Can we "fix" the Middle East?

[Rainsford]

I was having a spirited discussion earlier today with an ROTC Army student here at my college, and he said something I thought was interesting. He kept talking about how we really need to push ahead so we can bring democracy and freedom to the Middle East. Ignoring for a moment that I don't believe that should be our job, is that even something we can do...or are we going to screw ourselves over "pushing ahead" in our campaign to fight "terror"?

I asked him this and all he would say is that they want to be free from terror and we need to send the right message that we're going to "fix" the Middle East. We already agree we disagree on that, but what I want to know is if we can even "win" the war Bush has committed us to, and seems determined to push ahead with. No matter how right we are, right never helped anyone win anything. Do we have the ability to change and entire section of the world that is pretty much the opposite of what we want?

To explain why I'm thinking this...one of my concerns about Bush is that I don't think he's EVER going to admit he made a wrong decision because he feels "our cause is just". Personally I think that's like throwing good money after bad at the poker tables, which is why I am more comfortable with a leader who's willing to admit it's time to fold. I realize not everyone agrees with me, and I don't really want to debate that, but I'm curious if people are maybe so convinced we'll win that they don't mind Bush being ultra committed. Or perhaps no one has thought about it...?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Topic Title: Can we "fix" the Middle East?
Topic Summary: Or did we bite off more than we can chew?

Unless we invade, occupy and take over every Middle East Country we have bitten off more than we can chew.

 

[biostud]

Even though I think there's great deal of the popualtions that want democracy, I'm pretty sure they don't wan't to have it "fixed" by the US Army.

 

[Todd33]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/w.../britain_iraq_03.shtml

Under strong pressure from the United States, a sort of compromise was evolved whereby Britain and France were given mandates for the administration of these provinces, under international supervision, by the League of Nations. The Arabs claimed this was a veiled colonialism, because there was only an indefinite promise of independence.

Indiscriminate air power was used to quell the revolt of the region's tribesmen, methods the British admitted did not win them friends and, as one of them said, implanted undying hatred of the British among the people of the area, and a desire for revenge.

The mandate united the three disparate provinces under the imported Hashimite King Faisal, from the Hijaz region of Arabia. Apart from its natural geographical differences, the new Iraq was a complex mix of ethnic and religious groups. In particular the rebellious Kurds in the north had little wish to be ruled from Baghdad, while in the south the tribesmen and Shi's had a similar abhorrence of central control. In implementing their mandate, the British had certainly sown the seeds of future unrest.

Worked out well in 1920, I'm sure it will go fantasic now. How about we stop supporting oppresive regimes for cheap oil and let them tend to their own future?

 

[b0mbrman]

The Middle East has many more problems than we created or can fix w/regard to resources

 

[morkinva]

another ROTC hypnosis success !

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: morkinva
another ROTC hypnosis success !

Normally I don't discuss politics with people in the military, because some of them can get a little, um, in your face if you disagree with them. This guy did get me thinking about this in a new way though...not the pro-Bush way he intended, but thinking is good, right?

 

[0marTheZealot]

ROTC stands for Retard of the Corps.

Maybe if we didn't prop and support corrupt dictators and finance wars in the ME, we might have better clout in that region. Stop breaking democracies and start installing them.

 

[Moonbeam]

Physician heal thyself.

 

[ntdz]

i honestly believe the only way to "fix" the middle east is bring prosperity there. Democracy is part of it, but not all of it. Get people jobs, get them busy doing something instead of being pissed off at everyone and blaming the USA for their problems. That's the only way to fix the middle east, besides killing them all, which would bring worst consequences.

 

[Vic]

Can we "fix" the Middle East?

The real question IMO is should we bother? They don't seem to want to be "fixed" any more than a dog does.

 

[Infohawk]

Here's how you fix the middle east, stop giving Israel everything they want. You can't let one theocracy go nuclear and condemn the others. If you support Israel's colonialism, clearly the other countries are going to remain in a state of antagonism.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: ntdz
i honestly believe the only way to "fix" the middle east is bring prosperity there. Democracy is part of it, but not all of it. Get people jobs, get them busy doing something instead of being pissed off at everyone and blaming the USA for their problems. That's the only way to fix the middle east, besides killing them all, which would bring worst consequences.

I agree that prosperity for the people there would be good...but the question is whether we can bring that to them, or is it something we don't have the power to fix and they will have to do for themselves?

 

[Czar]

for any change to last then there are only two ways either a huge invasion on every middle east country and stripping them of their identity and willpower.. or let time take its course like could have happened with iran and still could

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: ntdz
i honestly believe the only way to "fix" the middle east is bring prosperity there. Democracy is part of it, but not all of it. Get people jobs, get them busy doing something instead of being pissed off at everyone and blaming the USA for their problems. That's the only way to fix the middle east, besides killing them all, which would bring worst consequences.

bingo
ie. my second option

 

[arsbanned]

I don't believe the populations of the Middle East *WANT* democracy. Why should we assume they want democracy? WHy should the U.S. dictate what people will do? Yeah, we are in deep trouble. Regardless of who wins the WH this time around, we are in deep trouble.

 

[Grunt03]

NO I have been to the country and have seen with my own eyes. The majority of the people would like to have freedom but they will never fight for it. At the first sign of resistance they will runaway and join the other side. Please do not get me wrong, there are good people there which I have come to respect. No amount of money or thousands of troops being sent will tame the country. Civial unrest is a way of life, their laws are different, let alone their culture. I truely think we have bitten off way more than we can ever handle.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Vic

Can we "fix" the Middle East?

The real question IMO is should we bother? They don't seem to want to be "fixed" any more than a dog does.

Do you know they? Do you know anything about they? Obviously not.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Grunt03
NO I have been to the country and have seen with my own eyes. The majority of the people would like to have freedom but they will never fight for it. At the first sign of resistance they will runaway and join the other side. Please do not get me wrong, there are good people there which I have come to respect. No amount of money or thousands of troops being sent will tame the country. Civial unrest is a way of life, their laws are different, let alone their culture. I truely think we have bitten off way more than we can ever handle.

Of course. If you fight for your freedom you will be shot and killed. Look at China and how well they have been able to keep their ways for such a long time. They have strict rules and punishments. Things in China have changed a little, but 10 years ago would you have the guts to stand up to the Chinese government? The people would rather live than to die. Why die when you know your fight will do no good?

There are some free Muslim countries that can set a good example for the middle east. Sadly, none of those Muslim countries are even in the M.E.

What about Egypt/Jordan/Lebanon/Morocco? Do those these countries need a regime change? I do not know much about their current regimes, but it looks like they are almost democratic. Jordan is run by a King, but how much power does he have and is he a good leader?

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: ntdz
i honestly believe the only way to "fix" the middle east is bring prosperity there.

Prosperity? The UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and a few others have a GDPPC hovering around those of developed European and Asian countries and yet respond in similar numbers to opinion polls w/questions regarding the US

It's not a lack of money that broke the Middle East.

In fact, I think you could argue that money is at the root of the problem. The Middle East was changing at a safe, steady rate before oil money hyper-accelerated everything.

 

[lordtyranus]

We need middle east oil, so I support fixing whatever we can.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus
We need middle east oil, so I support fixing whatever we can.

What if this involves getting Israel to be fair and give up their nukes? If all you want is oil then cutting Israel loose is the easiest way to do that.

 

[cwjerome]

I would say the Middle East needs to fix itself, but this will require help, especially from the US.

The Middle East will get better... it's just a matter of how soon and how hard the world makes it.

Similar topic thread "Planet America"