Something Other Than a War Has to be the Solution for the Middle East

I hope this comes out coherent.

Israel was 5 years old when I was born to a Jewish mother.  Growing up in the aftermath of WWII and the horrors of The Holocaust, I came to believe that the Jewish people deserved to have their homeland.  Viewing the ceaseless wars over religion and developing a skepticism for religion, I turned away from faith, but not away from my belief that Israel needs to exist.

The Palestinians have now been without a state for 67 years.  Over much of that period, they have not deserved a state.  Yasar Arafat was a terrorist and a rotten manager of a state.  The result, in combination with certain Israeli policies, was a lack of economic opportunity creating angry and frustrated young men.  What do angry and frustrated young men do, they become terrorists and soldiers against their perceived enemy.

The U.S. destroyed the Sunni led Iraqi government which was the only government crazy enough to stand up to Iran, which other than Iraq, Turkey and Israel, is the only other proven military force in the region.  So we should not be surprised that Iran is trying to exert some regional influence.

What did our war in Iraq accomplish?  It put the Shiite's in charge and eliminated a Sunni counterbalance to Iran's Shiite led government.  It created the basis for a Kurdish state and destroyed the Iraqi Army.   13 years later, all our training was for naught as the Iraqi Army cannot defeat ISIS without the assistance of the U.S. and Iran.  Our war in Iraq also destroyed the economy in the Sunni regions creating angry and frustrated young men who formed ISIS.

Now I have no idea what the attraction of a caliphate government is but it seems to attract all the angry and frustrated Muslims who have no economic opportunity where they are and even attracts some who do have economic opportunity.  It would seem to be a priority in future Middle East endeavors to avoid trashing economic opportunity and motivating young men to become terrorists.

It seems clear to me that we need to try some set of policies beyond destruction.  I say that for both the U.S. and Israel.  After 67 years of destruction, it is time to build up the Palestinian economy to create hope for the young so they don't become angry and frustrated.  I know this will not be easy.

And this is why the U.S. has to choose trust and verification when it comes to Iranian nuclear ambitions.  The U.S. has negotiated with the support of every other major economic power a way to monitor and limit Iranian nuclear activity.  If the U.S. walks away from this without the support of the global community, the global community may well end the sanctions that have brought Iran to the negotiating table and made them willing to have their nuclear program monitored and limited.

The only other path the U.S. could follow is one that only Israel and Saudi Arabia support.  That is bombing Iran to smithereens in an effort to destroy their nuclear capacity.  But much of that is dispersed and buried underground so it cannot be bombed.

So those who advocate no trust for Iranian leadership need to be focused on two things:  (i) Maintaining the support of the global community for sanctions if Iran does not comply and (ii) the consequences of any focused military action upon Iran.

It is very uncertain to see how military action would generate either regime change in Iran or a desire to end their nuclear program.  All military action would do is sponsor rage, frustration and angry in the young men who want some economic success for themselves.  Iran has a population of 75 million people and half are under the age of 35.  Do we really want to turn them into the fodder of a Shiite version of ISIS or the PLO?

Destruction has not created security for Israel, Iraq, or Afghanistan.  Destruction has not discouraged young men from becoming terrorists and soldiers for a war against their perceived enemies.

It is time to use economic growth as a tool in our War on Terror.  It does not mean anarchist acts will not occur, but except for Vladimir Putin who shoots down civilian airliners with impunity, the entire world hates anarchy and will fight it.  What we need to do is limit the number of angry and frustrated young men.

That is why I believe in a policy toward Iran that has the support of the world.  That means negotiate with them honestly, firmly and insuring that there is a means for verification.  Ronald Reagan's belief's have been distorted over time by some, but he did believe in negotiation, he did believe in trusting his enemies, but he also believed in verification.

The alternative policy of distruction has little possibility of success and a certainty of poor outcomes that would fuel an already disastrous outcome for many in the Middle East from the Iraqi War.  And the U.S. would own that as well.

The only way we could fight the Iraqi War was with the support of Kuwait and Turkey.  How could we fight a war in Iran if Turkey and Kuwait are in turmoil? Would the Shiite's of Iraq still like the U.S. if we are attacking Iran?   Israel is a small island in a very big sea of turmoil.  More destruction is not a path to stability.  In fact, I believe, it would only increase the instability many times over.

I hope Bibi Netanyahu and the GOP contemplate thoughts like I express here.

Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and the U.S. need a common policy if ISIS is to ever be defeated and economic opportunity rather than desires for a caliphate are to dominate young men's lives.