Why Must the *US* Solve the Mid-East Crisis?

Image via Wikipedia

Becky C., of the blog Just A Girl In Short-Shorts

"But why does everyone feel the [caution: work-unsafe illustrations], asks the question nobody else ever seems to ask, about America's insistence on traveling the world solving everyone else's problems: United States has an obligation to solve the thorny Israeli-Palestinian problem?



While it's true-- we were complicit in the creation of Israel —but we are no good at this sort of thing. Is there a single instance where the United States, acting as as an arbitrator or mediator, has had any degree of success in something like this? We are simply not qualified or up to the job...."

"[1.5 billion Muslims are obsessed about Isreal], a piece of land about the size of New Jersey—that has no oil, and not even enough water .. ."

"The Muslim countries have a lot of problems—virtually none of them caused by the United States or Israel. I can't help but think that Islamic life would improve immeasurably if they were able to let this go."

"The very best thing for us to do would be -- to butt out."

"What we need to do is cut everyone loose and let them grow up.... The president should quit running over to Riyadh, and ineffectively trying to jawbone those wealthy Bedouin chieftains into pumping out cheap oil. Although the King hands out some awesome swords and bling, we don't need to be bosom buddies with these guys. Their penchant for whacking off someone's hand or imprisoning a woman because she was gang raped — tends to offend American sensibilities. And with the exception of Turkeyand Iraq — the Muslim countries are all dictatorial police states or medieval kingdoms. Some nice business relationships would suffice—and certainly no more weapon handouts.

"We need to liberate Israel by letting them know, that even though we love them like Abraham loved his son, the full, faith and credit of the United States is no longer behind them — it creates more problems than it's worth — for everyone involved. They are free to grow up and solve their problems in any manner they desire — but we do not want to be involved — however, we wish them the very best. If they decide to blow up Tehran, they don't need to check in with us. Likewise if they want to start treating Palestinians like first-class human beings—great -- it's about time.

"America, simply by virtue of our enthusiasm for sticking our nose into every aspect of the Middle East, is a major destabilizer — and it is simply none our business.

"Once it dawns on these well-meaning clowns and scoundrels that they are going to have to solve their own problems—they might make a serious stab at it.

"It's worth a try."

And I agree. Likewise the rest of the world's hotspots that aren't next to our borders, like North Korea. As I posted in comments to her site:

You're right as rain on this one, Becky -- it's amazing nobody asks these simple questions about our foreign policy.

While we're at it, we should take a similar look at our numerous other world commitments. Why are *we* carrying water about North Korea? Isn't there a South Korea, a Japan, a China, and a Russia in the immediate threat area? Why don't *they* take the ball?

Yugoslavia-that-was? Why were we there? There's an entire continent directly affected. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, *we* came halfway around the world so the Saudis and Iranians and Isrealis wouldn't have to talk to each other to figure out how to handle that nutcake dictator.

We're idiots. We're letting politicians play with dynamite, like they always like to do. Idiots.