What gets me is that most of the current unrest in the Middle East arose from US (and UK) foreign policy over the last 60-odd years. From what I've read, it all started with disagreements over oil, and the west, either overtly or covertly, funding and backing various factions within the oil-producing countries to help them get into power and start exporting cheap oil. (That's over-simplifying it a lot, I know, but it's the gist of it.) Then, when those factions got into power and turned on the west, the cycle started again.
All that's happened as a result is that countries which were fairly poor in the past, but had oil are now armed to the teeth, with weapons supplied either by the US, Europe or Russia and they also bear grudges against the west for interfering in their countries' politics and way of life. How many times has this got to happen before western governments realise that it's probably not a good idea to stir things up in other countries? It's probably too late now.
The US was behind Saddam taking over in Iraq and trained and funded Osama Bin Laden when he was starting out because they planned to use them both against the Iranians. How often does information like that get out in the States? It's not the first time that something done "for the good of the nation" has backfired, but US governments carry on doing it.
Now, some of you might see that as an anti-American rant. It isn't. It's an anti-foreign policy rant. I've got nothing against (most) individual Americans, but you seem to give the reins of power to the wrong people. One comment that I hear frequently from American colleagues and associates over here is that they know more about matters of substance in the States from British/European news than their friends and relatives in the States do. Are your news programmes/papers censored or is it just that people are genuinely more interested in Britney's latest child/shag/hairdo/comeback (delete as appropriate) than about what's actually going on?
