If we were to abandon all allies in the middle east, would the region become peaceful?

Posted by: Mathgeekjoe

  • Yes, it would become peaceful.

  • No, it would still be violent.

14% 3 votes
86% 19 votes
  • Matters of this region were and are being intervened too much.

  • I believe that if all outside countries let their allies go then the region will gradually stabilize, with nothing to raise hate against, terrorist groups world gradually lose power. There would be setbacks, but the region would eventually stabilize. It would help if the oil was fully depleted

  • It would be more peaceful, but violence will always lurk around the corner. Still doesn't justify any intervention, however.

  • It would be even more violent, the USA gives aid to israel, saudi arabia and egypt so abandoning them wouldn't be a good idea.

  • The region was a mess before we got there, it will still be a mess if we leave. We may have thrown a couple logs onto the fire, but to quote Billy Joel, "We didn't start the Fire".

  • At least we wouldn't be wasting our men and money trying to protect nations that do nothing for us.

  • The only reason our allies in the region would be peaceful would be that the radicals killed them all and moved on to other regions.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
briantheliberal says2015-04-24T22:19:46.1517754-05:00
Not even close. The damage is already done.
TBR says2015-04-24T22:23:11.7651636-05:00
This has been a topic between Mathgeek and I. This is a slight strawman of the overall argument, but the question works. My basic contention is that all efforts that include military solutions have exacerbated the situation. Mujahideen -> Al-Qaeda -> Al-Qaeda in iraq -> ISIL etc. We, as all the "peace crowd" said, you cant kill them all, and will just make more, and more radical terrorists.
PetersSmith says2015-04-24T22:25:29.9779794-05:00
TBR: You can't kill them all. You're underestimating our capabilities.
TBR says2015-04-24T22:41:41.3580452-05:00
Lets say you could kill all existing "radicals", do you think that would be the end of it? No others would take their place?
TBR says2015-04-24T22:43:20.4617870-05:00
Say we kill all radicals, but not their children. They sure have motive, so we got to get them in there too. Their family that live in Europe. Well, got to get them too. Genocide, would that be the end? That does not work. If we took THAT route, I would take up arms against the governments of the west.
TheMarquis says2015-04-25T00:11:48.7652688-05:00
This question doesn't make a lot of sense. Our being in the Middle East has relatively little to do with our allies. Turkey can handle themselves. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have enough oil money to hire our population worth of mercenaries if things got too bad on their end. Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan largely want us to stop bombing random bits of their country claiming that we will occasionally hit a terrorist. And Israel is so not in any trouble right now. Nobody in the area likes them, but nobody is attacking them either. You can yell, "HAMAS" all day, but no, Palestine is not harboring any real threat to Israel as of now. They are clinging to a radical group because that's what people do when frightened. American leaders have their own reasons for entering the Middle East. So this poll is asking the wrong question.
biggest_pro_going says2015-04-25T08:31:01.8165830-05:00
Israel could beat all the Arab nations in a war, Americas oil suppliers (the gulf-Yemen) would be fine and that's about it. But the USA has already destroyed the place due to an array of stupid reasons.
TBR says2015-04-25T10:09:13.0255850-05:00
One of the things I see is young people, say 20 and under, have no recollection of NOT being at war in the middle-east. It is the status quo, so imagining any other solution is difficult. Civilian body counts as normal as any other bit of news. We are near 150k civilians killed in the area WE ARE PURPORTEDLY in to help keep safe! What makes anyone think more of the same will improve the situation? If you feel for the innocents of these countries, lets work for a solution that does not include more of the same.
biggest_pro_going says2015-04-25T11:59:16.4479925-05:00
Didn't start the fire? The US started multiple fires. Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya and now Yemen is being set alight.
Texas14 says2015-04-25T16:08:52.0542998-05:00
We can stop giving aid to Israel without abandoning them. That would actually help us earn respect in the region.
Welliss says2015-04-25T20:36:27.3254536-05:00
@biggest_pro_going, The U.S didn't start the war in Afghanistan. The Fundamentalists were active long before Uncle Sam showed up. The U.S started activity in the region near the end(?) of the Cold War. The USSR had set up a communist regime in the region and were trying to spread it. A civil war of sorts was going on as the first Fundamentalist rebels were trying to establish their own regime there with the soviets trying to defeat them. The U.S had to pick sides in the fight and because the Fundamentalist organization was not very strong at the time, you can guess who they sent support to. The Russians ended up withdrawing there support from the region after Gorbachev's election. The Afghanistan up being a free for all of warlords, remaining communists, democrats and Fundamentalists.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-25T20:40:52.2347302-05:00
I don't think the US caused the problem in Syria either.
58539672 says2015-04-25T22:08:46.7719504-05:00
@biggest_pro_going You really do have selective reading don't you. How about you read the beginning of my post before commenting on the ending. And the only conflict that you listed that actually started with direct US involvement was Iraq. Every other one had conflict occurring before the US got involved.
TBR says2015-04-25T22:15:41.2103801-05:00
I think many in the middle east would trace US intervention to May 14, 1948, and Western powers from well before WWII.
58539672 says2015-04-25T22:19:52.3238206-05:00
@TBR the middle east fell into chaos after the Ottoman Empire collapsed. Its been that way ever since.
TBR says2015-04-25T22:22:44.6847318-05:00
It has been a mess forever. The British carved up what we think of now as these countries. We have been pissing them off for a very long time now, and I think its high time we just stop.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-25T22:35:23.8766889-05:00
Stopping does stop them from being pissed off.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-25T22:35:39.8356935-05:00
Doesn't* typo sorry
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-25T22:37:41.9852595-05:00
Your estimate of them being mad is about 75 years. Angry people can do a lot in 75 years expectantly in today's fast pace dworld.
Mathgeekjoe says2015-04-25T22:38:05.6351627-05:00
Sorry for the D before the word, typo.
biggest_pro_going says2015-04-26T05:05:09.8897016-05:00
Wow, stupid America, at ease
biggest_pro_going says2015-04-26T05:10:53.7025094-05:00
I will take you out 1 by 1. Well a US did start a war in Afghanistan. It didn't start the SOVIET invasion of Afghanistan. Key word there. It did however intervene (naturally) in it and funded extremist groups. The soviets were bad but the Taliban are worse. The US also was at war with Afghanistan for about 10 years. Fighting an enemy they created.
biggest_pro_going says2015-04-26T05:17:48.3982237-05:00
" actually started with direct US involvement was Iraq"- Also Libya. The US also messed up Iran by creating a coo and putting a pro American dictator in who the people hated. Then when Iran eventually broke free America funded Iraq in a war against it and then started to sanction it and make it look evil. Just because you start it does not mean you cant make it much worse like in Syria.
biggest_pro_going says2015-04-26T05:18:00.6455378-05:00
Rant over
58539672 says2015-04-26T14:51:56.2456442-05:00
@biggest_pro_going Afghanistan was a conflict that started when the soviet union invaded the country and established their own communist government. The US later funded several militia groups, including the Taliban, who would later seize the country from the pro-russian government after the soviets withdrew. The US would later invade because the Taliban refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden and his lieutenants after 9/11. Libya and Syria are both conflicts that started after the Arab Spring. The US did not get involved until their revolutions were already underway. Yemen and Egypt are two nations that were effected by the Arab Spring that the US didn't get involved with (yet). And Iran was allies with the US back during WW2 because the Shah, the ruler of Iran at the time, thought we were better than the British and Russians. When Mohammad Mosaddegh started nationalizing Iran's oil industry, which was controlled by the British for much of their history, MI6 tried to remove him from power. They were unable to handle the matter by themselves however and looked to the CIA to assist. At first the US was against it, until the Eisenhower administration came in and was persuaded to help the British. You should know the rest of the story. Iraq is the only middle eastern conflict that the US started from scratch. They rest were already underway when we got involved.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.