[UnderseaLcpl]

Interesting. I wonder if this stance was at all influenced by public outcry over U.S. condemnation of Israel's last anti-nuclear strike back in 81'.


I admit, I'm still a little torn over whether or not the U.S should back Israel. On the one hand, I'd love to see a Western-backed power establish dominance in the region. Islam has been a thorn in the side of the west for thousands of years, and I see little reason to believe that they will curb their policy of militaristic expansion anytime soon.
On the other, I wonder whether it is any of our business. U.S. interference in the region pre-dates terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and interests by quite a bit. Perhaps we should leave well enough alone. That's Europe's backyard, not ours.

Ideally, I'd like to see peace in the region and the establishment of less oppressive governments, but failing that I wouldn't mind seeing the region tear itself to pieces. Perhaps that is what is needed. My only caveat is that the U.S. must not be involved. Our intervention has been less than welcome on a number of occassions, so we have nothing to gain from acting on behalf of other nations.
Such a policy would leave Israel on her own in the region, and I feel badly about that, but the U.S. did not create Israel out of thin air(to the chargrin of Palestine, which had been there for two millenia), nor was it responisible for the division of the Ottoman Empire along arbitrary lines. That was Europe's doing, in Europe's backyard, and the problem is Europe's responsibility. I leave it to them to sort out the rest of the matter amongst their constituent nations.

Which is the better course of action at this point? Is there another, more reasonable course? I don't know, but I do know that just as some in the old world may be tired of our interference, we are tired of interfering. We should have heeded Jefferson's advice and remained neutral from the very beginning.