Presidential debate: Barack Obama attacks Mitt Romney as ‘reckless and wrong’ on foreign policy

October 23rd, 2012

FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda

The former Massachusetts governor, who was repeatedly reminded by Mr Obama
that he had no experience as a commander-in-chief, fought back by portraying
the President as an apologist for American values who had encouraged Iran to
press on with its nuclear programme.

“They saw weakness where they expected to see American strength,” said Mr
Romney. Using the Sept 11 attack on Benghazi as an example of Mr Obama’s
Middle East policy “unravelling”, Mr Romney said it “presents an enormous
threat to America, to our friends and to the world”.

The candidates traded blows over how to handle the threat of a nuclear-armed
Iran, with Mr Obama boasting of the success of economic sanctions, but Mr
Romney accusing him of neglecting Israel.

Mr Obama vowed that as long as he were president, “Iran will not get a nuclear
weapon”.

He accused Mr Romney of agreeing with his plans but believing simply that “he
could say them louder, and somehow that would make a difference”.

Yet the Republican challenger insisted that by offering in his 2008 election
campaign to sit down for talks with Iranian leaders and other enemies, Mr
Obama had encouraged Iran to press on with its nuclear programme. “They saw
weakness where they expected to see American strength,” he said.

Mr Romney accused Mr Obama of weakening ties with Israel, boasting of his own
friendship with Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister.

He claimed that he would indict Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president, for
inciting genocide against Jews, and implement even more “crippling
sanctions” against Tehran.

Yet this opened him to the attack from Mr Obama that while his administration
was doing just that, Mr Romney and part of his $250 million (£160 million)
fortune was “still invested in a Chinese state oil company doing business
with the Iranian oil sector”.

Reiterating comments from his aides, Mr Obama denied a weekend report in The
New York Times that the United States and Iran – which have no diplomatic
relations – were prepared for one-on-one talks after the election. “Those
are reports in the newspaper. They are not true,” he said.

The president reminded Mr Romney of recent remarks in which he described
Russia as America’s “number one geopolitical foe”.

“You seem to want the foreign policies of the 1980s, the social policies of
the 1950s and the economic policies of the 1920s,” said Mr Obama, who also
attacked a speech by Mr Romney in which he argued for more keeping more
troops in Iraq.

The attacks from Mr Obama came despite a much more high-minded approach from
Mr Romney, who reprimanded the President for making personal attacks that,
he said, would do nothing to solve the growing unrest and instability in the
Middle East.

Mr Romney also studiously avoided attacking Mr Obama for his handling of last
month’s Benghazi crisis which led to the death of the US ambassador, but
chose instead to focus on positive solutions, including using greater trade,
gender equality and civil society building to blunt jihadist extremism.

While congratulating Mr Obama for killing Osama bin Laden, Mr Romney said that
the President had presided over a “dramatic reversal in hopes we had for
that region” during the past four years and, referring to religious
extremism, said the US “can’t kill our way out of this mess”.

As the Republican continually attempted to bring the economy into the debate,
Mr Obama lampooned Mr Romney’s promise to increase defence spending by $2
trillion and build up the US Navy and Air Force.

“You mention that we have fewer ships than we had in 1916. Well, Governor we
also have fewer horses and bayonets, because that nature of our military has
changed,” he said, mockingly.

“We also have these things called aircraft carriers that planes land on, and
ships that go under water – nuclear submarines. So the question is not a
game of battleships, but what are our capabilities…and how we are going to
meet the best of our defence needs.”

On Syria, Mr Romney criticised Mr Obama for refusing to arm the anti-Assad
rebels with heavy weaponry, telling the president: “We should be playing the
leadership role there.”

However, the Republican challenger attempted to counter the notion that he
would drive a war-weary nation into more military involvement, telling
voters he would not put US boots on the ground. He dismissed claims he would
risk equipping anti-Assad jihadist groups with weapons that could later be
turned against the US if Mr Assad were overthrown.

Mr Obama rejected the critique of his approach to Syria’s civil war, saying
the US was playing the leadership role by mobilising an international
coalition and introducing sanctions. However, “ultimately, Syrians are
going to have to determine their own future,” the president said.

In a series of questions on Afghanistan, the two men were asked whether the US
should still leave the country in 2014 even if it was unable to handle its
own security. They were also asked whether they approved the use of military
drones. Mr Romney said the departure of American armed forces depended on
success in Pakistan and that it was the job of the US to “help Pakistan move
towards a more stable government”.

“We will recognise that what’s happening in Pakistan will have a major impact
on success of Afghanistan”, he said.

On Afghanistan Mr Obama claimed that the US had achieved many of the
objectives it had set out to achieve in the country. He said: “We decimated
al-Qaeda’s core leadership. We then started to build up Afghan forces.” He
added that there was “no reason Americans should die” if and when
Afghanistan became capable of looking after itself.

On the issue of drones the two men rigorously agreed they were necessary. Mr
Romney said he supported “any and all means necessary” to protect America
but that what was really needed was a “far more effective strategy to help
move the world away from terror”.

Following a discussion about the Arab Spring, Mr Romney said: “Our purpose is
to make sure the world is peaceful. Promoting principles of peace has fallen
to America.

“We need a strong economy, we need as well a strong military. Budget cuts to
the military would change that.

“We have to stand by our principles. If we’re strong in those things, American
influence will grow. America has the responsibility plus privilage of
defending freedom.”

Mr Obama then argued that American authority in the world remained strong:
“America remains the one indispensable nation”, he said. “Our alliances have
never been stronger.”

He added that America needed to “position ourselves so we can start rebuilding
America, creating jobs here, not rewarding companies that are shipping jobs
overseas”.

Source Article from http://telegraph.feedsportal.com/c/32726/f/568301/s/24c403a8/l/0L0Stelegraph0O0Cnews0Cworldnews0Cus0Eelection0C96270A180CPresidential0Edebate0EBarack0EObama0Eattacks0EMitt0ERomney0Eas0Ereckless0Eand0Ewrong0Eon0Eforeign0Epolicy0Bhtml/story01.htm