Wouldn't it be easier if we kept our noses out of every other nation's business?

Answer 1

Israel is increasingly turning into a burden on itself, on its guardians, as well as on its countless victims.
Scores of innocent people have lost their lives. Villages have been levelled, and bridges, hospitals, roads, airports, fuel storage facilities and even milk factories have been destroyed.
Years of regeneration effort are reduced to rubble. Pressure from the Americans and their British and German allies is such that no mention is made of a ceasefire in the statement issued. Israel is given leave to impose its agenda on Lebanon at gunpoint. After all, Ehud Olmert had said it: there can be no talk of a ceasefire, since "Israel needs more time".

This unconditional support for Israel as it invades, occupies, demolishes, maims and massacres puts the entire Western moral and political order to the test.
While evangelising about democracy and reform, the US and increasingly Europe continue to give Israel open leave punish the Palestinian people collectively for their electoral choice, through air raids, ground incursions, siege and starvation.

In its latest military operation in the Gaza Strip, which has left more than 200 civilians dead, many of whom are children, the Israeli military has abducted the Palestinian deputy prime minister, along with two cabinet ministers and 56 parliamentarians. On July 1 Israeli warplanes attacked the headquarters of the recently elected Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh.
While preaching freedom to the people of the region, the US and many Western countries do not hesitate to provide political cover for the illegal seizure and occupation of Arab land in Palestine, Lebanon and Syria.

And while filling the air with demands for the release of two captured Israeli soldiers, it turns a blind eye to the 10,000 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians languishing in Israeli jails, about 4,000 of whom are detained administratively without charge or trial.

No wonder that most have lost faith in the American-led rhetoric of democracy, human rights and reform.

Much of the region’s troubles issue from this increasing convergence between American and Israeli policy in the Middle East. The similarity between the two strategies concocted in Tel Aviv and Washington is such that it has become increasingly difficult to tell which is which.

Breaking what has been a taboo for decades, Professors John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt concluded in their article "The Israeli Lobby" that American foreign policy is more representative of Israeli than American national interests. The US Middle East policy is contrary to the long-term strategic interests of the United States.
The alliance between the US and Israel is not something new. Since the end of the 1950s, preserving Israel's security was passed from the British to the US.

Ever since, American national interests have been seen as wedded to those of the state of Israel. However, what is new is that Israel has moved from a proxy at the service of British/American interest in the strategic Middle East to a definer of American policy itself.
It has become customary for consecutive British and American administrations to provide full support for Israel in its invasions, incursions and wars. With Bush and Blair, however, the usual frigid calls for restraint have vanished, making way for assertions of Israel’s right to defend itself and combat terrorism. This is as though Israel were a wretched occupied country, not the world’s fourth-largest military force and the region’s sole nuclear power. It has repeatedly invaded its neighbours’ lands, colonising the Egyptian Sinai desert, Lebanon, the Syrian Golan Heights and the Palestinian territories.

Its massive military arsenal has been used to impose and expand illegal settlement, pursue collective punishment of the local populations and terrorise its neighbours through raids, kidnappings, assassinations, massacres, violations of air space and territorial waters and detentions of scores of prisoners with impunity.

Since 1979 Israel has received over $130 billion and continues to receive nearly 40 per cent of total US foreign aid. Direct American aid to Israel in recent years has exceeded $3.5 billion annually, with an additional $1 billion through other sources, and has been supported almost unanimously in congress, even by liberal Democrats who normally insist on linking aid to human rights and international law.
Israel’s long record of violation of international law is made possible by the heavy diplomatic support guaranteed by the US. In the past 30 years, the latter has used its veto in the Security Council to protect Israel from international criticism, censure, or sanction, more than 40 times. The last one was on July 13, 2006, when it blocked a draft resolution condemning Israel’s attacks on the Gaza Strip and demanding an end to the tragic humanitarian crisis in the Palestinian territories.

The US has to know it cannot aid and abet aggressive occupation and rampant expansionism while hoping to "win Muslims’ hearts and minds". The two cannot go together.
A series of reports and surveys have indicated growing animosity to the United States in the Muslim world.

The latest was a Pew Research Centre poll of six Muslim countries (Indonesia, Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, and Morocco). An earlier Pew Global Attitudes survey of 50 nations in 2002 and 2003 found that the US was less popular in the Middle East than any other part of the world. Even in Turkey, a longstanding US ally, 83% had an unfavourable opinion of the US, matching levels in Jordan and Palestine.
Today, the survey concludes: "The US remains largely disliked in the region. Anti-Americanism in the region is driven largely by aversion to US policies, such as the war on Iraq, the war on terrorism and US support for Israel."

No amount of PR or media propaganda can improve those troubled relations. The problem is not with the marketing, as American statesmen like to believe, but with the product itself. It is with the great strategies pursued in the region.

So long as the US insists on imposing Israel as its chief agent in its overarching designs to rearrange the map of the Middle East within a master/slave relation, it will reap nothing but more disasters and chronic chaos.
wo facts are becoming clearer by the day: Israel is increasingly turning into a burden on itself, on its guardians, as well as on its countless victims; and that the people of the region will never accept an Israeli Middle East.

Sooner or later the US will have to decide between the whole Middle East along with the Muslim world beyond, and its Israeli ally. There lies the problem and the remedy.

Answer 2

No, and could no longer whilst it consumes 40 million barrels of oil an afternoon. to place that for the duration of attitude China consume 7 million barrels according to day. And that's no secret that the US plans to dominate the international militarily and already does with 850 bases in 80 countries, whilst reluctantly agreeing to Chinas prefer to dominate economically. that's confusing to understand how a us of a that spends greater suitable than something of the international on protection and conflict than something of the international prepare, how this would carry peace. particularly while the US has been in touch in 36 wars because of the fact WW2. It does not look including as much as peace, does it? different than that conflict = peace someway. Hmmmm!!!!!!

Answer 3

Quite the opposite.

If we did what you suggest, South Korea would collapse to the North Commies.

If we did what you suggest, the Soviet Union and East Germany would still exist.

If we did what you sugges, most of Europe would be speaking German.

If we did what you suggest, there would be more war, not less.

What interests me about liberals is that with one side of their mouth, they want us to internationalize more (i.e., be more like Europe). Then they want us to "keep out noses out of every other nation's business" as if America lives in a vacuum.)

Answer 4

yes it would be easier but not always better.sometimes other nations who are your Alliess or you want to be their Allie ask for help or need help.take Iraq for instance.they asked for help getting rid of Saddam in exchange for oil deals.with the amount of oil we use having them as an allie would be beneficial.the problem over there started when after we got Saddam out of power we didn't leave.instead MR.Bush decided to force a new government on them they didn't want.and as you can see what was a good idea turned out to be another screw up by MR.Bush.hope that answered your very good point.

Answer 5

I think that is what the United Nations is supposed to do.

I'm a liberal and I don't have a problem with us putting our noses out there...I just think we cannot act without regard to the consequences if things don't go exactly as planned and when the powers-that-be don't listen to people with more knowledge and/or expertise.

Answer 6

Yes it would but think back to WW2. We was minding our own business here and then we was attacked. Go back to 9/11. We was once again miding our own business and we were attacked. It's kind of hard to keep our noses out of other countries business when everyone hates us b/c of our freedoms.

Answer 7

We tried that, got involved in two world wars as a result. It is a simple fact other countries will not stay out of our business so we have to be involved in the world affairs.

Answer 8

Isolationism is no longer a feasible or reasonable alternative, for any major country. All major countries are inextricably bound through numerous agreements - trade, defense, etc.

Here's a question back - do you think preventing the slaughter of 100s of 1000s of innocents, up to millions of innocent people is a worthwhile thing to do, even if it violates your precious isolationism?

Answer 9

A country can't survive in isolation. The US economy is heavily dependent on both exports and imports. Unless your country takes a pro-active role in international affairs it cannot assure it's own survival.

(This isn't a justification for bad foreign policy)

Answer 10

Control freakishness isn't working that's for sure, we should offer incentives for countries to become more humane.
At this point in time however our own countries are so corrupt, and unjust, that we cannot credibly lecture/impose our views on others.

Answer 11

It would be easier, but you must realize that these countries also beg for our help. Since the UN cannot enforce it's own resolutions, the US must step in and enforce those failed resolutions and offer aid!!!!