The only obsession is the West's oil supply, or as you so delicately put it "the free flow of goods and services to keep the international economic wheels turning." The only regime which gets US aid gratis is the Israeli one, which is not lost on the hundreds of millions of non-Jews of the region and the world.
The Jihad has been a consistent and intrinsic Islamic notion ever since Mohammed and perfected under the Ottoman Empire
I'm sure that's why the Ottomans invited the persecuted Jews who sruvived the Inquisition from Spain. Thanks for explaining that bringing Jews back to Palestine falls under "jihad."
Your discussion on the Open Door is misplaced. You are not in the correct historical time period nor are you dealing with the issue I have stated.
You have categorically stated an "Open Door Policy" was the vehicle of American expansionism. This is untrue. In fact "Open Door Policy" is generally acknowledged to (A)Pertain to free immigration, and/or (B) Pertain to free trade with China only. I have not seen any reference at all to "Open Door" pertaining to the Philippines and Cuba. And if you think it through, because Philippines and Cuba became American protectorates, there was no need for an "Open Door" because the US owned them lock, stock, and barrel and could and did exclude all other countries.
It is helpful in any discussion to use words in their commonly accepted contexts.
Why is it so hard to understand that countries must defend and advance the free flow of goods and services to keep the international economic wheels turning?
According to that pesky Declaration of Independence, governments are instituted among men "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." "The governed" clearly does not include foreign powers wishing to help themselves to a region's resources. And "everybody does it" is not an excuse.
America only belongs in countries where we have the strong support of the local population, and can make life better for them as they perceive "better," not as we do.
Again, what this is leading up to is you're hinting that it's perfectly OK for industrialized countries to help themselves to the resources and the lands occupied by Islamics. This in turn presupposes a need for some kind of Islamic bogeyman to justify continuous pre-emptive occupations and attacks in these strategic and resource-rich areas. Which means it's not even about Islam, ultimately, it's about neo-colonialism of the Western world.
This is false as you well know. Many countries get U.S, aid "gratis". Egypt is the next big recipient of U.S. aid in the ME and it is so because of Camp David. Israel puts back into the U.S. economy by being required to purchase U.S. military equipment. On the other hand the U.S. putting $50 billion a year just to keep Hussein in line has nothing to do with Israel.
I'm sure that's why the Ottomans invited the persecuted Jews who sruvived the Inquisition from Spain. Thanks for explaining that bringing Jews back to Palestine falls under "jihad."
Maybe you forgot that Spain was conquered by the Jihad in the space of 100 years. Oh, I'm sorry you likely overlooked that small fact. You also likely overlooked the fact that the Almohads slaughtered Jews (and Christians) by their Jihad from the Maghreb to Spain in the 12th century.
You have categorically stated an "Open Door Policy" was the vehicle of American expansionism. This is untrue. In fact "Open Door Policy" is generally acknowledged to (A)Pertain to free immigration, and/or (B) Pertain to free trade with China only. I have not seen any reference at all to "Open Door" pertaining to the Philippines and Cuba. And if you think it through, because Philippines and Cuba became American protectorates, there was no need for an "Open Door" because the US owned them lock, stock, and barrel and could and did exclude all other countries.
Again, only because you have messed this portion of history up, the Open Door happened because the decision was made to PURCHASE the Philippines for $20 million (and extend its interests over Puerto Rico and Guam as a result of the Spanish-American War) as a deliberate decision to expand its interests in the Pacific. These acts coupled with the China sphere of influence, and particularly the latter, became part of the Open Door Policy debated through the Open Door Notes.
According to that pesky Declaration of Independence, governments are instituted among men "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." "The governed" clearly does not include foreign powers wishing to help themselves to a region's resources. And "everybody does it" is not an excuse.
The Declaration and Constitution give officials the elected authority to act in the interests of the American people. The American people allowed U.S. expansionism as well as a majority of the American people support Israel.
Again, what this is leading up to is you're hinting that it's perfectly OK for industrialized countries to help themselves to the resources and the lands occupied by Islamics. This in turn presupposes a need for some kind of Islamic bogeyman to justify continuous pre-emptive occupations and attacks in these strategic and resource-rich areas. Which means it's not even about Islam, ultimately, it's about neo-colonialism of the Western world
If the U.S. believed in outright hegemony and neo-colonialism it would still be occupying Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or some other Arabian country and extracting the oil on its own terms.