. . . engagement.
Arguably, the US has been involved in the Middle East for nearly 100 years:
THE STORY OF “ARAMCO”
In
1933, when Saudi Arabia allowed Standard Oil of California (SOCAL, now Chevron) to come in and explore, SOCAL assigned the job to a subsidiary it established, the California Arabian Standard Oil Company (CASOC). In 1936, the Texas Company (later Texaco) bought half of that subsidiary, and in 1944, the partnership renamed itself “Aramco.” In 1948, the predecessor companies of today’s ExxonMobil joined the partnership. This four-company consortium made up Aramco until 1980, when the Saudi government completed a gradual buyout of Aramco’s assets. In 1988, the successor com pany was established as the “Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco)” to recognize both its binational history and its good reputation.
https://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/200803/flash/75-facts/print.htm
This situation already relates to a much more significant national security concern than what occurred in SE Asia.
So, I am just reacting, I suppose, to how I took your "in the process ... soon" comment. To me, based on the history of the US in the region plus the extreme tolerance that seems to exist for friendship with the Saudis (alone, not even considering the Israelis), the "process" that you mention might take the next 75 years or until the US government (regardless of political party) is forced to acknowledge climate change and global warming as a threat and adapt. Even then, the region
might be a solar power collection hub.
So, I don't doubt that this will likely be bloody, but now that the MAGA side of this country and Trump have started this war, I don't see them backing down in the face of losses. If the losses are too great and too sudden, that probably will have the opposite effect, and this will become a full-scale invasion. Again, that would only get bloodier and last longer.
We'll see. I don't know how this will go, but it should never have been started in the first place. One concern is that Trump just does what he wants: he might be unhinged enough actually to use nuclear weapons. He has no limit on bad ideas he is willing to try out unless the markets count as a sort of limit, but moderation seems to be an afterthought with him--after things start tanking. (Note his Covid-19 response, etc.)
= new reply since forum marked as read