Debate Now Question: Should the US GTFO of the ME?

[task0778]

Rules:

1. No Trump bashing, this debate ain't about him. Or praising either. Start your own debate if you wanna discuss the recent killing of Soleimani.

2. Keep it germaine please.

What are the vital US interests that should clearly indicate why we still have troops over there? We don't really need ME oil anymore, we're self-sufficient in that regard. The Sunnis and the Shites have been fighting each other for what, 1300 years or so, why do we need to stick our noses into the middle of that? Iraq's Parliament recently passed a resolution to kick us out; fine by me, let's GTFO and let the locals do whatever they want. Doesn't look to me like our military presence is making much difference, the region was unstable before we got there and it still is. As far as I can tell, Afghanistan is going to be the same place it is now on the day after we leave. Why are we still there? We don't need nothin' from those guys.

Obviously, you make everyone understand that you don't fuck with the USA. Attack one of our embassies and we'll fire a missile up your ass. Kill Americans and you WILL pay. Harbor terrorists that do us harm and you WILL pay. Militarily and economically. We don't need to be sending troops over there when a few well-placed missiles will make a statement. Or more than few. So, I think we oughta pack up and leave Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and wherever else we are in the ME. Have at it fellas, good luck. Somebody tell me why doing so is a bad idea.

 

[bluzman61]

Rules:

1. No Trump bashing, this debate ain't about him. Start your own debate if you wanna discuss the recent killing of Soleimani.

2. Keep it germaine please.

What are the vital US interests that should clearly indicate why we still have troops over there? We don't really need ME oil anymore, we're self-sufficient in that regard. The Sunnis and the Shites have been fighting each other for what, 1300 years or so, why do we need to stick our noses into the middle of that? Iraq's Parliament recently passed a resolution to kick us out; fine by me, let's GTFO and let the locals do whatever they want. Doesn't look to me like our military presence is making much difference, the region was unstable before we got there and it still is. As far as I can tell, Afghanistan is going to be the same place it is now on the day after we leave. Why are we still there? We don't need nothin' from those guys.

Obviously, you make everyone understand that you don't fuck with the USA. Attack one of our embassies and we'll fire a missile up your ass. Kill Americans and you WILL pay. Harbor terrorists that do us harm and you WILL pay. Militarily and economically. We don't need to be sending troops over there when a few well-placed missiles will make a statement. Or more than few. So, I think we oughta pack up and leave Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and wherever else we are in the ME. Have at it fellas, good luck. Somebody tell me why doing so is a bad idea.

My one word answer to your question at the top of your thread - YES. We don't need oil from the ME anymore, pack up and leave.

 

[jwoodie]

Iran would take over the entire ME (except for Israel) if we pulled out completely. Then what?

 

[task0778]

Iran would take over the entire ME (except for Israel) if we pulled out completely. Then what?

I dunno about that, in the muslim world the Sunnis substantially outnumber the Shiites. Somewhere between 80-90% of all muslims are Sunnis. Saudi Arabia, Oman, Egypt, Jordan, and most of North Africa are primarily Sunni countries. Even Iraq has a significant number of Sunnis even though they are outnumbered by the shiites. Those guys are not going to stop their internal conflict,, and we'd be better off IMHO getting the hell out and not being involved.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Yes.
There ya go...

 

[Augustine_]

Iran would take over the entire ME (except for Israel) if we pulled out completely. Then what?

Then you wake up, and live your life as normal without having to think about the ME. I doubt they would anyways.

 

[there4eyeM]

It is totally antithetical to the origins of the U.S. that it ever became involved world-wide in anything other than spreading its revolution. Instead, it has become just another of history's swaggering, over-powerful, excessively rich, Machiavellian entities.
Now, it is too late to just 'get out' of anything or anywhere. The consequences would be worse than what is happening. Resolving things and retiring from the scene would be the noble and right thing to do. That excludes it from being what does get done.

 

[Augustine_]

It is totally antithetical to the origins of the U.S. that it ever became involved world-wide in anything other than spreading its revolution. Instead, it has become just another of history's swaggering, over-powerful, excessively rich, Machiavellian entities.
Now, it is too late to just 'get out' of anything or anywhere. The consequences would be worse than what is happening. Resolving things and retiring from the scene would be the noble and right thing to do. That excludes it from being what does get done.

All problems we face from the Middle East are of our own making, and are maintained only by our continued, pointless presence there.

 

[fncceo]

There is nothing to be gained from continuing interference in the Middle East.

If we're not willing to completely destroy our enemies, the will to do so we clearly lack, then this tit for tat warfare is best done from long range . We have long range capability, our enemies don't.

These countries have insoluble problems or problems they don't want to solve. We have no business trying to sort them out.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Iran would take over the entire ME (except for Israel) if we pulled out completely. Then what?

A. You have zero evidence of that.

B. Who cares?

We are the reason Iran is controlled by religious extremists in the first place.

 

[jwoodie]

Iran would take over the entire ME (except for Israel) if we pulled out completely. Then what?

A. You have zero evidence of that.

B. Who cares?

We are the reason Iran is controlled by religious extremists in the first place.

A. Do you seriously dispute that?

B. Should the US care?

C. Irrelevant to what we should do now.

D. Is this an urgent matter that must be addressed immediately?

P.S. Flippant replies do not contribute to this conversation.

 

[task0778]

Iran would take over the entire ME (except for Israel) if we pulled out completely. Then what?

A. You have zero evidence of that.

B. Who cares?

We are the reason Iran is controlled by religious extremists in the first place.

A. Do you seriously dispute that?

B. Should the US care?

C. Irrelevant to what we should do now.

D. Is this an urgent matter that must be addressed immediately?

P.S. Flippant replies do not contribute to this conversation.

I do seriously dispute the idea that Iran would take over the entire ME. That country is an unstable one with much of it's people dissatisfied with the status quo. And thanks to the sanctions, primarily the US ones, they are in some fiscal difficulties. IMHO, they are in no position to take over the entire ME and couldn't hold it for long even if they did. Sunnis from Africa and other places would join the fight against the Shiites. I do not think the US should be involved in that conflict.