Skip to comments.Romney Exposes Obama’s Zero Sum Game on Foreign Policy
Posted on 10/10/2012 2:33:52 PM PDT by Kaslin
The more Romney talks these days the better he sounds. While it may seem counter intuitive with less than a month to go until election day, Romney has finally found his voice in this presidential campaign and a backbone to support it.
After notching a heavy weight win against President Obama in last weeks Denver debate, Romney laid down another game changer in his foreign policy speech Monday at the Virginia Military Institute. Osama bin Laden might be dead but we are not safer was the theme of Romneys speech. America isnt shaping history but leaving our destiny at the mercy of events, said Romney.
Looking severely presidential at the Virginia Military Institute, Romney gave a searing indictment of Obamas failures to lead abroad, naming incident after incident where Obama has sat on the sidelines as world events unravel.
· The planned terror attack on the USA consulate in Libya where American diplomats were killed and Obama first tried to blame it on an anti-Muslim video.
· Daylight has been put between Israel and America.
· Iran is going nuclear and when it tried to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador in our nations capital Obama was silent when asked Are you with us, or are you with them?
· Syrian President Assad butchered 30,000 of his people and attacked Turkey while Obama remains silent.
· Al Qaeda is alive and well in Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, Syria and Northern Africa.
· No new trade agreements have been signed.
Romney said what is painfully obvious to Americans, hope is not a strategy and the nations security cant afford for more years of Obamas deliberate passivity. Because if America doesnt lead others will like Assad and the mullahs.
Assuming the mantle of a president, Romney declared Our friends and allies across the globe do not want less American leadership. They want more. Romney outlined how under his presidency our country would rise up again.
In short order Romney warned the world would know if he became president, America would back up its words with deeds. Romney pledged he would not tolerate a nuclear Iran or thumb his nose at Israel. He would restore Obamas arbitrary cuts in defense, show Putin no flexibility and make NATO nations pay their fair share. Today only three NATO nations pay the required 2% of their GDP to security spending.
Romney was unequivocal that USA aid to foreign countries would be predicated on nations respect for their citizens and protecting our diplomats and property abroad. He would send weapons to the Syrian rebels to prevent Iran from gaining a stronghold in the region since Iran is supplying weapons to Assad. Finally, Romney promised to pursue a two state solution between Israel and the Palestinians and work to ensure Afghanistan can effectively manage its own security against the constant threat of Islamic terrorists.
As Romney laid out his foreign policy goals, it seemed like a lot to promise but thats because President Obama has done so little. When was the last time we heard, Obama defend the ideals of America: freedom, peace and prosperity, as Romney fiercely did?
Instead our president apologizes for Americas greatness, strives to appease our enemies and scorns success. After years of being lectured to about our shortcomings, Americans need a leader like Romney who believes The 21st century can and must be an American century and will accept nothing less. Thats the road to recovery.
If this speech was a tease of what Romney will unleash on Obama during the upcoming foreign policy debate, Obama may want to read some Cliff notes on foreign policy and liberals may want to brace themselves for a sequel better than the prequel.
What's weird about this ring is the fact that it is the SAME ring he wore PRIOR to getting married.. Michelle placed his old ring on his finger at their wedding. That's some SERIOUS allegiance to Islam, there. Now we know why he can't even say 'war on terror'. It offends him.
In retrospect, I think this has been Romney's strategy all along. It's somewhat cynical, but it depends on voters having a short memory and coming into Election Season with late interest. I think that most do on both accounts (excluding many Freepers, of course.)
Romney was not going to be a victim of media burnout. He put little information out there during the summer, skipped the TV interviews, and largely avoided giving the media any morsels to twist, contort, mis-represent, question, or otherwise distort into a policy or idea that was largely untrue.
The Obama campaign began with their charachiture of Romney as soon as it was apparent Mitt would get the nomination. They spent a significant amount of money, which was essentially pissed away after the first debate.
Meanwhile, Romney had a strong debate, and is basically using the month of October to build the "Big Mo," headed toward Election Day.
Before the hords arrive to wail that if we arm Syrian rebels we will be arming our enemies in the tradition of the Arab Spring stupidity...
This seems to me to overstate what Romney said about Assad’s opposition. I got from his speech that we would only arm an opposition if they passed our careful screening and muster - NOT that we would willy nilly arm Assad’s opponents.
Mitt pointed out in the speech that al qaeda is ON THE MOVE in Lybia, Syria and elsewhere. He is clearly aware that you don’t call it the Arab Spring and cluelessly arm whomever opposes Assad or anyone else.
I’m glad he never onced used that stupid term, Arab Spring.
Can you say “pressure”?
It is certainly true that Romney’s campaign intentionally did not spend the tons of cash they had on hand as soon as they were able to do so. They let -bama punch himself out and only now are launching into the airwaves with all the pent up power and funds they have accumulated, while people are paying attention.
Not just avoiding media burnout — he also avoided giving the libs rope to hang him with.