Mitt Romney's Ridiculous "Middle East" Op-Ed

Mitt Romney’s Ridiculous “Middle East” Op-Ed

More of the same

PoliticsOctober 2012 • Views: 33,097

Mitt Romney’s op-ed for the Wall Street Journal is just more of the same old hackneyed right wing talking points; Obama is weak, Obama apologizes for America, Obama hates Israel, we need to pump more money into the military so we can be even more threatening, etc.

Mitt Romney: A New Course for the Middle East.

But this pile of empty verbiage is amazing in at least one respect: somehow, Romney managed to write an entire piece about Middle East policy without mentioning either Iraq or Afghanistan. An odd omission, perhaps explainable by the fact that both of these long-term wars were fairly well devastating to the jingoistic “American strength” line Romney’s feeding to the right — so Romney just pretends they don’t exist.

Schooling Mitt on Middle East History

Jump to bottom

104 comments

Ojoe Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:29:02am

Si vis pacem para bellum.

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:29:26am

@green_footballs 2009 post "Why I Parted Ways With The Right" now reads like Cliff Notes for the 2012 Election: goo.gl/3cIn
— Clay Shirky (@cshirky) October 1, 2012

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:29:29am

Mitt Romney: Dangerously Incompetent

Obdicut Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:30:26am

Wow, I thought people were being hyperoblic when they said he didn't mention Iraq or Afghanistan. He didn't. Wow.

ANd this bit:

The first step is to understand how we got here. Since World War II, America has been the leader of the Free World. We're unique in having earned that role not through conquest but through promoting human rights, free markets and the rule of law. We ally ourselves with like-minded countries, expand prosperity through trade and keep the peace by maintaining a military second to none.

Isn't true. Saudi Arabia is not a like-minded country with the US. Nor are many other countries that we ally with strategically. I'd agree that we should ally with like-minded countries, but I doubt Romney is actually suggesting that.

b_sharp Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:30:47am

Big fish eat little fish.
Might is right.
.
.
.
Carry a big stick and ignore the bear shitting in the woods.

Decatur Deb Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:30:55am

re: #1 Ojoe

Si vis pacem para bellum.

What's the sense building the World's Best Army if you're not gonna use it?

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:31:16am

Mitt Romney can't be taken seriously as someone who wants to fix the deficit when he's proposing more defense spending and refusing to consider repealing the Bush tax cuts. Must be nice to be Mitt to live in a fantasy world. Hey Mitt look a faery.

b_sharp Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:32:01am

What peace has the US kept?

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:33:06am

re: #8 reflections of a raging redneck

What peace has the US kept?

They've kept a piece of everything!

Joe Max Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:33:18am

It almost seems like Rmoney doesn't want to talk about Afghanistan at all, ever. And forget about Iraq! Just think of the shock-and-awe we could dump on Iran!

So Obama's counter attack: talking about Iraq and Afghanistan.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:33:32am

re: #4 Obdicut

Wow, I thought people were being hyperoblic when they said he didn't mention Iraq or Afghanistan. He didn't. Wow.

ANd this bit:

Isn't true. Saudi Arabia is not a like-minded country with the US. Nor are many other countries that we ally with strategically. I'd agree that we should ally with like-minded countries, but I doubt Romney is actually suggesting that.

He's living in fantasy land where we only ally with secular democracies who are capitalistic.

erik_t Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:35:18am

re: #4 Obdicut

Wow, I thought people were being hyperoblic when they said he didn't mention Iraq or Afghanistan. He didn't. Wow.

Fits right in with his apparent belief that the geopolitical stage hasn't changed since 1989. We didn't really care about Afghanistan or Iraq back then, either.

freetoken Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:36:27am

One of many false (or better yet, empty) claims:

The 20th century became an American Century because we were steadfast in defense of freedom. We made the painful sacrifices necessary to defeat totalitarianism in all of its guises. To defend ourselves and our allies, we paid the price in treasure and in soldiers who never came home.

Three sentences, but zero argument.

Of the many problems with the whole Romney approach is that it is geared towards making revanchists feel good, which means repeating their empty words back to them.

The "American Century" depended on many factors. Without petroleum being discovered in Pennsylvania, and the first (anywhere) oil well being drilled there the US would not have been the industrial growth after the Civil War. The US industrialized greatly and by WWI was already the dominant industrial power, even if in foreign affairs the US was not seen as a world leader.

Romney overlooks that European nations had to (literally) kill themselves off for the US to take central stage.

Romney is appealing to the self-lies of the very insecure in this country, a portion of the citizenry who need to be told continually something good about themselves.

This is not leadership, in the sense of foreign relations.

The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:39:29am

re: #11 HappyWarrior

He's living in fantasy land where we only ally with secular democracies who are capitalistic.

Nope. Never backed any dictators ever. Never gave money to any contra groups that fought against democratically-elected governments that we didn't like.

Derp.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:39:45am

re: #13 freetoken

One of many false (or better yet, empty) claims:

Three sentences, but zero argument.

Of the many problems with the whole Romney approach is that it is geared towards making revanchists feel good, which means repeating their empty words back to them.

The "American Century" depended on many factors. Without petroleum being discovered in Pennsylvania, and the first (anywhere) oil well being drilled there the US would not have been the industrial growth after the Civil War. The US industrialized greatly and by WWI was already the dominant industrial power, even if in foreign affairs the US was not seen as a world leader.

Romney overlooks that European nations had to (literally) kill themselves off for the US to take central stage.

Romney is appealing to the self-lies of the very insecure in this country, a portion of the citizenry who need to be told continually something good about themselves.

This is not leadership, in the sense of foreign relations.

Romney prefers just to deride Europe and act like we're successful because America fuck yeah! And you're right about what I've bolded. The aftermath of WWI and WWII especially are what led the US to become a superpower. Romney's derision of Obama "wanting America to be like Europe" is stupid anyhow considering Mitt has embraced the austerity mindset that many Europeans on his side embrace.

Joe Max Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:40:53am

Re: Happy Warrior #11:

He's living in fantasy land where we only ally with secular democracies who are capitalistic.

Like China? Secular, capitalistic... well, two out of three ain't bad.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:40:54am

re: #14 The Ghost of a Flea

Nope. Never backed any dictators ever. Never gave money to any contra groups that fought against democratically-elected governments that we didn't like.

Derp.

Never. Seriously, Mitt's probably the most moronic candidate I've seen nominated for president by either two parties when it comes to foreign policy.

Shiplord Kirel Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:41:44am

What Romney knows about the Middle East wouldn't fill a thimble. Worse, he will be dependent on quack advisors who don't know anything either. The Bush administration was a kind of golden age for military and intelligence consultants and contractors who advised on, and often ran, everything from food service to "enhanced interrogation" (civil service types being a little rusty on this sort of thing). Romney's objective is to re-start that gravy train.
His administration would be the second coming of Rumsfeld.

Decatur Deb Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:41:44am

re: #13 freetoken

One of many false (or better yet, empty) claims:

The 20th century became an American Century because we were steadfast in defense of freedom. We made the painful sacrifices necessary to defeat totalitarianism in all of its guises. To defend ourselves and our allies, we paid the price in treasure and in soldiers who never came home.

Three sentences, but zero argument.
...snip

"Fortunately, no one in my bloodline was ever called upon to dress shabbily or sit in a muddy hole."

DelusionDeluge Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:41:48am

If you buy what Mitt's selling, I've got some liberators who'd like to greet you.

freetoken Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:42:08am

Not unrelated:

PHOTO: Georgia GOP Goes Full Bircher

nines09 Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:42:29am

Mitt Romney has an inability to actually hear what falls from his lips. Does he buy this drivel? The machine hands him the latest gaff and off he goes. He is a puppet, and a bad one at that.

ShaunP Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:43:26am

re: #18 Shiplord Kirel

Romney's objective is to re-start that gravy train.
His administration would be the second coming of Rumsfeld.

I would have said Cheney, but absolutely correct. Proof from his own op-ed (this is really scary):

This means restoring our credibility with Iran. When we say an Iranian nuclear-weapons capability—and the regional instability that comes with it—is unacceptable, the ayatollahs must be made to believe us.

Shiplord Kirel Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:44:32am

Hope it's not too early for an OT:
Rush Limbaugh is now claiming that one adult in seven in Ohio has an "Obamaphone." I have no idea whether this is accurate but he really should call it a "Reaganphone," since that's when the program originated.

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:44:42am

re: #13 freetoken

Some of this is yet another rehash -- subtext -- that America single-handedly defeated the Axis powers in WWII.

Lidane Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:45:17am

re: #24 Shiplord Kirel

Hope it's not too early for an OT:
Rush Limbaugh is now claiming that one adult in seven in Ohio has an "Obamaphone." I have no idea whether this is accurate but he really should call it a "Reaganphone," since that's when the program originated.

Actually, it's much older than Reagan. IIRC, the original program started with the creation of the FCC back in the 1930's.

lawhawk Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:45:30am

re: #4 Obdicut

The first step is to understand how we got here. Since World War II, America has been the leader of the Free World. We're unique in having earned that role not through conquest but through promoting human rights, free markets and the rule of law. We ally ourselves with like-minded countries, expand prosperity through trade and keep the peace by maintaining a military second to none.

Realpolitik dictated cutting deals with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt, even as those countries were rife with all manner of human rights abuses, totalitarian regimes/monarchies. The US was more interested in preserving access to oil in the Middle East and preventing the Soviets (and then Russians) from exploiting the region to their own ends (also to gain access to fuel, but to deny the US a foothold in/on/near the Russian (ex Soviet borders).

In only one case did US interests towards a like-minded country sync up - and that's Israel. It's still the anomaly. It's buffeted by the effects of other regional powers (Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia) that are using direct and indirect means to tilt the peace process in their favor (or thwart it altogether).

Balance of power and the Cold War wasn't successful in keeping the peace (see the multiple wars fought between Israel and neighbors, and then the wars between various countries or civil wars, etc.) but it also tamped down some conflicts from growing even further - 1973 Yom Kippur War and 1956 War for instance and prevented the Israelis from marching on Damascus and Cairo in 1967 and 1973 (ceasefires implemented before that could come to pass). Even while Russia's in a diminished economic situation, and China's ascendant, war, civil war, social strife, sectarian violence, and foreign meddling are part and parcel of what's going on.

erik_t Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:45:35am

re: #22 nines09

Mitt Romney has an inability to actually hear what falls from his lips. Does he buy this drivel? The machine hands him the latest gaff and off he goes. He is a puppet, and a bad one at that.

This isn't even an off-the-cuff foot-in-mouth moment. This is ostensibly a carefully considered and polished editorial.

Can't he find an adviser with half a clue to write this for him?

No, he can't. And that's a horrifying prospect for a notional chief executive.

erik_t Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:46:07am

re: #24 Shiplord Kirel

Hope it's not too early for an OT:
Rush Limbaugh is now claiming that one adult in seven in Ohio has an "Obamaphone." I have no idea whether this is accurate but he really should call it a "Reaganphone," since that's when the program originated.

RING RING RING RING RING RING RING RING OBAMAPHOOOOOONE

Lidane Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:46:34am

re: #25 Gus

Some of this is yet another rehash -- subtext -- that America single-handedly defeated the Axis powers in WWII.

Our European allies might have a bone to pick with that, given that they were busy fighting the Axis for well over two years before Pearl Harbor prodded us to join the war.

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:46:55am

Romney is just going to try to get the most out of our defense budget.

"So you mean to say we've got all these nukes, and they're just sitting around unused, but we still pay to maintain them? Seems like it would be more cost effective if we fire a few off. Get Secretary Bolton on the line and see who we can outsource them to."

Kronocide Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:47:12am

El Romney: Tre Sinew!

Lidane Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:47:42am

re: #29 erik_t

RING RING RING RING RING RING RING RING OBAMAPHOOOOOONE

[Link: procatinator.com...]

Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:49:25am

re: #25 Gus

Some of this is yet another rehash -- subtext -- that America single-handedly defeated the Axis powers in WWII.

Douglas MacArthur would endorse that viewpoint.
:p

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:49:52am

re: #30 Lidane

Our European allies might have a bone to pick with that, given that they were busy fighting the Axis for well over two years before Pearl Harbor prodded us to join the war.

That's the thing. Pearl Harbor forced the USA out of a semi-isolationst stance other than at the time things like Lend Lease.

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:50:35am

re: #34 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

Douglas MacArthur would endorse that viewpoint.
:p

Perhaps I should rephrase that...

Some of this is yet another rehash -- subtext -- that ~~America~~ Douglas MacArthur single-handedly defeated the Axis powers in WWII.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:50:45am

re: #35 Gus

That's the thing. Pearl Harbor forced the USA out of a semi-isolationst stance other than at the time things like Lend Lease.

and Lend-Lease was quite controversial in its day.

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:50:49am

Big Steve Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:50:58am

Killgore.....I see you took a clean sweep of the bottom 10 comments.....I am so jealous.

b_sharp Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:51:12am

re: #38 Gus

//

Ghost of Tom Joad Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:51:17am

Romney could have saved himself a load of ghost-writer fees and just submitted "Bomb them! Obama sucks! America, F&CK YEAH!"

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:51:44am

re: #37 HappyWarrior

and Lend-Lease was quite controversial in its day.

Opposition to the Lend-Lease bill was strongest among isolationist Republicans in Congress, who feared that the measure would be "the longest single step this nation has yet taken toward direct involvement in the war abroad." When the House of Representatives finally took a roll call vote on February 9, 1941, the 260 to 165 vote fell largely along party lines. Democrats voted 238 to 25 in favor and Republicans 24 in favor and 135 against.

Burn!

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:53:03am

I really don't think Mitt understands international relations at all. Nothing he's shown this campaign shows he has even a rudimentary understanding of how to deal with the world around us. We're a great country but just saying America is great a gazillion times and tough guy posturing doesn't solve problems. Neither does making a guy like Bolton your foreign policy adviser while you claim that America isn't respected.

Decatur Deb Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:53:37am

re: #42 Gus

Opposition to the Lend-Lease bill was strongest among isolationist Republicans in Congress, who feared that the measure would be "the longest single step this nation has yet taken toward direct involvement in the war abroad." When the House of Representatives finally took a roll call vote on February 9, 1941, the 260 to 165 vote fell largely along party lines. Democrats voted 238 to 25 in favor and Republicans 24 in favor and 135 against.

Burn!

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

I'm not really voting and working to save Obama's America--I'm trying as much to save FDR's America.

Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:53:52am

re: #27 lawhawk

Tamping down the 1967 and 1973 results is one thing that was done. Something to mildly consider is the what might have resulted had Israel rolled into Cairo or Damascus on either of those campaigns.

No sort of long-term occupation would have been forthcoming. The resident regimes would probably have crumbled, but no guarantee that anything better (in regards to relationships with Israel) would have replaced them. And if Sadat goes in 1973 odds are there are no Camp David Accords. Added to this that Syria and Egypt would both be brooding in a nationalistic way from that point forward about a foreign power having occupied their capitol. (Compare to US not being pleased about Washington, DC being occupied and torched during the War of 1812.)

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:54:05am

re: #42 Gus

Opposition to the Lend-Lease bill was strongest among isolationist Republicans in Congress, who feared that the measure would be "the longest single step this nation has yet taken toward direct involvement in the war abroad." When the House of Representatives finally took a roll call vote on February 9, 1941, the 260 to 165 vote fell largely along party lines. Democrats voted 238 to 25 in favor and Republicans 24 in favor and 135 against.

Burn!

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

What the American right won't admit to is that isolationism was dominant in American right wing politics until the Communists became the big enemy. It's why Ron Paul is actually closer to the conservative tradition than modern conservatives will ever admit.

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:54:21am

Poll: Obama Tops 70 Percent Support Among Latinos

Shiplord Kirel Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:55:07am

re: #30 Lidane

Our European allies might have a bone to pick with that, given that they were busy fighting the Axis for well over two years before Pearl Harbor prodded us to join the war.

One of the chief authors of the infamous Lubbock County Republican platform insists that the US was not justified in going to war in 1941. He claims that we provoked the Japanese by "moving into the Pacific" (in 1898) and that Churchill and a Wilsonian cabal manipulated us into the war with the Nazis. He knows better than to spell out who made up most of this cabal, but you don't have to be a canine to hear that dog-whistle.
This is pretty much standard John Birch Society dogma; no surprise since the JBS counts many local Republicans among its membership.

Killgore Trout Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:55:53am

re: #39 Big Steve

Killgore.....I see you took a clean sweep of the bottom 10 comments.....I am so jealous.

Thanks. ;)

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:56:05am

re: #47 Kragar

Poll: Obama Tops 70 Percent Support Among Latinos

Wow, just wow. This election really is turning into a referendum on right wing racism and xenophobia.

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:57:01am

David Horowitz Says Huma Abedin is 'Worse than Alger Hiss' and Grover Norquist is a 'Practicing Muslim' Subverting the GOP

"And the kid who screwed up my coffee is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood! And the guy who drove in front of me with his turn signal on for 3 miles was a member of Al Qaeda!"

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:57:46am

re: #48 Shiplord Kirel

One of the chief authors of the infamous Lubbock County Republican platform insists that the US was not justified in going to war in 1941. He claims that we provoked the Japanese by "moving into the Pacific" (in 1898) and that Churchill and a Wilsonian cabal manipulated us into the war with the Nazis. He knows better than to spell out who made up most of this cabal, but you don't have to be a canine to hear that dog-whistle.
This is pretty much standard John Birch Society dogma; no surprise since the JBS counts many local Republicans among its membership.

Wow talk about throwbacks. But yeah I've seen the claim that "FDR provoked the Japanese" with the oil embargo. Yeah because the Japanese were just minding their business until FDR said no oil for you!

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:59:17am

re: #50 Charles Johnson

Wow, just wow. This election really is turning into a referendum on right wing racism and xenophobia.

Mitt Romney: “My dad, as you probably know, was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company. But he was born in Mexico… and had he been born of, uh, Mexican parents, I’d have a better shot at winning this. But he was unfortunately born to Americans living in Mexico. He lived there for a number of years. I mean, I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino.”

I can't imagine why Mitt is having problems rallying Latino support.
/

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 10:59:33am

re: #51 Kragar

David Horowitz Says Huma Abedin is 'Worse than Alger Hiss' and Grover Norquist is a 'Practicing Muslim' Subverting the GOP

"And the kid who screwed up my coffee is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood! And the guy who drove in front of me with his turn signal on for 3 miles was a member of Al Qaeda!"

That guy's a nutcase and he's making that other nutcase- Norquist look sympathetic.

Lidane Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:00:10am

re: #48 Shiplord Kirel

One of the chief authors of the infamous Lubbock County Republican platform insists that the US was not justified in going to war in 1941. He claims that we provoked the Japanese by "moving into the Pacific" (in 1898) and that Churchill and a Wilsonian cabal manipulated us into the war with the Nazis. He knows better than to spell out who made up most of this cabal, but you don't have to be a canine to hear that dog-whistle.
This is pretty much standard John Birch Society dogma; no surprise since the JBS counts many local Republicans among its membership.

Crazy Uncle Pat Buchanan's been spewing that same line for decades. I'm not surprised to find out that it's a Bircher line.

MittDoesNotCompute Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:00:16am

re: #2 Charles Johnson

[Embedded content]

This x infinity.

Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:00:23am

re: #52 HappyWarrior

Wow talk about throwbacks. But yeah I've seen the claim that "FDR provoked the Japanese" with the oil embargo. Yeah because the Japanese were just minding their business until FDR said no oil for you!

Because boycotts are bad.

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:01:13am

re: #54 HappyWarrior

That guy's a nutcase and he's making that other nutcase- Norquist look sympathetic.

Sometimes, you just need to lay back and watch the poo flinging monkeys beat each other up.

Kronocide Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:01:46am

re: #50 Charles Johnson

Wow, just wow. This election really is turning into a referendum on right wing racism and xenophobia.

If he didn't go Bronzer it would have been 80%!

Shiplord Kirel Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:02:09am

The Republican Party's 1940 isolationism didn't simply disappear after the declaration of war. It remained submerged, preserved in a kind of stasis field, through various internationalist GOP administrations. It has now re-emerged, almost unaltered, having been carefully nurtured by former fringe groups like the JBS. These groups have become the mainstream and they have brought their carefully preserved philosophies with them.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:02:09am

re: #55 Lidane

Crazy Uncle Pat Buchanan's been spewing that same line for decades. I'm not surprised to find out that it's a Bircher line.

Yeah, when I was working at a WWII magazine, they reviewed one of Pat's anti FDR and Churchill screeds and it was a lot of that crap. Pat usually tries to make it out like Hitler had no real choice. That one really pisses me off because Hitler just invaded Czechoslovakia like it was nothing but Pat thinks the Allies acted improperly.

Lidane Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:02:22am

re: #47 Kragar

Poll: Obama Tops 70 Percent Support Among Latinos

That's unpossible! Everyone knows that Mitt Romney is hoping for 38% of the Latino vote.

This poll is clearly skewed.

///

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:02:40am

re: #58 Kragar

Sometimes, you just need to lay back and watch the poo flinging monkeys beat each other up.

True that.

MittDoesNotCompute Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:04:25am

re: #35 Gus

That's the thing. Pearl Harbor forced the USA out of a semi-isolationst stance other than at the time things like Lend Lease.

re: #37 HappyWarrior

and Lend-Lease was quite controversial in its day.

IIRC, a bunch of isolationists in Congress (mostly Republicans, but there were some Democrats) hated the idea of Lend-Lease mightily and fought FDR tooth and nail on it.

Edit: Gus beat me to the punch...

Kronocide Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:04:55am

Romney's Great '3 Sinews' Op-Ed.

A Mom Anon Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:05:26am

re: #26 Lidane

Did this asshole stop to think of WHY so many people have these phones? God this pisses me off. They need the phones because the FUCKING JOBS LEFT THE STATE AND MOVED OVERSEAS. That's why it's called the "rust belt".

I wish this fucking douchebag would lose everything,his money,his"prestige",and have to live hand to mouth. Let's see how popular he'd be then. I loathe this man,he's done more damage than one person should be allowed to do.

Killgore Trout Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:06:37am

Update on the Moonbat visit to Pakistan...
Taliban make decision on Imran Khan’s Waziristan rally

The banned Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has said that the militant organisation has made a decision regarding cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan’s peace march to South Waziristan; however, the decision will be announced a day before the rally actually takes place.

I'm not sure why they would withhold their judgement until the last moment but the only reasons I can think of are not very nice.

Judging from previous statements things don't look positive.

Earlier in August, Taliban spokesman Ehsan had said that a reaction to Khan’s proposed visit will be made public after the “Shurah [council] of TTP…decide what to do a week before his (Khan’s) sure arrival.”

The spokesman, denying earlier reports of a TTP death threat to the PTI chief, however, had made it clear that the Taliban ‘have no sympathy for Khan or liberals, a term they associate with a lack of religious belief.

“It’s sure and clear that we don’t have any sympathy with Imran Khan. Neither [do] we need his sympathy, as he himself claims to be liberal and we see liberals as infidels,” he said.

The spokesman had said that by calling himself a ‘liberal’, Khan had proved that he was a ‘slave of the US and Europe’, and that the Taliban are not satisfied with his policies.

The Ghost of a Flea Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:07:32am

This whole "peace through strength" thing is crap.

The Cold War was just a giant string of proxy conflicts where US and Soviet allies were prodded into collision, then the situation was escalated by the two superpowers showering money and ordinance on their respective "teams."

In fact, accumulation of military forces...both troops and ordinance...has never been a stand-alone method of creating either internal or trans-national stability. Display of that force--bloody lessons--have always been hand-in-glove with the former. And not just once, and not "surgical strikes" against offenders. There is no "shock and awe" magic that completely cows your opponents...or your subject populations...in a single, deterministic blow. From Rome to the British Empire, the formula has remained the continuous exercise of the option of state-sponsored retaliatory violence.

Mitt's trying to sell us the velvet glove and pretend the iron fist ain't no thing.

Decatur Deb Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:07:39am

re: #64 Gert Fröbe

re: #37 HappyWarrior

IIRC, a bunch of isolationists (mostly Republicans, but there were some Democrats) hated the idea of Lend-Lease mightily and fought FDR tooth and nail on it.

The first American fliers to join RAF squadrons had to leap through terrific hurdles--they were seriously illegal. Having Britain-hating Joe Kennedy for ambassador didn't help. Later his son would fly to his death in a clapped-out B-17.

nines09 Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:07:58am

re: #51 Kragar

David Horowitz Says Huma Abedin is 'Worse than Alger Hiss' and Grover Norquist is a 'Practicing Muslim' Subverting the GOP

"And the kid who screwed up my coffee is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood! And the guy who drove in front of me with his turn signal on for 3 miles was a member of Al Qaeda!"

There are people who you wonder if they are on drugs and then those who should be on drugs. He should do and be on drugs.

Kronocide Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:08:08am

Not a vision of leadership, more of an assertion to return to a non-existent idealistic olden times vision of US hegemony because the current guy is a wussy.

Which is odd, because I thought Obama's vision for destroying America was being executed beautifully.

lawhawk Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:09:44am

re: #52 HappyWarrior

Another need for a history lesson -

Japan bombs Pearl Harbor and British targets on December 7 (8th local time); US declares war on Japanese, followed by Britain and other allied countries (USSR demurs) on December 8, 1941 (DC local time).

Germany invokes obligations to Japan and declares war on US on December 11, with the US reciprocating in kind.

The December 8th declaration of war against Japan didn't reference Germany. It was when Hitler announced his intentions to declare war on the US that the US reciprocated.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:13:41am

re: #72 lawhawk

Another need for a history lesson -

Japan bombs Pearl Harbor and British targets on December 7 (8th local time); US declares war on Japanese, followed by Britain and other allied countries (USSR demurs) on December 8, 1941 (DC local time).

Germany invokes obligations to Japan and declares war on US on December 11, with the US reciprocating in kind.

The December 8th declaration of war against Japan didn't reference Germany. It was when Hitler announced his intentions to declare war on the US that the US reciprocated.

Yeah but those are facts. Pat and those like him don't like it when facts don't support their bullshit agenda.

wrenchwench Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:14:54am

re: #41 Ghost of Tom Joad

Welcome, hatchling.

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:15:20am

Then there was the Korean war... brought to you by the UNITED NATIONS!!

Then there was the Vietnam War... brought to you by the FRENCH!!

erik_t Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:16:07am

re: #61 HappyWarrior

Yeah, when I was working at a WWII magazine, they reviewed one of Pat's anti FDR and Churchill screeds and it was a lot of that crap. Pat usually tries to make it out like Hitler had no real choice. That one really pisses me off because Hitler just invaded Czechoslovakia like it was nothing but Pat thinks the Allies acted improperly.

I'm no thoughtcrime advocate by any means, but anyone who thinks the Allies were in the general wrong in WW2 is so far outside of any sort of rational mainstream thought that I don't think they should get much more than the time of day.

Ghost of Tom Joad Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:16:09am

re: #74 wrenchwench

Thanks. Been reading from inside the womb for a couple of years.

Lidane Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:16:55am

re: #75 Gus

Then there was the Vietnam War... brought to you by the FRENCH!!

Impossible! Everyone knows the French are just a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys. What would they know about war?

MittDoesNotCompute Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:17:23am

re: #69 Decatur Deb

The first American fliers to join RAF squadrons had to leap through terrific hurdles--they were seriously illegal. Having Britain-hating Joe Kennedy for ambassador didn't help. Later his son would fly to his death in a clapped-out B-17.

"Clapped-out" denotes rickety, rundown; Joe Jr. flew to his death in a freaking giant remote-controlled flying bomb that went off before he could bail.

It didn't work out so well for him (or more than a couple of Operation Aphrodite flyers), but I have to give them props for having huge granite balls to even try that shit.

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:17:38am

re: #78 Lidane

Americans were the only ones fighting in the Viet Nam war!!

wrenchwench Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:17:40am

re: #68 The Ghost of a Flea

This whole "peace through strength" thing is crap.

Yes, but it's trademarked crap.

That entry has been changed recently.

HappyWarrior Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:17:45am

re: #76 erik_t

I'm no thoughtcrime advocate by any means, but anyone who thinks the Allies were in the general wrong in WW2 is so far outside of any sort of rational mainstream thought that I don't think they should get much more than the time of day.

No kidding.

lawhawk Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:18:13am

re: #68 The Ghost of a Flea

It's a collateral attack on the subject of military spending, but the GOP and Mitt have both insisted on increases in military spending and claimed that cuts to military spending would harm jobs. It's that latter point that undermines the GOP argument about government spending and jobs creation.

If the government spending can create jobs for military companies (an argument being thrown around in VA where there's a significant amount of defense contractor business that could be lost if there are cuts), then it can also create jobs in other sectors with spending. The corollary is that cuts in federal spending on other sectors (infrastructure, education, law enforcement, transportation) will lead to job cuts there - and that increases in spending on those sectors would lead to more jobs.

What the GOP wants is to increase spending on some kinds of jobs - defense contractors - while ignoring others, which can have a long term impact on reducing competitiveness and lifestyles (think bridge and road failures, reduced efficiency of transported goods, and students who do not get sufficient educations - and students who aren't properly prepared wont be able to do well in a military capacity either because of the growing reliance on technology in all aspects of warfare and national security).

wrenchwench Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:18:46am

re: #77 Ghost of Tom Joad

Thanks. Been reading from inside the womb for a couple of years.

Little wee tiny Kindle?

b_sharp Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:20:03am

re: #81 wrenchwench

Yes, but it's trademarked crap.

That entry has been changed recently.

Piece through bigger penis.

Ghost of Tom Joad Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:20:06am

re: #73 HappyWarrior

I doubt they care if facts don't support their agenda considering they just change the facts to fit their agenda whenever they need to. Political Calvinball at its finest.

Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:22:16am

re: #86 Ghost of Tom Joad

I doubt they care if facts don't support their agenda considering they just change the facts to fit their agenda whenever they need to. Political Calvinball at its finest.

The GOP has been making a lot of use of the Opposite Pole in the past few years. And Mitt might possibly have hidden it at this point...

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:22:28am

re: #80 Gus

Americans were the only ones fighting in the Viet Nam war!!

//

One reason we should always support South Korea. They were crazy enough to follow us into Vietnam.

Destro Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:22:47am

Charles brings up that nothing was mentioned about Iraq or Afghanistan - a point I did not bring up/see because I was just too gobsmacked by what Romney had written (or one of his neocon advisers had written) that I just did not focus and see that omission. Amazingly scary/bad Romeny disaster op-ed from a foreign policy standpoint.

Cross reference:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Romney goes full Neocon Crazy on Obama over Middle East in new WSJ editorial
WSJ article linked.

Destro

MIDDLE EAST • Oct 1, 2012 at 7:18 am PDT •

Seriously? The Republican Party is going to lecture us on how to manage the Middle-East and the military budgeting process?

In any case, I see 3 points in Romney’s position:

Point one, back dictatorships in the middle east to tamp down on Islamists winning in democracies. I don’t know any other way that can be taken as. He then muddles the issue by saying the USA should export our democratic values - except of course when the political parties his ideology does not like get elected. Then what would Mitt do? Back a military coup?

Point two, the US already has the world’s most powerful military, so any talk by Romney of strengthening the military is code words for military intervention.

Point three, is Mitt’s point that there should be ‘no daylight’ between the USA and Israel, a foreign country with its own foreign policy agenda (and nukes). That ties the USA to whatever the lesser country (Israel is the lesser country to the American super power) decides to do. If America is the ‘leader of the free world’ as Romney insists, should not Israel follow America’s lead rather than the USA follow Israel’s? We saw such an arrangement between Czarist Russia and Serbia. We see how that turned out. It is just an insane idea. - ----->Continued

MittDoesNotCompute Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:23:07am

re: #88 Kragar

One reason we should always support South Korea. They were crazy enough to follow us into Vietnam.

The Australians, too.

Ghost of Tom Joad Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:23:21am

re: #85 reflections of a raging redneck

Youtube Video

Hope the embed works.

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:24:56am

re: #90 Gert Fröbe

The Australians, too.

Anti-Communist forces:

South Vietnam
United States
South Korea
Australia
Philippines
New Zealand
Thailand
Cambodia Khmer Republic
Kingdom of Laos

Supported by:
Francoist Spain Spain[1]
Taiwan Taiwan[2]

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Sophia77 Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:25:35am

Well after all, they've managed to pretend the entire Bush Administration didn't exist, and that Obama has been POTUS since 2000.

b_sharp Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:26:11am

re: #88 Kragar

One reason we should always support South Korea. They were crazy enough to follow us into Vietnam.

Youtube Video

R.M, Ramallo Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:26:43am

Sooo,
Mitt Romney doesn't know what he doesn't know.
The problem is, that it's painfully obvious that he doesn't know to anyone who's willing to see.

Destro Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:27:51am

re: #11 HappyWarrior

He's living in fantasy land where we only ally with secular democracies who are capitalistic.

He is not making a policy statement - he is feeding his "Obama is a Kenyan Muslim who hates white people and Jews" racist base. This is race baiting on Obama with a little classic cold war era Democrats are weak on defense mixed in for good measure.

Destro Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:31:17am

re: #13 freetoken

Of the many problems with the whole Romney approach is that it is geared towards making revanchists feel good, which means repeating their empty words back to them.

Plus 1 Pretty much every comment here is worth a plus 1 but I can't keep up fast enough.

Kragar Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:33:36am

re: #94 reflections of a raging redneck

[Embedded content]

They forgot one.

Youtube Video

William Barnett-Lewis Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:36:17am

re: #79 Gert Fröbe

"Clapped-out" denotes rickety, rundown; Joe Jr. flew to his death in a freaking giant remote-controlled flying bomb that went off before he could bail.

It didn't work out so well for him (or more than a couple of Operation Aphrodite flyers), but I have to give them props for having huge granite balls to even try that shit.

The planes used were, in fact, clapped-out. Which makes it all the more astonishing that anyone was brave enough to try those missions. God bless them all...

100

Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:36:27am

What gets me is Romney says our gov't shouldn't pick winners and losers in the economy but demands we pick winners and losers in foreign elections and interfere in them to get the results we want. That is pure ridiculousness.

101

Gus Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:36:33am

Mark Harmon getting a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Live...

[Link: www.ustream.tv...]

102

Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:38:29am

re: #100 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance

What gets me is Romney says our gov't shouldn't pick winners and losers in the economy but demands we pick winners and losers in foreign elections and interfere in them to get the results we want. That is pure ridiculousness.

Amounts to believing that the citizens of other countries don't matter; or at a minimum don't deserve any basic rights or protections that the enforcement of which could interfere with American interests (political or business). American Exceptionalism!

103

engineer cat Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:43:04am

grover norquist thinks these are among the Top Five Worst Obamacare Taxes Coming in 2013

The Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income – a $123 billion tax increase: This is a new, 3.8 percentage point surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income:

Capital Gains 15% to 23.8%
Dividends 15% to 43%

The Obamacare Medicare Payroll Tax Hike -- an $86.8 billion tax increase: The Medicare payroll tax is currently 2.9 percent on all wages and self-employment profits. Under this tax hike, wages and profits exceeding $200,000 ($250,000 in the case of married couples) will face a 3.8 percent rate instead.

i don't feel quite the same way about them that grover does...

104

KiTA Tue, Oct 2, 2012 12:57:21pm

Not so outrageous, actually. It's part of the "October Surprise" strategy that Rove has come up with:
[Link: www.salon.com...]
[Link: www.washingtonpost.com...]

WASHINGTON — American diplomats in Libya made repeated requests for increased security for the consulate in Benghazi and were turned down by officials in Washington, leaders of a House committee said Tuesday.

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Chairman Darrell Issa and Rep. Jason Chaffetz said their information came from “individuals with direct knowledge of events in Libya.”

Of course, this information is from a SEKRIT SOURCE and you can't know it, so nyah, there. You'll just have to trust the guys with the obvious political motivation behind this.

The witch hunt they're trying to stir up? October 10th, the day before the VP debates. It'll play as follows:

* They start sending up flags for the villagers to see (Romney's op ed, Bret Stephens' "Benghazi Was Obama's 3 a.m. Call" nonsense, etc)
* They air a dog and pony show where they can spout off all kinds of official conspiracy theories to cloud the waters and give the Villagers something to talk about.
* The official media, not wanting this race to be over yet (this is the equivalent of sweeps' week for them, close races = maxiumum profit) will pick up on this and overplay it.
* Ryan brings it up in the VP debates, trying to hang it like an albatross around Biden's neck.

Then they watch the reaction. If it's bad, Romney drops it or takes his 358th position, decrying silly little Ryan getting oh just so excited, don'cha know? If it goes over well and he thinks that it's hurting Obama, he'll hammer it during the second presidential debate, which is just 6 days after the planned hearing.

Basically, this is the GOP's last gasp attempt to salvage this mess. They're going to take my buddy Vile Rat's (Sean Smith, one of the victims in Libya) body and try to use it as a political football. Again. All in an attempt to claim Obama's weak on terror.

And of course he's weak on terror: Just ask Osama Bin Laden. ... Oh, wait.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Mitt Romney’s Ridiculous “Middle East” Op-Ed

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud