, and life is stable despite occasional social troubles that may come up and bump into anyone unexpectedly.
The return of the huge regional caliphate that once controlled all of the middle east is a desire to have one big strong man running the entire region again.Democracy is simply too hard to manage in an area where there is little or no democratic traditions.
Syria is one of the nations where the democratic revolution failed in 2010. Assad is a second generation dictator who took over after his father died, and the war reached a stalemate from almost the beginning, a perfect condition for any radical group that wants another strong man to replace the strong man that already exists.
If the middle east was central America, with nothing but jungle and small nations, it would not be such a big deal, but it's not jungle, and it's not small, and it's not unimportant to the rest of the world. Geographically, it's the central movement land hub that connects the Orient, Africa and Europe together, and economically, it's where most of the nations in the world get most of their oil supply.
We will never be able to avoid being involved there. We have tried to avoid involvement there for over 100 years, but America is always sucked in to a conflict there. The United States is the big man nation of the world. That's why we can never stay out forever.
Any politician who says he has the magic key to lock up the middle east so we won't ever have to go there again is either a fool or a liar or both. Any politician who says the United States should simply fly over the middle east and bomb the region into slag is also a fool and a liar. It can't be done for a hundred different reasons.
The politician who says he will be very, very cautious and try his best to avoid going to arms first, is being rational. Iraq taught us a lesson we once knew but had forgotten; the middle east is one big Pottery Barn. If you break it, you own it, and once broken, the mend will never be as good as when the piece was unbroken.
We cannot go back in the past and un-break Iraq. Like it or not, what our actions did there caused waves of instability that are still rippling through the region, affecting those who loved us and those who hated us equally.
The rest of the world will not allow the United States to simply walk out of that Pottery Barn and let us leave all the broken stacks we shattered behind. We cannot abandon the joint we wrecked out of our own self interests as well.
Those two things combined would drive the United States back into a recession worse than the one we went through, by far, and one that would be beyond our means of repair. Staying out is no option at all.
So- live with the fact. Make the wisest choice you can when you vote, as this is a dangerous time, and fools are dangerous leaders. Don't follow your fond wishes for a return of isolation. Isolation is more dangerous to us all than wise involvement.
Realize that our leaders have learned some deep lessons from our failure in Iraq, but more failure will be inevitable, some time, somewhere, because it's all a very complicated knot that must be carefully untied. Cutting the knot in half only doubles the complications because it creates two knots.
Don't buy into any statement from anyone who says they have a solution to the middle east.
There is no easy solution to be found, and such a statement only shows a lot of ignorance as to what the realities are there.
We won't be able to ever stay out of the region, period. No ifs ands or buts. The very best we can do is attempt to limit the instability a bit and hope our efforts work for a little while.
Eventually, there will be a new generation of strong man leaders who will more effectively stabilize the region. they will all be in it for themselves, and we will always have to deal with them, but the anarchy we're now seeing in Syria could happen anywhere there and and do away with years of our best efforts at any time.
And when anarchy takes over, it will always come knocking on our door right away. If you think Syria is bad, consider Egypt, which is over twice Syria's size in population. If you can think, such a thought should make you pale.
Choose a person who is alert, knows there are no simple solutions, and is able to keep a cool head. That's the best person for the job right now, whoever they may be.
I would just like to address the point you made regarding the US trying to stay out of the ME. Standard Oil of California did its first exploratory drilling in 1932/1933 and the ME has been a central part of US geopolitical strategy since then (although it certainly evolved more to that region and away from the Pacific Rim after WW2.
FDR met with the Saudi King in 1945 where he solidified US involvement in that area. Everything from the Army Corps of Engineers to oil companies where brought there. Roosevelt even gave the King a plane which was the roots of Saudia Arbia Airline that you see today.
Anyways, over the past 100 years the Us has done everything but stay out of the ME.
Astute observation. That's my complaint too. I use to despise Pat Buchanan...now I'm one of his biggest fans although I can't buy into his social views.
That said, I'm not voting for anymore interventionist candidates anymore unless I'm forced to. I will vote for a non-interventionist Republican before I'll vote for an interventionist Democrat. That's how sick of our foreign policy I've become.
I'd vote for Pat Buchanan in a heartbeat if he ran.
Nixon once expressed the opinion that a President's real impact is on foreign policy and I agree that there is a lot of truth to that. Our current foreign policy is going to someday lead to something that makes 9/11 look like a picnic. Pat's book "A Republic, Not an Empire" cast in bronze my non-interventionist views. Buchanan is not my ideal President, but he is my ideal Secretary of State.
At this time, we all believe that Trump's agenda is non-intervention to foreign affairs. There are many Russian experts believe that Trump will retreat from Syria even Iraq.
How do you think about non-intervention ideology? I am sure that many chickenhawk will be disappointed.
I'm all for it. We should allow our allies/proxies to do our fighting, as Reagan did.
At this time, we all believe that Trump's agenda is non-intervention to foreign affairs. There are many Russian experts believe that Trump will retreat from Syria even Iraq.
How do you think about non-intervention ideology? I am sure that many chickenhawk will be disappointed.
We should pull every one of our people and each piece of equipment from the middle east immediately.
Those savages have been slaughtering one another over the thinnest pretexts for 10,000 years and nothing we do will deter them from continuing the carnage. Not our problem to solve.
Stability in the middle east depends on most of the nations there being led by strong men- dictators, generals, or kings.
The Arab Spring revolutions of 2010 wiped out a generation of them, along with our war in Iraq, which did away with one, and the natural attrition that comes from age, which killed off a few. Some are still living, and some rulers never faced a revolution at all.
In most of the countries that overthrew their leader, nothing has changed much since, 5 or 6 years later. Dictatorship is an easier form of government to live under than a democracy, especially when the dictators are all somewhat benevolent and don't seek to expand their territory. For the folks who live in them, it's like living in a loose caste system where most folks are able to get by, don't have expectations of ever doing much better or worse than what they were born into, and life is stable despite occasional social troubles that may come up and bump into anyone unexpectedly.
The return of the huge regional caliphate that once controlled all of the middle east is a desire to have one big strong man running the entire region again.Democracy is simply too hard to manage in an area where there is little or no democratic traditions.
Syria is one of the nations where the democratic revolution failed in 2010. Assad is a second generation dictator who took over after his father died, and the war reached a stalemate from almost the beginning, a perfect condition for any radical group that wants another strong man to replace the strong man that already exists.
If the middle east was central America, with nothing but jungle and small nations, it would not be such a big deal, but it's not jungle, and it's not small, and it's not unimportant to the rest of the world. Geographically, it's the central movement land hub that connects the Orient, Africa and Europe together, and economically, it's where most of the nations in the world get most of their oil supply.
We will never be able to avoid being involved there. We have tried to avoid involvement there for over 100 years, but America is always sucked in to a conflict there. The United States is the big man nation of the world. That's why we can never stay out forever.
Any politician who says he has the magic key to lock up the middle east so we won't ever have to go there again is either a fool or a liar or both. Any politician who says the United States should simply fly over the middle east and bomb the region into slag is also a fool and a liar. It can't be done for a hundred different reasons.
The politician who says he will be very, very cautious and try his best to avoid going to arms first, is being rational. Iraq taught us a lesson we once knew but had forgotten; the middle east is one big Pottery Barn. If you break it, you own it, and once broken, the mend will never be as good as when the piece was unbroken.
We cannot go back in the past and un-break Iraq. Like it or not, what our actions did there caused waves of instability that are still rippling through the region, affecting those who loved us and those who hated us equally.
The rest of the world will not allow the United States to simply walk out of that Pottery Barn and let us leave all the broken stacks we shattered behind. We cannot abandon the joint we wrecked out of our own self interests as well.
Those two things combined would drive the United States back into a recession worse than the one we went through, by far, and one that would be beyond our means of repair. Staying out is no option at all.
So- live with the fact. Make the wisest choice you can when you vote, as this is a dangerous time, and fools are dangerous leaders. Don't follow your fond wishes for a return of isolation. Isolation is more dangerous to us all than wise involvement.
Realize that our leaders have learned some deep lessons from our failure in Iraq, but more failure will be inevitable, some time, somewhere, because it's all a very complicated knot that must be carefully untied. Cutting the knot in half only doubles the complications because it creates two knots.
Don't buy into any statement from anyone who says they have a solution to the middle east.
There is no easy solution to be found, and such a statement only shows a lot of ignorance as to what the realities are there.
We won't be able to ever stay out of the region, period. No ifs ands or buts. The very best we can do is attempt to limit the instability a bit and hope our efforts work for a little while.
Eventually, there will be a new generation of strong man leaders who will more effectively stabilize the region. they will all be in it for themselves, and we will always have to deal with them, but the anarchy we're now seeing in Syria could happen anywhere there and and do away with years of our best efforts at any time.
And when anarchy takes over, it will always come knocking on our door right away. If you think Syria is bad, consider Egypt, which is over twice Syria's size in population. If you can think, such a thought should make you pale.
Choose a person who is alert, knows there are no simple solutions, and is able to keep a cool head. That's the best person for the job right now, whoever they may be.
You beg the question...why? If we pulled out completely and had no hand in the affairs of the ME, why would we be a target anymore? You have to assume they just hate us because we exist, which I don't believe. Maybe a few nuts, but not the majority. The majority hate us because we meddle in their affairs. Why do we have to? That question isn't answered in you lengthy and well thought response, but it's the most important question there is.
Moderator - Diabetes and Kentucky (including Lexington & Louisville)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
