Why are we interfering in a Civil War?

After all these years American Foreign Policy in the Middle East still resembles the early years of American business expansion into the world that earned us the name, "Ugly American" because of our assumption that everyone thought like us and would make decisions the same way plus have the same values and goals. How utterly stupid that was. American business learned...and prospered. American Foreign Policy is still seemingly unaware that not all the world wants to be like us.


Consider if Obama had been in power in England (or France, or Spain) during our Civil War.  How would we have felt if he come out with the command, "Lincoln must go" and set about organizing the other European Countries to bread the Northern blockade of Southern ports?  Sounds decidedly inappropriate when looked at from that point of view, doesn't it?  And where was this purposeful resolve when people took to the streets in Iran? Bahrain? Syria?

The inconsistencies are bad enough...and this article discusses them well. But there is more to be concerned about...and that is the nature of the Middle East itself. Up until now the countries have been run by heads of state with their own interests, and often at odds with one another. The President's actions are opening that up to a change that most certainly harbor more danger for the United States.

Not one American pundit, in or out of Government (much less the President) has considered that multiple secular leaders with self-interest at heart is much less a threat to the United States interests than a Middle East unified in a religious/political sect that sees Western Values (read, "American") as evil and to be overcome and destroyed. Many of the rebels in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain are Shi'ites and operate with the same attitudes and goals of those in Iran. And we are now the tools of their attempt to gain unified power.

It is bad enough to be wrong...but to be stupidly wrong is both an embarrassment and a horror.