Yes, indeed, but you forgot to point out that the major point of departure has been the Iraq war of 2003, and not the presence of any western troops in any Muslim country. That was a monumental disaster for everyone except the Kurds.
Furthermore, what you fail to grasp is that the presence of Western troops in the Middle East or elsewhere does not always have negative consequences, and sometimes they are even invited. The worst recent genocide in Rwanda took place because the west - and especially Bill Clinton - refused to interfere (they were busy with Yugoslavia at the time, where the death toll was much smaller), not because it did. The greatest recent famine/genocide combo in Somalia was the result of the withdrawal of the U.S. American forces (Black Hawk down) not because the west interfered there. Other genocides of immense proportions where the west didn't mess with include the Bangladesh war of independence. Even in Iraq where a portion of the west bares a huge responsibility, the casualties as a result of direct action by western forces is smaller than the casualties of the regime of Saddam Hussein, although the overall death toll due to religious and tribal warfare is certainly much bigger.
On the other hand, many western military bases in the gulf states are there because those smaller Arab emirates are afraid of their larger neighbors, Saudi Arabia and Iran in particular. Few of you around here could recall that when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Saudi Arabia found the opportunity to grab a small portion of disputed territory from another minor Arab neighbor.
Overall, the excuse that "The west is responsible for the conflicts in the Middle East" couldn't be further from the truth. Even the suggestion that the arms sales of western states to rich Arab states does not directly correlate to the bloodshed, since the bloodier recent genocide, that of Rwanda, materialized with machetes...
Don't play that leftist game with me. The causes of conflict in the Middle East (and elsewhere) have little or nothing to do with the west, no matter how much certain western states profit from them. Unless of course you want to legitimize the terror attacks in the eyes of the gullible... Nobody in this forum has gone to the crux of the matter of the real causes of conflicts.Islam, again, is not the direct cause of conflict. A look in the map would convince anybody that the reasons are once more correlated with geography rather than religion. The Muslim states of Central Asia are currently more peaceful than the Christian states of Africa or even Latin America. Islam is still, the religion which creates the most indirect causes of conflict, along with the Catholic church which comes a distant second.
The priest had guts, but I guess that had to be expected from a man who lived though WWII or the aftermath of WWII.
The millenials look like a lost cause, but I won't lose faith: Most U.S. kids had no experience in war prior to WWII, and yet they fought valiantly in the end...