I consider myself moderate and I was wondering if any other moderates out there also supported U.S. efforts in the middle east? Because I've been accused of being republican or a neo-con simply over this issue.

You'd have to define "efforts in the Middle East".

Do you mean, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel? All of the work they do in the Middle East? The support of dictatorships in the Middle East? So on and so fourth.

I know some of you will probably roll your eyes at this, but here goes. I do not support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm witholding judgement on U.S. relations with Isreal at the moment. However, I do support the troops that happen to be on tour in those regions.

I used to support Iraq but no longer.
I support the war in Afghanistan.
I don't support the support of Israel I think they are 90% of the conflict in the mideast.

laiguana, pay no attention to others' accusations. And I'm not sure what you mean by U.S. efforts in the middle east.
I'm a moderate and I believe we're in Afghanistan with good reason. I believe we're in Iraq for no good reason at all, but since we started it, we need to finish it. At the cost of many lives, limbs and sanity. It sucks rocks, but we can't just up and leave because the American public doesn't like it. We need to rebuild what we tore apart. It worked in Germany. It worked in Japan. We still have a military presence in both countries.
I think Israel is strong enough to stand on it's own.
I think messing with stable governments in any country is a waste of manpower and resources. If my government really feels it necessary to stick it's military nose in places, we should do it through the U.N. We should initiate discussion about countries where their governments are unstable. Places where there is *true* civil war. If we're going to send our soldiers off to be killed or maimed; they should be part of a larger, multi-national force. And the purpose should be to completely dominate a country until it becomes stable again. It should not be to bring democracy and "freedom" to people. I'm tired of Bush and his useless buzzwords. I don't understand his appeal to some people. I've never liked him. I disagree with him on so many points, that I could fill a thread in PTS slugfest. The only thing I *do* agree with him on is that we must not pull out of Iraq until we've cleaned up the mess we made.

When your in the middle, you get it from both sides... When the right thing to do falls into one camp or another (Liberal, Conservative, or some other philosophy) those that oppose that point of view will vilify you. It's a cheap tactic, one that the Right and Left have sunk into and can't get out of (I'm speaking in terms of the U.S. political scene). I always shrug these pathetic attempts off, and remind myself that I'll be in hot water next week with someone else... I figure it will average out in the end, just follow your own instincts on an issue and let the standard bearers be damned.

I got your back.

Fence Top Monkeys, not just for flinging poo in all directions...

If there are any repubs who are conservative it is me, heck I even happen to be a card carrying and sustaining member of the RNC. I don't know, would you all consider me a moderate? Honestly, I'm biased on the matter and second opinions would be of benefit here.

Are you a moderate Republican? Or are you a Moderate? Most likely you are a moderate Republican... If you focus on fiscal and foreign policy, and are not inclined to delve into the social issues (like the Christian right has a propensity to do) I would consider you more moderate. If You are willing to investigate any party's stance on a subject, and embrace it if you find it to be the "best" (that's a subjective best) solution to an issue, then I would tend to call you a Moderate. That being said, a Moderate is unlikely to side with an extremist position (say on immigration, to round up all the illegals and deport them). It's all shades of gray unless you're on the far ends of the political spectrum.