Posted on 01/15/2014 9:08:18 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
I think the hope of us who tend to a more localized US focus is that without the US as an ever present factor, the Sunnis and the Shiites will return to their prime concern of countering each other. And with a lessened US involvement, Israel and the Saudis might act on their common interests and common danger to produce a more durable regional stability.
Another thing I get tired of hearing is how every new tinpot dictator that comes down the pike is “another Hitler” and that our failure to overthrow him and occupy his country is “another Munich.” My response is: When Iran’s Rouhani or Syria’s Assad controls all of one continent and good sized chunks of neighboring continents, let me know. Otherwise, it all sounds like a hysterical little kid throwing a hissy fit.
Nazi Germany for a time had the world’s most potent army and air force. Iran couldn’t overrun Iraq when they still had the Shah’s first class military hardware. People can argue the danger Iran can pose through Hezbollah and other terrorist activities, but they’re nothing like the world power that Neville Chamberlain faced at Munich.
Moreover, Hizbollah's primary target isn't the United States. A lot of people seem to conflate Israel's conflicts and national security concerns with ours. They aren't one and the same and never have been.
Remember how Slobadon Milosevic was supposedly "the new Hitler." As I recall, Hitler controlled just about everything from the North Sea to the Ural Mountains. Milosevic couldn't even hold onto a chunk of the Balkans the size of New York state. And Bashar Assad, the latest "Middle Eastern Hitler" and allegedly a mortal threat to US National Security, can't even defeat a group of rag-tag rebels in Allepo. Some "Hitler" he is.
Some people have a knee-jerk reaction to the name "Buchanan," and seem to hate him more than any leftist Democrat or liberal Republican. It makes them completely incapable to arguing the merit of his ideas, so you get ad hominem instead.
So don't expect a straight answer for how the GOP went from being the party of rational non-interventionism in the early 20th century to crusading Wilsonianism a century later.
You are wrong. Iran is building missiles that can reach Europe. When it gets nukes it will threaten Europe, Israel and Saudi Arabia with them. We have allies and interests in Europe and the Middle East and Iran will soon be in a position to mess around with them. Russia, China and Iran will carve up the Middle East oil resources and nations. Short of this they will tell Arab oil nation how much oil to sell and to whom and to pay $10/barrel tax to Iran
As for the Saudis, they're much bigger sponsor of Islamist jihad than Iran will ever be.
Iran has been attacking us in Iraq for years. Using roundabout ways of course. They arm proxies armies. They like to have others do their dirty work. Like Hezbollah in Lebanon to attack Israel
Iran is trying to control Iraq since Iraq has a Shiite gov’t right now. They invented chess...you are still playing tic tac do
Saudi Arabia is or was an ally. They are very upset by our recent cave-in on Irans nuclear program
Like Hezbollah in Lebanon to attack Israel
Israel isn't part of the United States. We don't need to fight a war with Iran on their behalf, or to support an Israeli initiated war that would destablize the region still further.
Saudi Arabia is or was an ally. They are very upset by our recent cave-in on Irans nuclear program
You think it's a coincidence that Bin Laden, most of the Al Quaeda leadership, and most of the 9/11 bombers were Saudis? And not malcontents from the slums, but members of the Saudi ruling class? Whenever there's jihad being fought, where do you suppose the money comes from? Yemen or Sudan can't afford to bankroll Islamists in Asia and Africa. The Saudis can, and they do in order to prove their religious bona fides to the pious masses. So all this talk about "fighting terrorism" with trumped-up enemies in Iraq, Syria, or Iran is rather laughable while our leaders bow (Obama) or hold hands (Bush) with the Saudis.
The Saudi were still our allies. Maybe Obama has pushed them permanenatly into Moscow arms.
Under Obama we have stopped Israel from attacking Iranian nukes a few times. The USA has not been fighting Israel’s wars. The opposite is true. It has been preventing Israel attacks against Iran.
Israel is on our side and should be supported same as Saudi Arabia. This is totally negated under Obama-Kerry. Instead we thrown in with Iran by easing sanctions for getting absolutely nothing in return. The Obama program is to screw your historical allies and cave into America’s rivals and enemies.
recent Iranian statements have ridiculed us saying we caved in, in these recent negotiations. Muslims can smell weakness like a tiger does.
Given the choice between trusting Netanyahu and America's manifest national interest and a hack who shill for Hitler and say Churchill as the warmonger and an ideology, my choice is clear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.