2006-07-19 13:28:08 · 9 answers · asked by prettyqbee07 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Yes, but only to spank Israel for being misbehaving considering she won't listen to anyone else.
2006-07-19 16:11:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry to tell you , but the US is already involved with the feud in the Middle East. How could they not be, when they are the MAIN suppliers of the weapons the Israeli soldiers use??? And Bush staying quiet about this proves that he really couldn't care less about the killing and murdering going on in the Middle East.
2006-07-20 00:38:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i truly hope this question is posted by an american... if it is, thank you for asking your question - if fact, ANY QUESTION about u.s. involvement in the middle east.
"involved"? ...hezbolah was founded during the latter half of the u.s. occupation of lebannon? ...due to the history of colonialism, many countries are still suspicious about outsiders (u.s. included) in the region's politics. and why should they continue to be weary?.... hmmmmm.... in the case of the u.s....
the u.s. backed - financially and militarily - antisoviet forces in afgahnistan. that "rebel force" - "freedom fighters" - is now called al queda.
...the bush administration pressured the syrians to leave lebannon, now the syrians can't reign hezbolah back.
...and let's not mention, how/ why hezbolah received enough support from syria and iran. ...let me give you a clue... it has something to do with u.s. involvement in the region.
"involved"? ...are you talking about the u.s. role in destabilizing the region when u.s. forces stormed iraq under false pretenses? ...or are you talking about the bush adminstration's less than showcase-stellar ways in strong-arming iran to cease its nuclear program?
"involved"? ...so far, in terms of the isreali - hezbolah conflict, bush's "official involvement" has been to send mid-level dignitaries... he is wait until NEXT WEEK to send the secretary of state...
for the first time in history, the u.s. did not immediately instigate diplomacy once violence errupted.
...so far, bush and his adminstration has been busy pointing fingers - the only thing they CAN do because the u.s. is stretched way too thin to deploy any troops due to afgahnistan & iraq (which is, by the way, right next to iran).
...how would the u.s. react if "the enemy" invaded either canada or mexico? ...hmmmmmm... does the cuban missle crisis and bay of pigs ring any bells?
should the u.s. get involved?
NO!
,,,but since they - the bush administration - can't seem to help themselves?
...HELL YES the u.s. needs to get involved!
the u.s. needs to clean up the bloody mess they've made!
2006-07-19 13:33:25 · answer #3 · answered by Cassor 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
PPl get mad at the iraqs Y they R killing there husbands and there children and stuff. when your acually killing your own loved1 bcuz UR the 1 who is voting 4 bush who is sending ppl to war if u ask me Bush is afraid.afraid to loose.
2006-07-19 13:40:18 · answer #4 · answered by jordanian_muslim 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not,,the United Nations and European Union, Arab Nations should take the lead on this one.
2006-07-19 13:34:18 · answer #5 · answered by Irene T 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not? We can't keep our nose out of anything.....
2006-07-19 13:31:52 · answer #6 · answered by Dusty 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell no we already messed up iraq
2006-07-19 13:39:53 · answer #7 · answered by themailman562_13 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we should use this opportunty to bomb iran
2006-07-19 13:42:33 · answer #8 · answered by skihippy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
USA help Israel? They are winning. Duh! WTF for?
2006-07-19 16:32:12 · answer #9 · answered by al_dickey 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋