The stakes are much higher than the sweet but irrelevant American usual
personality debate. I want to know if the candidates are strong willed, smart,
educated about the world, informed about the threat, can define it, can identify
it, can fight it, are not duped by their bureaucracy, cannot be influenced by
foreign regimes, have the right advisors, can run an economy while commanding a
war and still see the threats as they handle daily crisis and take drastic
measures as the hard times are approaching. I want to know if the candidates are
very specific when they inform their public about the menace. Yes, it is indeed
a vital function of national security that we need to insure for the next few
years, so that all other issues can be addressed thoroughly. In short I don’t
want to see the fall of Constantinople being repeated on these shores in the
next decade or two. Humanity will not recover from such a disaster.
I have been leaning towards Romney since Giuliani dropped out of the race. Any differences I have with him on "social issues" are irrelevant at this time. There is only one issue and I agree with Phares that Romney exhibits the most thorough undersanding of and resolution towards dealing with it. As Phares puts it, McCain senses the nature of the enemy but has not yet identified it. If he is the nominee we can only hope that he will successfully "catch up" in time to take the right actions. Romney sees the enemy clearly and does not flinch. That is what I want in my president in the coming dangerous years.
1 comment:
Walid Phares rarely addresses domestic politics. He is the world top expert on Jihadism and the Jihadi threat. I read his article and it seem to me that he wishes that all candidates becomes aware of the challenge oru nation and the free world will be facing for the next decade or so. He reviewed the open source positions of the four leading candidates (democrats and republicans) on the Jihadi menace. he is absolutely right. As we will be confronting huge dangers in the next few years, we need to have a President who understand the ideoloogy and can mobilize the resources we need against it. Phares is a visionary. he is telling us that today the war is in Iraq but maybe it will spread somewhere else. Obama and Clinton are not even addressing the threat. I have no hope there. McCain wants to fight but doesn't tell us how neither who. Phares compare his agenda to the trenches war. Romney sees the threat, identifies it and want to go on the offensive against it world wide. I prefer this approach. Romney may not satisfy me on many other issues but at this point I don't care. I want us to win this war. I don't want to see Obama shaking hands with Ahmedinijad, I don't want to see Hilary repeating the mistakes of Bill. And really I am not going to accept sitting in the trenches with McCain until they come to us. I wish Giuliani stayed on. But now I want to go for Romney and hope he would pick a great VP.
Post a Comment