Nothing "easy peasy" about it.
The entire US economy is dependent upon a modicum of stability in the ME regarding the flow of oil.
Of course it's easy.
You don't even have to do anything, really.
It's simply a matter of not doing wot you have been doing.
Not an action but an inaction. How easy is that?
Leave Iraq.
Leave Afghanistan.
Quit protecting Israel.
America is now totally isolated from the rest of the planet on the issue of Israel.
Last vote in the UN on the issue of sanctioning Israel for commiting acts of state terrorism in the ME was The Entire World vs 5.
The 5 being the US, Israel and 3 tiny Pacific Island nations (most likely bribed to make the vote less embarrssing to the US).
If you listen to the rhetoric of the Islamic world (both extremists and moderates) you'll find that a lot of the instability in the region stems from America utilising it's veto as a permanent member of the UN security council in order to prevent peace.
The lie that it is the Palestinians who've been the main stumbling block to peace in the region is unravelling even in the heavily propagandised US. The rest of the world has largely been aware of the fact fer years now. Particularily in the ME itself, obviously.
America when it talks about it's so-called "war on Terror" has little to no credibility in the eyes of many in that America actually supports terrorism (the kind practised by Israel against Palestine) more than it confronts it.
When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in an ill-fated attempt to seize the oil the Carter Doctrine was set in motion. That dictated that US had the right to step in, using military force if neccessary, in order to prevent outside influences from creating instability in the ME because, as you state, their oil is considered part and parcel of America's "national interests".
Fine, fair enuff.
In point of fact America never took on the Soviets directly at that time but rather used the CIA to give the Soviets "their own Vietnam". Financing the forerunners to todays Al Quaeda and Taliban. After the Soviets left "the graveyard of empires" that is Afghanistan America largely turned it's back on the region but there had been a doctrinal shift in the meantime. The Carter Doctrine gave way to the Reagan Doctrine which stated that the US was right to step in, using military force if neccessary, in the event of internal instability.
By allowing the defining of "internal instability" up to the overly corporately beholden biatches of DC the pre-emptive war for oil that is and was Iraq (and which Afghanistan has become since OBL flew the coop) became inevitable on a certain level.
Spud is totally down with America preventing other countries from taking over the oil rich states in the gulf but Spud is dead set against America continually occupying those states in the name of preserving "stability" because the longer you remain an occupying power there the more hated you will be and the more instability will result.
In order to leave Afghanistan successfully you will have to negotiate with the Taliban and ally yourself with them against the far crazier and more dangerous AQ.
In order to leave Iraq successfully you will have to give up dreams of permanent military bases in the country, which was one of Cheney's long term goals, of course.
In order to have peace in the region in the long term you need to solve Israel/Palestine and that involves stoppping being Israel's Godfather at the UN. The consensus for peace in the region isn't rocket science. It's been around for a while. A two state solution involving UN resolution 242 borders in which a level of real autonomy is given to the Palestinians.
Maybe not "easy peasy" per se but certainly a lot easier than pretending that along term occupation of any of those three aforementioned places is sustainable permanently.
Be Well.
