Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JON HUNTSMAN-NEWT GINGRICH DEBATE (C-Span)
C-Span Video ^ | 12/13/2011 | 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 ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012election; jonhuntsman; jonhuntsmanjr; jonhuntsmansr; newt; newtgingrich
A very specific question to debate about the debate...

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.

Fulbright scholarships.

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".

1 posted on 12/12/2011 9:43:37 PM PST by PieterCasparzen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Rinolicious


2 posted on 12/12/2011 9:45:25 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

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.


3 posted on 12/12/2011 9:51:05 PM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Oh, very clever.


4 posted on 12/12/2011 9:52:29 PM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

bttt


5 posted on 12/12/2011 9:53:15 PM PST by Matchett-PI ("One party will generally represent the envied, the other the envious. Guess which ones." ~GagdadBob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Was it a kissyfest like the Cain debate?

I guess Huntsman is the new alliance.


6 posted on 12/12/2011 9:57:20 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen
No doubt Newt is on board with this:

Promotion of gay rights worldwide is a US foreign policy priority

7 posted on 12/12/2011 10:02:07 PM PST by mas cerveza por favor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

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?


8 posted on 12/12/2011 10:06:12 PM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

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.


9 posted on 12/12/2011 10:11:02 PM PST by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

I predict buyers remorse on Newt, he is not a conservative, he is a progressive.


10 posted on 12/12/2011 10:28:53 PM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Huntsman should debate in Chinese.


11 posted on 12/12/2011 10:39:17 PM PST by Gene Eric (Save a pretzel for the gas jets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

>> 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.


12 posted on 12/12/2011 10:46:45 PM PST by Gene Eric (Save a pretzel for the gas jets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BigBobber
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.

Here's a nice life story which shows how that works out:

His father was a Fulbright scholar. His father earned a master's degree in agricultural economics at New Mexico State University in 1971, received a doctorate at the University of Nebraska, and worked at the University of Minnesota from 1975 to 1977. He was Agriculture Minister and as President of a University in his nation of birth.

The "student" was born in 1971 in the United States. In 1978, when he was seven years old, he and his family returned to his father's nation of birth. He then lived in that country for 11 years and studied at a "modern" school.

He returned to the U.S state of Colorado in 1991 to attend college. He earned a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Colorado State University (1994), where he was President of the Muslim Student Association.

The boy's islamic education consisted of a few intermittent months with various scholars, and reading and contemplating works by several prominent Islamic scholars. Muslim scholars said they did not understand his popularity, because while he spoke fluent English and could therefore reach a large non-Arabic-speaking audience, he lacked formal Islamic training and study.

Sounds like a plan !

This guy gives it a big thumbs up !



And who is our hypothetical fine young muslim that Newt Gingrich's plan would be expected to produce ??????

This wonderful fellow !



Which requires our armed forces to expend blood and treasure and finally results in this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fbvmStl3HQ&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL237CF0D342F37B35)

Can you give me an example of another candidate who has a better plan?

So far, I prefer what I've heard from Michele Bachmann - not much other than what's on her website:

"As Commander-in-Chief, I will do whatever it takes to fulfill the federal government’s foremost responsibility under the Constitution: to keep you safe in an increasingly dangerous world. I will uphold America’s values by standing shoulder-to shoulder with those who share those values and our interests and standing tall against those who don’t. 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."

It's ludicrous to announce specifics about what one "will do" in office in terms of "fixing" a current problem in the mideast. The less an enemy knows of our strategy and tactics, the better. IMHO, it's enough said; no makey nice-nice trying to sooth a rabid dog. The leaders of these nations have called for our destruction - that's enough to know to just wait until the give us an excuse to destroy them. That attitude alone will be the most productive. It is very dangerous to get involved in conversations and interactions with them, we must be vigilant at all times and leave every option open and unspoken.

IMHO.
13 posted on 12/12/2011 10:57:33 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: All

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.


14 posted on 12/12/2011 10:59:51 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BigBobber

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.


15 posted on 12/13/2011 12:21:28 AM PST by JMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen
So far, I prefer what I've heard from Michele Bachmann - not much other than what's on her website:

"As Commander-in-Chief, I will do whatever it takes to fulfill the federal government’s foremost responsibility under the Constitution: to keep you safe in an increasingly dangerous world. I will uphold America’s values by standing shoulder-to shoulder with those who share those values and our interests and standing tall against those who don’t. 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.

16 posted on 12/13/2011 12:42:38 AM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JMS
Well, it doesn’t seem like that plan has worked since Western countries are not willing to confront Islam.

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?

17 posted on 12/13/2011 12:49:49 AM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BigBobber

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.


18 posted on 12/13/2011 12:59:50 AM PST by JMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

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.


19 posted on 12/13/2011 1:30:03 AM PST by Leto (Damn shame Palin didn't run, The Presidency was Her's for the taking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BigBobber

The trouble is, they come here and learn nuclear physics from us and then go back and use their knowledge to kill us.


20 posted on 12/13/2011 2:03:04 AM PST by Inkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Absolutely correct..my plan would be to kick ass and take names. Of course, i am not going to tell you the asses or the names.


21 posted on 12/13/2011 2:42:35 AM PST by richardtavor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

The Middle East needs change but it must come from within the Islamic culture and not be imposed from without—a Turkish or Egyptian force might impose a peace but not an America or China. Many reforms are needed but they must come from within. I thought Newt was smarter than that.


22 posted on 12/13/2011 3:36:25 AM PST by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Newt on immigration
http://www.newt.org/solutions/immigration

He is telling us that he wants to give legal status for a mere $5,000, or if you think you can run a janitor service with 10 people, you can come here free.

”those here outside the law will be granted Temporary Legal Status”

He wants a whole new bureaucracy of citizen judges that will insure Korean’s in Korea Town will protect Koreans, and the same thing for every other minority community.

He wants to make it easier for foreign students to come into our country, get an education and compete with Americans for jobs. With the obvious benefits of helping his corporate allies keep their employment costs down.


23 posted on 12/13/2011 3:48:14 AM PST by Haddit (Heartless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forward the Light Brigade

Yeah, I thought Newt was smarter than that, also.


24 posted on 12/13/2011 10:41:37 AM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen; All
He's not describing nation building AT ALL.

Nation building means taking over a country and trying to remake it, that's not what he was advocating. There's no occupying element and occupation is the cornerstone of nation building.

He's talking about evangelizing the positives Western culture as Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul II did behind the Iron Curtain. His point is these people generally only know madrasas and Sharia. Not all of them, of course, several Mid-East heads of state have been educated in the United States.

25 posted on 12/13/2011 10:45:11 AM PST by newzjunkey (Republicans will find a way to reelect Obama and Speaker Pelosi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

BFL


26 posted on 12/13/2011 10:45:32 AM PST by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Inkie
The trouble is, they come here and learn nuclear physics from us and then go back and use their knowledge to kill us.

I must've missed all those mushroom clouds popping up in U.S. cities. /s

Are you operating in reality or some paranoid fantasy?

27 posted on 12/13/2011 10:54:19 AM PST by newzjunkey (Republicans will find a way to reelect Obama and Speaker Pelosi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
He's not describing nation building AT ALL.

Nation building means taking over a country and trying to remake it, that's not what he was advocating. There's no occupying element and occupation is the cornerstone of nation building.

He's talking about evangelizing the positives Western culture as Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul II did behind the Iron Curtain. His point is these people generally only know madrasas and Sharia. Not all of them, of course, several Mid-East heads of state have been educated in the United States.


You're right - his plan is for the U.S. government to change the muslim culture !

To think that one can change muslim culture in the same way that Western powers worked "behind the iron curtain", i.e., eastern Europe, reveals a misguided and deadly notion that every culture can be remade in the same Western mold using the same means of simple immersion into it.

This idea completely disregards the muslim fanatical hatred of non-muslims and the ubiquitous teaching of lying to one's enemies throughout the culture.

Muslims have absolutely no difficulty "getting along" in a Western nation. And being there does absolutely nothing to erase their underlying arrogant hatred of non-muslims.

My earlier post - when I described the father and the son who came to America - THE SON WAS ANWAR ALWAKI - the American-born al-qada terrorist.

HIS FATHER WAS A FULBRIGHT SCHOLAR. alwaki himself had multiple college degrees obtained here in the U.S. All his exposure to the U.S. did absolutely nothing to make him like us at all.

How stinkin' stupid are we to allow people - who have as their life's ambition a desire to kill all of us - to continue to immigrate here and learn our ways, out thinking, our planning, our tactics, our technology ?

Newt and the Rep+Dem establishment (let's call it RDE) are utterly ridiculous in their arrogance and sheer stupidity. The same thinking in rampant in the U.K. elites.

One reason a muslim national leader smiles and is friendly towards us is that he's getting what he wants. The other reason is he thinks he's gonna get killed. It's real simple, that's why college boys don't get it. It's kill or be killed, the law of the jungle. That's all the "rabid dog" mentality of islam knows.

The hatred and arrogance of islam is not easily "reformed".

Some - of their own volition - come to see the bloodthirsty killing as wrong. Often they convert to Christianity. But this conversion work is simply done one way - by exposure to the Bible. Certainly nothing is achieved by their exposure to the wickedness of modern secular Western culture; in fact, the situation is made worse.

If they come to see anti-muslim hatred as wrong but do not convert, but simply give up islam or somehow try to continue but give up only the violent desires - the key factor is - do they give up the hatred of non-muslims, notably Christians, and especially Jews ? And then one has to find out if they are not lying to meld into Western society. In Nazi Germany, some of the non-Jewish population was latently anti-Semitic. A great deal of the population was not, but some were. So when Jewish persecution became known, i.e., what the camps were for, most people kept quiet to avoid getting sent off to the camp themselves. But their were three categories of reasoning: 1) truly believing it was wrong and keeping quiet out of fear and trying to survive 2) being ambivolent and keeping quiet out of fear and trying to survive and 3) secretly liking the idea and keeping quiet and being actually happy about it. To use this "secret thinking" model for muslims in America today - what are they really thinking about their non-muslim neighbors ? The answer is easy to obtain: get them to give you their real take on Jews and the nation of Israel. The answer you get will be all too familiar and repugnant if you're a student of history. Look at the video, over and over, of the townsfolk in Germany being forced to walk through the camps after liberation. Shame on us for not learning that it is wrong to be ambivolent about psychotic hatred based on race.

How does this tie into the preaching of the Gospel ? If a foreign nation is composed of a populace who are unbelievers with a false religion (heathen), but are otherwise friendly towards us, we get along with them fine. As long as the economy is good and there are no wars, we are lulled into a false sense of having no responsibilities towards God. But in the case of heathen nation that suddenly wants to make war on us - and what's more difficult they don't fight fair but send their citizens into our country through our wide open doors to begin taking us over from within - now we start to perhaps wish that we had evangalized that nation so we would not have that invasion taking place, but only the peaceful immigration that we tell ourselves it is in order to sleep at night.

We can continue with our mistaken, modern sense of "freedom of religion", but it will be our undoing if we don't realize the whole of our error and correct it.
28 posted on 12/13/2011 12:55:15 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All

IMHO.


29 posted on 12/13/2011 1:26:20 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson