So what are our good options? Another foreign war?
Lets not pretend like there was any "winning" choice. No matter what the
president does it was a horrible bad decision. Hindsight has 20/20 no matter
what we knew before a situation. The grass will always have been greener
on the other side... looking back that is. Perhaps bad decisions
have been made but I am not likely to notice because everything the man does is
One would would have to deaf, dumb, and blind not to note with unequivocal
veracity the dearth of leadership America is experiencing! The brazen around
the globe are laughing at the impotence of our leadership in Washington D.C.
“Why, across the world, are America's hands so tied?” Hands tied? Well I haven't noticed our hands being "tied"
exactly.We have been hobbled though . . . Hobbled with the legacy of
the Bush administration . . . embroiled in two wars (one of them completely
immoral and unjustified), and battling to bring the economy back from the
brink of the precipice GW and his Republican crew dug for us.And of
course, Obama and the entire nation have been facing a constant battle with the
mightily malignant Right Wing presence in America that absolutely INSISTS on
keeping this nation back from achieving the success we deserve.OK .
. . Hobbled, hands tied . . . potato, tomato . . . whatever you want to call it
. . . Yeah . . . "Conservatives" have done this nation tremendous harm,
and although they can successfully convince themselves of some fantasy where the
Repubs have been America's saviors, the real facts paint a far different
Remember when Mitt Romney said that Russia was dangerous and a threat to the
world? Nailed it.Barack? He accused Romney of being stuck in Cold
War times and that Russia was not a risk.Par for the course for both
of them. Romney was right on - barack was up in the clouds
A gracious loser to be sure.He might be correct in his assessment,
but c'mon, Mitt, have some class.
"I have clear eyes on this. I'm not going to wear rose-colored glasses
when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin, and I'm certainly not going to say to
him, I'll give you more flexibility after the election. After the election
he'll get more backbone." -Mitt Romney in the 3rd Presidential
DebateCrimea river. We picked the wrong guy.
You want another war? This time the other guy really does have nuclear weapons,
lots of them. And Crimea is important to us because???????
Obama is a weak socialist, but let's not forget that Romney also has
socialist ideas, that is why he lost the conservative vote. I can only hope we
survive three more years of this horrible administration and emerge with someone
who loves America.
Some feel that just because you stand up to someone it will bring war. I
believe it is the exact obvious. If you don't stand up to a bully you will
continue to be bullied. Putin is a bully and Obama is afraid of him.
Mitt Romney is exceptional in the Monday morning quarterbacking department.
The best thing Obama can do now is to call Mitt Romney and ask him for advise.
Mitt would know what to do!
How many absolute failures must we endure before left wingers will finally
acknowledge that Obama is clueless, lacks leadership, lacks vision, and cannot
be trusted?It is difficult to realize that partisanship has
deteriorated to such a level that honest reflection (that Obama is wrong over
and over again) by Democrats are holding our country back.Obama is
too busy planning his next vacation and marketing like a used car salesman his
Obamacare to care or understand what is happening in America and in the world
today. November cannot come soon enough, and I'm not talking
about November 2014. Where is 11/2016?
@ Gary OIt is frustrating that individuals with your mindset cannot
see the facts through the thick veil of ideology that dominates your thought
process. Pres, Bush did not cause the economic issues. That catastrophe was
born decades ago with chaotic money lending polices that created a real estate
and financial bubble that could not be sustained. It just happened to burst
while he was president. The Iraq war was supported by democrats and
republicans, as well as most other western countries. Everyone was in agreement
that Saddam had WMD, turned out different but Pres Bush finished the job, and
Obama pulled out and destroyed all we sacrificed for, and the same will happen
in Afghanistan. I did not agree with Bush on everything, but he was an honest
man with integrity, and love of his country. Our current President cares nothing
for the country and his lack of integrity, leadership, and honesty has been
documented over and over again.
This wouldn't be happening if Mitt had won the election. Period.We have gone from Mike Tyson to Michael Jackson with this current
administration.A strong United States, discourages these kinds of
Ukraine take overs, and now Russia, or China has no fear.When it
comes to world peace, legalizing gay-marriage, or creating a poor health care
system just won't cut it.
Welcome to the Abamanation where we spend like drunk sailors and appease like
Typical -- The GOP hasn't paid for the last 2 wars they
started, and here's another RICH guy wanting to keep spending someone
else's money.The 1st thing Mitt and his friends should be doing
is ponying up and paying higher taxes for the last boondoggle mess they made
us,THEN They can come back and talk about spending some more....Until then -- THIS formerly well off middle America ain't
@Hutterite and mcclarkBe brave. Standing up for what is right is scary
sometimes, but it is the right thing to do.@ no fit in SGMitt
is not being a Monday-morning quarterback, he was saying all this before the
election, you just weren't listening, obviously.@worfAmen!
Taking something/anything that comes out of CPAC Seriously? Really? I'm
certain that one of C's stands for Comedy. re: worf"This wouldn't be happening if Mitt had won the election.
Period."Because, Cheney would be SecDef and we'd be at War
with Iran. Exclamation Mark
@Harrison Bergeron"I'm certainly not going to say to him,
I'll give you more flexibility after the election"I like
how the evidence of Romney being right includes a misrepresentation. Obama was
suggesting he'd have more flexibility on things like nuclear arms reduction
deals after the election, which was based on the precedent of the new START
treaty being signed in the 2010 lame duck Congress period.
Romney you like warmongering John McCain before you lost! The American people
soundly and overwhelmingly rejected you and John McCain. As being outdated, out
of touch and unqualified to be president
Obama has drawn so many red lines .... he is standing in a circle.
"After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Sen. Obama's
reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that
would only encourage Russia's (Vladimir) Putin to invade Ukraine next."
-Sarah Palin October 21, 2008After all of the left's derision
of her intelligence, it's now agonizingly clear who is the dullest tool in
the shed...and who is not.
@U-tarRomney didn't lose conservative vote, he lost the independent
vote. Go back and look at the numbers. Republicans will keep losing if they
think their candidate needs to be further right than Romney.
And Mr. Romney's vast amount of foreign affairs experience emanates from
where? His two years in France? His outsourcing of jobs?
Basically, in a nut shell, Mitt Romney is saying that America had a chance to
solve our problems with war and violence and chose to not do so.
Mitt Romney could do nothing to stop Putin. If Romney was President, we'd
be at war in Syria right now, he'd be adding troops to Afghanistan, not
pulling out, and he'd be reinvading Iraq. The Republican War Machine would
be bankrupting America.
The United States has miscalculated in Eastern Europe, but not the way Romney
thinks. The U.S. under both Bush and Obama decided they would ram NATO down
Russia's throat and sponsor an anti-Russian oligarchy in Kiev. Moreover,
Russia has been looted, by some of her own citizens let's admit, but also
by the west in Russia's ongoing privitization. Putin is a Russian
nationalist who feels ethnic Russians need some defense after being roughed up
by the U.S. and the E.U. Romney apparently thinks the U.S. can
arbitrarily call the shots globally. I'm glad he's not president!
I don't know why this is so difficult to understand. In foreign policy,
you play chess. You think 5 to 6 moves ahead and plan accordingly. You
don't sit back and play Old Maid and wait until your opponent moves before
you plan your counter-move. That is what Mitt is pointing out, yet it's
somehow too difficult for some to understand. This administration has been
playing Old Maid while the world plays chess. Now, it seems that the party in
power can only see two moves...all or nothing. This isn't a zero sum game,
nor is it wise to measure things in those terms. We must be out in front of
these things, and that is what Mitt is saying. Trying to piece things together
after the fact isn't wise foreign policy. It's a formula for failure,
and the failure of foreign policy eventually brings even worse consequences.
Oh Mitt. I have great respect for you, but this is one situation where the US
is helpless. Why should we take the lead? There is no will from the US public
to get involved. Why not Syria? Oh yea, that's right, we're all
kinda burnt out from these wars. Unless if NATO leads, don't go. Me thinks the Washington defense companies smell a payday here.
Schnee, you are defending the indefensible.Obama: "On all these
issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but
it’s important for him to give me space."Medvedev:
"Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for
you…"Obama: "This is my last election. After my
election I have more flexibility."Medvedev: "I understand.
I will transmit this information to Vladimir"The START treaty
very well may have been one of the cards on the table. But we know for certain
the missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic were why he needed
"flexibility" and "space." This was the card that was set up by
Bush to force Putin out of Georgia. It was the one card that Putin feared. Tragically, we now know Obama intended to throw it in the discard pile,
but did not want the electorate to know until it was too late. And, by the way,
a Putin forced out of Georgia does not invade Crimea. Regrettably,
like Carter, Obama is proving once again that weakness, passivity, ineptitude or
other liberal foreign policies are never rewarded and almost always exploited.
There really isn't much difference between the Republican war machine,
implicitly supported by Democrats, and Democrats not acknowledging U.S. Might
and power, used without moral standing by Republicans. In obama's shame,
it is cowering before the bullies of the world and not standing for something
because of lack of conviction! In either case, America suffers! The new
Americans are rising, however, without being deluded and handicapped by
socialists (democrats) or war mongrels (republicans).
Yet he won't say what he would have done, just that there were better
options but it's too late now.Right. INVADE RUSSIA! But now
it's too late so don't. But I would'a done it. NO.
That's why we didn't elect McCain who said he knew how to find
Binladen but wouldn't tell anybody and that's why we didn't elect
Romney because everyone KNEW he was faking.Republicans in charge are
a disaster to purse and person. A trillion dollar WMD hunt in Iraq and hundreds
of thousands dead for it. No. You don't get to talk like that.
@Harrison BergeronMissile defense shields do not have a proven track
record of being able to do what their stated objective is in US testing, and
they are absolutely worthless when facing tanks and ground forces. There is no
reason at all to believe a missile shield in Poland would do anything to change
the current situation with Crimea.
Oh this is just the beginning. It is already obvious how badly the nation
screwed up by re-electing Obama. But over the next two years, it is going to
hit home with incredible force. He simply isn't presidential material. He
would rather be playing golf.
There should be a rule, once you lose to a candidate, you spend your life in
service instead of saying "I told you so". Nobody likes a sore loser.
One word for Mitt Romney's op-ed in the WSJ: Pathetic.He is
simply is not in a position to know what is occurring between President Obama
and his top aides in foreign policy. Those discussions, and discussions between
the President world leaders, are private. Nor does Romney bring any
insight to any of the issues he mentions.As for Russia's
swallowing of Crimea, it has happened before. That region has always been in
play. There's no reason for the U.S. to engage in anything beyond
sanctions. A war, which Romney seems to want, would be ridiculous.
What "American" interest is being attacked in Crimea?Our
borders?Our Constitution?Our people?Our rights?Failed on each and every Constitutional criteria for military action against
Russia.Thanks for "Trampling" the Constitution Mitt.
I wonder what Willard is running for now. Or is he just trying to appease his
ego with an ill-based "I told you so" whine? Whatever the cause, this
so-called opinion piece makes me incredibly glad that he wasn't inflicted
on the country and its people in 2012. Thankfully he was sent packing. If not,
we would already be at war . . . and for no good reason. We dodged a HUGE
disaster when Willard was rejected for the Presidency.
Score Board Obama 2 Romney n Repubs. 0
@marxistNuanced analysis of foreign affairs has no place on DN. The
world is divided between good and bad guys. Good guys love freedom and are
Americans (except libs), bad guys' role is to fear and respect America or
we'll hunt them down. All of this "studying" won't change
The golden age of US foreign policy ended back in the eighties with Ronald
Reagan when walls were torn down, people compromised and the US still had
respect. Its been on a steady decline since then with the largest plummet for
worldwide influence occurring during George W.'s administration.President Obama inherited the US presidency when the country was at it weakest
point. Not only had the US sunk the world economy but our military was off
fighting two unpopular wars. The US had no meaningful influence. The US saw a
reemergence, but it was short lived as we packed Congress with NO MEN whose
voices shut down the government and held the nations economy hostage. While I
disagree with many things the President supports, these NO MEN have weakened the
US so significantly the country will inevitably collapse if they remain in
The end of an election doesn't mean that the "loser" must sit
quietly and take things as they come. As an American citizen Mitt Romney is
perfectly in his right to continue to stand and speak what he thinks about this
nation and its direction, policies, and leadership. Despite anything he says,
vague or specific, decisive or suggestive, people will attack it.He's been more than gracious in "defeat", but that doesn't
mean that he's wrong or that he can't continue to advocate based on
his experiences, education, and observation. (frankly, "two years in
France" seems to leave him with greater foreign policy insight than
"being POTUS for four years", if attacking his experience is the
goal)He called it; that's all there is to it. It's
pointless to sit around and try to continue to defame him or put him down.
Dismissing any possible solutions from a previous Republican contender as
"more pointless war!" bears no insight or thought-it's mere
impediment to actual discussion or deliberation. But if war really turns your
stomach inside out, I suggest studying eastern Europe's dealings with
Russia through the 20th century.
I read the Wall Street Journal piece yesterday. Mitt is absolutely correct
about things. I wish he'd run for president again.Obama's
flexibility is to let his socailist/communist buddies in Russia have their way
and try to influence the U.S. in the same direction.
Why are America's hands tied?Here is a better question, Why do
you feel we are the world's policeman and it our obligation to involve
ourself in every conflict that arises throughout the entire world?News flash, the United States can't afford to do everything.Has the Senate ratified a treaty to defend Ukraine?
Hey Mitt - get a job.
"Remember when Mitt Romney said that Russia was dangerous and a threat to
the world? "That's not what Romney said. He said Russia was
the single greatest geo-political threat America faced in the world, washing
over the entire middle east including Iran. He was wrong then and
he's still wrong. At the core of this disagreement is the
Republican belief that there is only one kind of leadership. Chest thumping,
bloviating, stomping your foot.Would that have stopped the killing
in Syria, no. Would it have coward Assad into jut handing over his chemical
weapons no. Would it have maybe changed the way things happened maybe, but
maybe for the worse.Crimea was always gone and to no perceptible
loss. If Putin can be assured that Ukraine will not be part of NATO maybe just
maybe we will avoid further incursion. Hard to tell because of the uber
nationalists in eastern Ukraine but it's what a leader would do. Too bad
it's behind closed doors not out in the open where all the bloviators can
I simply don't understand what the right wing would have done differently.
They complain, but is the US responsible for everything that goes on around the
world? Are we supposed to control other nations? Are we to send troops in
every time we don't like what happens? The right is long on criticism, but
are bankrupt on ideas. What I have seen over the past five years is, we have
not started any new wars. Iraq and Libya have mostly settled down with
diminishing impact on us. Afghanistan is winding down. Our relationships with
Europe are good - we are less the bully than before. Russia? Problematic even
before Obama (Bush did nothing about Georgia). Syria? Yes, unresolved, but at
least we aren't caught in the middle of it, which is what our people want.
So, Mr. Romney, empty shots from the cheap seats are easy. Tell us what should
have been done (we will give you the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, but you'll
still be wrong). The one thing Obama has that you don't is a vast military
and diplomatic infrastructure to advise him. You have nothing but political
opportunism and election loss retaliation.
@ Harrison Bergeron, Obama was not President when Russia invaded Georgia. He
had no role. Bush was President. What did he do? Nothing! Looks who's
calling the kettle black. Good grief!
If Presidential election would have been done "blind," as to race and
religion, (as was done in choosing BYU for the NCAA tournament), Mitt Romney
would have won easily as the most qualified and best prepared candidate. Those who cry "racist" are usually the most so, and it costs our
country dearly to base votes upon the color of a man's skin, or what
religion he is, as we have all too painfully found out.
Hey Mitt - chew on this quote from a "real" Republican - Teddy
Roosevelt:"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who
points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have
done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who
errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error
and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great
enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at
the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst,
if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never
be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
Why are our hands tied? Because each time our hawks get us into another
international altercation, we are down a few trillion dollars. How about that
as an excuse! Is it bleeding-heart socialism to ask our country to
care for its hungry, homeless, sick and poor (or middle class for that matter)
before it goes and racks up another trillion in national debt on an island in
the Black Sea? Many of the comments on this thread are just not
thinking it through...
When GW Bush was POTUS, I had to pretend to be from Canada when traveling
abroad.With Obama as POTUS, I can at least once again proudly claim
to be an American.Being the Global Bully or Police Force of the
world is not in harmony with establishing the Kingdom of God on the Earth or the
Establishment Zion.I have made a coventant to do so, I intend
to keep it.
Most "arm chair quarterbacks" are right!It's easy when
you're on the outside to talk a good talk.
The real answer to the question "Why are America's hands tied" is
that a large contingent of the American people would rather see America fail
than a black president succeed.
So, basically, we are left with Republicans who like War and Democrats who want
the socialist welfare state? Is that it? It will take more than deluded
Republican and Democratic party loyalists to change this country--if it
isn't already obvious. One thing is for certain, if there ever was an
absolute that any sane person from any political spectrum could agree
upon,government answers to societal problems is not going to work! Now, if
Democrats will acknowledge that truth and Republicans will acknowledge the truth
that war isn't a way to stimulate the economy and that crony Capitalism
isn't capitalism at all, we might be able to get something accomplished.
Either way, I don't suspect that either party is prepared to do anything
other than make sure they retain their power and then point the finger of blame
on the other party.
Shnee&EsquireIt's all about leverage. Reagan successfully
leveraged the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) with Gorbachev. The Soviets
were absolutely beside themselves about it. SDI never got past the R&D
stage, but it brought Gorbachev to the table in Reykjavik. Gorbachev was willing
to give up all ballistic missiles in exchange for cancelling SDI. Reagan had the
courage to reject Gorbachev's offer and walk away. He kept his leverage
point, the Soviets ended up signing the INF and the rest is history. Similarly, shortly after the South Ossetia War in 2008, Bush pushed forward
stalled plans for a European Interceptor Site. The US missile defense complex in
Poland was ostensibly aimed at Iran. However, the Russians, once again, were
beside themselves. RussianNATO envoy stated, "The fact that this was signed
in a period of very difficult crisis in the relations between Russia and the
United States over the situation in Georgia shows that, of course, the missile
defense system will be deployed not against Iran but against the strategic
potential of Russia," Dmitry Rogozin. Only a few months later,
Bush left office. Bush handed off to Obama his Ace, but sadly Obama threw it in
the discard pile.
At ultra Bob, really? Do you think the people of the United States want what is
happening to us now simply because of a racial issue?
@ Harrison Bergeron II, that's rationalization and selective application of
the facts. The missile defense system can be put back on the table with no
problem. What did it serve Bush? Nothing. Your stated facts alone indicate
that. What difference did it make in Georgia. None. The system was and is no
leverage. Revisionism to support a vague argument isn't worth a whole lot.
Pack,Check your recent history.Re: Republican leaders meet the night
following Barack Obama's election in November 2008.#1-Destroy the
Obama Presidency no matter how difficult it may be. #2- Negate anything
Obama proposes for the United States and the world.Has this been
done to any other US President in US history?
Sorry DLC, it’s untrue that the Republican-caused Real Estate Bubble
“just happened to burst” while GW was President. The Bush
administration created that bubble, both by promoting the circumvention of
regulations, and by pressuring Fanny and Freddy (at the behest of the housing
industry) to give low-interest, no-down-payment home loans to 5.5 MILLION
dirt-poor minority families.“I set an ambitious goal.
It's one that I believe we can achieve. It's a clear goal, that by the
end of this decade we'll increase the number of minority homeowners by at
least 5.5 million families . . . Achieving the goal is going to require some
good policies out of Washington. And it's going to require a strong
commitment from those of you involved in the housing industry . . . Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac . . . have committed . . . to help meet the shortage of
capital available for minority home buyers.” – GWB 2002GW didn’t do this out of any progressive sentiment. He did it to make
money for a substantial voting block, even though the risk to America was huge.
GW was being a typical Reagan “Conservative.”
Ed GradyIdaho Falls, IDHey Mitt - get a job.7:55 a.m.
March 19, 2014========== I think he has one, he is
a salesman for Dick Cheney, Haliburton, Lockheed, Boeing, and the rest of the
Military Industrial Complex.
LOL everyone! We have (had lol?) a treaty with Ukraine? Obviously we can't
live up to it because to do so would be outdated. HA
To "airnaut" I assume that you are talking about Obama. You know, that
rich, Ivy league educated guy that your ilk pushed for. You know that Obama and
the things that he has done have been very damaging to the US economy.To "LDS Liberal" yes we know you hate anything and anybody associated
with the Republican Party, but why didn't you ask those questions when
Obama got us involved in Libya?What American interest was there in
Libya? Our borders? Our Constitution? Our people? Our rights?You
complain about anything Republicans or Conservatives do, while cheering for
Obama and his ilk as they destroy the Constitution and the US economy.As for your travles, if Obama has done so much good for the US, why is it that
the State Department has issued so many travel advisories warning Americans to
avoid so many countries? The Government is telling you if you go to those
places don't tell people you are American. Where is the great healing that
Obama was to accomplish with his Nobel Peace Prize?
Riverofsun, the repubs haven't needed to try and destroy Obama, he has done
that all by himself. Check recent history.
Our hands AREN'T tied. The U.S. still has several options for applying
significant pressure to Russia to reverse course that don't involve
military intervention, as well as a few saber-rattling options that don't
involve direct military engagement.We could certainly hit Russia
with an economic and diplomatic sledgehammer, meaning that the United States
could do the following:-Freeze ALL Russian assets in the U.S.,
starting with President Putin's-Revoke Russia's "Most
Favored Nation" trading status-Enact a U.S. embargo on all
Russian goods-Expel all Russian diplomats from the U.S.-Call for a vote in the U.N. General Assembly to revoke Russia's
permanent Security Council membership-Call on the E.U. to take
similar actionsIf these measures weren't enough and we needed
to turn up the heat further ("saber-rattling"), we could also announce
plans to conduct naval training exercises in the Eastern Mediterranean, the
Baltic, and the Sea of Japan, and threaten to sell arms to the Baltic states,
Belarus, Poland, and Romania.These actions would certainly get
Putin's attention, without firing a single shot.
riverofsun,RE the meeting the day Obama took office, and "Has this
been done to any other US President in US history?"...Yes.
There was a similar meeting of Democrats the day after Bush took office. They
came out of the meeting and declared to the media that their plan was to tie up
the administration in continuous congressional investigations to insure that
none of the President's priorities would ever see the light of day in
Congress.....So yes it has happened before.I swear some
people have no idea what happened before Obama. Like their brains just turned
on the day he took office.
No RedShirt, you are wrong. What did Obama do that was damaging to the
economy?He proposed a jobs' bill in 2011 that would have had
millions of people working now, building and refurbishing necessary
infrastructure along with millions employed in support industries.But the Republicans in Congress shot it down. Now we are paying billions of
dollars in in unemployment insurance for people to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.That's "Conservative" leadership for you.And
what about Libya? No American boots on the ground; and Qadafi, who described
America as the enemy of Islam and the "Great Satan," is out.
Mitt is assuming we even have a leader. We don't. We do have a late night
talk show celeb. We do have commedy central celeb. We do have a UN apologizer.
We do have man whose own heart beats because of his telepromoter. But a leader?
Nah - it's been 5 years since we have seen the lights on in the White House
doing the peoples business.
To "GaryO" you obviously have not been paying much attention.Lets start with just Obama's attitude towards business. Obama is
anti-Business, which makes it so that businessmen don't want to start new
companies or expand. See "Obama Seen as Anti-Business by 77% of U.S.
Investors" in Bloomberg.Next, you have the cost of regulations
that Obama has imposed. See "Obama's regulatory agenda will cost U.S.
economy $143B next year" in Washington Times. That is another drag on the
economy.The ACA has made businesses raise prices and cut hours for
workers. Neither of which is good for business. See "Businesses claim
Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours" at NBC News.We
can discuss the 2 downgrades to the US credit rating that Obama has overseen.We can discuss how the debt levels that Obama has given us are a drag.
The CBO has stated that the debt as it grows will further impede the economy.
See "CBO Study: Four Ways Government Debt Will Drag the Economy Down" at
TownHall.As for unemployment, that was all done when Democrats
controlled both the White House and Congress. Don't blame Republicans for
Since when did Mitt become the expert? Yeah, why don't we start a war with
another country that has nuclear weapons! Lets just jump in there and show them
who the boss is! There are a lot of things to consider before you start doing
something serious. Even the people are divided! Many of them still see
themselves as Russian! Why are republicans always looking for another war?
@ Ed Grady and LDS Liberal. Mitt doesn't need a job because he can live on
his investments just fine right now. But he has been busy volunteering in a
foreign country volunteering his time and resources to help children with poor
@WiazI didn't realize 51% to 47% is an overwhelming victory.
Obama won, that's for sure, but the country is much more half and half than
many like to think.
As a Mormon, I would have loved to vote for Romney. But over the campaign he
demonstrated that he was simply pandering to the Dixiecrat wing of the GOP. In
the foreign policy debate, Romney offered nothing different from Obama's
point of view. I voted for Obama. Again.Putin is an adventurer and
"invaded" the Crimea. New flash: Crimea is a peninsula in the BLACK SEA!
We don't have a fleet in the Black Sea. The Crimea is half full of ethnic
Russians who welcomed Russian troops.Now what is Obama going to do?
Launch missiles? Drones? Putin exercised a bloodless conquest. The US and EU
will impose some sanctions that may or may not hurt the Russian economy.So, Obama haters, what exactly would you do? What exactly did Romney say
he would do? Oh right, he just called Obama some names and skated. He has no
more idea as to what to do than anyone.Shoe on other foot: What if
the US invaded Cuba? What would Putin do? Answer: Nothing.
This is becoming tiresome. Time and again, the fans of this administration
accuse Mitt of wanting war, yet he said nothing of the sort in this op-ed. He
didn't even hint at it, yet there it is, time and again, being accused of
wanting military action. This is a redux of the last campaign; Mitt says one
thing, the media and the DNC twist it into something else and all of a sudden,
it's Mitt's position. it's mind-boggling.@
BlueHusky: If you were to read the op-ed, you would see that Mitt asked why our
hands are tied. He asserted, and I agree, the the weak foreign policy on
display in DC is what got us in this predicament where our options are limited.
By doing this Carter foreign policy on steroids, we are now backed into a corner
and very limited options. He asked and you don't like the answer, but
it's staring us all in the face. It will take years to fix this, and we
may not have that kind of time. We may just get backed into a corner.......
You know, it's amazing the amount of revisionist history going on here. But
never mind that. So Romney was right when he called Russia the
greatest geopolitical threat to America? Hmnn. Then what was he when he said
this:"Right now, the greatest danger that America faces and the
world faces is a nuclear Iran.”Sandbagging?
Romney: "Americans' hands are tied."Obama: according to
an article I just read on msndotcom, our 'stop the rise of the oceans'
President did not even make the list of the 50 most influential Americans.So, for those who think highly of our President, please tell me again
how "right" Obama is and how, if he is so 'right', why
didn't he make the list?
You're kidding. A list on MSN? Really? What did you say you were?
Mitt has apparently read The Art of the Deal but not the Decline and Fall of the
Roman Empire. It is also evident that he is reticent to extrapolate scripture
to see how positions such as his have played out historically, if there is
indeed history in scripture.The hawks here in this forum insist on
the military solution. Ineffective and costly and ultimately bankrupting (see
Gibbon). If BHO took unilateral action, I can hear the cries of
"dictator" echoing from Capitol Hill ... even from 2000 miles away (well
... in my case only about 150 miles)The US Government, I believe,
took a pretty hawkish posture to some folks with ideological beliefs much
different than their own. The evidence is Fort Douglas. How did y'all
feel about that? Mr. Romney, I disagree with you ... again!
EPoint says: "If Presidential election would have been done
"blind," as to race and religion.. Mitt Romney would have won easily as
the most qualified and best prepared candidate."EPoint, if the
Wall Street Journal (and, as well, the Deseret News) printed foreign policy
analyses "blind", looking for the best argument, without regard to the
race and religion of the speaker, this piece from Romney would never have seen
the light of day.
Mitt, You do not matter!