CDZ A poll concerning Mitt Romney as Sec of State

[Staidhup]

I don't care if he was a critic of the Donald, my concern centers on if he has the balls to sec of state, which from what he has said apparently lacks.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, because he's the one who said in 2012 that Russia is our "number one geopolitical foe" which set the stage for Hillary's dangerous neo-McCarthyist campaign in 2016.

?

How so, Russia IS our largest Geo-political 'foe.' I don't think that is really the correct word though as adversary is far more accurate. I don't see how it has any relation to Hillary's run either.

He didn't say largest, he said number one and that hasn't been true since the Cold War. Hillary's neo-McCarthyist propaganda is just an extension and expansion of Romney's anti-Russia campaign.

They are the number one threat.

The only power that exceeds them that is not a direct ally is China and they are not really an adversary as their power is directly tied to our own.

I'd say the number one threat is from one of the many countries we're actually at war with presently. Russia, on the other hand, has shown great restraint towards the U.S. and NATO. Granted, they have every reason to not want to stand up to the U.S. or NATO, but for all the propaganda trying to make Putin out to be our newest most evil boogeyman ever it's pretty hilarious how accommodating they've been. NATO moves right up to his borders and he does... nothing. Turkey shoots down one of his planes and he does... nothing.

 

[FA_Q2]

No, because he's the one who said in 2012 that Russia is our "number one geopolitical foe" which set the stage for Hillary's dangerous neo-McCarthyist campaign in 2016.

?

How so, Russia IS our largest Geo-political 'foe.' I don't think that is really the correct word though as adversary is far more accurate. I don't see how it has any relation to Hillary's run either.

He didn't say largest, he said number one and that hasn't been true since the Cold War. Hillary's neo-McCarthyist propaganda is just an extension and expansion of Romney's anti-Russia campaign.

They are the number one threat.

The only power that exceeds them that is not a direct ally is China and they are not really an adversary as their power is directly tied to our own.

I'd say the number one threat is from one of the many countries we're actually at war with presently. Russia, on the other hand, has shown great restraint towards the U.S. and NATO. Granted, they have every reason to not want to stand up to the U.S. or NATO, but for all the propaganda trying to make Putin out to be our newest most evil boogeyman ever it's pretty hilarious how accommodating they've been. NATO moves right up to his borders and he does... nothing. Turkey shoots down one of his planes and he does... nothing.

The countries that we are at war with do not present any threat. That is why we should never have went to war in them in the first place - not to mention that we have made them a greater threat by destabilizing the central government in them.

As far as Russia not doing anything, that is just a silly thing to say. They have annexed territory two times within the last decade. Action is not a measure of an adversaries strength anyway nor how great a threat they are. Weather or not they act on their ability is rather irrelevant - a nation acts when it is in their best interest. They are the number one adversary to us because the threat of their power, influence, and their opposition to our international goals. Proper FP would ensure that Russia does not have a good reason to act and that it is not in their interests to do so while increasing our interests. Bad FP either forces them to act or decreases our interests over theirs.

What you have seen during the Obama (and Bush) FP is an abysmal failure in dealing with Russia. You had better bet your bottom dollar that Russia is by FAR the number one adversary we face - war with these ME nations makes news and a lot of hot air. War or the mishandling of Russia will see nations FALL and create WWIII.


"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein

 

[grbb]

He did well on private sector. But he was very vile to Trump. I just do not like people that join the winner like that.

I do admire his private sector accomplishment. It's a tough choice. I am sure Trump is smart enough to figure that out. I am not. I'll see and learn.

 

[I amso IR]

I enjoy sparring as much as the next person. But my intent for this poll was to observe how folks felt about Romney being Sec of State. This poll is not personal, it is informative, only. It does not call for opinions. Concentrate only on what your feelings are on Romney bring the next Sec of State. Thank you, I amso IR

 

[grbb]

I felt that he's a good leader. However, what he said about trump, how he tried to screw the then underdog trump when trump need people most makes me feel bad.

I don't kick underdogs. Romney did.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, because he's the one who said in 2012 that Russia is our "number one geopolitical foe" which set the stage for Hillary's dangerous neo-McCarthyist campaign in 2016.

?

How so, Russia IS our largest Geo-political 'foe.' I don't think that is really the correct word though as adversary is far more accurate. I don't see how it has any relation to Hillary's run either.

He didn't say largest, he said number one and that hasn't been true since the Cold War. Hillary's neo-McCarthyist propaganda is just an extension and expansion of Romney's anti-Russia campaign.

They are the number one threat.

The only power that exceeds them that is not a direct ally is China and they are not really an adversary as their power is directly tied to our own.

I'd say the number one threat is from one of the many countries we're actually at war with presently. Russia, on the other hand, has shown great restraint towards the U.S. and NATO. Granted, they have every reason to not want to stand up to the U.S. or NATO, but for all the propaganda trying to make Putin out to be our newest most evil boogeyman ever it's pretty hilarious how accommodating they've been. NATO moves right up to his borders and he does... nothing. Turkey shoots down one of his planes and he does... nothing.

The countries that we are at war with do not present any threat. That is why we should never have went to war in them in the first place - not to mention that we have made them a greater threat by destabilizing the central government in them.

As far as Russia not doing anything, that is just a silly thing to say. They have annexed territory two times within the last decade. Action is not a measure of an adversaries strength anyway nor how great a threat they are. Weather or not they act on their ability is rather irrelevant - a nation acts when it is in their best interest. They are the number one adversary to us because the threat of their power, influence, and their opposition to our international goals. Proper FP would ensure that Russia does not have a good reason to act and that it is not in their interests to do so while increasing our interests. Bad FP either forces them to act or decreases our interests over theirs.

What you have seen during the Obama (and Bush) FP is an abysmal failure in dealing with Russia. You had better bet your bottom dollar that Russia is by FAR the number one adversary we face - war with these ME nations makes news and a lot of hot air. War or the mishandling of Russia will see nations FALL and create WWIII.


"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein

You're basing your analysis on what ifs, however. Russia is not our number one geopolitical foe because none of those what ifs have taken place. Yes, if we went to war, or if another outright cold war started, I'd agree with you, but they haven't. But as far as what ifs go, I'm much more concerned about our relationship with China going forward than I am Russia. If Trump goes after them for "cheating" with their currency or for the actions of North Korea how will they lash out, and then how will Trump respond to that? Not good I'd imagine.

 

[FA_Q2]

?

How so, Russia IS our largest Geo-political 'foe.' I don't think that is really the correct word though as adversary is far more accurate. I don't see how it has any relation to Hillary's run either.

He didn't say largest, he said number one and that hasn't been true since the Cold War. Hillary's neo-McCarthyist propaganda is just an extension and expansion of Romney's anti-Russia campaign.

They are the number one threat.

The only power that exceeds them that is not a direct ally is China and they are not really an adversary as their power is directly tied to our own.

I'd say the number one threat is from one of the many countries we're actually at war with presently. Russia, on the other hand, has shown great restraint towards the U.S. and NATO. Granted, they have every reason to not want to stand up to the U.S. or NATO, but for all the propaganda trying to make Putin out to be our newest most evil boogeyman ever it's pretty hilarious how accommodating they've been. NATO moves right up to his borders and he does... nothing. Turkey shoots down one of his planes and he does... nothing.

The countries that we are at war with do not present any threat. That is why we should never have went to war in them in the first place - not to mention that we have made them a greater threat by destabilizing the central government in them.

As far as Russia not doing anything, that is just a silly thing to say. They have annexed territory two times within the last decade. Action is not a measure of an adversaries strength anyway nor how great a threat they are. Weather or not they act on their ability is rather irrelevant - a nation acts when it is in their best interest. They are the number one adversary to us because the threat of their power, influence, and their opposition to our international goals. Proper FP would ensure that Russia does not have a good reason to act and that it is not in their interests to do so while increasing our interests. Bad FP either forces them to act or decreases our interests over theirs.

What you have seen during the Obama (and Bush) FP is an abysmal failure in dealing with Russia. You had better bet your bottom dollar that Russia is by FAR the number one adversary we face - war with these ME nations makes news and a lot of hot air. War or the mishandling of Russia will see nations FALL and create WWIII.


"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein

You're basing your analysis on what ifs, however. Russia is not our number one geopolitical foe because none of those what ifs have taken place. Yes, if we went to war, or if another outright cold war started, I'd agree with you, but they haven't.

Of course it is based on what ifs. Would you really wait for a war to start before judging who are your allies and who are your adversaries? Would you really base policy off right now while utterly ignoring what could happen from those policies?

That would be disastrous.

But as far as what ifs go, I'm much more concerned about our relationship with China going forward than I am Russia. If Trump goes after them for "cheating" with their currency or for the actions of North Korea how will they lash out, and then how will Trump respond to that? Not good I'd imagine.

If Trump pushes China to far that is a real possibility. Such would prove to be the worst mistake in FP in modern times if not in the entire history of the nation. I understand and agree with a lot of the sentiment here though - China purposefully fixes the market with currency manipulation and we have set up trade agreements that force companies here to abide by stifling regulation but they can go there and do whatever they want. That is not a 'free' market or an example of capitalism. It is fixing the market. We cannot keep doing that and survive.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

He didn't say largest, he said number one and that hasn't been true since the Cold War. Hillary's neo-McCarthyist propaganda is just an extension and expansion of Romney's anti-Russia campaign.

They are the number one threat.

The only power that exceeds them that is not a direct ally is China and they are not really an adversary as their power is directly tied to our own.

I'd say the number one threat is from one of the many countries we're actually at war with presently. Russia, on the other hand, has shown great restraint towards the U.S. and NATO. Granted, they have every reason to not want to stand up to the U.S. or NATO, but for all the propaganda trying to make Putin out to be our newest most evil boogeyman ever it's pretty hilarious how accommodating they've been. NATO moves right up to his borders and he does... nothing. Turkey shoots down one of his planes and he does... nothing.

The countries that we are at war with do not present any threat. That is why we should never have went to war in them in the first place - not to mention that we have made them a greater threat by destabilizing the central government in them.

As far as Russia not doing anything, that is just a silly thing to say. They have annexed territory two times within the last decade. Action is not a measure of an adversaries strength anyway nor how great a threat they are. Weather or not they act on their ability is rather irrelevant - a nation acts when it is in their best interest. They are the number one adversary to us because the threat of their power, influence, and their opposition to our international goals. Proper FP would ensure that Russia does not have a good reason to act and that it is not in their interests to do so while increasing our interests. Bad FP either forces them to act or decreases our interests over theirs.

What you have seen during the Obama (and Bush) FP is an abysmal failure in dealing with Russia. You had better bet your bottom dollar that Russia is by FAR the number one adversary we face - war with these ME nations makes news and a lot of hot air. War or the mishandling of Russia will see nations FALL and create WWIII.


"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein

You're basing your analysis on what ifs, however. Russia is not our number one geopolitical foe because none of those what ifs have taken place. Yes, if we went to war, or if another outright cold war started, I'd agree with you, but they haven't.

Of course it is based on what ifs. Would you really wait for a war to start before judging who are your allies and who are your adversaries? Would you really base policy off right now while utterly ignoring what could happen from those policies?

That would be disastrous.

But as far as what ifs go, I'm much more concerned about our relationship with China going forward than I am Russia. If Trump goes after them for "cheating" with their currency or for the actions of North Korea how will they lash out, and then how will Trump respond to that? Not good I'd imagine.

If Trump pushes China to far that is a real possibility. Such would prove to be the worst mistake in FP in modern times if not in the entire history of the nation. I understand and agree with a lot of the sentiment here though - China purposefully fixes the market with currency manipulation and we have set up trade agreements that force companies here to abide by stifling regulation but they can go there and do whatever they want. That is not a 'free' market or an example of capitalism. It is fixing the market. We cannot keep doing that and survive.

No, but I would stop provoking them and then pretending that they're the aggressive ones.

As for China, of course they manipulate their currency. They have to because the U.S. manipulates its currency, and then they expect China to buy their debt and prop up their economy.