The next American president should disengage from the Middle East

[GW in Ohio]

There are two important things we should have learned from Mr. Bush's disastrous attempt at regime change in Iraq:

1. We should not be involved in the Middle East militarily, and we should only be peripherally involved at the diplomatic level. Our involvements there have fueled an enormous tidal wave of anti-American and anti-Western sentiment. They hate us in the Arab world and they also mistrust us; our credibility in the region is close to zero. Our continued involvement there only serves as a recruiting booster for al Qaeda and the other radical Islamist groups.

2. Our dependence on Middle Eastern oil is the reason we feel compelled to be involved in the politics of the region. So we have to stop depending on Middle East oil. We have the technology now to implement alternative sources of power for our automobiles. We need to use the power of government to support and encourage electric cars, hydrogen fuel cells, ethanol and other alternative fuels. The next American president has to inform Americans that their love affair with gas-guzzling, high-powered cars is over.

The next American president needs to dissociate him or herself from the Bush foreign policy. The next American president has to declare that we will stop meddling in the Middle East and let the region take its own natural course. (As the Bush foreign policy has shown, the region will take its own course whether we are involved or not.)

Israel has demonstrated since 1947 that it can take care of itself, so there is no compelling reason for us to be involved militarily. The next American president should be prepared to tell the Jewish lobby to sit down and shut up.

Is there a presidential candidate with the intestinal fortitude to do all this?

[Monkeybone]

should we just go back to isolationism(?) like we were before Pearl Harbor? would that work?

[GW in Ohio]

should we just go back to isolationism(?) like we were before Pearl Harbor? would that work?

No, not isolationism. We should be actively involved in the rest of the world.

But the Middle East is different. They're basically crazy over there. They're consumed by hatred and violence. Right now, we're providing them with a target and a focus for their rage.

If we leave, they will turn on one another. That is what I mean by letting things take their natural course over there.

[Monkeybone]

gotcha. just stop policing. i agree with that.

but how do we appease their hatred and such? we can't just be politically nice and hope that they get warm & fuzzy feelings for us

[GW in Ohio]

gotcha. just stop policing. i agree with that.

but how do we appease their hatred and such? we can't just be politically nice and hope that they get warm & fuzzy feelings for us

They'll never like us, but if we disengage from the region and stop acting like the Romans trying to pacify Gaul, we'll at least remove their major rationale for attacking us.

Now, I'm not saying that disengaging from the ME would mean an end to terrorism. But over time, as they see that we have disengaged and are leaving the ME to work things out for itself, their desire to destroy us will diminish.

What does "working things out for itself" mean? It means that without the Great Satan (i.e., us) to provide a target and focus for their hate, they'll turn on each other. The Sunnis and Shiites have some issues to work out.....

[Pale Rider]

They'll never like us, but if we disengage from the region and stop acting like the Romans trying to pacify Gaul, we'll at least remove their major rationale for attacking us.

Now, I'm not saying that disengaging from the ME would mean an end to terrorism. But over time, as they see that we have disengaged and are leaving the ME to work things out for itself, their desire to destroy us will diminish.

What does "working things out for itself" mean? It means that without the Great Satan (i.e., us) to provide a target and focus for their hate, they'll turn on each other. The Sunnis and Shiites have some issues to work out.....


I disagree. It just isn't going to happen that way. We weren't anywhere near these fanatic cold blooded killers before 9/11. If we leave, we'll just give them an oil rich country to take over and train their new terrorists in, so that they can hit us again. The six terrorists just arrrested at Fort Dix had nothing to do with them over there, and they STILL wanted to mass kill soilders here. No, I believe we'll be fighting these crazed islamo zealots no matter what we do.

[Monkeybone]

aggre Pale.

yes they hate us for the war, but mostly what we stand for. they hate us cause we let our women run loose and have christians and jews and do not believe what they do.

[avatar4321]

You realize the only reason we are dependent on Middle eastern oil is because environmentalist wackos like yourself have been preventing any sort of exploration, drilling, refining etc of oil in the United States dont you?

[Yurt]

No, not isolationism. We should be actively involved in the rest of the world.

But the Middle East is different. They're basically crazy over there. They're consumed by hatred and violence. Right now, we're providing them with a target and a focus for their rage.

If we leave, they will turn on one another. That is what I mean by letting things take their natural course over there.

Right now? What about 1993 WTC? Let's go back to Islam's evil foundation 1400 years ago. You think "now" matters? You need to understand the enemy a bit more. Their goal is only one thing:

the world and it subjugated to Islamic rule


I challenge you to find any muslim who believes otherwise. Why? Because the Quran says it must be so.

[Nuc]

No, not isolationism. We should be actively involved in the rest of the world.

But the Middle East is different. They're basically crazy over there. They're consumed by hatred and violence. Right now, we're providing them with a target and a focus for their rage.

If we leave, they will turn on one another. That is what I mean by letting things take their natural course over there.

Yes and the fact that they are crazy proves that Britain was idiotic setting up Israel there. Should have been in Greenland or the middle of the Australian desert.

[Nuc]

You realize the only reason we are dependent on Middle eastern oil is because environmentalist wackos like yourself have been preventing any sort of exploration, drilling, refining etc of oil in the United States dont you?

Either that or because every slutty soccer mom in the US thinks it's her RIGHT to drive a Hummer to the grocery store and to pick up Buffy from ballet school.

[Dilloduck]

Either that or because every slutty soccer mom in the US thinks it's her RIGHT to drive a Hummer to the grocery store and to pick up Buffy from ballet school.

LOL right---that's gotta be it. :lol:

[nevadamedic]

There are two important things we should have learned from Mr. Bush's disastrous attempt at regime change in Iraq:

1. We should not be involved in the Middle East militarily, and we should only be peripherally involved at the diplomatic level. Our involvements there have fueled an enormous tidal wave of anti-American and anti-Western sentiment. They hate us in the Arab world and they also mistrust us; our credibility in the region is close to zero. Our continued involvement there only serves as a recruiting booster for al Qaeda and the other radical Islamist groups.

2. Our dependence on Middle Eastern oil is the reason we feel compelled to be involved in the politics of the region. So we have to stop depending on Middle East oil. We have the technology now to implement alternative sources of power for our automobiles. We need to use the power of government to support and encourage electric cars, hydrogen fuel cells, ethanol and other alternative fuels. The next American president has to inform Americans that their love affair with gas-guzzling, high-powered cars is over.

The next American president needs to dissociate him or herself from the Bush foreign policy. The next American president has to declare that we will stop meddling in the Middle East and let the region take its own natural course. (As the Bush foreign policy has shown, the region will take its own course whether we are involved or not.)

Israel has demonstrated since 1947 that it can take care of itself, so there is no compelling reason for us to be involved militarily. The next American president should be prepared to tell the Jewish lobby to sit down and shut up.

Is there a presidential candidate with the intestinal fortitude to do all this?

once again, another user on crack.

[gabosaurus]

I disagree. It just isn't going to happen that way. We weren't anywhere near these fanatic cold blooded killers before 9/11. If we leave, we'll just give them an oil rich country to take over and train their new terrorists in, so that they can hit us again. The six terrorists just arrrested at Fort Dix had nothing to do with them over there, and they STILL wanted to mass kill soilders here. No, I believe we'll be fighting these crazed islamo zealots no matter what we do.

Pale, they already have several oil-rich countries to train new terrorists in. If we disengage from the Middle East, it gives us more manpower to protect our own country from attack.We can't be fighting in every country on the globe, despite the ConRep lust for mass casualties.

[Monkeybone]

it's hard to protect the country Gabs when the ones that would do such things come into our country and look like cilivians and kill innocents and non-combatants.