Skip to main content

Romney's all the way for war and conflict

Mitt Romney seized the nettle to show his mettle on foreign policy in making a broad-ranging statement on the subject.  What he would do as President, etc. etc.    Pity is - and more than troubling - that it all comes down to one theme.    War or conflict!

"He denounced “the abrupt withdrawal of our entire troop presence” from Iraq, though he didn’t say how long he would have kept our troops there.

And he hinted broadly that he’d keep U.S. troops in Afghanistan beyond 2014. “I will evaluate conditions on the ground and weigh the best advice of our military commanders,” he said. “And I will affirm that my duty is not to my political prospects, but to the security of the nation.”

On Iran, he also threatened war, aligning himself squarely with Benjamin Netanyahu. “I will put the leaders of Iran on notice that the United States and our friends and allies will prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons capability,” he said. The policy of the Obama Administration has been to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, not the capability to build them. But like Obama at the U.N. in September, Romney threatened war against Iran “for the sake of peace.” George Orwell alert!

As for Israel, Romney said: “The world must never see any daylight between our two nations.” That’s a green light for more Israeli intransigence with the Palestinians.

On China, Romney said its “recent assertiveness is sending chills through the region.” He vowed to “restore our Navy to the size needed to fulfill our missions”—and he said he’d build “15 ships per year, including three submarines.” That would put China on high alert.

And Romney seems eager to relaunch the Cold War. (Romney in April seemed to think the Soviet Union still existed, as he blamed Obama for entering “into an agreement with the Soviets, excuse me, with Russia” on nuclear weapons reductions.) “I will implement effective missile defenses to protect against threats,” he said at the VMI. “And on this there will be no flexibility with Vladimir Putin.” Similar hardline language from Romney earlier in the year only made Putin more stubbornly opposed to missile defenses—and more ready to respond with moves of his own.

Romney’s approach would be sure to kick off a new arms race with Moscow.

A Romney presidency would be a boon for military contractors but no one else."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...