Hi Tracy.

The point I wanted to make with Kevin is that if the western nations have some responsibility for the current state of affairs in the middle east, which I think they do, then Kevin's argument of the moral high ground must fall away. You cannot take an incident as cause for action without considering how that incident came about.

iro whether the US should pull out of all other countries; The US needs the rest of the world just as much as the rest of the world needs the US. No first world country is an island. The world is an interelated and inter-dependent network. The US can keep its money at home and the rest of the world can keep it's money at home. However, that arrangement will benefit no one and everyone will be worse off in the long run.

iro negotiating with terrorists - it's a tough one and I am sure leaders have the counsel of the best minds in the business. I think that these issues are immensely complex and often with interelations to other issues which we may not even be aware of.


>IMO, absolutely not. I believe the U.S. should pull completely out of the affairs of all countries. Keep our money at home as well. They won't like it, but you can't have it both ways. However, I am finding it difficult to reconcile the original premise that the U.S. will not negotiate with terrorists no matter what (the stance of all administrations in the U.S.) to the current state of affairs where terrorist organizations are gaining strongholds in government states (foreign countries) and expecting to be recognized and most probably will.
>
>SNIP
>
>>Do you believe that the US and other western nations are free of any responsibility for the state we find the middle east in?