Posted on 10/08/2012 12:29:14 AM PDT by Zajko
Mitt Romney will call for an escalation of the conflict in Syria by arming rebels with the heavy weapons needed to confront president Bashar al-Assad's tanks, helicopters and fighter jets.
Romney is to make the proposal on Monday in what his campaign team has billed as a major foreign policy speech in Lexington, Virginia.
In extracts published in advance, he opened up the prospect, if he becomes president, of a US-Iranian proxy war being fought in Syria.
"Iran is sending arms to Assad because they know his downfall would be a strategic defeat for them. We should be working no less vigorously with our international partners to support the many Syrians who would deliver that defeat to Iran – rather than sitting on the sidelines," he said.
The proposal would mark a significant shift from Barack Obama's administration's policy of trying to keep the conflict a low-intensity one amid fears it might turn into a regional war. Obama is putting pressure on Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the main backers of the rebels, to restrict the supply of weapons to small arms.
The Republican presidential candidate has made several attempts at establishing his credentials to be commander-in-chief but those speeches made little impact. Against the background of his win over Obama in last week's debate, the Romney campaign team is hoping this speech will be better received.
The speech is aimed at countering critics who say he has not had much to say so far about foreign policy and given little indication of the lines he would pursue as president.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
There are NO good guys involved there, and we don’t have a dog in that fight. Idiot position, Mitt.
Sounds like he’s made the mistake of listening to John McCain. It’s about time that Americans realized that, in today’s Middle East, of all the possible outcomes, none of them are good outcomes.
Best to stay out of these tribal conflicts and civil wars.
LLS
Arming them is different than putting people there. This is a sign to the rebel supporters, namely Saudi and Qatar to green light more weapons. Romney is trying to draw Russia into these conflicts. Interesting.
Well, it should come as no surprise to folks that Romney’s sporting the neocon interventionist claptrap since he’s got former Bush people on his team as foreign policy advisors, like Condi Rice.
Romney to propose new sanctions on Iran, new help for Syrian rebels
CBS News·45 minutes ago Romney plans to call for more direct intervention in Syria, including making sure anti-government opposition forces have weapons. He also plans to criticize the Obama administration for its initial focus on an… http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57527605/romney-to-propose-new-sanctions-on-iran-new-help-for-syrian-rebels/
Considering the WMD’s have already been moved and “lost track of,” by our intelligence community it just might make some sense.
Supposedly will be rebels who have our values>>>course America doesn't have a good track record with that?
http://news.yahoo.com/most-americans-against-intervening-syria-poll-finds-220600979.html
Bad idea. Extraordinarily bad idea.
The American people most definitely do not want a reprise of Bush's warmed over Wilsonianism.
Bad idea, Mitt. I hope he’s not taking advice from John McCain.
At this time, especially with the uber-screwups of Obama & Clinton running the show, the USA needs to stay neutral.
Looks like he’s going to follow the same insane path. Not good.
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/middle-east
“To protect our enduring national interests and to promote our ideals, a Romney administration will pursue a strategy of supporting groups and governments across the Middle East to advance the values of representative government, economic opportunity, and human rights, and opposing any extension of Iranian or jihadist influence. The Romney administration will strive to ensure that the Arab Spring is not followed by an Arab Winter.”
NOoooooo !
The USA should never, repeat never, get involved with any muzzie state, no matter what side is winning or losing.
Do you know what time is the speech?
These were my thoughts exactly. How likely is it that an ultra-left, British news organization would obtain inside information from the Romney camp that domestic media outlets could not? It has the smell of a disinformation campaign to me, and who are more likely to gleefully go along than the Guardian?
The likely sources are the Syrian rebels who are angry that the U.S. hasn't been more forthcoming with heavy weaponry. Officially, Hillary is forking over only “humanitarian aid”, which I suspect is diplomatic code for CIA logistical support and intelligence. The rebels want artillery, heavy machine guns and armor.
Hopefully, Romney will resist the temptation to use this ugly situation as an opportunity to look tough on foreign policy. As Kissinger said of the Iraq and Iran War, it's a shame both sides can't lose. We need to stay the heck out while trying to protect endangered minority communities that stand to suffer still worse oppression should the rebels prevail: e.g. Syrian Christians and obscure Muslim sects like the Druse.
At the Clinton global initiative forum he already said much of this.
He wants to continue foreign aid to create economic opportunity. (whatever that means)
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.