The middle east has always been chaotic. There has always been war. Even before the Crusades.
The only reason we give a **** is because they're drowning in oil. No oil? We go back to ignoring them, like we had been doing for the last 300 years prior to the demand for oil.
Think about it. Most of the middle east ascribes to a religion that places very little value on human life. It is, as a culture, antiquated to the extreme, BY DESIGN. Think of them as almost being violent Amish. When you way of life dictated by tenants that are a thousand years expired, and your leaders are indoctrinated and compelled to INDOCTRINATE those very same tenants upon their populace, this is what happens.
Imagine what THIS country would look like if each individual interpretation of Christianity had the added belief that all the OTHERS were infidels who cannot be suffered to live...at least not in the same vicinity as themselves.
I would agree, and it speaks to my point on having to go with a confusing, changing, and hypocritical foreign policy. If there is something in it for the US (or our "allies") then there is behavior we will overlook. This is very true of Saudi Arabia and how they handle discrimination, oppression and persecution of Christians. Now, are the chopping heads off and putting the video on the internet? No, but that does not negate that we overlook their behavior because there is something in it for us. So we overlook that generally speaking Christians enter Saudi Arabia as foreign and temporary workers that cannot practice their faith openly. Bibles, crucifixes, statues, items with Christian religious symbols are still not publicly allowed forcing those who are Christian to worship within the confines of their residences. Yet, we do business with these jackals.
You are correct in that this region of the world has been in some degree of conflict that predates even the concept of monotheism, let alone Islam that by design does not want or allow for ideological competition. Even with the splintering of that faith the result is more of the same, pockets of ideology that cannot get along with one another. It explains well everything from Libya to Egypt to Syria to Iraq and so many others that cannot function with groups of competition ideology trying to negotiate. It is all based upon a faith that does not allow for negotiation. That then makes good sense as to why western governmental and sociological philosophies do not work over there in any long term. Note what was put in place in Iraq and how quickly that resulted in failure. I suspect Afghanistan is not that far behind in experiencing some degree of set back in dealing with what all is left of their competition ideologies (and there are many, it is not just the Taliban.) Representative governments tend to fail over there, and what seems to be the norm suggest aptitude for military and/or religious dictatorships. Seriously, they are all reading a book with a baked into the text mechanism of societal control and "religious authority."
So, rather hypocritically we support those dictatorships that benefit us in some way then point the finger at others spending lives and dollars in a confusing effort to tell everyone over there how they should live and under what system of government. We can then tell from history all the way to current, that it tends to fail in spectacular manner. What is bred, and rather well, is contempt for Western governments in interference in everyone else's lives. And speak of, more often than not we worked with people we later determine are problems. We tried to work openly with Saddam before calling him a problem, and don't get me started on our position during the Iran / Iraq war. Similar story with those that made up the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan when fighting the Russians, and what they later became under terrorist organization names.
It has always been a mess over there but I would argue more often than not our interventionism has made matters worse, and as such placed us in even more danger the further we go along. It is an odd position for us to be in but we seemed to have upset (or at least are not trusted) by a good 1/2 the planet as of today. How can that possibly be defined as good policy?