Presidential debate over foreign policy in US is waste of time

來源: Warsteiner 於 2012-10-22 20:01:01 [檔案] [博客] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 閱讀數 : (1581 bytes)

本文內容已被 [ Warsteiner ] 在 2012-10-24 07:43:35 編輯過。如有問題，請報告版主或論壇管理刪除.

As I said time and time again, the only thing doesn't change in US, is its foreign policy - US interest first and last.

Therefore, really, there isn't much to differentiate in principles, except maybe for some execution details. Mitt could only resort to adjectives, as we all know when you can't use verbs, but rather pile on adjectives (like more effective), you don't have too much to show for. Obama has the timing going for him - killed Bin Laden, finished Iraq War, and set a timetable for exiting Afghan. Romney can't have much opposing opinions there.

In US, defense spending, relationship with Israel, things like that in foreign policies are the "politically correct" thing to say in public. So, it doesn't matter what you think, no serious candidate will say anything else.

There really isn't much to debate.

But tonight, both used the platform to deliver their own messages, nothing to do with foreign policy itself.

Obama emphasized again and again - Romney has been all over the map, you won't know his position, and he won't tell you how.

Romney's most effective punch is obviously economy, unemployment rate, and deficit.

Both are actually very good and valid points. So the election is really about the choice. If Obama gets re-elected, it will NOT be how excited voters are about his jobs done, but rather because they don't see Romney's solution to make it better, and/or don't believe him. If Romney gets the nod, it will NOT because his "business experience", but simply because voters are done with Obama, and they want a change.