Mitt Romney, President Obama — April 2, 2012 at 6:09 am

Mitt Romney gets a public spanking by Obama’s foreign policy advisors


That’s gonna leave a mark

It’s not rare these days to hear Mitt Romney lying his ass off about President Obama and all the things President Romney would do to make things better. However, it IS rare to see as thorough and effective a response as the one from President Obama’s foreign policy team this week in Foreign Policy magazine.

It’s long but every word is worth your attention. Here are some snippets to whet your appetite.

Dear Governor Romney,

The letter in yesterday’s National Review signed by your foreign policy advisors painted a distorted picture of President Obama’s national security record. We’re writing you to set the record straight. Today, al Qaeda’s senior leadership has been decimated, the Iraq war has been brought to a responsible end, the transition in Afghanistan has begun, and the president has restored our leadership role in the world. We urge you to clarify exactly how and why you would depart from many of President Obama’s policies.

Because you have repeatedly said that your foreign policies will be informed by the advice of experts, we wanted to highlight some of the factual inaccuracies in the letter from your advisors. The American people deserve an honest, fact-based discussion about these important issues. Here are those facts:

  • Iran is weaker and more isolated today precisely because of actions that President Obama has taken.
  • No president since Harry Truman has done more for Israel’s security than President Obama.
  • After nearly nine years of war in Iraq, the president ended the war responsibly, brought our troops home, and developed a strong relationship with a sovereign Iraq.
  • The president also has a clear strategy to end the war in Afghanistan based on a transition plan embraced by NATO, our ISAF partners, and the Afghan government at the Lisbon Conference.
  • Regarding Russia, President Obama signed the New START treaty, reducing the number of strategic nuclear weapons in Russia and allowing inspections of its nuclear arsenal to resume — without placing any constraints on U.S. missile defense and conventional strike capabilities.
  • On the defense budget, the president’s new strategy both keeps the U.S. military as the best fighting force in the world and keeps faith with the men and women who serve.
  • And finally, on Cuba, President Obama has repeatedly renewed the trade embargo, and he has promised to continue to support liberty for the Cuban people and to provide humanitarian assistance to dissidents.

Each of these is just the headline and come with a paragraph of smackdown for Mitt Romney. They then ask him some questions:

We are prepared to engage your advisors on these and other issues. While they were criticizing the president, they have failed to answer the following basic questions about your national security proposals:

  • What specifically would you do to address the Iranian threat that is different from what President Obama is already doing? Do you believe there are still viable options for dealing with the Iranian threat short of war?
  • You have said you would have left tens of thousands of U.S. forces behind in Iraq. Would you have done so against the wishes of the Iraqi government and people, with no legal protections?
  • Why have you not outlined any policies to achieve U.S. objectives and end the war in Afghanistan?
  • What did you mean when you said, “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person,” referring to Osama bin Laden?
  • Why did you call Russia “without question our number one geopolitical foe,” especially when strategic cooperation with Russia is essential for countering the Iranian nuclear threat? What do you think is gained by casting Russia in this role?
  • Why do you continuously mischaracterize President Obama’s support for Israel, which threatens America’s longstanding bi-partisan consensus in support of our ally, by suggesting that the president is not doing things that in fact he’s already done — such as increasing military cooperation and assistance every year since he took office?

Again, these are just the headlines. Check out the entire article. It’s an epic public spanking like none I have ever seen. It deserves wider attention and I hope this is a preview of coming attractions for the Obama campaign who clearly are not going to sit on the sidelines and get Swift-boated this year.

By the way, here’s the list of the signatories on this letter: Michèle A. Flournoy, Adm. John Nathman (ret.), Colin H. Kahl, Jeffrey A. Bader, Spencer Boyer, Gen. Wesley Clark (ret.), Richard Danzig, Janine Davidson, Nathaniel C. Fick, Nina Hachigian, Bruce W. Jentleson, Brian Katulis, Cliff Kupchan, Mel Levine, David Shorr, Sean Smith, Richard Verma, and Jeremy Weinstein.

[CC image credit: Gage Skidmore | Flickr]

  • NG612

    As to your tweet about the “sanctity of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th marriages”:  what does this have to do with politics and the important issues you usually deal with?  You have offended me and the many, many others who have remarried and are good people and good liberals.  Stay on track and think before you tweet – or maybe this blog is not what I thought it was.

    • If you have issues with LOLGOP’s tweets, take it up with him on Twitter.

  • Rnperini

    Open hand bitch slap on the eface

  • BlueIA

    PWNED. Big time.

  • ArrogantDemon

    That was the classiest, most effective use of a pimp hand you will ever see.

    Not only will Romney feel it, his decedents will feel it for several generations as well

  • Test

    I wish people would stop misusing “decimated”.   It does not mean mostly wiped out, like everyone seems to want to use it, it means one tenth wiped out.  So the opening phrase about Al Qaeda is not all that effective to folks who know what the word means. Other than that, nicely done. 

    • Whenever I see someone use it that way, I laugh to myself because if they really knew….


      • Sanforjw

        Decimate… that was used by the Roman Army. One in every 10 men were taken and executed to keep up morale.

        • CB_Demented

           That’s true…but the modern connotation is considerably different…so much so that the practical definition has changed, as it is for many words. Just look at the word Nimrod, which most people take to mean an imbecile. It actually refers to a hunter.

          Also…10% casualties is pretty high. If we lost 1 in 10 men we sent into the field, the American public wouldn’t stand for it. Approximately 1.5M men and women have been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan with 7747 fatalities. That’s a .5% casualty rate, and I don’t think you’ll find anyone anywhere that doesn’t consider that to be a high amount.

  • CB_Demented

    First off, a group of Obama’s Foreign Policy wogs have really no more credibility than any other candidate’s foreign policy wogs. And their conclusions are quite debatable, and disagreed with by quite a few foreign policy experts.

    Iran is no more isolated than it was during the Bush administration,but it is closer to putting together a nuclear weapon. There isn’t a helluva lot the administration can do about that short of putting boots on the ground, but to insinuate they are somehow in a weaker position because of Obama’s polices is pretty disingenuous.

    The statement about Israel is also, very, debatable. At best, Obama’s team has stayed the course with Israel, and therefore has done nothing more or less than the previous administration.

    The rest of the statement isn’t untrue, but most of what Obama has done on the foreign policy front is stay the course. To his credit, he tends to listen to the professional mililtary men who advise him on the military, something Clinton failed to do most of the time. As a result, he’s had a good deal of success militarily and did make the ballsy call on Bin Laden.

    Other than that, great questions for Romney.

    There isn’t a helluva lot more that can be done with Iran without military intervention…so it would be great to hear just what Romney thinks he can do better.

    Iraq was a conquered country. They really don’t get a say in how many troops be leave behind, but leaving as many there as Romney would like would be a waste of resources and lives.

    I’d love to hear what he’ll do in Afghanistan. We need to be out of there…ASAP. The mission was to end Taliban rule and take out Bin Laden. Both were accomplished, it’s time to leave.

    I’d love to hear is answers on the rest as well.

  • My understanding was that the U.S. has in fact left a veritable army of tens of thousands of “contractors” and “consultants” in Iraq, but I guess since they’re private mercenaries and not directly on the State Dept. payroll, we can pretend we’re out of Iraq.

    • CB_Demented

       Private companies are just that…private.

      But it’s an interesting point. The Bush administration used an unprecedented amount of private contract labor…something which this administration and the democrats in power have continued, like many other things, despite making hay about it during the elections.

  • Obama is a dog fucking Christian terrorist, a traitor who has continued every terrorist crime and every act of treason that Bush created. Obama needs to be stood against a wall right along side his fellow dog fucking Christian terrorists.

  • It is hard to tell which is causing Romney more harm:  his numerous gaffs, or his propensity to lie all the time.  I may vote for him tho, if I can get a guarantee that his wife will lend me one of her Cadillacs.

  • Brianfruman

    Who gives a shit about foriegn policy. The countries going bankrupt, As far as Obamas foriegn policy
    i think he has done ok. Russia is a problem in regards to Iran as well as China. Especially if sanctions are going to work. As far as a friend of Israel the President dugs his own grave during an open mic incident. Note too the bunker busters where sold under the Busch administation and delivered in 2010.