If pundits fear chaos, havoc and the rise of terror in the Middle East upon our Troops' withdrawal, shouldn't they be screaming and demanding for Iraq's rich Arab neighbors to take responsibilty in forming a coalition to take responsiblity for financing and sending their Troops, and not depend completely on the U.S. Taxpayers' money and U.S. Troops, to force the weak and incompetent Iraqi government to stabilize Iraq?
2007-01-11 04:49:06 · 9 answers · asked by United_Peace 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Becuase said Rich Arab neighbours probably would have... had the same situation be happening now but NOT having involved the US. Many people view it as an issue caused by the US government therefore, from those people's viewoints it would be America's job to clean up the mess.
2007-01-11 04:58:25 · answer #1 · answered by Heh? 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Ceterus paribus" the Arab nations and indeed the whole world should be equally interested in establishing a stable regime in Iraq. But we all know that we, the US, started this without international support. They use that as the primary reason for not helping us now, but the fact is that there are myriad reasons including agendas not favorable strategically to the USA and outright hatred of the US, its primary religion, its support of Israel, the fact that they hold us hostage with petroleum, 1400 year old feuds and their arrogant adamance toward other Arabs not in their sect and tribe. The middle east is a complicated mess that will not get better any time soon.
2007-01-11 13:00:37 · answer #2 · answered by Nightstalker1967 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, in all seriousness... there aren't many rich Middle Eastern Nations.
And the ones that are there, probably hate Iraq anyways. The extremist beliefs of most Middle Eastern folk, would hinder progress.
2007-01-11 12:57:25 · answer #3 · answered by koepnick012787 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We are trying to create democracy in Iraq, not tyranny, like in all the other middle eastern states. I can really see Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria really agreeing with us in this instance seeing that they all have tyrannical regimes.
2007-01-11 13:06:03 · answer #4 · answered by asmith1022_2006 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because all the other middle eastern nations would LOVE to see Iraq fall.
2007-01-11 12:57:33 · answer #5 · answered by godoompah 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Saudis would back sunni militias, Iran would back Shia militias ... All it would do would be to give the militias more power and money and sectarian violence would...(well lets not go there)
2007-01-11 12:57:14 · answer #6 · answered by cloudbunny 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I guess we can't force them to care about their neighbors.
They didn't care what Saddam was doing what makes you think they care now?
The USA cares and are told they are a**holes for doing it.
I shudder to think what the world would be like without the USA.
2007-01-11 13:18:16 · answer #7 · answered by psych0bug 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
and if this "coalition of rich middle eastern nations" refuses? we still have a need to ensure our security...hmm?
2007-01-11 12:53:44 · answer #8 · answered by kapute2 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
so that the american government can hide the money they are supposed to spend in there own accounts!!!
2007-01-11 12:59:10 · answer #9 · answered by Half Breed 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋