[Preechr]

On a very important level, it's obvious that had that miserable chunk of desert no oil underneath it nobody would be fighting over it. It's also important to remember that without western technology, the inhabitants of afore mentioned arm-pit would still be farming goats instead of pimping it.

Westerners set up their oil industry, and they promptly nationalized it... which is what you call it when a country steals your stuff. Didn't this all happen about the same time Saddam Hussein came into power? Yeah, I'm sure it did. In fact, that's like the most commonly overlooked historical fact in the history of middle-eastern oil.

Now, I'm not saying that Bush has oil on the brain or that it would be Ok if he did, but only that if we were going to get all greedy when it comes to their ONLY form of real income we'd have had 35 years to do something about it.

Originally Posted by davinxtk

What you said makes perfectly logical sense in text, Preechr. The trouble is, Iran and North Korea are not paragraphs, proposals, or research papers. They're countries with arrogant patriots and loyalists, just like the US. They're not going to belly up any faster than we are.

In neither case do those governments enjoy the support of ANY other entity on the planet other than themselves. Everybody pretty much feels threatened by them and wishes for a better alternative to dealing with them, especially their own citizens. While I'm lobbing a soft pitch in there for anyone that wants to say that I could also be describing [your most hated country here,] it's interesting and informative to look closely at what really changed when we invaded Iraq. Or maybe what didn't...

France never said that it objected to an American invasion of Iraq for the only actually valid reason she could've given: That seeing that happen would make France concerned that America might attack France next. That was not a legitimate concern as was never offered as an objection, which meant it was always going to happen as long as we wanted it to.

That NK and Iran are considered a threat by every other nation on the planet severely limits their options. They tend to decide things like criminals, whic makes predicting their actions a lot easier. Either way, it's just a prediction.

When read that paragraph's last sentence, I could've just just said "They always have..." but I'm wordy.

Originally Posted by davinxtk

I honestly agree with most of what you said, but you're either
A) Overestimating the influence of the United States simply because you see its power from the inside-out.
or
B) Failing to account for pride and expecting other countries to be defended by the same sort of business-oriented collateral damage analysts that have been running up our defense budgets.

I wish I were over-estimating America's influence on the world. I don't believe I am, which is a though that makes me all the more nervous for thinking it. The balance of power on this planet is decidedly tilting in our direction, so much so that I'm not so sure a coalition of everybody else could stop us from whatever we wanted to do. I have also lost most of my faith that our citizens are
up to the task of holding this government's reins.

When you say I'm ignoring the pride of other countries and that I'm overestimating America's power, it sounds a lot like a European getting pissed that Europe has given all it's former responsibilities, and thus it's power and glory, over to America.

Originally Posted by davinxtk

I have no faith at all that this will be done right. Toss me a 'cynical bastard' t-shirt, but I have yet to see just a single example of something being done well in that corner of the world.

I'm gonna go have that embroidered on a shirt.

You have every right to be cynical. You're in good company.

The only difference between a cynic and a realist is that one of them ends up being right.