Not A Dime's Worth of Difference

Submitted by Dave (United States), Nov 8, 2012 at 18:24

I totally agree with Robert Spencer that there was no substantive difference between Romney and Obama on foreign policy. Romney has obviously failed to come to grips with Islam as an ideology or think about how to handle it in a way that he could articulate with any passion in contrast to Obama. That was totally incredible, what with everything out there.

Take Afghanistan. That is a very unpopular situation. It's an obvious failed state, and most Americans are tired of wasting resources on it, an attitude sharpened by the disgust with "allied" attacks. Romney could have ripped into Obama for lack of coherent policy goals and squandering lives.

Similarly with Pakistan. Is there a more infuriating "ally" than Pakistan? Most Americans are mystified as to why we waste their tax dollars on that Osama bin Laden harboring, two-timing terrorist waste dump. Yet Romney said we should be friendly with Pakistan. As Bill O'Reilly opined: "Why do we need to be friendly with Pakistan?" Yet, Romney walked away from this luscious red meat topic.

Yes, Romney is a nice guy, so he finished last.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".