First off, a statement of the obvious: the Middle East is one messed up place. I think we can all agree upon that. And no matter what anyone has done, peace in that region has been a fairy tale dream at best; a major catastrophe of "biblical" proportions at worst.
I keep wondering why we are so heavily invested in trying to barter peace there. The Left says that it is all about oil. The Right says we need so support our allies there. In one sense, they are both right. In another, I think they are standing on flimsy arguments. Let's take a look at the Left's side of it first.
Oil. Black gold. Texas "T". (Wait, did I just alienate some of my readers? Sorry 'bout that. Guess I'll have to go dunk my head in the ol' "cement pond".) No matter what Earth Day advocates have said, oil is still this nation's blood. No other energy source even comes close to the power and convenience of oil. We, in the United States, used to produce most of what we needed ourselves. Thus the "Texas 'T'" reference. But costs to produce it here have become so astronomical that it became cheaper to import it. That's where the Middle East comes in. That area of the world is one of the areas we get it. It's not the only place, but any drop in production there has a significant enough impact upon our nation that we will do anything to keep it flowing. Even poke our heads in wars of solely religious significance to those who live there.
Now, the Right says that we are there to support our allies. You know, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the on-again-off-again love affair with Iraq and Iran.
When we went into Iraq under President G.W. Bush, we were going in based on "supposed" Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Saddam Hussein even used them on his neighbor (Kuwait). We had "Intelligence" reports (I put that in quotation marks to signify that I question the validity of the existence of governmental "intelligence") that said he had them. After much feet dragging with the useless entity known as the United Nations, we finally went in to find that no, he didn't have any. "Bush lied / People died" became the chant of the left. But did he really lie?
Saddam DID indeed have WMDs. I'm not going to argue what happened to them during the foot dragging. That's not the issue. He DID have them. How do I know? Let me ask you a question: Where do you think he got them? Saddam was put in power by the U.S. as an "ally". We supplied him with the weapons to protect him from his neighbors. Do you honestly believe that Iraq had the technical knowledge to actually create and store such weapons? Really? Hell, even Iran - the country most-likely-to-get-a-nuke relies heavily on Russia for weapons. Most of the weapons these countries use are stamped "Made in" some other country than their own.
Which brings me to the whole "ally" argument of the Right. Why do we consider those religious nut jobs our allies in the first place? If we, the U.S., were to be invaded by a hostile nation, do you think any of those nations are going to send troops over here to support us?!? Yet, we send our troops there to protect them. Why? I'll tell you why: those nations are not our allies - they are our vendors. Our suppliers. I'd like to see the cost analysis comparing the cost of producing our own oil, or obtaining from non-hostile environments, versus the cost in weapons, aid, and the lives of our troops (yeah, place a dollar amount on THAT) currently spent.
"But J.P., Israel is not a source of oil. They ARE our ally." Israel "needs" our support. Is it really supporting them that when they are attacked we help barter a TEMPORARY cease fire that their enemies have CONSISTENTLY broken? You want to support Israel? Let them take care of themselves. They are fully capable of doing it on their own. Sure, that means those attacking them will have civilian casualties. In war they are called "collateral damage". If those civilians are in support of their government attacking Israel, they cannot be considered innocent civilians. If those civilians are not in support of their government attacking Israel, they have the responsibility to do something about that government.
I've read that the worst kind of call to respond to for the police is a domestic dispute. There's something to that.
As I mentioned above, those in the Middle East are fighting over religious differences. Do you realize, that before the Islamic takeover of those nations (think: sharia law), Muslims in that area were the leaders in technological and scientific advancements? Not so much any more. Their religious system has stifled any growth in those nations. And they want to force everyone else to follow suit. According to them, Israel has no right to exist. I've read the bible. It's hard to make the argument whether they have the right to that land or not. But they've been there for years. Should they now be kicked out because it belonged to someone else years ago? Let me ask my fellow Americans specifically: Would you move out of your house freely and hand your land over to the Native Americans/Indians/whatever-is-PC who lived there before? Do you think Alaska needs to go back to Russia? Heck, it was their land before it was our land.
This is a religious war. I say leave them alone and let the best God win.
© Emittravel 2014
