Mitt Romney: President Obama, Hillary Clinton ‘failure’
Mitt Romney is blaming President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the situation in Ukraine
well, i'm just SHOCKED!!!! they're salivating for some war.
Mitt Romney is blaming President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the situation in Ukraine, as well as other foreign policy debacles, citing a “failure” in their leadership.
The former Republican presidential nominee wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal saying that the fact that there are “no good options” for the U.S. everywhere “from Crimea to North Korea, from Syria to Egypt, and from Iraq to Afghanistan” is due to negligence on Obama’s part — leaving us only to “wring our hands.”
“A large part of the answer is our leader’s terrible timing. In virtually every foreign-affairs crisis we have faced these past five years, there was a point when America had good choices and good options,” Romney wrote on Monday night. “There was a juncture when America had the potential to influence events. But we failed to act at the propitious point; that moment having passed, we were left without acceptable options.”
Romney called out Obama and Clinton, a front-runner for the 2016 presidential race, for “failure” and urged the president and current Secretary of State John Kerry to take heed.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/mitt-romney-op-ed-hillary-clinton-president-obama-ukraine-104758.html#ixzz2wJu9pebM
= new reply since forum marked as read
as it has been to get rid of Sarah Palin, who the media always thinks is newsworthy for some weird reason. 
Loser says what?
Second, what's his solution? Notice how they're all saying, "Well, our options are bad now because Obama, Hillary, blah, blah, blah". The truth of the matter IMHO is that they have NO idea what they would do differently because, well, they wouldn't do anything differently. Outside of public denunciations and sanctions, there is precious little that I can see the US or the EU doing short of military action, which would be too costly to bear IMHO and, given the last time President Obama actually wanted to do something militarily (i.e. Libya and esp. Syria), the Republicans- sans McCain and Graham- were vocally opposed to it.
So, I have to ask Mitt, et. al again, WHAT WOULD YOU BE DOING DIFFERENTLY NOW? Or for that matter, what else would you have done before that "propitious point"- where there WERE supposedly other options? I would expect there to only be the sound of crickets chirping and a blank stare on his face.
Crickets.......
Mittens and Cheney seem to think that what they have to say is important. Well, it's not.
The RW appears to be stuck in the Cold War mindset, thinking that the US is still a power to fear and obey. When our economy tanked, so did a lot of the power that it gave us. Why should others listen when we got ourselves and most of the world into a mighty mess that we can't seem to fully recover from?
The US is still relevant in the world stage, but long gone are the days when the rest of the world would bend backward not to get on our bad side. What precisely does Romney, and the rest of the saber rattlers, think that Obama and Hillary should have done differently? If diplomacy and cajoling didn't work, do they think that they should have just said, "eff it" and bombed these countries into the next century?
Romney's foreign policy experience is nonexistent and Cheney's got us into two unwinnable wars that cost the lives of many thousands (the civilian count alone is over 150,000), and plunged our economy in billions of dollars in debt.
They should both keep their traps shut.
