Anyone wonder what “sustainable security” in Syria or the Middle East is supposed to look like? I get the impression from recent “debacle” comments against Obama, that the Conservative position is that we need to regain a foot-hold in the region in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. If we elect a Republican in 2016, must we really go back to war in the region? Do we have to wait that long, or will Obama convince Congress to rubber-stamp his “red-line” foreign policy threats and oblige us the same fate? And if so, either way, how are they (i.e. we) going to pay for it all? Are they going to use the spoils of war (Arab Oil) to pay for it all? If so, don’t they know those sources are already being depleted (and we gave away Iraq, now thought to have more oil than originally imagined), but we already have plenty of oil in North Dakota to frack? Furthermore, further American involvement in the region will only serve to bolster the arguments of our enemies, and further radicalize the region.
“Sustainable security” in the Middle East of the type I think they are suggesting sounds like double-speak for a continued form of American imperialism reminiscent of “Manifest Destiny” or the “White-Man’s Burden,” but this time it’s oil instead of gold, the Arabs are the Indian/African “savages” and Islam is the heathen belief system that must be eradicated at all costs! If we wish to destabilize the entire region, we should rush into war, and blindly be lead by the terrorists to do exactly what they expect us to do – “Play with the Middle East like a money with a hand-grenade.” What a great and telling quote by Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister! The only problem being that lost within that quote, there may be a method to America’s madness, and our leaders may actually want to blow it all up (or destabilize the region to deter democracy that leads to Islamist nations) so they can “bomb them back to the stone ages, and pave the desert over with a parking lot.” I’ve heard this sentiment expressed by far too many of my countrymen to think it might not be a guiding principle of America’s current foreign policy agenda. No one should be fooled, “sustainable security” is either direct American domination and assimilation of the region, or indirect domination and assimilation via pro-American dictatorships or adoption of pro-American forms of government with pro-American election outcomes. Otherwise, nothing else will be tolerated or allowed to grow and flourish. If you don’t believe this conclusion, ask the Egyptians.