"....there are those who look to the middle east (and other contemporary "hot spots" in the world) and see the footprint of British colonialism. Perhaps the collapse of British Colonialism may be more accurate. Boundaries for emerging political entities following the collapse of the Ottoman empire were drawn in such a way as to retain control by optimizing tension. The US is rather a "late comer" to the area. "

The Ottoman Empire - dates back to the Moorish expansion, so we are talking about a period going back some 1000 years. The first World War and the Treaty of Verseilles put an end to the Ottoman Empire in 1919 - in comparison not that long ago. In line with the ludicrous point made, and insisted upon, by US President Woodrow Wilson that any and every ethnic group had the right to call itself a nation and establish itself as a country (I acknowledge the over simplification), gave birth to among others: Austria
Hungary
Czechosolvakia
Serbia
Croatia
Albania
Serbia
Poland
Syria
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Jordan
Palestine
The Trucial States
Oman
Yemen

Now with regard to the middle east states created, the League of Nations (which Pres Wilson had to good sense to steer clear of having created the pot mess), recognised that as some of the above hadn't any idea what the concept of nationhood was they would need looking after. It did this by mandates. The French looked after Syria and the Lebanon, the British looked after Egypt, Palestine (including Israel), Iraq, the Trucial States and Oman.

I don't know if Paddymac thinks that all these people lived in harmony and that everything was sweetness and light up until 1919, but a few facts - no British colonies in the middle east - ever. In fact the British involvement in that part of the world dates back to the Napoleonic times, and only then because the French were attempting to cut British trade and reduce British influence in India. We're pretty new on the block ourselves chum.