misterg792000 wrote:
That cartoon falls into the same trap that a lot of media outlets are: pretending the Syrian opposition is basically an al-Qaeda front rather than a complex somewhat-coalition of many different groups that has secular roots.
Not that any of that makes your statement any less true, of course.
True; real life isn't that simple. But it seems to me that every time we intervene over there, all we do is make things even worse for everyone; them, us... everyone. Have we made the world a safer and happier place by invading Iraq and Afghanistan? Did we accomplish anything positive in ousting Saddam Hussein that was worth the cost in lives and resources? Are we safer than we were just after 9/11? Havent' we been burned enough in that Godsforsaken part of the world already?
Seems to me that we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. I vote we go for the easier and cheaper option and stay the hell out of it until we're attacked ourselves directly.
Every country in history that had an overactive foreign policy eventually lost its political and economic clout by over-extending itself. Spain did. France did. Britain did. Germany did big time. Japan. Russia. Italy. All were once greater in the last few centuries than they are now; but they over-reached themselves and their dreams crumbled like a house of cards by the winds of change. It'll happen to us too if we don't stop trying to be the world's policemen. No one else likes it and we can't afford it. If we don't stop, we'll wind up being second banana to some other country with a much different way of doing things - like China!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...