| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Election 2012 |
| Romney: Obama 'Has Failed to Lead' in Syria, Middle East |
| 2012-10-09 |
[An Nahar] Barack ObamaI inhaled. That was the point... has "failed to lead" in the Middle East and the strained ties between his White House and Israel have emboldened Iran, presidential challenger Willard MittRomney ...former governor of Massachussetts, currently the Publican nominee for president. He is the son of the former governor of Michigan, George Romney, who himself ran for president after saving American Motors from failure, though not permanently. Romney has a record as a successful businessman, heading Bain Capital, and he rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from the midst of bribery and mismanagement scandals. More to the point, he isn't President B.O... declared Monday. In a major foreign policy speech, Romney warned the president's dithering had increased instability in a region clamoring for U.S. leadership and left both the United States and its Middle East allies less safe than they were. With the slowly improving economy providing less ammunition four weeks from the November 6 election, Romney's address at the Virginia Military Institute marked a bid to muscle in on turf largely seen as Obama's preserve. "The president has failed to lead in Syria, where more than 30,000 men, women and kiddies have been massacred by the Assad regime over the past 20 months," Romney declared. He said Syria's rebels do not have the necessary weapons to battle Bashir al-Assad's troops and claimed Obama's handling of the crisis was emblematic of a president who does not "shape history" but opts to "lead from behind." "In Syria, I will work with our partners to identify and organize those members of the opposition who share our values and ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat Assad's tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets," Romney said. But Romney stepped carefully, refusing to commit any future U.S. government to directly provide weapons to rebels. Obama, worried that shoulder-fired missiles and other heavy weapons could end up in the hands of terrorists, has not provided arms for the rebel groups, although he has arranged for the delivery of communications equipment. Romney acknowledged that Obama had had some foreign policy successes, notably the killing of chief terror suspect the late Osama bin Laden ... who is now neither a strong horse nor a weak horse, but a dead horse... , but said that the Democrat incumbent would not leave the world a safer place. "But when we look at the Middle East today -- with Iran closer than ever to nuclear weapons capability... with violent cut-throats on the march, and with an American ambassador and three others dead (in Benghazi, Libya) likely at the hands of al-Qaeda affiliates -- it is clear that the risk of conflict in the region is higher now than when the president took office," he said. The Republican nominee said he would keep Iran in check, chase hard boyz in Libya and impose conditions on U.S. aid to Egypt. "I know the president hopes for a safer, freer and a more prosperous Middle East, allied with the United States. I share this hope. But hope is not a strategy," Romney said. "It is time to change course in the Middle East," he stressed. Romney put adversaries on notice that as president he would not tolerate the anti-American unrest that has been allowed to fester under Obama. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #6 Not ground troop support, more along the lines of how we helped the Northern Alliance if we even got that involved. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2012-10-09 21:04 |
| #5 I see benefit in providing support to Turkey, at least then we might have some say in the Kurdish/Israeli issues that might develop. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2012-10-09 21:03 |
| #4 The Wisconsin State Fishwrap: "US Should Help Arm Syrian Resistance". The A and P reporters apparently didn't listen to the speech at all, and the headline writer didn't either. Grateful to Althouse for the link to the original speech. |
| Posted by: mom 2012-10-09 16:37 |
| #3 He said Syria's rebels do not have the necessary weapons to battle Bashir al-Assad's troops... I dunno. The rebels seem to be having some success with their suicide bombers. That's one weapon these creeps always seem to use quite well. Sorry, Mitt. I know you'll be better than Obama but I don't see the benefit of helping al Qaeda fight Assad and his Iranian puppet masters. As long as our two worst enemies are killing each other that's a win-win for us. Isn't it? Or would your weapons be carefully rationed so as to merely prolong the killing? As for Iran, I can't help thinking it would be better to smack them directly and get it over with. Then, without Iran's meddling, the Syrians might be able to take care of themselves. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-10-09 11:56 |
| #2 Too much lead, that is. (No, definately NOT Obama) |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2012-10-09 06:30 |
| #1 Hmmm, gotten to much for the MSM to overlook? |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2012-10-09 06:26 |