Monday’s presidential debate offered a startling case of President Obama defending his first-term foreign policy and challenger Mitt Romney abandoning many of his harsh criticisms of the incumbent. But ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar suggests some common-sense ways for Americans to assess global choices.
Exclusive: Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney did all he could in Monday’s debate to calm voters’ fears that he would revert to George W. Bush’s neocon foreign policy. But there was one telling slip-up when Romney signaled that his heart remains with the neocon plan to remake the Middle East, reports Robert Parry.
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has charted a novel course through Campaign 2012, shape-shifting his positions endlessly on domestic and now foreign policies. In Monday night’s global affairs debate, Romney exchanged his neocon garb for a new cloak of moderation, notes ex-CIA analyst Melvin A. Goodman.
The pundits say America’s economic angst will trump worries about war in the Nov. 6 election. However, as Americans learned a decade ago, careless foreign policies can have disastrous consequences, a lesson that ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar also traces back one and two centuries.
The idea of arming a favored side in a civil war has become popular among U.S. policymakers chastened by the disastrous Iraq War, but there are grave dangers in that approach, too, especially the uncertainty of who might get the weapons and how they might be used, says the Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland.
With hopes brightening that President Obama is close to a negotiated settlement of the Iran nuclear dispute, Mitt Romney’s campaign is eager to counter any positive news. The moment is reminiscent of past October Surprise moments, says Robert Parry in this article adapted from America’s Stolen Narrative.
The prospect for a peaceful settlement of the Iranian nuclear dispute is now within sight amid various reports that Iran is ready to make concessions to President Obama. But the U.S. election remains an obstacle with Republicans attacking the very idea of one-on-one talks, notes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.
Mitt Romney and the right-wing media keep drilling ever deeper in hopes of striking a political gusher from the deaths of four U.S. diplomats in Libya last month. But the desperate search for a “cover-up” continues to come up empty, writes William Boardman.
Islamophobes, including some involved in the ugly protests over an Islamic community center in Lower Manhattan, are now taking their case against the “savage” to billboards, urging greater U.S. support for Israel. But this message is designed to justify ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, says Lawrence Davidson.
Many American progressives are angry with President Obama for his actions, including expanding the Afghan War and his drone assassinations. Some vow to not vote or to vote for a minor-party candidate. But Vietnam-era whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg warns of the far greater danger from a Romney-Ryan administration.