See other War, War, War Articles
Title: In Foreign Policy Debate, Candidates Agree On a Militarist, Interventionist Foreign Policy
Source:
antiwar.com
URL Source: http://news.antiwar.com/2012/10/22/ ... capitulates-agrees-with-obama/
Published: Oct 23, 2012
Author: John Glaser
Post Date: 2012-10-23 11:40:35 by F.A. Hayek Fan
Keywords: None
Views: 119
Comments: 7
In Monday’s presidential debate, GOP contender Mitt Romney persistently avoided confronting President Obama on foreign policy issues, with both candidates agreeing on most fundamental issues. Romney was put in a difficult position on Monday night’s foreign policy debate. As the Republican nominee for President, he was supposed to prove himself the more hawkish candidate. But Obama’s aggressive record on foreign policy left little room for Romney to appear to the right of him. Unlike in previous debates, Romney avoided confrontation with Obama,while Obama this time was on the attack. While both candidates quibbled on the specifics, there was very little in the way of substantive differences in policy that was displayed. Obama at times tried to paint Romney as too hawkish, resembling the militarist George W. Bush. But the only accurate criticism Obama had of Romney was that he was “all over the map” on issues of foreign policy. Obama accused Romney of flip-flopping. “Governor,” Obama said, “the problem is, is that on a whole range of issues, whether it’s the Middle East, whether it’s Afghanistan, whether it’s Iraq, whether it’s now Iran, you’ve been all over the map.” “I’m pleased that you now are endorsing our policy of applying diplomatic pressure [on Iran] and potentially having bilateral discussions with the Iranians to end their nuclear program. But just a few years ago you said that’s something you’d never do. “In the same way that you initially opposed a timetable in Afghanistan, now you’re for it, although it depends. In the same way that you say you would have ended the war in Iraq, but recently gave a speech saying that we should have 20,000 more folks in there. The same way that you said that it was mission creep to go after Gadhafi,” but later supported the Libyan war,” Obama said. Indeed, it’s true: Romney has pivoted on all these issues, changing his tune when it suits him politically. But Obama was pivoting too. On the issue of Iran, similar agreement between the candidates was forthcoming. Obama talked about preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power and bragged about the harsh economic sanctions his administration has imposed. Romney agreed, with the only difference being a ridiculous proposal to have Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad indicted for incitement of genocide, an absurd sideshow of an issue. On Syria, Obama laid out his policy of aiding and indirectly arming the Syrian rebels, while working hard to avoid the US getting drawn into another ground war in the Middl East. Romney agreed: “We don’t want to get drawn into a military conflict,” he said. “So the right course for us, is working through our partners and with our own resources, to identify responsible parties within Syria, organize them, bring them together…And then make sure they have the arms necessary to defend themselves. We do need to make sure that they don’t have arms that get into the wrong hands,” in a verbatim reiteration of the White House’s explanation of their policy. Lastly, drone policy made an unexpected appearance in Monday night’s debate. When asked what was his position on President Obama’s use of drones, Romney said “I support that entirely, and feel the president was right to up the usage of that technology, and believe that we should continue to use it, to continue to go after the people that represent a threat to this nation and to our friends.” Much with regard to these issues was left out of the debate. While the sanctions on Iran were mentioned, it was not mentioned that the sanctions are mainly harming the Iranian people, with little effect on the regime. While aiding Syrian rebels were mentioned, it was not mentioned that the UN reports they have committed war crimes, and US intelligence says the bulk of them are tied with al-Qaeda. While drones were mentioned, the fact that they consistently kill civilians and drive al-Qaeda recruitment and are probably illegal, was not mentioned.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#0)
(Edited)
.... While drones were mentioned, the fact that they consistently kill civilians and drive al-Qaeda recruitment and are probably illegal, was not mentioned. coming to a neighborhood near you. first they came for the muslims.... "....Drones NYPD's message to the public Take a close look at what the NYPD is putting up on the streets of NYC these days. What do you really see? Missiles being fired by drones to FAMILIES. See the Dad, mom, and little girl? They are flat out telegraphing that they are first spying on families, then hunting them down. Not terrorists, bank robbers, or whatever...BUT FAMILIES. The message is clear. In the USA, the family is the enemy to be hunted down and destroyed....." can't post the picture. see it here: www.whale.to/b/covert_q.html edit: Revealed: 64 Drone Bases on American Soil "...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
Isn't it sad that the Democan and Republicrat faithful are unable to see this and those independents that do see it sit on their hands and refuse to at least try and do something about it by voting for candidates who do not hold those militarist, tyrannical values? Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come over and break your window - unknown I WITHDRAW MY CONSENT! i'm guilty. i stopped voting. "they" choose the candidates so what's the point? http://watch.pair.com/dragon-lineage.html ""Capital must protect itself in every way, through combination and through legislation. Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law, applied by the central power of wealth, under control of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capital to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expand their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd. Thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves what has been generally planned and successfully accomplished." " Edit: Bankers' Manifesto [ties in with US Senate Doc. 43: all property in the hands of the state]. http://www.afn.org/~govern/safe.html edit again: Drones NYPD's message to the public Take a close look at what the NYPD is putting up on the streets of NYC these days. What do you really see? Missiles being fired by drones to FAMILIES. See the Dad, mom, and little girl? They are flat out telegraphing that they are first spying on families, then hunting them down. Not terrorists, bank robbers, or whatever...BUT FAMILIES. The message is clear. In the USA, the family is the enemy to be hunted down and destroyed.... Bankers' Manifesto [ties in with US Senate Doc. 43: all property in the hands of the state]. .... Because "war has been declared against the American people and their children..." since 1933. www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.html These people shouldn't be voted on; they should be destroyed by those trained to protect this country from enemies both foreign AND DOMESTIC. Then maybe the rest of the world can live in peace. "...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
While you are likely correct, I firmly believe that the more people who stay at home instead of voting for a third party, the easier it is for the two-party fraud to continue their charade. The more more who vote, the more resources the two-party fraud has to expend to keep control and control the propaganda in a believable way. Eventually it will become obvious to even the most dim. There are more non-Democans and Republicrats than there are the party faithful. Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come over and break your window - unknown I WITHDRAW MY CONSENT! and that's where some of us expend our energy...to that end. "...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.html and not to change the subject, but that article talks about the Letter of Marque which I have come to the conclusion, is exactly what that CONstitution was. the east wind will blow on it before long [Ezekiel 17:7-10/John 15:1/Matthew 15:13] and something far better will take its place. "...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
Give GaryJohnson2012.com a vote - Live Free
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. MenckenLastly, drone policy made an unexpected appearance in Monday night’s debate. When asked what was his position on President Obama’s use of drones, Romney said “I support that entirely, and feel the president was right to up the usage of that technology, and believe that we should continue to use it, to continue to go after the people that represent a threat to this nation and to our friends.”
#2. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#1)
coming to a neighborhood near you. first they came for the muslims....
Any perceived compliance with unconstitutional “laws” or orders put forth by government employees is NOT recognition of their authority; it is simply the result of carefully calculated submission to an entity exhibiting superior firepower.
#3. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#2)
(Edited)
Isn't it sad that the Democan and Republicrat faithful are unable to see this and those independents that do see it sit on their hands and refuse to at least try and do something about it by voting for candidates who do not hold those militarist, tyrannical values?
#4. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#3)
"they" choose the candidates so what's the point?
Any perceived compliance with unconstitutional “laws” or orders put forth by government employees is NOT recognition of their authority; it is simply the result of carefully calculated submission to an entity exhibiting superior firepower.
#5. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#4)
Eventually it will become obvious to even the most dim
#6. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#3)
Because "war has been declared against the American people and their children..." since 1933.
#7. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#6)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest