Skip to comments.Former CIA chief: Romney’s right on Iran (On Stage, One man was President, the other Presidential)
Posted on 10/24/2012 1:48:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
How well did both candidates frame the biggest threats against the US during the final presidential debate, to the extent that they stuck to the debate topic of foreign policy? Newsmax asked former CIA chief Michael Hayden whether Barack Obama was correct in identifying terrorist networks as our greatest threat, or Mitt Romney pointing to Iran and their pursuit of nuclear weapons. Hayden gives the point to Romney --- and says that Obama has been largely ineffective at stopping the mullah's march to nuclear proliferation:
Former CIA Director Michael Hayden tells Newsmax that Mitt Romney was right and President Obama wrong when the GOP candidate said during the Monday debate that a nuclear Iran and not a terrorist attack was the biggest threat to Americas national security.
The retired 4-star Air Force General also says he is not very hopeful that negotiations with the Iranians will dissuade them from developing nuclear weapons. And he predicts that a President Romney would review Obamas exemption of some of Irans major trading partners from imposing sanctions on the Islamic Republic. …
During Mondays presidential debate, President Obama stated that the biggest national security threat was an attack by a terrorist organization, and Romney said it was a nuclear-armed Iran.
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV, Hayden states who he thinks was right.
I was advising the [Romney] campaign, but I did not advise the governor on this question. But I can tell you, I have been giving speeches now for three and a half years since I left the government. The general theme of the speech is what things keep you awake at night, and for three and a half years I have begun with Iran, a nuclear Iran, and pointed out that of all the things I left when I left the government, the one that has gotten increasingly dark, increasingly problematic, has been Iran.
The governors choice was the one that I have been saying since I left government, and I frankly think it is the most destabilizing trend out there, should it come to fruition and the Iranians get the nuclear capability.
In fact, as Hayden points out — and as Romney also argued during the debate — the toughening of sanctions originated in Congress, not in the White House. “They have really held the president’s feet to the fire,” Hayden remarks. Hayden also criticized Obama’s efforts to provide some exemptions to the sanctions for some of Iran’s trading partners. Hayden told Newsmax that those exemptions undermine the pressure of the sanctions, as well as the symbolic unity that magnifies that pressure.
Finally, Hayden had particularly sharp words for Obama over his “horses and bayonets” remark. “You had two men on stage,” Hayden said. “One was President. The other was presidential.”
Al Qaeda has killed thousands more Americans on US soil than Iran ever has. This dangerous fixation on Iran is diverting attention away from the organization that has declared war on our nation, attacked our cities and has promised that they will do it again.
One nuclear blast will change all that.
This dangerous fixation on Iran is diverting attention away from the organization that has declared war on our nation, attacked our cities and has promised that they will do it again.
Might want to update your research on Iran, because they have promised to do the same thing. Pre 9/11/2001 Al Qaeda had made similar threats, then they FINALLY carried it out.
Iran is no less determined.
Only a fool would think otherwise.
How many decades have we heard threatenings from the Tehran regime? I think if Iran’s talk was more than just talk, there would have been blood in the streets of America long before now. For all their reputation for irrationality, the powers that be in Iran have shown an affinity for the conventional rules of self-preservation over the years.
What-O-what happened to General Petraeus and what have they done with his body??
You miss the point, or are not well-informed. al Quaeda may be more mobile, and therefore seemingly more a threat, but once Iran gets nuclear capability, it has enumerated over and over again that it’s one goal will be to destroy both the US and Israel. If that means selling those bombs to al Quaeda to do that, they will. Their economy is suffering, so they could use the cash. Ahmajenadab has a fixation on the coming of the Mahdi, their so-called messiah, and probably the real anti-Christ. He is itching for the glory of being the one who ushers “him” in. He is ruthless, as we’ve witnessed. Nothing stops him. He is determined. I believe the Chinese are helping him, along with Russia. A nuclear attack on what few ships we have left of our fleet now would cripple us in a way that we could not easily recover. He has already threatened that. The whole international community are tracking al Quaeda members. Yes, we only need one to slip through. But if Iran put a nuclear warhead on a ship and sailed into the midst of the 6th Fleet, or another large contingent of our military, it would do great harm. We have old equipment...ships, aircraft, helicopters, etc. We could be rendered sitting ducks in a hurry. This president is quickly taking us into third world status, both economically and militarily. This is no time to look at Iran as if were not a threat. We do not have the luxury of making a mistake there. Romney’s 300+ retired military advisors know exactly what the threat is, as MANY of them are recent (the last 10 yrs or less) retirees. And, with the turmoil in the ME, it is ripe for “anything goes”. I am scared. I’ve lived int he ME. My friends in Iran are afraid, as well.
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.