The Middle East, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.Follow

Forgive me for saying this, but:

Would anyone really miss the Middle East?

I mean if we just turned the area from Bekka Valley to Southeastern Yemen into a giant glass parking lot, would anyone really be all that upset?

Gas prices are astronomical. The Arabian countries of the area are sitting on a land-sea of sand that covers a gagillion dollars in resources, yet keep their own people trapped in sub-Third world status.

The region's main religion preaches hate and death against foreigners and non-Muslims. The schools teach that other cultures are "Satans" and the entire region is a severe liability to global integrity.

Every day we read or watch the news about some poor military or civilian folks blown to smithereens by a psychotic 13 year-old. We see rape-rooms and oppression of women. Children with malnutrition and entire societies under the thumb of a brutal monarchy or twisted theocracy.

The dead dinosaurs that create energy for the rest of the world burn off to create pollution and kill the environment. Millions of gallons of oil spill into the ocean when a drunken boat captain missreads his maps and runs ashore in Alaska every 3 years. Exxon, Texaco, Shell, etc. are fleecing the US people because they can. Besides, there are wayyyyyyyy too many people driving on our roads, cluttering up the scenery and pasting the sky with a charcoal colored smog. Sure, nuking all of Asia-minor would cause some eco-emergencies but c'mon, it couldn't be all that bad.

Why not burn it down and try again? Call it a do-over if you will.

Just sayin'.

You had me at: Let's nuke all the sand-******** who needs brown people or non-Christians or other cultures.


Just sayin.

Ethnic cleansing, ala WWII? 'Why not just get rid of the _____?'


Hm, I can find a few points where you are wrong:




Not quite...some religions over there preach peace, and I've heard some people going into war actually read the books to calm their nerves and relax.



Several thousand people in Saudi Arabia get millions of dollars a year (princes). Doesn't sound third world to me, it just sounds like the rich people are keeping it form the poor and there aren't any Robin Hoods to help people out so we have to step in.

There are more places to get oil other than there, I think what the US should do is pull all relations with them and get oil from Alaska/Canada - there are a sh[/i]itload of oil resources there and I think pulling out of there would just be like, OK, fuc[i]k it, let's see what happens when we don't hold their hand and help.



That's kind of stereotypically speaking - there are 26 million people in Afghanistan alone, if you hear, let's say, 3 stories on average a day about people getting blown up and etc, for the last 5 years, that's nothing totally past maybe 1500, and there are easily a few hundred million innocent, law abiding, non-American hating people over there, and just blowing everyone up because of the few psychos is just ignorant.

Imagine if the US was a 3rd world country - the world looked down upon us and etc, how would you, the law abiding citizen from wherever you're from, be labeled as a stupid idiot who all they do is kill other people. Half your post is based on oil, and complaining that there are too many people on the roads, etc. Consider that a blessing. Over there, they can't afford even health care thanks to the rulers, let alone a car to drive. No, I'm not brainwashed by the Bush administration, but the people there can't help it - they're born into 3rd world mind sets, reproduce, die and the cycle goes on for years. And what's one country (us) going to do about something that's been going on for 1000s of years?



True, a lot of people would 'happy' over that (as sick as it sounds) but let's say that happened, and the US is screwed - there goes the jobs that the oil companies had - 1000 or a few thousand US people now have no jobs. Gas prices would raise to over 6 dollars a gallon - there goes anyone that has a big car, rendering it useless and uneconomical - that'd put Hummer dealerships, Ford, and all car manufactors hard pressed to come up with better alternetives. Out with the car, in with public transportation, aka the bus? Crime rates would climb because a bus is an easy place to smuggle, attack, mug and etc. It's a chain reaction - the Middle East is really more important that you talk about it to be. It's not worth fighting over though, if country X has Nukes, and they have plans to attack the US with those nukes, US needs to invade country X. North Korea has nukes, they admit it. Why doesn't the US invade? Probably because the US's economy is so greatly focused around there (made in China, Korea, Japan, etc) that attacking Korea would worsen forgein relations with those countries, which would turn our economy into a sh[i][/i]ithole.

Blowing the area up isn't a solution - that's killing hundreds of millions of people for no viable reason. They attacked us once, we've bombed them and attacked them for much longer. If anything, I feel that the US needs to just pull out [their troops] and see what'd happen. No war, no fighting, just let Middle Easterns fight Middle Easterns.



For one, if you nuked them, the effects of radiation would last for years to come, and the survivors would suffer for many years before dying a painful death.

Secondly, if you killed the people like that, it'd give the US such a horrible name that no one would want to do anything, ever with the US, and it'd cause the whole world to probably want to fight us. As, that's what WWII was about - one country thought they could take over another because they were 'better than them', and you want to blow them up because they cause us 'trouble'. We attack them, what's the world to think? Is Country X next? Am I going to die? Is the US going to bomb North Korea?

I won't rate you down - I believe in free speech and free opinion, and I'd feel gratitude towards you if you felt the same. If anything, I rate you up because your idea is out of the box, no matter how sick it may seem - it's the way you think and I respect that.

Mehh.

When you said "Middle East" I thought you meant Ohio, West Virginia and Michigan.

I was with ya til you started on the ay-rabs

because we'd be burning the oil, we'd destroy the infrastructure and NO COUNTRY HAS THE MONETARY ASSETS TO COMPLETELY REBUILD HUGELY DIVIDED RELIGIOUS SECTS LIVING IN THE SAME REIGON.

Just sayin.

This post has been altered to bring you this Monkey

Edited, Sun Feb 20 15:26:46 2005 by xythex

For those tough, hard to get out ethnic stains in the country of your interest, the world's political leaders use new, Sickle&Hammer genocidal cleanser. Sold in your local Nuclear weapons depot around the corner.


Sickle&Hammer as a company is not liable for any political backlash or retaliation after use. Use as directed, do not apply to your own countries or allied countries. Best stored underground in areas people really could'nt give a sh[b][/b]it about. Remember, "All problems can be solved by using unneccesary force!"TM

Shadowrelm.

One of these days that horse is gonna get up and b!tchslap your ***.

And exactly WHERE would we crusade to then?

Sheesh, you wanna nuke Six Flags, too?

You do know that religion is the world's biggest farce right?

Exactly.

I think they have enough bodies to pile up across the Pacific and walk over here...

Yes. You are. Fabian tactics are essentially worthless in any situation where the thing you have to defend is your home. If all you have to defend is a mobile force, Fabian tactics can be valuable provided that your enemy has limited supplies and you cna outlast them.

Also, about the two tugboats bit; at their current rate of expansion, China will have the largest navy in the water in between 7 and 10 years. Think about THAT, roundeye.

One of the FIRST things I learned back in the day when I took up RTS games was the 'your house' rule. If we're gonna fight, we're fighting in your house. If a lamp gets broken, it will be yours. Second thing I learned was 'my plate.' All resources are considered 'my plate.' Like any dog, I will bite you if you're eating from my plate. I may not be able to bite with impunity, but you will not eat my supper without me trying to stop you.

*IF* we wanted to defeat China in a non-nuclear war, we would first establish air superiority using existing and new military bases in range and then we would pound their infrastructure relentlessly. Provided that they did not receive substantial outside sources of military materials, we could put them back to the stone age.

But then we'd have to look elsewhere for cheap products. Not only would the economical impact be significant for their country, I can assure you it would harm the global economy. It is in our best interest to be friends with China.