Yes the wars would still be taking palce as they would really want their land back don't you think? We should not return to the middle east. Everyone hates us as it is!
2006-07-25 20:21:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by Folded Paper Figures 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Although it's true that a unified presence, such as the British Empire, would negate most of the problems that are now present, that presence alone would cause problems in its own right. Personally I feel that the British Empire was, overall, a good thing for the Middle East, however some of the policies undertaken at that time of the Suez Crisis made their position untenable and forced them to withdraw form the region.
Should the UK return to the Middle East? No, their history in the region would only cause to inflame matters and would probably only lead to even greater problems later on.
2006-07-26 03:39:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by reaper8436247 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There were British protectorates in the Middle East, but none of the nations there were ever part of the British Empire. They simply do not have the financial or military resources to make a big difference now. Do a web search on the Ottoman Empire to see who was the biggest influence in the Middle East in recent history.
2006-07-26 04:35:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since Britain is basically responsible for the creation of the state of Israel (it could not have been done without Britain's consent), then you could argue that there wouldn't be all these wars now. On the other hand, since the state of Israel came about because of terrorist activity on the part of the Israelis, you could argue that if it hadn't happened then Israeli freedom fighters might still be waging a war of independence.
There is no place for unilateral intervention in the region from anyone, including the UK. There is a strong argument that perhaps a UN peacekeeping force could be used, but that can only happen with the consent of both sides, which has never been possible, and still looks exceedingly unlikely.
2006-07-26 03:29:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by Graham I 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The arabs aspired to independence, there may have been some terrorism as with elsewhere in the Empire.
However the Jewish terrorists set out deliberately to render the rule of law irrelavent. They believe they have a divine right to the land which is driving the bloodshed.
My Great Grandfather held Allenby's right flank on the Jordan in 1918 vs. the Ottomans. Palestine is of no financial significance and holding it would be a waste of time and resources.
The Isrealis racist state is as abhorant as apartheid era South Africa. Frankly I think we're better off staying as far away from the place as possible.
2006-07-26 03:37:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Red P 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
IT IS A RESTLESS WAR...
You're saying that UK return to the Middle East?
By what?
To create an another piece of conflict!
UK deserve their homeland and Arabs deserve Middle East their homeland, and America deserve their homeland, and so on to the others, everyone must deserve their homeland, where they are now, history is the fact to prove those things...
Anyway, I think that was not possible to let UK return into the Middle East, besides, its not their homeland, although they influence some factors of human lifestyles including governance, that will be then A COMMAND AND CONQUER version 2.
Let United Nations decide on this thing....
"God watching our wars"...said by System Of A Down
2006-07-26 03:20:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by aRnObIe 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
the wars started when the area was a british protectorate (it was never acyually part of the empire) mainly due to the fact that we promised the same area of land to both the jews and the palestinians. While the british were still there just after the second world war there was terrorisim (on both sides) and even the occasional pitched battle.
So basically yes there would still be wars there.
2006-07-26 03:28:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by esteban 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably not. In fact, I'm sure they wouldn't be happening. Though England would be having a much harder time with Terrorism and Foreign Policy. England shouldn't adopt, in my opinion, an imperialistic view on the Middle East.
Realistically, these wars wouldn't have happened. Also, there would be a much different, possibly worse situation there. Although, who can say what COULD happen. It's not wise to deal with "if's".
2006-07-26 03:20:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes there would be the problems as the UK government are far too soft. It would be like another Northern Ireland but 10 times worse.
I say pull out and let them get on with it. If they want to blow each other up then why involve innocent individuals from other countries.
2006-07-26 03:32:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by The one 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
probably not..I have a silly personal belief that any land the British empire occupied and was forced to leave,a curse has fallen upon it..yes..and could never be stable again..take for example;India and Pakistan,and a bunch of African countries...so no,I don't think the region would've been this boiling had the British empire stayed....
2006-07-26 03:47:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by seaba 2
·
0⤊
0⤋