-
We Will Remember
May 24, 2013 | 23 comments
-
The Prince of Madrid
May 14, 2013 | 16 comments
-
French Fears, French Fantasies
April 30, 2013 | 262 comments
-
The Prince of Monte Carlo
April 23, 2013 | 362 comments
-
Winning and Staying Honest in America’s Game
April 1, 2013 | 1 comment
Special Report
How to Win the Final Debate
Give ‘em hell, Mitt! — because foreign policy matters.
“Mr. President, with all due respect, why are American boys still dying in Afghanistan?”
With that question, Mitt Romney positions himself to seize the high ground in the third presidential debate, programmed to focus on foreign affairs, and lead the Republican party to victory on November 6.
The whole point of foreign policy is to protect America and Americans, regardless of what the rest of the world thinks, wants, expects. America first, last, and always — and American interests always take precedence over American principles, though in reality a foreign policy well conducted will be reinforced in almost all circumstances by American principles.
And with a question taking the debate squarely into the Afghan quagmire, the governor can underscore a simple and grim fact, which is that the Democrat administration and its allies in the media, in the academe, in the chattering la-la classes, do not subscribe to this fundamental proposition — a Constitutional proposition, note (“…assure the common defense…”) — and have been pursuing dangerously suicidal policies in the one area of government, outside the postal service, where it really is indispensable. “A well regulated militia…” may well be an absolutely crucial second line of defense of the home ground, our critical linebackers (not that I care much for sports analogies in this realm, but you see the picture), but in the world such as we know it, the militia and the armed citizenry are insufficient.
We need our military services, and we need to use them wisely, prudently. That means we do not waste them. We do not sacrifice the best of our breed in losing wars.
The governor can show he is a leader, which means fundamentally an educator, by asking, with all due respect, why Barack Obama, who voted against the intervention in Iraq, finds himself still a war president, and a losing war president at that.
The governor can say, with all due respect, that it is perfectly legitimate to change one’s mind on security policy. It is quite possible that Mr. Obama, who belonged to the defeatist party when he sat in the Senate, changed his mind once he acceded to supreme responsibilities in 2009. He could have perceived the world differently, understood better the threats and the global situation our republic faces, and he could have decided we have to see a war through, and win it, if we want to insure the safety and well-being of our posterity in the new century.
But then, the governor can say, facing his political adversary directly, you should have said so, Mr. President. You should have explained the nature of this war to our fellow-citizens. You should have advised the world (“… a decent respect to the opinions of mankind…”), you should have advised our friends and warned our enemies that you were in this conflict to see it through to victory.
For which there is no substitute.
And, quite the man of honor that he is, the governor can eschew partisan pusillanimity and concede — in debate terms a clever move, pre-empting the other side’s attacks — that the last Republican administration fumbled the ball (another one of those sports metaphors, sorry), did not see the job as clearly as it might have been expected to after its running and ardent start in the wake of the attack on our territory in 2001. Misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan based on dead-end — though generous — notions of nation-building, when the object of war is to win, caused unnecessary and terrible losses to our side, pardonable only to the degree we learn from them. The American people had every right to expect the new administration had learned from its predecessor, based on all the president-elect and his men said about foreign policy.
After four years in command, what have they learned? We are being rolled in Kabul, betrayed in Baghdad, attacked in Benghazi — by political thugs who owe their positions and their very lives to us and our heroic servicemen. This is totally crazy and what is more, we have a leadership that denies it. It makes up excuses and changes facts as it goes along, breaking one of the cardinal rules of American foreign policy: politics must stop at the water’s edge.
Why? Because as soon as we leave our shores, we are all Americans, not Democrats and Republicans, pacifists and warhawks. As soon as we leave home, we extend the hand of friendship to everyone, our word engages our honor. But that means we cannot accept for one moment that we should be crossed.
Why then has the administration, the governor can ask, permitted false allies who despise us to stay in power? Why are we funneling billions in aid to them and letting our young men be sacrificed to their treacheries and connivances?
Why, Mr. President, are we still in Afghanistan? Why are we, politically and diplomatically, in Iraq, whatever brought us to Libya?
Mind, maybe we should be in those places — but under very different conditions, with very different purposes, on very different terms, than the ones you seem to view as honorable and to our republic’s advantage. You have given the American people no indication that you know what serves American interests in those places. You have shown repeatedly that you are more concerned with winning the regard of anti-American Saudi potentates, of Pashtun con-men, or of Shiite clan leaders, than with defending our soldiers’ and diplomats’ safety and insisting that our interventions in those barbaric lands redound to our advantage. Foreign policy is not philanthropy.
About the Author
Roger Kaplan, a Washington-based writer, covers the Middle East and Africa (and tennis) for The American Spectator.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (80) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Roger Kaplan
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/19/how-to-win-the-final-debate
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 6:29AM
Pat Buchanan has a great column availible today at many conservative webbsites, on this very topic. He opines that Romney must put forth a more peaceful position then he has put forth so far to win this debate. Obama will try to paint Romney as a warhawk in country that wants none of it anymore. I have said the same thing many times on this site. The author above is right. Romney should denounce the way these wars were started, fought, and the failed results. He could promise to pull out of Afganistan now and sew up a huge victory. Why the hell are we going to stay until 2014 and beyond when the war is a lost cause? He could promise no more nation building and to send our troops in harms way only with the consent of Congress after declaration of war or when there is an immediate threat to the USA. Terror is a tactic not a country and is best fought by police actions with countries all over the world. The whole premise of what we have been doing in the last 11 years is wrong. It is time for a change of course and Romney has to put forth a more peaceful program to win this thing. Painting Romney as a warmonger is Obama's last chance to pull out a win. The vast majority of Americans want no more wars.
Jacob McCandles| 10.19.12 @ 8:24AM
I can't imagine a scenario in which Romney loses this election. He had his team ready to go, and peaked right as the playoffs started. Unless we have a serious "October surprise" this thing is over, good debate or bad.
Start giving money to the Republican senate candidates in close races. That is the most bang for your conservative dollar today.
C Smith | 10.19.12 @ 12:28PM
The "Forth Debate" Mitt 90% Obama 10%
In what some are referring to as the "forth debate," during Wednesdays' the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, a charismatic Mitt dominated while Obama in his typical self destructive fashion was cherishing his precious " Honey Boo Boo" endorsement:
http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....inner.html
http://blogs.suntimes.com/poli.....inner.html
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 10.19.12 @ 2:42PM
"Give 'em hell, Mitt! -- because foreign policy matters"
Foreign policy is all you have; at one time you Reagan said quote unquote government is the enemy-- Romney says no such thing.
KennesawJack| 10.19.12 @ 9:29AM
Jack, I rarely, if ever, find myself agreeing with you, even a little bit, but in this instance much of what you say is, in my view, correct. The exception is the "Terror is a tactic...best fought by police actions...". No, it's not. Terrorism has to be funded. Our doctrine should be simple and straightforward. If a nation funds terrorism and we can prove it, their capital city will be reduced to ashes and rendered uninhabitable for a thousand years. Only takes one to get that point across. Your penultimate sentence is spot on as is your last one.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 9:50AM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 9:56AM
The more we bomb. the more innocents we kill, the more terrorists we make. You would level a huge city full of women and children for the actions of a few terrorists. That is complete insanity. Saudi Arabia and Israel have a long history of fomenting terrorism and false flag attacks. How about starting with them? The 9/11 terrrorists all came from our Middle East allies. There is plenty of supposition that the the israeli intelligence services knew something was going to happen on 9/11 and did nothing to warn us. Google the 5 dancing Israeli's on the Jersey shore on 9/11. The whole story was exposed on Fox News in a 4 day report by Carl Cameron. The only sane way to treat terrorism is like we did before 9/11. We go after the terrorists not attack whole countries that had nothing to do with it like Iraq. If a government is responsible we go after the government not the whole population. You have made a few hundred terrorists into tens of thousands. Go after the guilty not the innocent.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 10:37AM
That's why we need to Vaporize all of them at the same time.
Problem Solved.
They get to be Martyred. They get 72 New Palaces, with a Smoking Hot 6 Year Old in each one of them.
They Love Death. Ask them. They're always running around saying - "You love life. We love Death" - so what's the Problem?
Everybody Wins.
They get to be DEAD, and the rest of the world don't have to Smell'em.
We're gonna have to do it sooner or later, anyway.
I say we do it NOW, before they get the chance to kill Millions, first.
It's 2 + 2.
Do it.
While you still can.
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 10:59AM
You have just advocated the mass murder off 10's of millions of innocent people. What a disgusting bunch of criminals and lunatics who inhabit this site. They come over here because we are over there. Get the hell out of those countries and let them figure it out for themselves. Mass murder and war have solved nothing. We are bankrupt and hated all over the world. It is time to mind our own business and take care of our own country. We don't need them and they don't need us.
KennesawJack| 10.19.12 @ 11:44AM
Jack, you make the mistaken assumption that if we get out of those countries and let them figure it out for themselves, they'll leave us alone. They won't and, further, I don't really give a sh*t what the rest of the world thinks about us. Twice in the last century we bailed the world out and all we got for it was DeGaulle throwing us out of France and a Soviet Union which spent 50 years thwarting every effort at peace we ever made. So, f*ck em. We need to let the camel fu*ckers know that if they screw with us they get to be glass. I spent the better part of two years in Pakistan and Afghanistan in the early '60's. Force is all those bastards understand.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:42PM
Jack, it's worse than that.
We came to their Rescue, after the Tsunami.
We Saved their asses, in Serbia.
We were the only reason that the Soviets got out of Afghanistan.
WE FED THEM in Somalia.
VAPORIZE THEM, and let OUR GOD sort it out.
pogybait| 10.21.12 @ 11:15AM
I agree, my experience also....force is all they understand, we have diplomats and members of this administration that think that there are no real evil monsters out there, just misunderstood people that appear to be different than you and me and as such Americans prejudge them because we don't understand or celebrate diversity B.S...
Tom Kyba| 10.19.12 @ 11:57AM
Parsing another of your endless anti-war diatribes leaves me with this; you have resorted to calling regulars here criminals and lunatics, all because the're not on board with your opinion. This leads me to believe that you think people here would prefer war just for the love of killing and destroying. This goes beyond oversimplification. I believe your opinion has been refuted here many times. With all due respect, you are like the scientist in the original "The Thing" movie, who tries to embrace the alien despite the obvious foolishness of the move, and gets whacked for his holier than thou ignorance of common sense. Ignoring the nut-jobs will not make them disappear. It will embolden them. As messy as things are now, in your way lies madness.
KennesawJack| 10.19.12 @ 12:17PM
You really need to submit that analogy to TLP's contest. I has real possibilities.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:38PM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:38PM
That was for Kyba.
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 5:29PM
I call you criminals and lunatics because you advocate killing millions of people on a regular basis. If I had a dollar for every time someone here wants to nuke whole populations because they won't give in to what we think, I would have thousands of dollars. Iranians, Palistinians, Afganis are human beings and children of God just like everyone else. There were no Iranians, Iraqis, Afganis, or Palistinians on 9/11. We can't go nuking people by the millions as has been called for numerous times on this site, just because they don't like us invading their countries. For 11 years the war on terror has been a huge flop.
It is time to get the hell out of these countries once and for all. Our civil liberties have been destroyed in this country. We are bankrupt and hated throughout the world. The Bush Obama administation needs to be replaced and the sooner the better. If Romney tries to double down on those failed policies he will be a bigger flop then those 2.
Simon Templar| 10.20.12 @ 2:43PM
Excellent liberal rhetorical devices. Start first by using the false premise that everyone posting here are criminals and lunatics and advocating mass genocide because the 'poor victims' do not agree with our way of thinking. We are so culturally intolerant! Then the religious references and God implying that we are also evil.
Cute but lame. Yeah, we want to Nuke people because they do not like our supposed invasions.
Of course, there is no real threat here as you obviously imply without actually saying it. Yeah, those nations NEVER threatened us with terrorism, bombed our embassies, funded terrorists, trained them, or threatened us in any way, it was all 9-11, isolated just to itself, a lone group of Arabs or whatever who took the wrong turn on the turnpike.
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 5:37PM
It has never been refuted. For 11 years our policies have been a complete failure. Iraq is a far more radical place then it was when Hussain was in charge. Syria is going over to the radicals, Afganistan is a total failure. Egypt is headed the same way. Lest we forget the mess in Libya. Pakistan is ready to go over as well and they have a hundred atomic bombs. The only answers you guys have is more war and mayhem. We were friends with most of these places until we tried to take them over. All we have done is waste trillions and a lot of blood for no sane reason.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 10.19.12 @ 5:11PM
"You have just advocated the mass murder off 10's of millions of innocent people."
The TLPs are the real Jackboots, not the Jacks in Wi.
Simon Templar| 10.19.12 @ 11:47AM
What is really dangerous about your daily drivel is that it contains a few grains of truth...just enough to give you an aura of possible credibility and the illusion that you are being objective and so reasonable.
However the reality is that we have read your little comments for over two years now and you have given away and revealed a great deal of what you actually think, particularly of Jews.
The ridiculous thing is as a so-called Libertarian as you describe yourself as you have been doing a great disservice to not only conservatism but libertarians as well. All of want to live in a world where there is peace and also want our government to protect our interest in the most honorable, effective, and ethical manner that reflects our values as Americans. You try to achieve this objective by using arguments that are false, distorted, and impracticable. We are not intentional or otherwise level whole cities full of women and children to kill a few terrorist. To make such statements borders on treason and gives away your falsehood and hidden agenda.
Simon Templar| 10.19.12 @ 11:47AM
All you need to say is simple but you do not. We must fight this war by first recognizing it is real and a real threat to our survival but we need to do it effectively and cost effectively without bankrupting our nation or shirking from our defense. We need to pick our battles carefully and not overextend ourselves or become involved in unnecessary nation building or intervention. We need to have both battle plans and exit plans before launching on new endeavors. We need full commitment and desire to win with clear directions and policy position with our allies and enemies. But that is really not what you are saying is it?
Simon Templar| 10.19.12 @ 11:49AM
Of course, these comments are directed at Jackboot.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:42PM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
Simon Templar| 10.20.12 @ 2:30PM
TLP, not sure what you are talking about relative to these 'contest'. I must have missed the joke or post your day when this all came up. Sorry.
pogybait| 10.21.12 @ 11:42AM
I agree, there hasn't been any real commitments or any real desire to win, only taking power away from one despot and giving it to another as if our policy leaders have never been able to understand the difference between real threats and dysfunctional rhetoric.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 10.19.12 @ 6:34PM
"..we have read your little comments for over two years now and you have given away and revealed a great deal of what you actually think, particularly of Jews..."
But your passions against Islamics, and not only Islamists, exceeds by far any negative sentiments Jack harbors against Jews-- IMO Jack dislikes Israel, but not Jews or not particularly so.
Simon Templar| 10.20.12 @ 2:03PM
My passions have been directed primarily to the likes of yourself not "Islamics," whatever that means.
Passions and negative sentiments are not the same, perhaps in your strange left wing world where truth and facts be damned, as your Bill Mayer has said recently. As far as jihadist Islamic terrorist go, yes, I have quite a few negatives....you should as well... and you would if you were not the traitor and America hater that you are. Jack has made many comments over, and yes the last 24 or so months, that have not only slighted Israel but Jews as well. It is amazing you would not only come to his defense but attempt to distort this reality..but again, you are a liberal. Jack, is it nice to be defended by a 'frigin' left wing troll?
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 10.21.12 @ 6:57PM
"As far as jihadist Islamic terrorist go, yes, I have quite a few negatives"
You conflate Islamics with Islamists, which is v. common. As for Jack, what you are doing is portraying him as a simpleton, saying he hates Jews-- why would he live in a Jewish neighborhood for so long? You yourself conflate Islamics somewhat with Islamists, which is v. common.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 10.21.12 @ 7:00PM
...mainly, I'm tired of the sentiment that it is 9/12/ '01 and we are all Republican, or something-- it wore out over the last eleven years.
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 11:08PM
Simon: I haven't been here for 2 years. It may not be even one. I have repeatedly stated that I lived in the most Jewish neighbohood in Wi. for many years. The majority of people on my block were Jews. I also did a lot of business with Jews over the years and found most of them to be honest business people. There is even a family rumor that my great grandfather could have been a Jew. The vast majority of Jews that I know are far saner then the people who inhabit this site and call for mass murder and war. Most of them are liberal Democrats who will be voting for Obama again. Most of them are Zionists I guess, but not like the loons that come here.Most Jews by polling and by my personal experience want nothing to do with more wars.
Simon Templar| 10.20.12 @ 2:15PM
Jackboot, you have so much in common with Alan Brooks our local communist, progressive, socialist, liberal or whatever they are calling themselves today, it is scary. Even the way you answer an argument, with the irrelevant distraction of how long you been posting here as an attempt to avoid the central criticism of my argument with you. Then 'the I have plenty of Jewish friends argument'. Tiresome and lame.
Of course, you had to accuse everyone posting here a a mass murderer and wanting war. Another liberal fallacy and poor liberal rhetorical device.
Then the best for last. Like Alan, finish it up with a bold lie. Recent polling is showing an historical break toward Romney in the Jewish community. Did they not elect a Republican the first time in one of the largest Jewish communities in the US this past year? Well, yeah, it is all propaganda and who can lie more artfully and with a straight face, right?
Occam's Tool| 10.19.12 @ 6:42PM
Jack: Bullshit.
Levelling a city works. Did for Nagasaki.
The Israelis were lining up to donate blood for our hospitals, asshole.
Jack in Wi| 10.19.12 @ 11:11PM
Occam: The chief caller for mass murder and genocide on this site strikes again. To think that you claim to be involved in th emental health field. Dr. heal thyself. You are a lunatic and should be locked in cage.
Simon Templar| 10.20.12 @ 2:25PM
You take your own phony self righteousness too seriously, Jackboot. Got news for ya, brainiac, people kill each other in wars. They do it sometimes in small batches and big ones. They sometimes do it in large scale to bring an end to the conflict and with whatever technology they can employ as they are seeking to defend and bring it to a close. Mass murder and genocide have a specific meaning asshole. It usually involves killing unarmed people who are not soldiers and are not engaged in hostile activities towards one's nation or oneself.
pogybait| 10.21.12 @ 11:45AM
Jack, you seem to shit diamonds, and fart rainbows...
SUBVET| 10.19.12 @ 10:09AM
Jack .......here's my one any only response to your daily "drivel". This war thing you talk about is of course a necessary evil, we as humans have to deal with. You ask anyone and you will get a common answer "we don't like it".
There are some out there that think that they can take what you have worked for and you'll just say OK. Or if you don't believe in what they believe in will some how inslave or just kill you.
Your mind set is the typical one of...... you guys go up there and take them out while I sit in this foxhole and hide.
Those of us who take a stand on principle always are the forbearers of freedom for others.....we accept it .....we are proud we can do the heavy lifting for thoes that don't have the guts to stand for anything.
Everyday I read your pathetic posts and somehow remember guys like you who just couldn't cope so they just got loaded and others died. They hid under their comrades bodies so they could escape death.
Then come home looking for medical help because of MSD. Still getting loaded talking about war and how bad it is.......Jack you are a pitiful example of a human being and I will pary for your soul.
I am proud to say that I stood up front to give your "cut and run" type the freedom we have today.
Drunken Sailor| 10.19.12 @ 12:20PM
Bravo Zulu
Frank Drackman| 10.19.12 @ 1:24PM
you left out that Jack's a homo
Frank
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:43PM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
Occam's Tool| 10.19.12 @ 6:43PM
Yes, SUBVET, you did, and G-d Bless you and keep you.
Jack, drop dead and do the ecosystem a favor.
Occam's Tool| 10.19.12 @ 6:48PM
Pat Buchanan did very well in his Presidential runs...NOT.
Jack, you have a lot in common with Haman. By the way, Jews won three more Nobels this year, none from Wisconsin.
Occam's Tool| 10.22.12 @ 12:31AM
There really is no question that there is an approach to beating the Islamists that is direct, simple, and effective. It beat the empires of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan: it's called strategic bombing, followed by Occupation, (if desired to, say, continue oil exports) with massive counterattacks to ANY assaults on US infantrymen---kill one of ours and we execute a thousand of yours. With our modern Air Forces and modern light infantry, it could be done to Iran, Libya, etc. with minimal cost and US casualties; but it will involve massive collateral damage (which is part of the point). When are we willing to do it? How many attacks must we endure before we do what will win?
Our current infantry safety problem is that we are NOT killing civilians when we get our soldiers attacked. I would recommend killing 1000 males over 12 for each US soldier killed---1000:1 ratio set by the Galid Shalit/Palestinian terrorist exchange ratio, BY THE PALESTINIANS. In short, stop playing beanbag. Let them hate so long as they fear.
Appleby| 10.19.12 @ 6:31AM
No, don't refer to our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines as "our BOYS". They are MEN. and WOMEN. When I hear someone who has never been in the service refer to our BOYS, I think of Code Pink, who really mean "our TODDLERS".
Whenever someone refers to serving warriors, he should say "our men and women" or "our people". Have some resspect.
KyMouse| 10.19.12 @ 1:33PM
However, remember these lyrics:
"Off we go into the wild blue yonder,
Climbing high into the sun;
Here they come zooming to meet our thunder,
At 'em boys, Give 'er the gun! (Give 'er the gun now!)
Down we dive, spouting our flame from under,
Off with one helluva roar!
We live in fame or go down in flame. Hey!
Nothing'll stop the U.S. Air Force!"
No insult intended toward the "boys" there.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:43PM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
KyMouse| 10.19.12 @ 3:57PM
I shall always treasure the moments I spent in Tunisia. So will my madre (oops, I mean my mother).
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 4:54PM
It's a Clue!
Go to yesterday's Story on Tunisia.
Oy Gevalt.
Occam's Tool| 10.22.12 @ 12:32AM
Dear Appleby: Man are often referred to as boys when they are in the Armed Forces, which is a patriachal organization.
drudge ette obama| 10.19.12 @ 6:58AM
Obama will revert right back to his behavior of the 1st debate: eyes and chin down, look-aways - he did it on Comedy Central - and Mitt will mince-meat him again. Can't wait. Start with Poland, run through Russia, and finish with Israel and Egypt. Obama won't find the evening "optimal".
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 9:51AM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.19.12 @ 7:25AM
I wonder if Obama will wiggle out of the debate.....a nuke over Tehran would keep him busy. ...doing presidential stuff.
Nancy in NC| 10.19.12 @ 7:59AM
I thoroughly expect some kind of military reprisal somewhere as a smoke screen for Obama's miserable record. Libyans should be very afraid.
KennesawJack| 10.19.12 @ 9:30AM
You can bet on it.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 10:07AM
I don't know.
I was looking at a story, from yesterday, called - "Looking At Tunisia", and I think that him attacking from behind (please refer all questions about that to Purp, Pelleas, and AlanmakemineafootlongBrooks) at the Same Libyans that he spent MILLION$ of Taxpayer Money PUTTING IN POWER in the 1st Place, doesn't sound like something he'll be able to thump his Chest over.
After all.
If he hadn't started his ILLEGAL WAR against Khaddafi? Khaddafi would still be wearing makeup in the Palace, these ISLAMISTS wouldn't be in Power now Armed to the teeth with the Weapons that Obama gave them, our Embassy would still be up and running, and our Personnel would STILL BE ALIVE.
If he should go ahead and Cruise Missile an Aspirin Factory, and a Coupla Empty Tents, Romney and Ryan can Regurgitate everything I just said about why this Hurts The Muslim, not Helps.
Now, go back in time and get in the Contest.
Looking At Tunisia.
Al Adab| 10.19.12 @ 11:15AM
Aren't all of you shocked, just shocked, to learn there is gambling going on at Ricks'?
In other words, the President is risking the future for electoral advantage.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 1:44PM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
Frank Drackman| 10.19.12 @ 10:07AM
are you the Nancy in NC who left me more depleted than an A-1o Warthog 30mm GAU-8 Avenger round in a Myrtle Beach motel room in 1990? You know who should be afraid?
The Crew of the C-17's flying absentee ballots back from Iraq/Saudi Arabia/Kuwait/Afghanistan/UAE/Quatar/Okinawa....
Frank
SUBVET| 10.19.12 @ 10:21AM
Story surfacing says that the two seals that were killed were not the protection for the ambassador....when they got word that the ambassador was in trouble they came to his aid. I understand that the two heros saved over 20 lives.
Will that be a story today ??????
SUBVET| 10.19.12 @ 10:13AM
Any truth to ROBERT'S clam that barry had an ear bud in....during the debait.
Frank Drackman| 10.19.12 @ 10:51AM
in THOSE ears,
be like tryin to find a BB in Candy Crowley's Va-Jay-Jay
junkyard infidel| 10.19.12 @ 11:07AM
ha ha ... rumor has it that sandra fluck occasionally spelunks the vast crowley cavern !
Joellen| 10.19.12 @ 7:54AM
Headline on Drudge Obama says "Americans Killed Not Optimal" - WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN? Did the fools in the audience laugh at that line - after all, it was John Stewart and his liberal audience wasnt it? The Evil one is on the unfunny commedy show yuking it up while four families are in mourning for the dead sons still waiting for answers and retribution. And yet, we are supposed to marvel that the likes of Bruce Springsteen, John Stewart, Eva Longoria and the likes endorse this man and continue to defend his honor while spitting on the honor of our four dead Americans. Keep praying warriors the battle will be very heated this last days to Nov 6th.
Nancy in NC| 10.19.12 @ 8:04AM
Nation building went so well in post war Germany and Japan. Unfortunately we are not dealing with Germans or Japanese in the Middle East. We are dealing with an uncivilized bunch of religious zealots incapable of rational thought. They don't give a fig about their own people but rather are dreaming of a caliphate and the nasty Islamic religion all over the world.
The left ignores evil and actually believes they can regulate others into behaving responsibility and reasonably. And if that doesn't work they will make them behave by force. Good luck with that line of thinking with the Islamists.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 9:00AM
If you girls are looking for a Good Time?
You might wanna go back to Yesterday's Story Menu, and Take a Look at Tunisia.
You might even like it.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 10:19AM
p.s. Nancy - Nation Building is a Helluvalot Easier, after you've OBLITERATED your Enemy.
William Tecumseh Sherman and his March to the Sea.
Dresden. Berlin. Tokyo. Hiroshima. Nagasaki.
Our Dads, and Grandads didn't FCK AROUND when it came to Killing America's Enemies.
Sherman coined the phrase: "War is Hell", and his Scorched Earth Policy on his way to Atlanta, was meant to show His Enemies that They could Never Defeat America. And, that they would be sure to think Long and Hard (Again - Purp. Pelleas. AlanlickmyassBrooks) before taking up Arms against Her, again.
Our Greatest Generations weren't "Concerned" about Collateral Damage. They tried to cause as much of it as they could.
And, Thank God that they did.
Al Adab| 10.19.12 @ 11:20AM
Actually a good point there about enemy recognition. The Left will not admit that there even are enemies of this nation. It is against their ideology for all differences are just the result of American arrogance and misunderstanding. If only America behaved itself all the issues would go away. Delusional.
Occam's Tool| 10.19.12 @ 6:54PM
Yup. In Warfare, it is MUCH better to give than to Receive. Those chanting assholes deserve whatever they get.
Von Mises Jr| 10.19.12 @ 9:35AM
Here is what Mr. Kaplan and many brain dead liberals miss: socialist love war.
Hayek's "Socialism and War" and Rothbard's "War Collectivism" explains that war creates the crisis for centrally planned government. Once the war is over, socialist always argue that central planning worked so well during war, we should continue it in peacetime.
Mises "Omnipotent Government" also explains how the Nazis chose war plunder over free trade. Why work when you can simply attack your neighbors and steal what they produced?
Is it not obvious since the Obama regime is still in Afghanistan, attacked Libya, and has drone strikes in Pockeystan, Sudan, Yemen and who knows where else? They even armed the Libyan terrorist and Mexican Drug Lords for shits and giggles.
TLP| 10.19.12 @ 10:20AM
I'm looking at a Column from Yesterday, entitled - Looking At Tunisia.
Did you know that they have Contests in Tunisia?
It's true.
You should check it out.
Frank Drackman| 10.19.12 @ 10:02AM
Top 10 ways for Romeny to win final debate.
#10 Show up 30 minutes late, say he thought debate was at 9pm "CPT"... Nation gets 30 minutes of unfiltered A-hole-ism, Romeny even carries Vermont
Frank Drackman| 10.19.12 @ 10:25AM
#9 go into "Hambone" knee-slapping rap everytime EICOTUS(Evolver in Chief of the United States) mentions Bin Laden/Auto Industry/Infrastructure/Investments/Lillie Ledbetter
Frank
Frank Drackman| 10.19.12 @ 10:59AM
#8 respond "OH YEAH, Well if I was President, my Uncle wouldn't live in a box" everytime EICOTUS says "Fair Share"
Louis Jenkins| 10.19.12 @ 1:46PM
#7...Obama responds with the shuffle, side step, side step, everytime Romney mentions unemployment and hyperinflation.
Thom| 10.19.12 @ 4:59PM
Most discussions of AF ignore the elephant in the room. What do we do when AF reverts back to what it was before 2001? The head up their Arse crowd never have a coherent answer to that question. One of the downsides of keeping your head in a rectum echo chamber most of your life.
The last 4 years have mirrored our failed policies in the latter years of the Vietnam conflict. The enemy not only maintains the initiative but has a road map to victory provided by our stated strategy and policies. The Taliban are just rolling in the dirt at our stupidity. In such matters you either win or lose there is no middle ground. If we were fighting a "war" that might be understood. What's we've done the last four years is not "war" but folly. There will be consequences to "losing" this so called war in AF.
Under no circumstances can AF build and maintain the targeted military force off of a per capita annual income of $1000 of which 25% is direct USD injection into the economy. The Taliban never fielded more than 45,000 troops and the Northern Alliance had around 15,000. That's what the illegal drug trade of AF will support. AF has no meaningful exports that will sustain them beyond that. AF is the way it is because of where it is and that is not going to change.
Thom| 10.19.12 @ 5:00PM
The proper question is not how to win the debate but how to avoid AF becoming the ideal terrorist training camp again. We've spent 11 years displaying for the world to see that we don't have the forces or the will to defeat what is just three division equivalents of militia level military forces. The ideal time to destroy the Taliban was in 2001 when they presented a semi¬formal military structure and were willing to stand and fight as such. That didn't happen and why that didn't happen is the other elephant in the room. Both elephants are the kinds of things competent military commanders have to deal with every day. Politics in and outside the military keep both elephants in the "closet". Good men die in vain because of this practice.
We win or we lose. Losing doesn’t resolve anything.
Occam's Tool| 10.19.12 @ 6:56PM
Teheran has deserved destruction since 1979. Had Carter done that, he would have been re-elected, and we wouldn't be havingany problems we have today with the Islamists. Hell, if Jack and Purp had been there at the time of the nuking, life would be sweet.
Abu Nudnik| 10.20.12 @ 11:49AM
With all due respect, Mr. Kaplan, all Mitt has to do is show up. Obama is shrinking in plain view. Onstage the man who golfs looks small compared to the man who works.
You're right about foreign policy though. Bush should have outflanked Iran (he did) and done the job and disarmed the head of the Hydra in 3 years and out! Leave 'em smoking, like the twin towers. Don't like us? Fine. We'll take respect. If not respect, fear will do for now.
The only nation American presidents are constitutionally allowed to build is the USA.
Kingofthenet| 10.21.12 @ 2:24PM
What happened in the attack to this day is not a 100% clear, the President relies on intelligence gathered and vetted from several agencies, he does not have direct access, nor means to collate the various reports for truthfulness and accuracy. It seems there was a lot of different motives going on here, you had Hard-Core Terrorists watching events in Egypt, undertaking a primitive attack, with very little planning. Some participants were also motivated by anger of the videos, some were just looters looking to steal stuff. What IS clear is not every attack can be shoehorned into a tightly defined 'Box'. Some events are very fluid and defy easy categorization.
Occam's Tool| 10.22.12 @ 12:33AM
King: Yes, but decrying free speech is not a winning strategy. Ever.