Well perhaps colonialism is a bad choice of words, but I think you catch my drift.
I think one of the few valid solutions would be a repeat of what the allies did after World War II with Germany. It can't be done from a distance. We need to be there playing an active role in the process or it will fail.
Anything less, and we will likely leave the Middle East in a bigger state of turmoil than it is already. We will need a bigger American presence, and such presence would likely be a stabilizing factor rather than a de-stabilizing factor: We still have bases in Germany, Cuba, etc...And one benefit of an American presence would be a stabilization of the India-Pakistan problem (Although it wouldn't solve it).
The model could work.
Current Events » in reply to Re: We cannot sustain a 'colony' . . .
Re: We cannot sustain a 'colony' . . .
