NeoCon Wet Dreams live in Romney
Posted: October 8, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, Foreign Affairs, Libya | Tags: American Century Imperialism, Belligerence, Mitt Romney, NeoCons 33 Comments
The one thing I don’t ever want to see again in my life time is a fiasco like the Iraq invasion. The same gang that brought us that costly and horrible misfortune is advising Mitt Romney. Romney waded in to the foreign policy arena today with a speech to Virginia Military Institute. He inkled a lot of the Cheney/Rummy/Wolfie/Bolton threats in a speech that you really need to read. Can we really afford more of this mass invasion of the Middle East in the name of oil and empty dreams of US imperialism?
Romney channeled their evil intent. Make no mistake about it. First, he’s riding a wave of lies about what happened in Benghazi. Second, he’s rattling sabers again.
The GOP candidate added that “the blame for the murder of our people in Libya, and the attacks on our embassies in so many other countries, lies solely with those who carried them out—no one else. But it is the responsibility of our President to use America’s great power to shape history—not to lead from behind, leaving our destiny at the mercy of events.”
He also laid out a broad foreign policy vision that called for the U.S. to “lead the course of human events” with “more American leadership.”
In other words, it was a boilerplate speech with nods to the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party, a wing that leads his foreign policy team as well. But asWired’s Spencer Ackerman notes , “the policies Romney outlines in his speech differ, at most, superficially from Obama’s.” Obama’s record on foreign policy is an aggressive one, with escalated drone strikes that have killed scores of civilians in Pakistan and Yemen and the continuation of the war in Afghanistan. Romney didn’t offer anything specific that was more aggressive than Obama, though his rhetoric was ratcheted up.
Romney indicates that all we need is a bit more military presence in the Middle East. At least we know where those $2 trillion dollars that none of the military folks want will actually go. Get ready to send your grandchildren to Iran.
When Romney says “the 21st century can and must be an American century” and that is the U.S.’s responsibility to steer the world towards “the path of freedom, peace, and prosperity,” that’s code for the maintenance of U.S. hegemony. Romney still believes that the U.S. should be able to shape the world as we see fit–the rest of the world who refuses to go along with it be damned. These ideas are particularly galling given that Romney was partly addressing the Arab Spring–a series of revolts that were decidedly against U.S. support for repressive dictatorships.
Romney also believes that in the case of Iran, “American support”–read meddling– for the opposition in that country would be helpful. But that ignores the fact that the Green movement in Iran did not want U.S. support and intervention.
The Republican candidate also lamented the fact that “America’s ability to influence events for the better in Iraq has been undermined by the abrupt withdrawal of our entire troop presence.”
Lastly, he hinted that U.S. involvement in Afghanistan could continue for years to come if he was president. “The route to more war – and to potential attacks here at home – is a politically timed retreat that abandons the Afghan people to the same extremists who ravaged their country and used it to launch the attacks of 9/11,” the candidate said. “I will evaluate conditions on the ground and weigh the best advice of our military commanders.”
Neocons in the US and Israel are dying to invade Iran. We’ve already implemented tough embargoes of the country. Evidently, this will never be enough for the likes of Romney and his neocon advisers. Romney offers to send more Navy into the region. He offers to further arm Israel and to extend free trade agreements to any one under the sole circumstance of not being aligned with ‘enemies’ . Hopefully, this is the Romney we will see at the next presidential debate. However, given the flip flops and lies of the last debate on the economy, I would assume that he may walk back his eagerness to display Neocon belligerence. Do we really want a few more wars and conflicts in that region. Haven’t the lessons of the Dubya presidency taught us enough already?
UPDATE: Okay, well this firms it up completely.
Romney’s New Freedom Agenda Draws Praise From Bushworld
“Terrific,” says Rumsfeld. “A kinder, gentler neocon.
Would you let any one you love vote for some one that just was praised by Donald Rumsfeld?
But it was Romney’s speech, and its echoes of the Freedom Agenda, that drew rave reviews from some of the leading avatars and supporters of the clear and combative foreign policy of Bush’s first term.
“Terrific, comprehensive speech by Gov. Romney,” Bush’s first term Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, tweeted “He knows America’s role in the world should be as a leader not as a spectator.”
Romney’s speech offers a new Republican articulation of the Bush doctrine of moral clarity, wielded — as Romney said — “wisely, with solemnity and without false pride” to “make the world better—not perfect, but better.”
“What’s not to like?” asked Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, a leading foreign policy hawk and backer of Bush’s war in Iraq, who called the speech “kinder, gentler neocon.”
Kristol’s fellow travelers on the neoconservative right were ebullient.
“Kristol could have written it himself,” said Michael Goldfarb, an aide to Senator John McCain’s 2008 campaign who now chairs the conservative Center for American Freedom. “Strong on defense, strong on foreign involvement and aid, strong (and courageous) on Afghanistan and Iraq.
“For all the talk about fissures in the party — the [Project for a New American Century] guys are the ones who will be toasting the Republican candidate tonight,” he said, referring to a group that pushed in the 1990s for, among other things, an invasion of Iraq.
A range of leading Bush Administration foreign policy figures also embraced the speech.
“Mitt Romney understands that the best way to preserve international peace and security is for America to lead from the front,” said former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, a figure who never entirely shared the neoconservative worldview. “President Obama believes that American strength is provocative, that we are too much in the world, and that a U.S. recessional is necessary and appropriate. This is exactly opposite of what we need. It is not our strength that is provocative, but our weakness, which our adversaries worldwide interpret to mean it is safe to challenge us. We need to reverse this dangerous American decline, and return to Ronald Reagan’s philosophy of ‘peace through strength.’ It has worked throughout our history, and it will work again under President Romney.”
Jamie Fly, who served in the Pentagon and National Security Council in the second Bush term and now heads the Foreign Policy Initiative, praised Romney for making clear that “the answer is not to lead from but to be every clear.
Fly said he heard “hints” of Bush’s Freedom Agenda rhetoric in Romney’s speech, “but any time the governor ventures that sort of territory, it is tempered by recent events.”
ARGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
grayslady
mablue2
JJ Lopez aka Minkoff Minx
peggysue22
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Experts pan Romney foreign policy speech
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82143.html#ixzz28jhtdPs1
Romney is like a big swarm of gnats. He has nothing really to say about foreign policy, but is still annoying as hell.
You nailed it guys………………..We already knew that we are and not should be a strong country according to Mitt. He never gives us specifics, just a bunch of BS on policy. There is no difference today in his speech than it was 18 months ago. He has nothing to say about foreign policy, nothing.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/08/the_lie_that_screwed_up_50_years_of_us_foreign_policy
Here we go — bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran. If you liked “W’s” 8 years, you’ll love Romney’s foreign policies with half W’s neocons on his team, his additional $2TR in defense spending, and that Republican addiction to forcing democracy onto oil-rich ME countries or aiding Israel at any cost of lives or money. If you support Romney, I ask for a draft of at least one of your family members into the military. Let’s not send only those who have no other choice. Let’s send your husband, yourself, your son or daughter, or your grand-son or -daughter. Allow yourselves to confront giving the ultimate sacrifice for these foolish wars. The 3rd WW isn’t going to be very pleasant if you survive. (The 2nd-coming enthusiasts look forward to rising up from the ashes to heaven, I’ll remind you.)
Ditto peregrine. My family members have been deployed in both Afghanistan and Iraq and we currently have one in Aghanistan and we’re sending two more. One in November and another in Jan-Feb.
Send Mitt Romney’s sons, or send the sons or daughters of the lame brains who keep feeding that giant sucking machine called the military industrial complex by waging war all over the planet.
Fortunate sons:
Out of respect for those serving out of commitment to defend our country, or other reasons of choice, I will change the sentence above to read: “Let’s not send many of our young men and women who feel they have no other choice.”
Latest Pew Poll has RMoney +4. Dumb cluckers!!!!
I shudder at the thought of another GOP POTUS where foreign policy is concerned. As you noted Dak, Iran is the next target. he can’t wait to start another war that his family WILL NOT fight in. It will be my grandchildren, the children and grandchildren of the poor, the middle class and minorities. That’s how it works in CHICKEN HAWK WORLD, where the warmongers make mega war bucks and our families pay the ultimate price.
Maybe this will help a bit…
Colorado: Obama 49%, Romney 48% (Rasmussen)
Iowa: Obama 49%, Romney 47% (Rasmussen)
Pennsylvania: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Susquehanna)
Gallup tracking poll shows Obama with a five point lead, 50% to 45%.
Pew’s poll seems kind of hosed. With a 1112 sample size, half their normal, they show all women voters tied between Romney and Obama and Romney leading among white women 57 to 38.
That one data point, I just don’t believe. It’s a lot like that Gravis poll a while back where Romney led Obama among African-Americans.
Did they poll just one town in Banjoville County?
I don’t know where that sample came from but I just can’t believe Romney is leading Obama among white women by 19. That just seems crazy.
I’ll be much more comfortable when/if Obama breaks above 50 in the swings and stays there.
I was going to post this, but you beat me to the punch ralph. All white evangelical women will vote for Romney. Why? ‘Cause he’ll protect those precious fetuses & take food stamps away from the already born children. I guess you can only believe in a merciful god if you suspend ALL logic. I can’t come up with any other explanation as to why an embryo has more value than a living, breathing, walking, crawling, crying, talking child has.
I read that the Pew sample was from the two days after the debate, so it caught the bump but not the leveling out. It is startling, but Nate Silver says it’s the only poll that looks that good for Romney so I think it’s kind of an outlier. The PPP poll tomorrow is going to show Romney with a lead though. Everyone needs to remember that it’s the swing state polls that matter most, and Romney path to 270 is still extremely difficult.
I watch Nate’s numbers. He’s a wonk’s wonk.
Ed Kilgore: Pew’s Perfect Post-Debate Window
PPP’s poll was taken the same time window as Pew.
I agree with you Mouse, is scares the bejubus out of me!
BTW great post Dak…Like I mentioned in tonight’s reads, this book 500 Days is about the shit Bush brought on via Iraq…you should read it.
I’ll have to go check it out.
Steve Goodman, “Unemployed”
For the record, we just entered our 11th year in Afghanistan. It seems obvious to me that we need to get the fuck out of there sooner rather than later, with no DETOURS to IRAN.
Well at least he had this speech on Columbus Day because it sure had the same spirit of go out and conquer the world even though they really don’t want you there.
This dude makes Allen West look sane but it’s OK because he’s anti-abortion. He also wants to expel all Muslims from America, of course.
HuffPo: Charlie Fuqua, Arkansas Legislative Candidate, Endorses Death Penalty For Rebellious Children In Book
Where do these people come from? How on earth can a first world nation produce complete misfits like this?
I don’t know but it’s starting to make me a little crazy now. They are beyond redemption!
They are coming out of fundamentalist, evangelical churches, prayer groups, and schools. Remember Jerry Falwell? His son, Jerry Falwell, Jr., is president of Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA. That school enrolls 12,500 resident students annually and has 80,000+ students online. It is the largest Evangelical Christian university in the world. Evangelicals, and other weirdos, may succeed someday in changing “rule by law” to “rule by God’s law.” They are a political force not to be dismissed as a bunch of cranks.
peregrine. That’s what has me going a little crazy myself. I’m scared of these people.
That delusional sadist should have been picked up on in childhood mental-health screenings. But the USA is always at the bottom of developed-nation health status lists.
After the deluge …
Hey here is Madeleine Albright on Romney’s shitty speech: Madeleine Albright: Romney’s Foreign Policy Speech “Devoid of Substance” | Crooks and Liars
Oh, and if you saw the O’Reilly/Stewart debate there was some good stuff on the foreign policy questions. I tried to find some transcripts…the thought process of O’Reilly and the whole Israel/BiBi thing is frightening.