Skip to comments.The Foreign Policy Debate: hiding from reality
Posted on 10/22/2012 7:26:51 PM PDT by The_Reader_David
There is something deeper going on than the fact that this is a domestic-policy election with both candidates dragging the discussion into their domestic agendas. Neither Romney nor Obama shows any evidence of comprehending the nature of Islam, or the policy implications of the nature of Islam, or even of Salafist Sunni Islam, which is the dominant force in the "Arab Spring".
I think it is a matter of not wanting to face reality. The refusal to face the reality of Islam is endemic in Western society, as Bill Warner says in his talk the history of Islam on Gates of Vienna, "it is history we don't want to know."
actually, i feel the only solution to the the muslim problem is to eliminate them.
then there is no problem.
let them eat pork.
Sounds to me like two guys bragging about who can insert us into the most foreign disputes when we need to get the hell out.
Romney also missed a chance when Bammy said “I” stood with the Tunisians and Libyans. Romney should have reminded him that both countries are now unstable messes as is Egypt. He should have then reminded Obama that he didn’t stand with the Iranian people when they were calling for real reform.
Honestly, I think the real winner of tonight’s debate was Ayman al-Zawahiri.
They’re both clueless about the nature of the Syrian opposition. Romney’s proposals for the follow-on to the Arab Spring are pure vaporware, and of course Obama presided over that disaster, which both of them kept trying to make out to be a victory for democracy. Obama’s assertion that al Qaeda is weaker than when he took office is based on an erroneous perception of what al Qaeda is — in terms of its own declared program, al Qaeda is winning.
Another ignored reality was Russia’s involvement in the middle eastern events and how that affects our interests. Russia has flatly stated that an attack on Iran would be perceived as an attack on Russia and has aided them in developing their nuclear program and yet Barack Obama wants to believe that Russia isn’t a threat and that the cold war is all over. This on the anniversary of the Cuban missile crisis no less. How’s that for irony? Romney should have gutted Obama over that cold war comment.
I felt like the elephant in the room that nobody would talk about was the fact that Obama inherited a Middle East that was supportive of America’s anti-terrorism and those governments have since been replaced by Islamist regimes that openly side with terrorists and persecute non-Muslims. At the same time, the Obama regime has given up on defeating the Taliban and has instead turned to negotiating with the Taliban, with the idea that if the Taliban is terrorizing its own people it will stop exporting the terror. It’s still terror; it’s just terror against the very people that Obama and Romney both say need to stand against terrorism in those countries.
What we got was platitudes, with nobody actually addressing the extremely vulnerable position America is now in, after 4 years of Obama’s foreign policy failures.
Yep. Have to agree with you.
This is part and parcel of the Ivy League mindset. There are some ideas that are too radical for people from the Ivy League to wrap their heads around - ideas that seem so common sense, so obvious that anyone should be able to see them like the sun in a clear midday sky, but the graduates of the Ivy League moron factories get heavily invested in certain mindsets which are considered ‘acceptable.’
The obvious facts then become ‘unacceptable.’
And the unacceptable facts in the middle east - that Islam is an expansionist military doctrine posing as theology, that Moslems fall into two groups (jihadists and silent apologists for the first group) and that they’re seeking to regain what they’ve lost from the 17th century or so... those ideas might be obvious to us, but they will never be spoken aloud by the graduates of the Ivy League schools.
Which is why I didn’t vote for Mittens (and I sure as hell didn’t vote for Obama). I’ve had it with these wishy-washing, RINO Republicans. I’m just washing my hands of them.
I wonder how Mitt could do other than point out some of the failures - very difficult to developp an argument when you have had no connections whatever to the subject.
Don’t blame the Ivy League for blindness to the threat of Islam: I’m a Penn man (GA&S ‘84, Ph.D. in Mathematics) and see it plain as day.
I’m guessing you’re one of the few in your class that actually works for you achievements rather than sponges off your alma mata connections.
Every now and again, they let an honest one slip through the mob of grifters.
Actually, all of us who got doctorates in mathematics, science, or engineering from the Ivies work for our achievements. I think the only things I’ve ever gotten off Penn connections were getting a semester back at Penn when on sabbatical and the lead on the really nice little apartment I rented during that sabbatical, which you actually needed Penn connections to rent at all.
The EE’s from Haaaavaaadddh that my classmates and I met who didn’t impress us much. Real good at quoting formulas... not so hot at actually solving problems.
I’ve heard the same opinion from other engineers who went to “trade school” engineering colleges, like RPI. As one RPI grad put it to me in the 80’s: “They’re like incense - lots of pretty-smelling smoke... no real flame.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.