I'm no fan of President Obama...not too huge on Mitt Romney either. Given the current international political climate, though, this is pretty darn interesting to go back and review.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YV2KQkBhWs

Romney was right about Russia and Obama could not have been more wrong. The foreign policy debates in the 2012 presidential campaign was like a well educated adult debating a kid promising free candy in a high school election.

To be fair, our allies and threats are constantly evolving.

To be fair, our allies and threats are constantly evolving.

 

 

Then we should have elected the guy who understands the changing climates of political intrigue. As we look at the current status of world events, Romney would have had a better handle on 'evolving' events. He could not have done any worse.

Then we should have elected the guy who understands the changing climates of political intrigue. As we look at the current status of world events, Romney would have had a better handle on 'evolving' events. He could not have done any worse.

Americans still recovering from the Iraq experience are appreciative of the fact that we have not gotten involved in fighting in places such as Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Also, do not overlook the effect of economic sanctions. One other point: It simply has gotten too expensive to "wage war" in every jerkwater country. I believe the bill for Iraq and Afghanistan came to $1.8 trillion, which is about 10 percent of the current national debt.

Then we should have elected the guy who understands the changing climates of political intrigue. As we look at the current status of world events, Romney would have had a better handle on 'evolving' events. He could not have done any worse.

 

I tried, but I only get one vote.

I tried, but I only get one vote.

 

You obviously aren't a Democrat then.

You obviously aren't a Democrat then.

 

Ok, that's funny. :thumb:

Americans still recovering from the Iraq experience are appreciative of the fact that we have not gotten involved in fighting in places such as Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Also, do not overlook the effect of economic sanctions. One other point: It simply has gotten too expensive to "wage war" in every jerkwater country. I believe the bill for Iraq and Afghanistan came to $1.8 trillion, which is about 10 percent of the current national debt.

 

What does any of this have to do with the Obama administration not understanding Russia. Romney to call for war with Russia.

Then we should have elected the guy who understands the changing climates of political intrigue. As we look at the current status of world events, Romney would have had a better handle on 'evolving' events. He could not have done any worse.

 

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Outside of the trivial "gotchya" stuff, I don't think anything either of them said is wrong. Except neither mentioned China, which is surely the graver threat to American hegemony than Russia, al Qaida, or Iran, which seems to be what they were quibbling over.

What does any of this have to do with the Obama administration not understanding Russia. Romney to call for war with Russia.

 

I meant didn't call for war. Just saw the error.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

Romney made the statements about Russia in 2012, I believe that is called foresight.

Americans still recovering from the Iraq experience are appreciative of the fact that we have not gotten involved in fighting in places such as Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Also, do not overlook the effect of economic sanctions. One other point: It simply has gotten too expensive to "wage war" in every jerkwater country. I believe the bill for Iraq and Afghanistan came to $1.8 trillion, which is about 10 percent of the current national debt.

 

I did not call for war, nor did Romney. He realized that Putin may be making a power grab on the world stage. I realize there are many things a President can do before resorting to war. One is showing strength of American diplomacy by "Speaking softly, but carry a big stick" or "Peace through strength".

When dealing with evil in the world one can project a determination wanting peace, but must be willing to show the bully a willingness to fight, if necessary. Peace through appeasement is always a loser.

I did not call for war, nor did Romney. He realized that Putin may be making a power grab on the world stage. I realize there are many things a President can do before resorting to war. One is showing strength of American diplomacy by "Speaking softly, but carry a big stick" or "Peace through strength".

When dealing with evil in the world one can project a determination wanting peace, but must be willing to show the bully a willingness to fight, if necessary. Peace through appeasement is always a loser.

Re: "Peace through appeasement": So Obama should pound his chest before announcing economic sanctions? Your complaint appears to focus more on style, not substance.