We have enough problems that need addressing in this country....why do we have to get involved in every squabble in the world ?
we should have invested money in technology to find an alternative to oil instead of this war
if we take care of americans and protect our country from
attacks would that be a bad thing ?
do we need other country's
2007-10-28 01:26:08 · 15 answers · asked by blaqking45 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
It'll give ME a chance to stand on their feet,but that is exactly why the US won't mid its own business.
The US not only has military control, it controls the amount of wheat we produce so we can keep importing from them, in other words its controlling our survival.
ME presidents and kings should stop being cowards and stand up for themselves against USA for the sake of their own people.
P.S I don't care if you give me thumbs down,but if you don't live in ME then you shouldn't judge things from your own country.
2007-10-28 03:41:09 · answer #1 · answered by romaica 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It wasn't just the oil you know. Saddam Hussein wanted to start trading in the Euro instead of the Dollar which is why the US invaded. This further weakens the Dollar and if it comes to a sizeable number of countries adopting the same policy, the wealth of the uber rich would suffer and the US economy would be hit (it would mostly hit the greedy and the 'gas guzzlers' which is something the Ultra right wing elite won't tolerate.) The US economy on the whole would survive, though it would have to cut its defense policy and withdraw from the Middle East.
The Middle East is going through a "core-and-periphery" policy like many places in the world, meaning they believe they need to expand to prosper and become stable. So its something they will need to work at on their own. It's such a shame there's so much tempting oil there.
Finally, you do need other countries. Isolationism may make people misty eyed, but you would have to do without a lot of luxuries, and that bit poorer. You have as good a case as anyone, its a shame the ruling classes would never abide it.
2007-10-28 08:43:38 · answer #2 · answered by Chris W 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We WERE minding our own business. That's what so upsets certain people in our country and elsewhere.
That's why the World TRADE Towers were targeted.
That's what they want out of the Middle East.
They want control of the oil. The invasion of Kuwait by Iraq was to control the oil. We would have been left with oil at $50 dollars a gallon, and Russia would have joined them.
Some people in this country have blocked every effort to drill for oil in this country, and have stopped every nuclear plant (SO much safer now), which would leave us free TO EXPLORE ALTERNATE WAYS!
Instead we're being bled to death, and attempting to prevent that from getting worse has gotten President Clinton and President Bush nothing but grief.
You mean isolate ourselves?
That's not our business. That's abandoning businesses of our citizens around the world to the whims of dictators and Islamic regimes.
No, thank you.
2007-10-28 09:05:34 · answer #3 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Operation Desert Shield
Which evolved to Operation Desert Storm.
We were asked for intervention, it went from there. Not necessarily in the right direction, good intentions aside.
But on reflection, isn't that always the way of things? "All good intentions aside" ?
Is there something in the rules of life? I do agree we need to take care of our own. And yes, it looks like it's up to we Americans to do so. No "good intentions" toward us,from my personal point of view. If there are others out there who disagree with this, please let me know! Examples in lieu of that thumb up/down stuff would be greatly appreciated. Ribbing me for this doesn't accomplish anything btw.
2007-10-28 09:02:33 · answer #4 · answered by Poetry 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...I live in the Middle East....
And the US leaving the Middle East will cause what we would like to say "World Peace"...as US is not getting countries for itself...instead that George Bush..who is called "The Devil" is only supporting Israel so he wont be vunrable ..because once he stops supporting other countries for war, they wont support him neither...which he will get pounded, slaughtered for by the Middle East...he is taking the countries fromm the weakest to the strongest...
Israel cannot live on its own...if US wil leave them now... the Middle East will cause extinction to Israel...
Leaving George Bush vunerable...
2007-10-28 08:44:02 · answer #5 · answered by Game 'N' Blaze 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If Bush put half the effort he puts into the Middle East into America, then it wouldn't have crappy healthcare and education systems. And the Middle East would probably be better off for it too.
2007-10-28 08:43:14 · answer #6 · answered by YA RLY 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
depends, if the US stopped funding Israel aswell things would probably be a hell of alot better and it's a UN ideal not to interfere with the internal runnings of other countries anyway, the Us bypassed that law when they went into Iraq.
2007-10-28 08:38:32 · answer #7 · answered by Calum of Calderdale 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, I think it's too complicated to just leave the middle east alone now, and we already have buttloads of alternatives to oil, it's just that the oil companies are making sure we don't get to use them.
2007-10-28 08:29:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
What are you some kinda of nut or a pinko lovin Communist--how would we get "our" fair share of the oil that God mistakenly put under their soil.
2007-10-28 08:54:18 · answer #9 · answered by stevemxusa 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I agree why don't we just start worry about our own country god knows we need the help
2007-10-28 08:29:36 · answer #10 · answered by melissa_is_maxx 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋