Romney’s foreign policy merits tough questions (Kerry's column in the Union Leader)

[Mass]

As per rules, 4 paragraphs, but click on the link for the whole editorial.

http://thepage.time.com/2012/01/08/kerry-reporting-for-duty/
[div class=" excerpt"]
...
The real question is: Would Mitt Romney have done differently? Did he want tens of thousands of troops to remain in Iraq at a cost to taxpayers of billions of dollars? More importantly, would he have left U.S. troops in Iraq without legal protection? Would a candidate who prides himself on running such a disciplined and methodical campaign really have set the stage to be the first President in history to recklessly station tens of thousands of American troops for the long haul in a country that would deny them the legal protections any previous American President would’ve insisted upon?
This seems to be a test for the coming vote ahead in just days: to force a wouldbe commander in chief to explain what his policies would look like in reality. I suspect that Romney in his heart of hearts knows that he would never actually undertake such irresponsible moves as commander in chief, but he’s doing what he believes it takes to win over Republican primary voters in a year the candidates are battling to see who can be the furthest to the right, and where his conservative credentials are so suspect.
Tough talk is no substitute for tough decisions. Americans deserve a President who is comfortable using American power to promote our interests and who stands up for our troops, our nation, and our allies on the international stage. I believe they have that President now — a commander in chief who looks a little further down the road.
We don’t know what kind of commander in chief Mitt Romney would be. But judging from rhetoric that can be at once reckless, extreme and naïve, New Hampshire voters would be well-advised to ask the tough questions now in order to test that proposition.


Read more: http://thepage.time.com/2012/01/08/kerry-reporting-for-duty/#ixzz1itUaCVhz


(This was written before Mitt declared that only rich people should run for office, or he could have added this to this column...)

[karynnj]

1. This really asks excellent questions

He does an excellent job in framing why staying under this situation would be reckless. My guess is that the Republicans will argue as McCain did that they could have negotiated that legal protect. However, any number of polls show that the majority of people want us out.

[ProSense]

2. Good find, and

"strange rationalization" pretty much sums up Romney's thinking.

[ladym55]

3. He really calls it

The Republican rhetoric on national defense is totally crazy. Right now it's a bit of a blur of nuttiness, but either Rick Perry or Santorum said Saturday night he would send the troops BACK to Iraq ... uh-huh.

Perry and Santorum aren't exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer, but Romney is smart. However, Romney says what he thinks the audience wants to hear at that moment, and he is not making any sense whatsoever.

[karynnj]

5. Thought you and others would like this old thread of Kerry and Romney "sparring" over fight

on terrorism in 2006. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=273&topic_id=98771

The BG article in the OP is interesting and now that 5 years have passed, it is clear Kerry could not have been more on target - and David Wade was right in saying, "Mitt Romney's command of national security is about as real as the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" (If you read down the thread, there are other links and some excellent anti-Romney facts from the MA people here.

In 2006, the Boston Herald went after Romney for leaving MA in the midst of devastating floods to go to Iraq and Afghanistan to get foreign policy creds - pointing out that it won't work -
[div class = "excerpt"]
So there’s no way Gov. Mitt Romney isn’t going to take advantage of his last year in office to engage in this utterly shameless exercise - made all the more amusing by the attendant spin. The governor’s visit to the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba a month ago was supposed to be a chance to update officials there on Massachusetts’ “best practices” in its prisons.

His current trip to Iraq and Afghanistan is “about seeing our men and women from Massachusetts” serving there, he said. Although he’ll also be stopping in Pakistan and getting some face time with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. All so at some appropriate moment he can say, “As I was saying to Hamid Karzai last time I was in Kabul. . .”

Of course, Sen. John Kerry could so one-up him on that score. In brief remarks last Friday to the New England Council, Kerry dropped enough names of foreign leaders to fill several rows of the U.N. General Assembly, including that of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Karzai (who was the star attraction at a Georgetown dinner party thrown by John and Teresa).

Although it is disappeared from the Boston Herald site - not even showing up as archived - it is saved in TAYTAY's post. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=273&topic_id=88188&mesg_id=88266

Romney is smarter than Perry and Santorum, but he has very very little knowledge on foreign policy.

Kerry in 2010 also completely demolished Romney's stupid oped against START. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/blogs/the_angle/2010/12/new_start_debat.html?comments=all#readerComm ( from the comments, the BG buried this response - not including it in the published newspaper and not front paging it on line.)

[ladym55]

6. These were great!

Mitt was clueless then and now. And sadly just as openly manipulative.

[karynnj]

7. I remembered the BH article, but I was blown away by the Boston Globe article that

I found via the search on DU2 for the BH link. It is startling how accurate Kerry was in mid 2006. (and that was when even George Will was saying that "Kerry was right" as far as his 2004 definition of how the war on terror should be mostly international law enforcement and intelligence and only occasionally limited military effort - after the British used those methods to prevent the bombing of planes to the US.)

I was amused that the BH eliminated that anti-Romney hit. I wonder what else they eliminated.

TayTay really captured Romney well. I have to admit that it wasn't until weeks of hearing Romney's phoney attempt to sound sincere that I truly get why she and others in Massachusetts really grew to strongly dislike or hate him. Though when he panders saying things he likely does not believe, his eyes seem almost wild - darting quickly back and forth. He really seems edgy when challenged and very thin skinned. That will be interesting in debates with the cool, genuine Obama. (It's like in 2006 - I hoped that JK would be the candidate against McCain. At that point, I thought McCain would be stronger than he was - more like he was in 2000. Had that been the case, Kerry would have been the strongest against him - both because of his knowledge on everything and his ability to not get angry.)

[wisteria]

4. He makes some very pointed and serious points.

He seems to be calling Romney out on his foolish foreign policy comments.