Skip to comments.JON HUNTSMAN-NEWT GINGRICH DEBATE (C-Span)
Posted on 12/12/2011 9:43:32 PM PST by PieterCasparzen
Republican 2012 presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman met in a 90-minute Lincoln-Douglas style debate on national security and foreign policy.
Video from yesterday's debate...
(Excerpt) Read more at c-spanvideo.org ...
At 50:40, Newt describes his idea of good middle east strategy.
It is quite simply the nation-building idea... review the video at the link for yourself.
Broadly shape the culture.
Compare to U.S. efforts in Japan and South Korea and Europe after WWII.
Maximize the liberation of women.
Maximize entrepreneurship and economic growth.
Maximize people who understand modernity.
Translate a lot of books into Arabic.
Maximize the opportunity for scholars [from those countries] to come to the U.S.
So you'd have a generation growing up that understood something other than sharia, etc., etc.
I look for forward to finding out who agrees with this strategy that Newt lays out starting at 50:40 in this video and hopefully to comfort me that...
he is not advocating recommending the same nation-building that we have been doing for a decade and opening our borders every wider - to muslims - and allowing them to move here and become an ever larger segment of the U.S. population.
I think Europe is a little ahead of us in that endeavor and it's getting worse and worse for them instead of better.
I mean, I'm curious if anyone on FR actually thinks that this is a wise strategy.
I'm curious if anyone who says anything remotely like this is a candidate that an American should want to "loan the Presidency".
Newt’s describing the typical attitude of academics: that we Westerners can change people who do not want to change.
We were successful in helping Germany, Italy, and Japan in their recoveries post-WW2. These nations had all been modern states before becoming dictatorships.
Afghanistan had never been a modern state. To think we could nation build there was arrogant. Bush was poorly advised and it has cost us dearly.
The Middle East is known by historians as the “Graveyard of Empires”. We would be wise to heed that warning.
If the people of that region want change, they will have to initiate it themselves. It cannot and should not be imposed upon them by us.
This is something I disagree with Newt Gringrich completely.
Oh, very clever.
Was it a kissyfest like the Cain debate?
I guess Huntsman is the new alliance.
I did not hear Gingrich say he would be bringing people over here from Arab countries to immigrate. He said bring them here to our universities so they can then go back home and spread word of Western society from a first-hand perspective.
He describes Westernizing their society through broadcast information, translating our books into Arabic, and paying particular attention to the liberation of women in Muslin countries. This is not nation-building. This is spreading information about the West to those who have little exposure to it now.
We are going to have to reform and modernize the Muslim culture or we’re going to have to go back to war - perhaps both.
Can you give me an example of another candidate who has a better plan?
I would suspect that Rand Paul as well as myself agree with you. Newt as an historian should know the USA became an exceptional Nation because the Nation was setup intentionally to be different. Now to try and invert the nations left behind and still with their old penchants for government is not and should not be the task for USA citizens. If this is an example of Newt’s approach to world involvement and considering his indicated intent for leadership I will back off from him unless I’m sure such a program will be put to and come from the people of the USA. I really suspect that Newt is taking Paul lightly.
I predict buyers remorse on Newt, he is not a conservative, he is a progressive.
Huntsman should debate in Chinese.
>> I predict buyers remorse on Newt, he is not a conservative, he is a progressive.
The latest, quixotic stratagem.
Folks better start cheering for their candidates before the cynicism crystallizes into another default for Obama.
Just to review...
a real-life example of how Newt’s mideast strategy of “teaching the islamic world about modernity” works is at my prior post.
Well, it doesn’t seem like that plan has worked since Western countries are not willing to confront Islam. Personally, I think the West should re-colonize the Islamic Barbarians and forcibly convert them - pretty much what Ann Coulter said after 9-11. Now, since we don’t want to continue having wars I would say seize the oil fields, break up OPEC and they can live as Barbarians in tents in the desert.
"As Commander-in-Chief, I will do whatever it takes to fulfill the federal governments foremost responsibility under the Constitution: to keep you safe in an increasingly dangerous world. I will uphold Americas values by standing shoulder-to shoulder with those who share those values and our interests and standing tall against those who dont. I will devote the resources necessary to maintain our fighting forces as second-to-none, while being judicious in the use of our power. I will ensure our borders are fully secured. And I will not rest until the war on terror is won."
With all due respect to Bachmann, who I like, this is typical politician gibberish. It says nothing. But no one can attack her for saying nothing, so it's very safe.
Gingrich is not a typical politician. He has ideas. He's willing to share them. He doesn't play it safe. Which I find very refreshing.
You are correct about that. Isn't Newt's willingness to call the Palestinians a made up people an indication that he's willing to confront falsehoods about the Middle East that have not served us well for many decades? Who else has had the guts to do that?
I agree with what Newt said, but I don’t believe the answer is to Westernize them - they have had every opportunity over the last 50 years and haven’t responded. Also, he didn’t mention the main issue, it’s not nationality real or imagined, it’s Islam that must be defeated. I have no real problems with Newt vs. Obama or Romney but I’m sad we don’t have another Reagan. Personally, I’m not really comfortable with legislators becoming president without any administrative experience but again, anyone but Obama - even Romney.
Reagan’s “Shining City on a Hill” is what Gingrich is calling for with respect to the Muslim world and giving a cultural alternative to Sharia.
It could take a long time.
The trouble is, they come here and learn nuclear physics from us and then go back and use their knowledge to kill us.