The United States is too involved in Middle Eastern affairs

Oh dear how could I have missed the Con's definitions of Democracy? my oh my, they were only all the way at the bottom at number 5, 4, and 8 respectively..... My definitions were the first ones that came up on those respective websites the ones YOU cherry picked were the only ones you wanted to use because their definitions are just vague enough for you to warp to reinforce your own argument.... How could you accuse me of cherry-picking definitions when you did the same thing??http://www.merriam-webster.com...http://dictionary.reference.com...http://www.thefreedictionary.com..." Any society that strives to be classless and equal must recognize that all people in their society or not have the same rights and are excluded due to "the absence of hereditary of arbitrary class distinctions. This means, on a fundamental level, every person born has the same rights. These rights do not differ person to person based on race, religion, socioeconomic status, location."Perhaps you easily missed my definitions of society, societies are independent divisions of society that differ on their structure or organization. As for your interpretation of hereditary + arbitrary class distinctions they do apply to race, religion, economic status but location does not apply because again, societies are subdivisions of mankind so one society does not have superiority over all the others because they are all independent. Hereditary = genetic inherited traits that pertain to race, sex, etc. Class distinctions = income, marriage status, political orientation, etc. Location does not apply to either of the qualities in the definition you yourself cherry picked out of my own sources...They may be universal rights but the US still does not have the inherit power to enforce their idea of society over other sovereign nations. As for my statement, "why is it that the US has only been focusing on primarily the Middle East?", I apologize to voters for my poor grammar and I would argue that I accidentally put the word "only" in there by mistake, but that would probably just draw an attack from the Con so........ My bad"....but the US pays far less attention to them...."I acknowledged the US has paid attention to these conflicts, but not as much attention as they have given to nations of the Middle East. You still have not answered that question actually.... If the US has the "right" to overrun entire countries to instill democratic ideologies on other peoples, then why is the US focusing much of its attention on the Middle East and not in these other conflicts? The only reason you offered is that the US needs "a starting point" but that is far from a justified argument, sounds more like an excuse to me...As for the straw man, relax, christ it was an honest question you didnt have to rant about it.... Also the example of what a straw man is is a pretty poor example since you made a statement, I showed the flaws of that statement, and your response is "well your wrong"....Ill end with one of Con's statements, "If there is anything history can teach us it is that governments are their for the people not the other way around"Governments are there for THEIR people, their OWN people, as in citizens who reside and live within the borders of a nation that is maintained by their government. The US involvement in the Middle East compared to other regions, regions that are just as volatile, abusive, etc. is unbalanced, the Con has not offered a reason for why this is, and the logic that the Con is using to justify such action is flawed as I have shown....