It’s 3 AM, when the phone rings in the oval office. Open conflict has broken out between Israeli and Palestinian forces in both the West Bank and Gaza. Claiming that Iran is supplying the Palestinians with weapons and logistical support, Israel is about to launch a strike against Iran and has their nuclear arsenal at the ready. What will President Willard Romney do to defuse the crisis? The phone in the oval office keeps ringing. There’s nobody home.
No one has ever had any illusions about where Mitt Romney stands on the two hottest disputes in the Middle East: the argument over the creation of a Palestinian state, and the debate over what can be done to assure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon.
In both cases, he has taken positions very close to those of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, his friend from their days together as young consultants here in Boston.
But if he is elected president in November and finds himself in negotiations over a future Palestine on Israel’s borders, Mr. Romney may find that his comment at a campaign fund-raiser — captured on video — that “there’s just no way” a separate state can be workable could undermine his effectiveness in bringing the two sides together. And any dealings with the mullahs of Iran may not be facilitated by his description of them, in the same video, as “crazy people.”… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <NY Times>
Publically, Willard’s stances on there issues, have been those of a Neocon war monger. But privately, to his 1% buddies, he is a wimp. Rather than engage the issues, he would kick the can down the road and hope for the best. Ed Schultz discussed Romney and the Middle East with Richard Wolfe.
The difference between Romney’s public war mongering and his private passive incompetence demonstrate that he is totally unprepared for world affairs. But his public and private stances do have two things in common. Both are wrong, and both are dangerous!