Romney outlines “tough” foreign policy approach

To date, Mitt Romney’s critique of the Obama foreign policy has been a case study of bluster over content, without specifics, although the presence of men such as John Bolton, the shoot-first former U.N. ambassador, as influential members of his foreign policy team ought to give Americans serious pause.

In fact, if we are to judge him from the tone of his rhetoric and by those whose counsel he seeks — and that’s about all he has given us to go on — Romney proposes to pick up where Dick Cheney left off in 2004, when a chastened President Bush belatedly took back control of foreign policy from his over-adventurous vice president.

I note that in his speech today at the Virginia Military Institute (text available here), Romney blamed the Obama administration for differences of opinion that have erupted between the United States and Israel.

“The world must never see any daylight between our two nations,” Romney said.

However, I do not believe it is our responsibility alone to ensure that such daylight never occurs. Israeli leaders bear at least equal responsibility for keeping that important relationship on an even keel. We are certainly under no obligation to outsource our foreign policy in that region to Benjamin Netanyahu, as Romney seems to advocate.

(In fact, if forced to synthesize the Romney Doctrine to one sentence, I might offer this: The rest of the world will be required to abide by our wishes; we will be required to abide by Israel’s).

Romney also spoke, as he has in the past, of a foreign policy based on confidence, clarity and resolve. These are good and necessary things. Unfortunately, the man’s credibility in preaching these virtues is more than a little suspect. You may recall that earlier this year, as an uprising in Libya gained strength, Romney first supported U.S. intervention and then opposed intervention and then embraced it again once it had succeeded. At one point, he even fled reporters in Las Vegas rather than be forced to take a position on the crisis.

Likewise, he harshly criticized the goal of removing Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddhafi from power, then turned around celebrated once that goal was achieved.

That is not a policy based on resolve. Likewise, Romney’s outrageous claim that President Obama sympathized with those who attacked and killed our ambassador to Libya and three others — a statement issued on the very night of their deaths — communicated not mature confidence but hasty, amateurish desperation and an eagerness to inject partisan politics in foreign-policy decisions.

I am most curious about his policy toward Afghanistan. Here’s what Romney had to say:

“… in Afghanistan, I will pursue a real and successful transition to Afghan security forces by the end of 2014. President Obama would have you believe that anyone who disagrees with his decisions in Afghanistan is arguing for endless war. But the route to more war — and to potential attacks here at home — is a politically timed retreat that abandons the Afghan people to the same extremists who ravaged their country and used it to launch the attacks of 9/11. I will evaluate conditions on the ground and weigh the best advice of our military commanders. And I will affirm that my duty is not to my political prospects, but to the security of the nation.”

Now, I would suggest that those are odd words from a man who just preached the necessity of clarity in foreign policy. Take a look again — do those words tell us anything about Romney’s approach to Afghanistan, or how it might differ in concrete terms from that undertaken by Obama?

Finally, Romney not only suggested that he would oppose any cuts in defense spending, he advocated what would appear to be a new military buildup. That is consistent with his pledge to commit a minimum of 4 percent of GDP to defense spending. By 2014, that would mean a $200-billion-a-year increase in spending over currently projected levels.

Given our financial situation, a 33 percent increase in projected defense spending at a time when we already spend more than the next 10 biggest military powers combined would not seem to be a wise investment. And again — although Romney continues to be painfully averse to specifics — in general the GOP candidate would seem pretty eager to put that larger military to regular use overseas.

– Jay Bookman

1,169 comments Add your comment

Two Parties, One Con (Welcome)

October 8th, 2012
11:34 am

I guess nowadays keeping Bibi on speed dial is considered having a “tough” foreign policy approach.

What a joke.

Lord Help Us

October 8th, 2012
11:38 am

Neocon foreign policy?

No thanks, I’ve seen this movie before…

Two Parties, One Con (Welcome)

October 8th, 2012
11:39 am

Isn’t it kind of ironic, Jay, that Romney is using the ideas of George Marshall to shore up his foreign policy approach when Marshall himself was deeply skeptical about recognizing Israel?

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 8th, 2012
11:41 am

What’s tough about having one’s lips constantly pressed against Bibi’s backside?

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:41 am

I haven’t finished the video yet but so far Romney is stating that Obama’s foreign policy doctrine is working………

Joe Hussein Mama

October 8th, 2012
11:42 am

The mere fact that Bolton’s present on Romney’s team tells me all I need to know about Romney’s foreign policy plans.

And I’m agin’ ‘em.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 8th, 2012
11:42 am

Struggle between “us” and “them.”

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:42 am

Oh hell, this is live and I’ve missed what I’ve missed so far lol.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 8th, 2012
11:43 am

Fred

You haven’t finished the video ’cause it’s a live feed.

Aquagirl

October 8th, 2012
11:45 am

What’s Romney gonna do…order more troops from a outsourced Chinese factory?

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

October 8th, 2012
11:45 am

“the presence of men such as former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton as influential members of his foreign policy team ought to give Americans pause”

pause???

more like give Americans a frickin HEART ATTACK

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 8th, 2012
11:47 am

He keeps turning right then left on an almost timed basis.

Lemme guess, teleprompters right?

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:47 am

I’ll believe your war mongering Mr. Romney when you are willing to risk YOUR OWN DAMN BLOOD AND THE BLOOD OR YOUR RICH COWARDLY CHILDREN.

Mighty Righty

October 8th, 2012
11:47 am

one) John Bolton is an expert on foreign policy as opposed to Obama’s political appointments of his friends and donors. two) I doubt Romney’s Afghanistan policy will not include rules of engagement that require our soldiers to be disarmed while inviting the enemy inside of our fortts which was clearly an air headed liberal dreamed up over a bong pipe.

RF

October 8th, 2012
11:48 am

So we add to Afghanistan with wars in Syria and Iran? Wow, let’s just keep the war that never ends going? Do we have that many young people left to send to all these wars? And we would actually consider giving this nitwit access to the situation room?

Oscar

October 8th, 2012
11:48 am

Romney seems to want to stay in Afghan forever. That’s not going to be popular. He will probably change that position during the debate. Bully at home, bully in foreign policy. Sounds like he will get us in a few more wars if elected.
You want another war, Romney’s your man.

F. Sinkwich

October 8th, 2012
11:49 am

“…although how that policy would differ from Obama’s is not yet clear.”

I’d be willing to bet that the Mittster will not embark on an apology tour like our appeaser-in-chief O’bozo.

josef

October 8th, 2012
11:49 am

“…a case study of bluster over content, without specifics”

That’s it in a nutshell.

and Bolton?

G-d help us and the world should that one come in to direct/advise on foreign policy. A beast of the Apocalypse, he.

TWO PARTIES

Barak and Bibi are in bed together, thick as thieves, make no mistake about that…

Oscar

October 8th, 2012
11:50 am

I haven’t finished the video yet but so far Romney is stating that Obama’s foreign policy doctrine is working………

_____

He won’t say that in the debate. He will loudly say it’s not.

RF

October 8th, 2012
11:50 am

“What’s Romney gonna do…order more troops from a outsourced Chinese factory?”

Now, finally we know why all the investing in China. They’ll be beholden to us so we can use all their citizens up after we’ve wasted an entire generation here. Republicans scare me these days, and I have two teenage boys who will have to consider joining the military in a few years…

Brosephus™

October 8th, 2012
11:51 am

josef

I’ll second that on the B&B connection as we’ve discussed that before.

F. Sinkwich

October 8th, 2012
11:51 am

Another lie by O’bozo:

“President Obama quipped Sunday night that energy efficiency initiatives are not a “socialist plot” in remarks that contrasted his energy policies with rival Mitt Romney’s.”

josef

October 8th, 2012
11:52 am

OSCAR

I watched it all…that was my take, too…

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:52 am

Ah free trade with China. He wants to send MORE jobs to the slave labor in China.

independent thinker

October 8th, 2012
11:53 am

I hope Romney explains how his buddy Bibi allowed an Iranian drone helicopter to fly Saturday over the most sensitive Israeli and US military sites in the South of Israel before being shot down. I hope he also explains how we should aid Al Quaida operatives who are part of the opposition in Syria and that if they succeed they will have access to one of the world’s largest stores of chemical weapons. He may also want to explain how the new governments in Egypt and Libya are fighting extremist factions called Salafis who are allied with religious extremists in Saudi Arabia and other countries. I am sure Mitt and his eminent advisers like John Bolton are on top of all this and have more information than Obama, Hilary and Pannetta.

Aquagirl

October 8th, 2012
11:53 am

I have two teenage boys who will have to consider joining the military in a few years…

Somebody’s kids have to fight and it sure ain’t gonna be Mitt’s boys.

Joe Hussein Mama

October 8th, 2012
11:53 am

F. Sinkiewicz — “I’d be willing to bet that the Mittster will not embark on an apology tour like our appeaser-in-chief O’bozo.”

Not intended to be a factual statement.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

October 8th, 2012
11:53 am

“Another lie by O’bozo:”

okay … I’ll play … how are his energy efficiency initiatives a socialist plot?

and please show your work.

JamVet

October 8th, 2012
11:53 am

John Bolton is an expert incompetent and deadly idiot on foreign policy…

NO MORE PNAC STOOGES.

Eight years of those f ups was plenty…

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:54 am

What a complete and utter moron. Since when has Syria EVER been our “friend?”

Kimmer

October 8th, 2012
11:54 am

Kamchak. There is nothing wrong with using a teleprompter. Obama’s criticism is not for using a teleprompter. He gets dinged for his obvious over dependance on one and his seeming inability to speak coherently without it (see last weds night).

td

October 8th, 2012
11:54 am

Sounds like a pretty specific foreign policy to me and it sounds like Romney knows what he is talking about.

“Real and successful transition to the Afgan gov. by the end of 2014 as long as the military leaders say it will make us safe” Reasonable.

Oscar

October 8th, 2012
11:54 am

“President Obama quipped Sunday night that energy efficiency initiatives are not a “socialist plot” in remarks that contrasted his energy policies with rival Mitt Romney’s.”

——–

That’s not a lie. That statement is true. Using govt. money to encourage and help develop industry and the economy is how we became a great country. American as apple pie.

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 8th, 2012
11:55 am

Do we have that many young people left to send to all these wars?

Pretty soon we’ll have to get the kids from the 1% families to enlist.

moonbat betty (from the pit of hell)

October 8th, 2012
11:55 am

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:55 am

LOL There’s a longing for American leadership in the Middle East my fat white ass. The only ‘longing” there is their longing for us to leave them the hell alone and get our big noses out of their business.

josef

October 8th, 2012
11:56 am

Independent Thinker

So, Bibi “allowed” that drone…yeah, he was watching the whole time! That’s just plain silly.

Joe Hussein Mama

October 8th, 2012
11:56 am

Aquagirl — “Somebody’s kids have to fight and it sure ain’t gonna be Mitt’s boys.”

Of course not. They’re fulfilling their national service obligation by helping their dad try to get elected.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/questions-about-romneys-sons-and-military-service/

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 8th, 2012
11:56 am

There is nothing wrong with using a teleprompter.

Translation: IOKIYAR!

josef

October 8th, 2012
11:57 am

td

Specifics? Do tell. What were they?

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:58 am

He’s is going to “prevent conflict” by war. Wow. Like I said earlier when he is willing to risk his own blood, the blood of his cowardly children, then I’ll get behind his warmongering.

Mitt’s policy, LET ME KILL YOUR CHILDREN IN A USELESS WAR WHILE MINE SIT SAFELY AT HOME AND ENJOY BEING RICH.

Thomas Heyward Jr.

October 8th, 2012
11:58 am

Pay no attention to obama “toughness” ..lol…..——–From a real thing,a real human rights prog, not rainy day ones——-Greenwald———

“In essence, the same mentality that drives Democratic support for drones sustains Democratic support for sanctions: they tacitly embrace the unexamined assumption that the US is inevitably going to engage in aggression and kill Muslims, and then pat themselves on the back for cheering for the way that kills the fewest (I support drones because they’re better than full-scale invasions; I support sanctions because they’re better than air strikes). They are seemingly incapable of conceiving of a third alternative: that the US could or should refrain from killing innocent people in predominantly Muslim countries.

Democratic support for sanctions on Iran shares another attribute with the pro-drone mentality. No matter how many times it is documented that drones do not decrease the threat of terrorism but rather increase that threat – by generating the anti-American hatred that drives terrorism – drone advocates insist: we must do this to stop the terrorists. ”
.
And Bookman claims that the iraqi sanctions “worked”.
.
sigh

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

October 8th, 2012
11:58 am

“Since when has Syria EVER been our “friend?””

well, remember that company picnic when they let us borrow their sweater because it was getting chilly out? we thought that was the beginning of a friendship, but found out later that they were telling everyone that we were sleeping with Turks and things got a bit tense …

Adam

October 8th, 2012
11:58 am

F. Sinkwich: I’d be willing to bet that the Mittster will not embark on an apology tour like our appeaser-in-chief O’bozo.

Ask Osama bin Laden whether he engages in appeasement or apology. Also, ask people hit by drones.

stands for decibels

October 8th, 2012
11:59 am

get our big noses out of their business.

Anti-Semite! I’m telling Teach!

td

October 8th, 2012
11:59 am

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
11:55 am

LOL There’s a longing for American leadership in the Middle East my fat white ass. The only ‘longing” there is their longing for us to leave them the hell alone and get our big noses out of their business.

I am sure the Coptic Christians are saying leave the Islamic extremist alone. I am sure the women in Egypt, Afgan, Iraq and Syria are saying leave us alone. I know Israel is not saying leave the middle east alone.

philosopher

October 8th, 2012
12:00 pm

Excuse me??? Did he say anything??? He sounded like the grownups in a Charlie Brown cartoon, “wah..wah wahwah, wah wah…”

td

October 8th, 2012
12:00 pm

josef

October 8th, 2012
11:57 am

td

Specifics? Do tell. What were they?

I guess you did not listen to the speech.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

October 8th, 2012
12:00 pm

” Obama’s criticism is not for using a teleprompter. ”

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight …

Adam

October 8th, 2012
12:00 pm

td: I am sure the Coptic Christians are saying leave the Islamic extremist alone. I am sure the women in Egypt, Afgan, Iraq and Syria are saying leave us alone. I know Israel is not saying leave the middle east alone.

Since when did you care about women’s rights and religious freedom? Still voting Republican this year? THEN YOU DON’T CARE ABOUT EITHER OF THOSE THINGS.

Joe Hussein Mama

October 8th, 2012
12:01 pm

T. Heyward — “And Bookman claims that the iraqi sanctions “worked”. sigh”

So, found the WMD yet? :roll:

TaxPayer

October 8th, 2012
12:01 pm

If the Mitt really wants to make a lasting impression, he should declare his intentions to reinstitute the draft as it was when he was but a youngster — All able-bodied males must sign up for the French Foreigh Legion on their 18th birthday. Or something like that. :roll:

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

October 8th, 2012
12:02 pm

“Ask Osama bin Laden whether he engages in appeasement or apology. Also, ask people hit by drones.”

hell, I’d just like one simple example of one of his infamous “apologies” – one.

JKL2

October 8th, 2012
12:02 pm

Jay- Israeli leaders bear at least equal responsibility for that relationship

The president is too busy doing fund raisers to meet with world leaders, but don’t let that get in the way of a good story.

He’ll have more room to “negotiate” after the election…

hewhoasks

October 8th, 2012
12:02 pm

(Remember Teddy Roosevelt:speak softly, big stick. You don’t have to be a bully to prove you are strong.)

Romney would have a major problem: every foreign head of state knows he lies. The only ones who would really cooperate with him are (a) those who are even better at lying and (b) those who would join with Romney in propagating a self-serving lie.

Professional diplomats surely are aware that when a country bases its foreign policy on a stance of belligerence and acts of belligerence other countries will band together to oppose the belligerent country. Countries like Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, India, Germany, France, Egypt. Nor will they always do it openly.

The right wing’s stance ultimately is based on US nuclear arms and US willingness to wage nuclear war. (Certainly not on ground troops, air power, naval power.) That is not in any way of benefit to anyone, certainly not the US and its people. The right wing would do it for the right wing, but it would turn out far worse than they are capable of discerning.

JamVet

October 8th, 2012
12:03 pm

I guess you did not listen to the speech.

tdspeak for don’t ask me, I don’t do specifics…

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
12:03 pm

I know Israel is not saying leave the middle east alone.

Show me in our Constitution is says we are the worlds policeman and that MY children have to die to protect some Syrian women that hate us anyway.

What were they saying the last time YOU were over in the middle east? What do you even really know about that area except how to spell Middle East?

TaxPayer

October 8th, 2012
12:04 pm

Has the Mitt estimated the size of tax cut needed to fund another war yet.

josef

October 8th, 2012
12:05 pm

td

You guess wrong. I did. And I heard nothing specific…

philosopher

October 8th, 2012
12:05 pm

I am of the suspicion that he underwent acting classes instead of debate prepping…gotta give him some kudos, though….he’s a quick study…That performance will stir the heart of any right wingnut with ADD and mixed memory loss to march right out and sign up with their local recruitment officer. (well, one can always hope…)

Jefferson

October 8th, 2012
12:06 pm

Romney ran to France instead of fighting, he’s better off wrecking companies for the money he keeps offshore.

Peter

October 8th, 2012
12:06 pm

Vote for Romney and expect another WAR !

Fred ™

October 8th, 2012
12:06 pm

josef

October 8th, 2012
12:05 pm

td

You guess wrong. I did. And I heard nothing specific…
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Neither did td but then again he listens to talk radio so he’s used to pretending that nothing is a whole lot. He’ll be back in a few. He has to listen to talk radio or FOX so they can tell him what Romney pretended to say.

RF

October 8th, 2012
12:06 pm

“Sounds like a pretty specific foreign policy to me and it sounds like Romney knows what he is talking about.”

And so did the Wizard of Oz…but just ignore the man behind the curtain. Even in a head-injury induced dream, his policies can’t be judged sane.

stands for decibels

October 8th, 2012
12:07 pm

So, found the WMD yet?

They done went to Syria. Along with Yosemite Sam’s buried treasure. Sean Hannity told me so it must be true.

td

October 8th, 2012
12:07 pm

Adam

October 8th, 2012
12:00 pm

Pure BS leftest talking points. Next.

stands for decibels

October 8th, 2012
12:07 pm

Romney ran to France

where the Mormons wear no pants

weetamoe

October 8th, 2012
12:08 pm

Wonder if he has an opinion on throwing a US citizen into solitary for embarrassing the administration. Did they do that to TI when he violated parole by cruising Atlanta streets with a car load of assault weapons? Truths. Easy to verify.

RF

October 8th, 2012
12:09 pm

“hell, I’d just like one simple example of one of his infamous “apologies” – one.”

Probably has the drones playing Brenda Lee belting out “I’m Sorry” as they circle overhead….just a guess.

Thomas Heyward Jr.

October 8th, 2012
12:09 pm

Obama Foreign Policy=Neo-Con 101.
.
lol
.
Forward Soviet!

josef

October 8th, 2012
12:10 pm

RF

Same question as to td: what are his foreign policies?

RF

October 8th, 2012
12:10 pm

“Romney ran to France

where the Mormons wear no pants”

They don’t need them with that ridiculous underwear they have- talk about killing the moment- you’re over it by the time you get out of all that!

td

October 8th, 2012
12:11 pm

We as a nation either supports Israel or we support the Muslim extremist. It appears to me that Romney supports Israel and Obama supports the Muslims so your vote will say a lot about what side you fall on.

jconservative

October 8th, 2012
12:11 pm

One of Romney’s foreign policy advisors is Dan Senor from the Council on Foreign Relations. As I recall Senor was one of the authors of Gen. McCrystals report and request for additional troops for the Afghanistan surge.

All I remember about John Bolton is that he speaks loudly and carries a small stick.

The US has still not accepted the idea that we should not the the world’s Nanny. Number one we cannot afford it monetarily. Number two we cannot afford it personnel wise. We had 3000 people killed on 9/11 and immediately went out and got an additional 6500 killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We cannot have Small Government and Big Defense at the same time.

If Romney wants to create a “defense tax” with the proceeds earmarked for defense, then let him propose it to Congress and if it passes, so be it. But let’s not borrow it as we have done for the past 31 years.

TaxPayer

October 8th, 2012
12:12 pm

I have no issues with Republicans sending their Republican constituency off to fight their own wars so long as they pay for them. I conscientiously object to paying for them to kill each other.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 8th, 2012
12:12 pm

We as a nation either supports Israel or we support the Muslim extremist.

There’s your sign.

RF

October 8th, 2012
12:12 pm

josef: I haven’t the foggiest notion, but I’d speculate all you have to do is ask Netanyahu- he has more control over the conservative view of Middle East policy than anyone here in my opinion.

td

October 8th, 2012
12:12 pm

Romney: Walk softly and carry a big stick.

Obama: Walk softly and carry a limp stick.

Aquagirl

October 8th, 2012
12:13 pm

Pure BS leftest talking points. Next.

That brilliant rebuttal convinced me of your deep concern for women, td.

Women in $#!^hole countries need education and birth control. Your wingnut pals will provide neither. Hell, they don’t even want women HERE to have those things.

independent thinker

October 8th, 2012
12:13 pm

Bibi was so preoccupied telling Obama when to pull the trigger on Iran that he disregarded Iranian and Hezbollah warnings of a preemptive attack. Over 50 rockets landed in Southern Israel today. I assume
that all this is in response to US and allies sanctions against Iran. With 40,000 missles in hands of Hezbollah, and access to chemical weapons in Syria do the neocons think pulling the trigger on Iran is still such a great idea? But if Obama met with Bibi all this would not have mattered. Just sent John Bolton over there and we will have a war to end all wars.

DownInAlbany

October 8th, 2012
12:13 pm

Any foreign policy is better than O’s…appease and apologize is NOT a foreign policy.

JamVet

October 8th, 2012
12:13 pm

It appears to me that Romney supports Israel and Obama supports the Muslims.

Of course.

Your eyesight is 20 – 2000.

No list of “specifics’ in that speech, td?

LOL…

JamVet

October 8th, 2012
12:15 pm

Any foreign policy is better than O’s…appease and apologize is NOT a foreign policy.

Stupid with a capital S.

(Silly Bushbot chickenhawks…)

josef

October 8th, 2012
12:15 pm

td

Please cite to me how the Obama administration differs in its Israeli policy from any American administration since the founding of the State of Israel.

RF

October 8th, 2012
12:15 pm

“We as a nation either supports Israel or we support the Muslim extremist.”

LOLOL!!! That’s good, td. Since we created Israel and could easily let them fall to the internal struggles they face with the Palestinians, we should be a little more conscious of who owes who in this relationship. Since when does Israel dictate our foreign policy and who the heck decided to invest such power in them?

moonbat betty (from the pit of hell)

October 8th, 2012
12:16 pm

Geeze, you would think Romney is currently president.

[...] EastFox NewsRomney assails Obama on Middle EastUSA TODAYCBS News -CNN International -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 3,825 news articles » This entry was posted in Environmental Earth Destruction. [...]

Mighty Righty

October 8th, 2012
12:16 pm

Our foreign policy to date has been to apaologise to our enemies for making them angry. Let Iran obtain nucleur weapons. Destroy our friendship with Israel. Encourage Hamas, The Muslim Brotherhood, Taliban and Alqueida to take over all Middle East countries with our help, permit the killing of our embassy personnel, make excuses for terrorism, call German WW2 Holacost Prison Camps,”Polish Prison Camps”, leak top secret sensitive information to the press to make Obama look good and instead caused our friends to no longer trust us, aggravate, France, Germany, Italy, and England while bowing down to Muslim Kings and Princes all the time asking the question
what what can be done to lower the strength and prestige of the United States.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

October 8th, 2012
12:16 pm

“appease and apologize is NOT a foreign policy.”

and again I ask … to whom has he apologized … whom has he appeased?

and please, be specific – exact quotes

stands for decibels

October 8th, 2012
12:18 pm

Romney: Walk softly and carry a big stick.

Obama: Walk softly and carry a limp stick.

td: I like to think about the candidates’ sticks.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

moonbat betty (from the pit of hell)

October 8th, 2012
12:18 pm

Obama is going to hide in the closet until after the election.

josef

October 8th, 2012
12:18 pm

RF, independent

I don’t get it…Bibi and Barack are in lockstep.

East Cobb RINO, Inc. (LLC)

October 8th, 2012
12:18 pm

“…………..bluster over content, without specifics……….”

Describes more than Romney’s foreign policy – describes his entire campaign.

stands for decibels

October 8th, 2012
12:19 pm

Come on, we’re 90 comments in and nobody has played the Neville Chamberlain card?

Goldie

October 8th, 2012
12:19 pm

“Earlier this year, as an uprising in Libya gained strength, Romney supported U.S. intervention and then opposed intervention and then embraced it again once it had succeeded. ”

Exactly — and this is just one reason why we can never let Mitt reside at the White House!

:)

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 8th, 2012
12:19 pm

Obama: Walk softly and carry a limp stick.

There’s your sign.

Paul

October 8th, 2012
12:20 pm

“do those words tell us anything about Romney’s approach to Afghanistan, or how it might differ in concrete terms from that undertaken by Obama?’

Jay

No, and… no.

_____________________________________________________________________

Reading thru these posts…. trying to discuss foreign policy with some people here seems…. a bit of a challenge.

Shall we first begin by defining ‘foreign’ then ‘policy,’ then putting them together and understanding what the term means?

RF

October 8th, 2012
12:21 pm

“Encourage Hamas, The Muslim Brotherhood, Taliban and Alqueida to take over all Middle East countries with our help”

That whole killing bin Laden thing was just a publicity stunt, right? That wasn’t meant to discourage anyone was it? Just an appeasement of the extremists wasn’t it?

JamVet

October 8th, 2012
12:21 pm

Please cite to me how the Obama administration differs in its Israeli policy from any American administration since the founding of the State of Israel.Enter your comments here.

Rush Jr. does not do citations, emprical facts, verifiable data or any specifics.

Like his hero, he just slings opinioated cr@p and pretends that that is the same as fact-based intellectual discourse…

josef

October 8th, 2012
12:21 pm

RF
@ 12:15

Well, that answers any questions I might have had.