Posted on 11/15/2015 4:42:55 PM PST by markomalley
Mitt Romney is blaming President Obama for "doing the minimum" to fight the Islamic State.
In an op-ed published Sunday, the 2012 Republican presidential candidate criticized Obama for having said "we have contained" the Islamic State in an interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos one day before a series of attacks hit Paris, for which the Islamic State claimed responsibility. Romney said the U.S. needs to "eradicate" the Islamic State, not contain it.
"The president was right when he called the Islamic State a cancer," Romney said, "but it is a cancer that metastasized on his watch. Paris is proof."
The U.S. year-long airstrike campaign has not been sufficient, Romney added, and called for military experts from the U.S. and NATO to create a comprehensive strategy that would incorporate the forces of the Kurds, Turks, Saudis, Egyptians and Jordanians.
His remarks come as France launched airstrikes against the Islamic State on Sunday, carried out in coordination with U.S. forces, in retaliation for the terror attacks in Paris that left 127 dead and over 350 injured.
Romney decried the Islamic State's propaganda campaign and urged Muslim nations to come together and "immediately engage in a sustained global campaign to promote tolerance and eschew violence."
Romney also addressed the potential threat of the stream of refugees escaping conflicts in the Middle East, one day after a Greek official announced that a Syrian passport was reportedly found near the body of one of the gunmen responsible for the Paris attacks. A Greek official announced that the passport was processed on a Greek island in March.
"The West must stop the insanity of welcoming hundreds of thousands of people from the Middle East without knowing who exactly they are," Romney said.
"Only America can lead this war, and that leadership means being willing to devote whatever resources are required to win — even boots on the ground," Romney continued. "We have the best-equipped and most dedicated military for good reason. The president must stop trying to placate his political base by saying what he won't do and tell Americans what he will do."
Amen to 29 - I started writing 39 (in full agreement with you) and got up to do some chores.
One can make a very good argument that ISIS was in large part created by the Obama administration.
For sure. With GOP help. The GOP is fully complicit in arming them and supporting Obama’s adventuring.
But it is a Barry/Muslim Bro op at the core.
Of the two men in those pictures, there is one responsible for Obama’s election. It isn’t Barry. The spurned fan upthread needs a dose of reality.
Almost being the operative word.
Mittens is right about that, but it’s not as if he discovered it. We all knew that already.
Anyone who still blames Romney's loss on people who didn't vote for him are hopeless idiots to be mocked and shunned.
I spent all of last week with like 10 of them. ALL of last week. They are like jilted lovers and they want revenge on the people that stole their man. When Romney runs they will go scorched earth to elect him/win him back. Again. And turn FR into a madhouse. Again.
Because they WANT what he offers. WANT it.
Hell, Obama nurtured ISIS and grew it into what it is today. Another $700 for the rebels is earmark by Obama. IMHO he needs to be impeached.
Won’t be. People demanded lesser evils and got them. Now no one in DC with principle to do it, all 5 or so of them, has any backing from the liberals that Republican voters intentionally sent them.
It’s the fruit of lesser evil. Thank the freepers and their likeminded morons across the right that ensured Berry was untouchable by sending him defenders rather than opponents. Actions haZ consequences.
First of all, there is no such crime as "high treason" in US law.
Second of all, we are not "at war" with anybody.
It is certainly possible to construe the Libyan rebel forces in Benghazi as "enemies of the united States", but the defense at Obama's trial would assert that, if Congress had meant to declare war on them, it would have done so.
How do you figure that he purposely brought about his own defeat? I just blamed it on rank incompetance.
He dominated the first debate and then went silent. He did not bring out any big guns. There is no way a former Governor does that if he wants to win. He’s not that stupid or gutless.
It’s just like McCain going hands off. He attacks Cruz like a Kamikaze but when it came to Barry, he ‘suspended’ his campaign over and sets Romenys pit bulls on Palin, his own VP. Then talked him up.
There is no way on earth a person chasing victory does that.
Yes, i see what you mean. And will the same thing happen when Trump and Clinton face off? Perhaps Trumps ego will prevent it.
I have my issues with Trump but I would never believe he would intentionally tank himself. Its not in him. Alphas will never intentionally set out to lose. They might be defeated but they will never contribute to their own defeat.
” And will the same thing happen when Trump and Clinton face off? Perhaps Trumps ego will prevent it.”
Maybe they got a few messages a la Ft Marcy Park.
If anyone can stand up to that, it’s Donald
I held my nose and voted for him as well as donating hundreds of hours. I still despise him for his disrespect of conservatives. Tell me again how I am a fool.
Is this moronic Mormon being brought back in preparation for a Trump challenge? I’ve seen this loser assclown quoted all day
I thought his name was Milt?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.