No more Middle East wars

I disagree. If we vacate the area, you know who comes in to take our place. Russia, yes. Turkey, yes. China, maybe. But the biggest threat to us is Iran. With us out of there Iran becomes more and more dangerous. Eventually they attack Israel, and we would have to return anyway. and if we didn't, the Persian Empire returns...this time with nuclear weapons, and allied with our enemies.

So we stay, and If necessary, yes we bomb them back to the stone age, but none of that nation building nonsense. Let them rebuild their own country, with the understanding that we'll return and do it again if we have to.

A case can be made, however for staying in the area, but not in Iraq. That's fair, but we can't leave the area completely.

Good points you make & fair enough.

No matter what happens though, we need to stop with the "we need to let all those poor refugees of war pour into America."

We're being flooded with people as it is, we don't even take care of our own ! Enough with caring for the entire worlds 'poor & oppressed &/or refugees' !

....Coming from such wonderful places as written about yesterday by Ann C. - www.anncoulter.com/columns/2019-12-31.html#read_more

This is what we want to import more of ?

Ask a liberal

I don't know where exactly this belongs, but I really get a kick how these middle eastern combatants get described by our media.

Mourners now. SMH

That wasn’t the U.S. bombing the fighters, though.

Just some people [who] did something.
🤷🏻‍♂️

Of course, "Benghazi was caused by a YouTube video" is the same as Manti Te'o's girlfriend, "if you like your doctor....," and the claims of the Steele Dossier........PURE FICTION. 

The only reason there is much interest in the Middle East is the oil, obviously. The reason Iran is a concern is

1). Because it is trying to dominate its neighbors and ultimately manipulate the world oil supply, and

2). It can attempt to shut off oil shipments through the Persian Gulf. Not an existential problem for the US but it is a major problem for the rest of the world and therefore a threat to overall stability, which is a key US interest.

So you can't walk away from the area but at the same time you don't also have to try to make Jeffersonian democrats out of largely illiterate populaces. It becomes a matter of having sufficient presence to deter while at the same time avoiding a full on war.

I suspect that the mullahs feel so much on the ropes politically and economically that they believe their best bet is to trigger a crisis with the US in hopes of getting the Iranian population behind its unpopular government again, while gambling that the US won't commit overwhelming force (or that doing so will create such a backlash in the US and elsewhere that the US will back down). It's safe to say that every single Democratic contender would ostentatiously object to any definitive US military activity.

Even now I suspect Theodore Roosevelt's axiom to speak softly and carry a big stick has its merits. I don't recall President Trump ever speaking softly, but he does seem to have a common sense aversion to getting overly involved in noncritical Middle East issues................................Luca