Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Longbow1969

In this instance, like a broken clock, he’s accidentally better for the moment. Eliminating aid would be a plus in my book. It does us little good and costs you too much.

But that’s not what I mean. He just said that it is not the US’ affair if Israel should attack Iran. That’s still not good, becausee without carrier groups and navy pilots we can’t pull it off.

But it’s a whole lot better than what the present administration is doing and Romney is likely to continue: stringing us along and trying to make our decisions for us, and delaying any action until it’s too late.

Neither of them are any good, really. I’d rather hear: We’ve already scrambled the USS Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln to the Persian Gulf. They’ll pick up your guys on the way, have them assembled in Eilat within a week.


18 posted on 11/23/2011 7:46:10 AM PST by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Eleutheria5
In this instance, like a broken clock, he’s accidentally better for the moment. Eliminating aid would be a plus in my book. It does us little good and costs you too much.

Just no. You are calling for the elimination of aid to Israel which is a dramatic departure from current policy and a decidedly anti-Israel policy shift. Most of that aid is in the form of military assistance and it is arguable that Israel would have no chance of attacking the Iranian nuclear installations without that aid in the first place. It is not costing us too much and doing us too little good. In the grand scheme of things it costs us very little and serves to make our only solid ally in the region much stronger militarily.

But it’s a whole lot better than what the present administration is doing and Romney is likely to continue: stringing us along and trying to make our decisions for us, and delaying any action until it’s too late.

That's really not what he said. For the most party Romney's position is the boiler plate Republican position, NOT the current Obama policy. Romney claims he would take the Iranian nuclear threat much more seriously and while he isn't advocating a military attack, it is pretty clear he would be more sympathetic to Israel than the current administration would be. Romney is a flip flopping RINO, but there is no indication he would be weak on Israel.

Neither of them are any good, really. I’d rather hear: We’ve already scrambled the USS Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln to the Persian Gulf. They’ll pick up your guys on the way, have them assembled in Eilat within a week.

That you may ultimately hear from any of the Republican candidates at some point with the exception of Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is a kook on foreign policy and defense issues. He is in NO way better than any of the other Republican candidates in this area.

19 posted on 11/23/2011 8:17:55 AM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson