Do you agree or disagree with this statement (details inside) regarding the Middle East?

Disagree. Instead of “must”, it “would be nice”. Apart from the fact that “the problems” is a bit vague, a lot of the problems are (going to be) problems for everybody all over the world. Sticking your head in the sand might feel good, but that doesn’t mean that the problem will solve itself.

Disagree. I would love to think the problems in the Middle East will stay in the Middle East and be solved in the Middle East. But, we already have ample evidence that is not true. State funded and equipped extremists will gladly disrupt Western activities any chance they get. The disruption can and will occur in many ways: fly commercial planes into buildings, soft target shoot-‘em-ups in shopping malls, bombs on commercial transportation, etc. Eventually there will be a (state funded) dirty bomb in a Western city.
Sadly, I don’t see a “good” solution.

I understand the logic used in the blog but the reality for me is that the US cant just sit back and remain passive while ISIS terrorists burn or dismember innocent victims at will.

Agree, reluctantly. I thought we were right to support the rebels in Egypt, Syria and Libya but now I am not so sure. Our intervention has caused chaos in the region, not to mention the intervention in Iraq with which I did not agree. Our interventions in the Middle East have led to the rise of extremism rather than the rise of extremism necessitating our interventions. We have deposed secular governments and paved the way for religious extremists. We don’t even care about these countries or the people who live in them and I am sure they know it.

I should elaborate on my earlier post: while I think “the people and leaders in the Middle East” and not the sole ones who should worry about and try to solve problems in the Middle East, that does not mean that everything countries outside the Middle East do is an appropriate solution. I am, however, utterly unqualified to determine what is and what is not a good solution.

Although it seems like I’m making the same point as @LuckyGuy, I think we disagree in how those problems apply to the rest of the world. I don’t actually think that terrorist attacks in the West will be a major problem, apart from what we do in response to that. I do think that human suffering in general is something humans in general should and do take to heart. Furthermore, human suffering is a breeding ground for future problems for other people in many, many ways as well.

The statement makes all the right noises, but ignores global realities.

I mean, that’s great if everyone outside the Mideast would agree to let the Mideast figure it out. But they won’t. Look at Russia trying to make inroads with Greece during the recent debt dispute.

If the US fails to maintain some kind of presence in the Mideast, another country with an agenda will take up the slack. Russia, most likely, but China and India are poised to be players.

Yes, the people of the Middle East must solve their own problems. They are the only ones who can. To believe that we, the US specifically, or the West at large, can solve their problems is the same blind hubris that’s gotten us into this mess in the first place. Anything we do there will only, and can only, add fuel to the fire.

State funded and equipped extremists will gladly disrupt Western activities any chance they get…fly commercial planes into buildings, soft target shoot-‘em-ups in shopping malls, bombs on commercial transportation

All those things happened and none were state funded.

ISIS is a big problem now because the state of Iraq was removed.

We have been bombing up to at least 8 countries for the past 13 or so years, yet we completely ignore the fact that maybe, just maybe, ISIS may be created from our constant bombing and overthrowing of governments in the middle east.
Notice how we focus on burning bodies and beheadings, but never do we see what happens when a drone drops a bomb and kills people. I’d imagine it’s about the same as burning and beheadings.
I’ll show you how clueless we are in America regarding our foreign policy.
Start asking people how many countries that we have been bombing. I guarantee you that a majority of people have no idea on what we have been doing in the Middle East.
We have a complete lack of empathy in this country.
I feel we should be focusing on Saudi Arabia and their funding of ISIS. Aren’t thy one of our biggest allies over there?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/10/drones-dream-yemeni-teenager-mohammed-tuaiman-death-cia-strike

Honestly, I think that the biggest problem with US policy is that they approach everything as middle-aged rich white Christian men. TPartyRUs

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, what the flock did George W. Bush (or his Dick, for that matter) know about being an Iraqi in Iraq??
Where are the Sunnis and Shiites in the State Department?

It seems like what the US does best is alienate those that they have the best chance of befriending. I just read David McCullough’s history of the Panama Canal, 1870–1914. In the beginning, Panama was part of Columbia and Columbia was one of out best buddies…even having patterned their government after the US. Impatient and wanting to save a few million dollars, the US threw Columbia over, backed an insurgency in Panama and basically stole Panama from Columbia. South America has been distrustful of the US since.

“Big Stick” diplomacy.
BS is right.

“Not to put too fine a point on it, but, what the flock did George W. Bush (or his Dick, for that matter) know about being an Iraqi in Iraq??”

One thing they knew was billions of dollars in no-bid government contracts for Dick’s company Haliburton.

The premise that folks in the Middle East must solve their own problems is all well and good. The idea that they might confine the turmoil to their own neighborhood while achieving this is clearly not in the cards. Our bungling in the region has handed Isis and anyone else who is miserable and frustrated with more than ample excuse to pin (right or wrong) blame squarely on us. It is important to understand that it no longer matters WHICH excuse for WHICH issue is given for the upcoming slaughters, beheadings, bombings, kidnappings etc. All of it is about misery and the underlying message is “YOU will feel OUR pain”

It’s no surprise that there is mounting pressure in the Congress to insert troops once again into the meat grinder that is the Middle East. And of course it is always the conservatives ready to jump the gun. This country pays an awful price for sending shallow empty headed people to our seat of government, but then again, who better to represent an empty headed populace?

I suppose Isolationism is a valid theory. We did that before WWII and it worked for us for a while. I can’t help but wonder at what point do we get involved. Do we allow a nuclear arms race in the Middle East? Do we respond if there is another 9/11 style attack? Is there any humanitarian abuse that would justify any involvement?

There seems little doubt that if we stay out entirely, eventually the strongest country or military force will prevail. I wonder who they will align with, certainly not us. I also wonder if merely taking control of the Middle East will be enough. Might they want to expand beyond those Borders? If they do where does it go and where does it end. Problems can sometimes solve themselves but this seems very risky.

There are really only 2 solutions to stability in the region. The first and cheapest remedy is of course iron fisted brutal repressive dictatorship ala Sadam and Khadaffi. The second involves providing economic viability for the millions of frustrated jobless people with no foreseeable future.

Well certainly the several decades-old method of creating power vacuums has worked out well for us. Let’s continue it.

A power vacuum is always created when we don’t finish what we start. If we take out the existing authority and don’t replace it with a new stable authority, those power figures that are left will fight toi gain control until a new repressive brutal authority is created to replace the old.

@stanleybmanly we can’t even do that for ourselves, how can we do it for others. I agree however. It would be nice to be able to show what we can do and have them follow by example.

@Jaxk we started years ago and are no closer to a solution. My thoughts are because we are really not interested in the welfare of the region only how much we can suck out of it.
Also, our last attempt to finish what we started and replace a repressive dictatorship with a new stable authority did not, or rather is no going so well is it? What in our foreign policy has changed to make you believe we will get it right next time?

@rojo – Not a thing.

@Jaxk

Your post highlights the problem. We think we can move in on a country, create a vacuum there and fill that vacuum with our puppets. This has never worked for us. Even when we do install the government of our choosing they are soon removed by their own people or, at best, their power is gravely challenged (usually leading to them only having nominal control over their country).

@Darth_Algar – I have to agree in some part with your statement but I don’t think we have to try and fill the vacuum with our puppets. Unfortunately sometimes (especially in the Middle East) we are better off letting some fairly unsavory people take power. We have supported or at least been friendly with, some successful governments. Mubarak for instance ruled Egypt from 1981 and we were friendly with him. Hell we even helped Saddam during his war with Iran. Even Gaddafi was working with us, why we took him out is a mystery to me.

What seems obvious is that we can’t force a democracy on people that have no clue how it even works. I do however believe we can provide some support for a regime or leader that may be inclined to work with us, even if that person is brutal. For instance I would support the Kurds in their fight against ISIS and I wouldn’t object too loudly if we decided to work with Al-Assad against ISIS. I would put boots on the ground but there are lots of ways to support someone that might be in our best interest.

Sorry, that should have been “I would not put boots on the ground”.

@Jaxk
Don’t forget about bin Laden possibly being funded and trained by the CIA.

@Jaxk

Yeah, we don’t have to try and install our own puppets, but that’s usually what we do. Sounds like you and I are pretty much in agreement here though.

It’s too complicated for such a blanket statement. In principle, I think local problems in the Middle East should be resolved by the people who live in those communities. There are a number of times when I believe we have made a grave error when we’ve interfered. However, our interference has escalated some of those problems and we can’t now back out and leave those affected to resolve escalating and ongoing conflict.

In addition, the problems in the Middle East are now manifesting themselves in countries outside of that region through terrorist actions. And the citizens from other countries going to that region to fight or to support factions in other ways. The conflict is no longer isolated to the Middle East.

Ah, the United States…fucking world police.

@Earthbound_Misfit Here’s a blanket statement for you. The turmoil and unraveling of the region is a direct consequence of the decision to invade Iraq. It IS and (and we should all pray that it remains) this country’s greatest strategic blunder.

I agree. But after causing the mess I don’t think we can wash our hands of it. Any assistance provided should be provided cautiously and only with agreement from within the region. However, as I said, the shit we’ve whipped up is no longer limited to the Middle East. We’ve opened Pandora’s Box. Whether Western nations want to be involved or not may end up being out of our hands. I’m not in the US by the way and I certainly don’t agree with aggressive military action and I didn’t agree with such action in the past.

Sooner or later,our hand will be forced. By “our”, I’m referring to Western powers in general. One reason I’ve been screaming for 11 years that the war is our greatest blunder is because unlike the war in Vietnam (which prior to Iraq, was the champ.) the current events WILL be defined as episodes in a “holy war”. The puny percentage of the world’s Muslim population pushing these disruptions have it within their power to define their “struggle” as such, and it’s a definition that’s gonna stick.
Any Muslim in the world with any complaint from a toothache to a barren wife will be goaded toward blaming the “infidels” and joining up. It’s an open invitation to the world’s mentally unstable and psychopaths everywhere, and already the conversion to Islam by the mentally troubled is through the roof. Regardless of any resolution to the current struggles on the ground in the middle East, the elevation of Islam’s “lunatic fringe” to world wide attention assures us a future war of never ending world wide atrocities. It is all but guaranteed to be a war without end, with profound implications regarding everything from the elimination of our civil liberties to billions tossed down the toilet for stupid ineffectual “security” measures.

But back to the ground war. Our hand will be forced, but any proposed introduction of significant numbers of troops will amount to political suicide for those responsible (another consequence of the war in Iraq). I suspect that there is going to be a fundamental realignment of relationships in the region (to the great alarm and consternation of Israel), because the SOLE power remaining in the region with the competence and capability to exterminate Isis is Iran.

I don’t think we disagree with each other @stanleybmanly. The shit has already hit the fan.

I agree with your second paragraph too. I think the situation in the Lindt cafe in Sydney is a perfect example of this. However, I also think governments will use such activity to cull civil rights and justify any action they take and that’s going to further fuel unrest and disharmony.

We’re increasingly seeing reports of young people, male and female, travelling to fight with (or against but mostly for) Daesh. Eventually, if they’re not killed will these fighters return to France, Britain, the US, Australia and how will that affect future conflicts? I don’t know but I can’t see any good coming of it.

And I agree that eventually our hand will be forced and there will be a realignment of relationships in the region.

So I return to my opening sentence that the situation is too complex for that one statement to be the answer.

@stanleybmanly

What about Saudi Arabia? Apparently, they have the worlds fourth largest military. Why are they being ignored when in comes to ISIS?