Pharaoh Salman bin Abdel Aziz: Hustling “crown prince”
Condemned by French Court
Al-Saud Mafia-House: Your US Presidents and Politicians’ Policies Resemble 1920s Armchair Strategists
Pharaoh Salman bin Abdel Aziz and Hustling “crown prince”,
I don't think US need serve as the world's policeman anymore. Muslims Arabs in the Middle East want to be prosperous, peaceful and free just like everyone else, and that means modernization is inevitable. Some extremists link modernization with America in their minds. At this point, the best thing is to be patient and wait for historical forces to play out.
There is not one compelling reason for the American people to continue to squander their tax-dollars, and the blood of its soldiers as the 'World's Policeman'. Muslim and Arab outpouring of hatred against the US and its allies is at least partly a result of systemic 'Blowback'. America is broke, yet the American government with Pres. Obama now at the forefront expands the number of military bases (now numbering over 900), increases the number of drone strikes in sovereign countries and has further decimated the Bill of Rights with laws such as section 1031 of the NDAA.has always been right on foreign policy: bring our troops home, close bases, repeal the attack on Liberty, have a strong National(not international) Defense and establish the Golden Rule in foreign relations with Diplomacy and Trade in the forefront; in other Words, Peace through prosperity and dialogue.
Rome is burning and unless radical changes happen, it is only a matter of time until the US government is forced by the weight of the collapse to change. It reminds me of an article I read where a Russian General, a veteran of their war in Afghanistan, was being shown around by an American Officer. The Officer was explaining all the programs they were doing to win the hearts and minds of the locals. The Russian general eventually could not contain himself and asked the Officer bluntly "We tried all of that. It didn't work! What makes you think it will be any different for you?" The Officer had no answer.
Likewise the USA had nothing to do with European colonial rule in the Middle east but now has to deal with the consequences of it. After all, USA also deal with the consequences of European colonial rule in North America, so it just fit the job perfectly well.
I wonder what "the fair share to keep the world safe" is exactly. That is highly subjective terrain. There's major EU contribution in Afghanistan, the mission does have a so called UN mandate. Iraq in contrast started out without that backing (in the name of …?). USA and buddies must know that there is a fine line between maintaining international order - "keep the world safe" - and geostrategic interest of individual powers. That line has increasingly eroded, especially in the Bush era. Also, international commitments only tell a part of the story why the US defense budget is higher. It is also about purchasing decisions. The trillions spent on controversial F-22 and F-35 projects are just one example and have yet to turn out as smart choices. That being said, it might make sense to further open the defense market to EU contractors.
I remember President Bush did running around the globe bribing and threatening countries to join in the attack on Iraq. Canadian non-involvement led to some spurious trade decisions (namely softwood lumber).
So, I would say that the first thing to do is for Americans to tell US leaders: We don't want any part of it. As for President Obama, a leader that can't stay away from the ME ready to hand over billions. Maybe the rest of the world hasn't gotten the memo. Possibly USA politicians haven't sent it. Although most every American has composed it in their mind many times, maybe they haven't written the first or final draft. I believe that Americans are done, tired, through, over, and finished with being the world's police. It is someone else's turn now.....
In the wake of the war in Libya, ordinary folk now own guns and RPGs in Benghazi. One of the many reasons why few people choose to go there on their vacation.
Gulf Pharaohs know that Americans – especially the soldiers - are asking these questions: Protecting our nation? Yes! Bringing in humanitarian aid as it is needed in any place or any time? Yes, and our brave young soldiers will be thankful to be a part of it? Yes! Intervening in another country's war against its citizens? Not our turn. Hillary Clinton's world "We came. We saw. He dies."
When the Arab Spring allowed the US and her allies (Gulf Pharaohs) to take military actions against Muslim countries they didn't like, it was o.k. When the Arab Spring produced retaliation against the US and her allies it is unacceptable. When millions of Muslims were slaughtered by the West it was o.k. When a few Americans in Libya lost their lives it is unacceptable. What “Democratic!!” double standards.
In response to the judgment: "America should do more in the Middle East":
(1) Peace: America has supplied 48% of the $50bn arms sales to the region these past 10 years. If words of peace, support, and freedom aren't getting through to people the region, weapons are.
(2) Freedom: America supplied 38% of Saudi Arabia's $6bn arms imports 2001-2011, a Tyrant-Mafia regime, and 80% of Qatar's $500mm, which has – at least - a history of labor abuses (as reported by U.S. State Dept.).
(3) Security: Since the 50s America has intervened in the region: Iran (with, and now against), Iraq (with, and against), and Afghanistan (to mention some) - all implicitly/explicitly to support American economic dominance-(ocracy). America also can't/won't stop “israel” forming more settlements. Most people in the region know this, no doubt, as it's their history.
(4) Practice what you teach, teach only what you practice: America has the largest level of income-disparity of all OECD nations; 20% of Americans live in poverty (36% under the age of 18); 60% of Americans will spend at least 1 year in poverty; and big money continues distorting democracy (Citizens United, Super PACs, Banks - Romney's top five donors, and the most expensive campaign in history).
Alternative: America could probably leave the Middle East region, reflect introspectively for a period, soul search, and be left in peace to do so. And then someone could consider: If 25% of the 400mm people in the region live in poverty (<$2/day), and America split Iraq/Afghan war spending equally between all 400mm individuals, i.e. $9,250 per person (13 years of earnings for the poorest) - who would they support? "Offers a better future," no?
US Presidents and politicians often seem to resemble 1920s armchair strategists - somewhere drawn from the Home Counties -who like to play with their world maps, knowing what is best for the world.
I think a policy of 'benign neglect' is best for America's approach towards the Middle East. America needs to become less visible or 'stealthy' in the Middle East in order to deflect the Muslim and Arab anger, which is justified. Many Middle Eastern problems are simply intractable and a waste of effort, both in time and money. The “israeli”-Palestinian conflict has not been resolved for a over a hundred years and will not be resolved in a hundred years. I am not even American, but I think it would be good for the USA to develop its own energy sources, so it can be self-sufficient and doesn't have to dabble in the Middle East. USA must leave the people in the Middle East alone to sort out their own "internal affairs".
Recent related articles of mine: 62. Al-Saud Mafia-House’s Myriad Shameful Acts http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-new
Pharaoh Salman bin Abdel Aziz and Hustling “crown prince”,
“Your US Presidents and Politicians’ Policies Resemble 1920s Armchair Strategists.” Remember the Arab proverb: Invalids do not move forward.
Dr. Walid Amin Ruwayha
Your Saudi “Dissident” Paris Neighbor