• Mitt Romney: US foreign policy 'must change course'
    35 replies, posted
[QUOTE] [B]Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has called for a "change of course" in the Middle East, criticising US President Obama on foreign policy. Speaking in Virginia, he lambasted the White House over an attack in Libya that killed the US ambassador.[/B] [B]He said he would put Iran "on notice" over its nuclear plans, and called for arms to go to Syrian rebels[/B]. With four weeks to go before the election, polls show Mr Obama retains a foreign policy lead over his rival. The former Massachusetts spoke at the Virginia Military Institute for his first major policy speech since the candidates met on Wednesday for their first face-to-face debate, on the US economy. Mr Obama was widely seen as having "lost" the debate after a hesitant performance in Denver. Their vice-presidential running mates Joe Biden and Paul Ryan will debate on Thursday. Libya reactions Mr Romney has repeatedly criticised the president for a foreign policy that he believes has left the US less respected and less powerful in the world. In his speech at the military institute he said he wanted to "offer a larger perspective on these tragic recent events" and share his vision for a "freer, more prosperous, and more peaceful world". Mr Romney linked the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya to the president's foreign policy and criticised his administration's response. "The attacks on America last month should not be seen as random acts," Mr Romney said. "They are expressions of a larger struggle that is playing out across the broader Middle East - a region that is now in the midst of the most profound upheaval in a century." [B]"This latest assault cannot be blamed on a reprehensible video insulting Islam, despite the administration's attempts to convince us of that for so long."[/B] Initial reports said the protests and attacks were sparked by an anti-Islam film made in the US. But since the attack, the Obama administration has said that the attack in Benghazi, which killed US ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three others, involved some people "linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al-Qaeda". Mr Romney was criticised at the time after saying that the administration appeared to "sympathise with those who waged the attacks" before the situation in Libya and at another protest in Egypt became clear. The White House has faced repeated questions over the security situation in Benghazi in the run-up to the attack. On Monday, US media reported that Ambassador Stevens wanted a specialised security team to stay past their August deployment, but that the staff was told to make-do "with less". A state department official told ABC News that embassy's security officer never made a specific request for the team to stay and that there was no net loss of security personnel. Arms to opposition? Mr Romney - whose foreign affairs team includes advisers from the "realist" and "neo-conservative" wings of the Republican establishment - repeatedly accused Mr Obama of being soft in foreign affairs. He was particularly tough on the administration's policy in the Middle East, asserting: "Hope is not a strategy". Mr Romney said the US was missing "an historic opportunity to win new friends who share our values in the Middle East" and said there was "a longing for American leadership" in region. On Iran, Mr Romney said "will not hesitate to impose new sanctions", describing Tehran as "never closer" to a nuclear weapons capability. [B]"For the sake of peace, we must make clear to Iran through actions - not just words - that their nuclear pursuit will not be tolerated".[/B] On Syria, Mr Romney said Mr Obama had "failed to lead" and said that his administration would work "with our partners to identify and organise those members of the [Syrian] opposition who share our values and ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat Assad's tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets". As the Republican candidate spoke, BBC News uncovered evidence suggesting that weapons intended for the Saudi military have been diverted to Syrian rebels in Aleppo. Correspondent Ian Pannell saw three small crates of Ukrainian-made weapons - with a consignment note for the Saudi army - in a base being used by rebel fighters in Syria's second city. [B]During his remarks, Mr Romney also gave strong words of support on Israel, arguing "the world must never see any daylight between our two nations". He also used the speech to argue against expected US defence cuts and for increased US Navy shipbuilding, as many as 15 a year, including three submarines.[/B] Before Mr Romney spoke, the Obama campaign released an ad highlighting his gaffe-laden international trip this summer as well as his response to the Libya attack. "We're not going to be lectured by someone who has been an unmitigated disaster on foreign policy," Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said on Monday. The two candidates will debate foreign policy in their last meeting on 22 October. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19874429"]bbc[/URL] "I recommend that all US presidential candidates... do at least two things: that they use their head and consult their reason when they formulate their positions, and that they check the time - it is now 2012, not the mid-1970s."
[quote]"For the sake of peace, we must make clear to Iran through actions - not just words - that their nuclear pursuit will not be tolerated".[/quote] Let's bully the smaller kids trying to progress [quote]During his remarks, Mr Romney also gave strong words of support on Israel, arguing "the world must never see any daylight between our two nations". He also used the speech to argue against expected US defence cuts and for increased US Navy shipbuilding, as many as 15 a year, including three submarines.[/quote] Then let's buy bigger sticks and stones to bully them with!
well US foreign policy does need to change course but I don't think romney has the right idea about where it needs to go
[quote]I recommend that all US presidential candidates... do at least two things: that they use their head and consult their reason when they formulate their positions, and that they check the time - it is now 2012, not the mid-1970s.[/quote] I thought it was the dark ages...
What we need to do is to pull our military out of the Middle East and focus on our own problems. [editline]8th October 2012[/editline] Neither candidate has any plans of doing so though.
We must go to war to preserve peace!
So, don't want to be the asshole to point this out- but the embassy attack would've probably never occurred had the Libyans not overthrown Gaddafi. Now, Romney wants to send weapons to the Syrians.
[QUOTE=Nikota;37962443]We must go to war to preserve peace![/QUOTE] Actually, that [b]CAN[/b] be a valid statement, it just isn't in this case. I don't think Iran would be dumb enough to use nuclear weapons with Israel right around the corner.
It'll take a turn for the worse if this idiot takes office, I'll tell you that much.
[QUOTE=laserguided;37962259]"I recommend that all US presidential candidates... do at least two things: that they use their head and consult their reason when they formulate their positions, and that they check the time - it is now 2012, not the mid-1970s."[/QUOTE] But the Soviet Union is the greatest enemy to freedom!
so a candidate wants something changed wow shocker
[QUOTE=Nikota;37962443]We must go to war to preserve peace![/QUOTE] WAR is PEACE FREEDOM is SLAVERY IGNORANCE is STRENGTH -Brought to you by the Mitt Romney campaign.
Yeah, you have one thing right Mitt. Our foreign policy does need to be changed. Your changes would just make everything worse though. We need to just pull out of that part of the world entirely. Let it do whatever the fuck it's going to do. [QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;37962493]Actually, that [b]CAN[/b] be a valid statement, it just isn't in this case. I don't think Iran would be dumb enough to use nuclear weapons with Israel right around the corner.[/QUOTE] If they used them I have a feeling Israel might very well be who they use them on.
[QUOTE=Fort83;37963163]Romney wanting the US to police the world eh. One of these days someone is going to knock the US off its high horse.[/QUOTE] implying that anyone would blatantly attack the largest and only remaining superpower in the world. lol
ONCE AGAIN he has used many words to say nothing at all. No specifics, no plan, no actual criticism besides saying "What Obama has done is wrong". Just very vague and meaningless rhetoric and talking points.
[QUOTE=Aspen;37965882]implying that anyone would blatantly attack the largest and only remaining superpower in the world. lol[/QUOTE] there are plenty of super powers in the world other than the US.
He also used the speech to argue against expected US defence cuts and for increased US Navy shipbuilding, as many as 15 a year, including three submarines. Someone correct me if I'm wrong (GunFox, I choose you!) but doesn't the US have a near monopoly on sea warfare? I think allied nations like the UK and France have strong navies as well but if there is one part of the US military that I didn't think needed expanding it was our naval force.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;37966020]He also used the speech to argue against expected US defence cuts and for increased US Navy shipbuilding, as many as 15 a year, including three submarines. Someone correct me if I'm wrong (GunFox, I choose you!) but doesn't the US have a near monopoly on sea warfare? I think allied nations like the UK and France have strong navies as well but if there is one part of the US military that I didn't think needed expanding it was our naval force.[/QUOTE] They may have strong navies, but ours is unrivalled. The last nation to have a navy that could threaten ours and wasn't also a steadfast ally was Japan circa 1941. After that, the only countries with navies capable of threatening ours are also our steadfast allies.
[B]"The president has failed to use Americas great power to shape history" -Mitt Romney.[/B] I hope he does not get elected.
I dunno how I feel about the US having a cry over Iran's nuclear program. It sounds to me a lot like 'we're all powerful because we have nukes; we don't want anybody else to get them and be able to challenge that'. I mean Iran isn't stupid enough to actually nuke somebody; they know it's all over for them if they do. But in this day and age it's a good enough deterrent from attacks.
[QUOTE=Fort83;37966565]What if Canada attacked the US? Crazy I know :v:[/QUOTE] Canada would have to enjoy being reamed.
Expand our navy even more? Holy ship! Romney what are you thinking?
Do you really need more Navy? You're already trillions in debt.
At least he realizes our foreign policy is shit
[QUOTE=Maloof?;37966784]I dunno how I feel about the US having a cry over Iran's nuclear program. It sounds to me a lot like 'we're all powerful because we have nukes; we don't want anybody else to get them and be able to challenge that'. [/QUOTE] I don't think it's so much America having a cry about it, rather I feel it's America being a bully about it. Why would they anyway? I mean, it's not like Iran having nukes is even remotely a threat to America, there's nothing to cry about.
[QUOTE=Trogdon;37967215]At least he realizes our foreign policy is shit[/QUOTE] Yeah, but it seems he's wanting to take it in the wrong direction.
[QUOTE=TestECull;37967249]I don't think it's so much America having a cry about it, rather I feel it's America being a bully about it. Why would they anyway? I mean, it's not like Iran having nukes is even remotely a threat to America, there's nothing to cry about.[/QUOTE] 'Having a cry' was just my way of saying 'making a fuss' haha
[QUOTE=Raidyr;37966020]Someone correct me if I'm wrong (GunFox, I choose you!) but doesn't the US have a near monopoly on sea warfare? I think allied nations like the UK and France have strong navies as well but if there is one part of the US military that I didn't think needed expanding it was our naval force.[/QUOTE] We have a total monopoly as far as Navy's go. We have more aircraft carriers than all the world combined, and plan to build 3 more.
All I hear is "blah blah blah more deployments". Fuck you Mitt.
So he thought supporting Libya and Egypt was wrong but now arms should go to Syrian rebels?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.