The "leave us alone" policy might be easier to implement if the Iranians would leave others alone as well. Maybe we could be more non-interventionist if they would renounce their state sponsorship of terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah and Palestine Islamic Jihad, stop their interventions in Iraq and reign in the activities of the Quds Force and its support of the Taliban.
Well first it isn't "leave us alone" but "let's leave them alone" policy, a bit of a difference there. No matter what, the idea that we need to be involved (selectively that is) is part of our internal and external problem.
If Iran was to say come to grips with what the west is demanding, then it would be an issue internally that they took a step backwards, not forwards. In the eyes of their enemies and even their allies, they are fighting the west and the colonization style of being messed with that the west has been doing since the fall of Turkish rule. This is one of the problems of the entire middle east and only two countries within the region have been diplomatic enough to deal with the west on terms that they understand. If you can't figure out how the Iranians feel, maybe understanding what we and others have been doing there for a while - their reaction would be the same as ours if the tables were turned.
Beside, we provided a lot of money to Hezbollah - you do know that?
True, the royal family needs us to shore up their internal stability.
Well shoring up their internal stability is one thing but using us as a distraction and putting us in the cross hairs is a BIG problem for us. If you may remember that the Sauds are the source for how many of the hijackers who drove the planes into the WTC ... I think it may be 16, with a direct connection to the financing of the operation through Saudi Arabia. Mind you that if you want to talk about cooperation, I think we got more cooperation from Libya with the issues of Al Queda than we ever have with the Sauds.
On top of that, if we are supposed to be (take your pick) either spreading democracy and freedom across the globe or if we are protecting our freedoms by being in places that we shouldn't be in, where does our allying with the Sauds leave us?
But they can't get the military hardware or technology like ours anywhere else, and we don't want them to go shopping in Russia or China.
Who says they haven't been?
Why should we be exporting our technology to a country that is internally unstable like UAE and Omar?
I don't see the reasoning behind our best going to a region where we lose control of it, they are not like the Germans or even for that matter the French.
It would also be nice if they didn't go nuclear and right now they don't need to with us as an ally. But if we bail on them as suggested by candidate Paul, they would surely go nuclear to have a deterrent against Iran - and that's just what the world needs is a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. We need to stay involved over there.
I guess the question should be "why hasn't Iran been able to buy a nuke from China or the Russians when they have the money to do so?"
The same question could be asked of the Sauds, but then if they get one, I think Israel would also react to that by launching a strike against them, a true escalation.
But market price would be influenced by supply and demand.
Well that seems to be more myth than true. Speculation in the market is the biggest influence which is tied to emotion of the market.
There are three obvious benefits to our development of our own oil resources: (1)Price would go down with increased supply (2)Our dependence on foreign oil would be lessened (3)Our economic rebound would be vastly improved and a huge source of wealth and stable jobs would be created.
1 - not really, if there is strife in the middle east, the market will react and the price will rise even if supply is not reduced. Maybe in the long term it would bring the price down to a stable level but right now Opec can do that if they want by increasing supply which triggers the emotion in the market.
2 - true to a point, but our dependence isn't about the actual oil, it is about the market. We buy all kinds of oil on the market, a company like BP extracts its own supply and that supply is marketed at prices based on the market pricing, not their cost. This goes back to the issue #1, where the market dictates the price. By the way, I think if we produce more oil, it would go to China.
3 - to a point. I think there is more to be said that jobs would be produced but the limit of those jobs wouldn't be as needed - 5 to 7 million jobs. Most of the jobs would be in extraction, supply processing would not increase as would distribution all because the system is not going to expand much if at all.
We have everything to gain and nothing to lose by developing our own energy sources.
True and I agree with you on that, we have nothing to lose and everything to gain but alas we have too many stupid people not thinking in this country.
The countries over there have to stabilize their governments and national economies for all that to happen, and that stability isn't going to happen any time soon.
Well the countries over there can stabilize their governments if they are allowed to progress with their own ideas and ways to fill their needs. What Iran represents is a mess that we involved ourselves because we thought they were too dumb to handle it and tried to westernize the culture. This is why we failed in Iraq and failing all over the middle east - this doctrine of spreading democracy is a fallacy when the people have their own idea of what democracy is.
The best solution we can have is not to demand things from them but to allow them to have the region grow and deal with them, like Iran. If it is an Arab against Arab country, then it is their right to fix their problems but we should not try to interject a foreign culture and demand they follow that way of thinking. I guess my point can be better made to point to when Iraq was forming their constitution and people here were so incensed that it has a religious (Muslim) tone to the entire document and further outrage when Sharia Law was mentioned. We don't get that, many are still dumbfounded by it here and in Europe but it seems to work for them.
Soon the Syrian govt will topple and they'll be going through the same mess as Lybia and Egypt. Iraq will struggle for several years to come, especially if Iran makes a likely interventionist move.
Well I think we need to ask ourselves what shouldn't we do and where should we be. Syria is a problem, not because of the present government but what that will unleash, remember that they gave us problems in the past and have been part of the Lebanon issue. Libya and Egypt is a mess and we should not have been involved with them at all without assurances that there will be a friendly government but alas we still give a crap load of money to Egypt when we need to just cut them off.
The harsh reality is that if we don't maintain a presence in these places the Chinese and especially the Russians will fill the void of our absence. We're in a situation of choosing the lesser of the evils, like it or not. An isolationist foreign policy only avoids - or postpones - making the hard choices.
Well see here is the thing, they are already there. Look at the alliances and how they were formed and by whom.
China has been in Africa, a place we seem to ignore and they have been moving to capture the oil in parts of Africa where we should be so we lost out on that.
BUT a very important issue has also been ignored and should be more of a worry than any middle east issue - Pakistan. See maybe you read this before when I said we need to focus on that country, not because they hold our oil supply in their hands but they hold our banking and financial life in their hands. This is two different threats, one with them directly and the other is if they go to war with India which could happen if they get into an internal problem with the factions of radicals that want to take over the country. On top of that, China has a foot hold with them diplomatically because of the Kashmir region and I bet they would have a very fast ally with China if there is a problem with that region and India. The other part of this is what access China has, seeing they are involved with Pakistan and Pakistan has no laws about identity stealing.