Romney Foreign Policy

[Alferd_Packer]

Yes, I know that's an oxymoron.

From the same tapes as the 47% comment:

One the other hand, I got a call from a former Secretary of State. I won't mention which one it was, but this individual said to me, "You know I think there's a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis after the Palestinian elections.". I said, "Really?". And you know, his answer was, "Yes, I think there's some prospect." And I didn't want to delve into it."

Why not, Mitt?

Not enough potential profit there for you?

 

[Travis]

That is interesting.

One has to wonder why he doesn't care.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Because he has already made up his mind.

 

[theprestige]

I'm curious: Who here thinks there's a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis after the Palestinian elections, that's worth delving into at this point?

 

[NotJesus]

I'm curious: Who here thinks there's a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis after the Palestinian elections, that's worth delving into at this point?

I'd also like to know this. I'm sure the opinions of forum members will be more significant than those of some former Secretary of State.

 

[Brainster]

Wow, yeah, if somebody told me they had a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict I would be listening intently.

 

[theprestige]

I'd also like to know this. I'm sure the opinions of forum members will be more significant than those of some former Secretary of State.

Wow, yeah, if somebody told me they had a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict I would be listening intently.

Maybe. It probably depends on the person, and the solution.

Of course, nobody in this scenario offered a solution. At best, they thought there was a prospect of a settlement--whatever that means. The history of Israel-Palestine relations is rife with settlements, accords, agreements, cease-fires, etc. The likelihood of a settlement leading to a solution isn't great. The likelihood of the prospect of a settlement, even less so. So what are we to make of the thought of a prospect of a settlement?

And, of course, as usual in these threads, there's a lot of context missing. Who's the former secstate? What's their thought? Is it private, or have they been pitching it in various places? Is it possible that Romney's team has already heard this thought, identified some problems with it, and decided it's not worth getting into right now?

Is it possible that there's nothing to get into right now anyway? That it might make more sense to see how the Palestinian election shakes out, and then look at which thoughts of prospects of settlements (that may, improbably, lead to a solution) are worth delving into?

 

[Unabogie]

Maybe. It probably depends on the person, and the solution.

Of course, nobody in this scenario offered a solution. At best, they thought there was a prospect of a settlement--whatever that means. The history of Israel-Palestine relations is rife with settlements, accords, agreements, cease-fires, etc. The likelihood of a settlement leading to a solution isn't great. The likelihood of the prospect of a settlement, even less so. So what are we to make of the thought of a prospect of a settlement?

And, of course, as usual in these threads, there's a lot of context missing. Who's the former secstate? What's their thought? Is it private, or have they been pitching it in various places? Is it possible that Romney's team has already heard this thought, identified some problems with it, and decided it's not worth getting into right now?

Is it possible that there's nothing to get into right now anyway? That it might make more sense to see how the Palestinian election shakes out, and then look at which thoughts of prospects of settlements (that may, improbably, lead to a solution) are worth delving into?

Sorry, intellectually curious people formulate opinions by talking to as many people as possible. Only a moron would say "nah, let's not delve into that" when given the opportunity to talk to a former SoS about a thorny foreign policy issue.

And let's be clear. Yes, I'm saying Mitt Romney is a moron. And this story just underscores why.

 

[varwoche]

Wow, yeah, if somebody told me they had a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict I would be listening intently.

Even if I had a defeatist outlook like Romney, and if I was a foriegn policy doofus like Romney, I sure as hell wouldn't be crowing about blowing off a former SoS.

 

[theprestige]

Sorry, intellectually curious people formulate opinions by talking to as many people as possible. Only a moron would say "nah, let's not delve into that" when given the opportunity to talk to a former SoS about a thorny foreign policy issue.

"As possible." Without more context, I don't see how you can support the assumption that it was possible (or necessary, or desirable) to talk to this particular person about this particular issue at this particular time.

Earlier this year, the president played his 100th round of golf since taking office. Of those, how many took the place of delving into thorny foreign policy issues and formulating better opinions by talking to as many people as possible?

And let's be clear. Yes, I'm saying Mitt Romney is a moron. And this story just underscores why.

You've already concluded Romney is a moron. So any you interpret ambiguous, context-free story, that you can fit into that narrative, as supporting that narrative. I don't half wonder if your narrative is turtles all the down.

 

[Unabogie]

"As possible." Without more context, I don't see how you can support the assumption that it was possible (or necessary, or desirable) to talk to this particular person about this particular issue at this particular time.

When is a bad time to pick the brain of a former SoS? The man doesn't hold a job. He's got some spare moments.

Earlier this year, the president played his 100th round of golf since taking office. Of those, how many took the place of delving into thorny foreign policy issues and formulating better opinions by talking to as many people as possible?

This is deeply silly. In four years, that's 25 times per year, or 2 times per month. Wow, twice a month he spends a couple of hours exercising. Again, deeply silly.

You've already concluded Romney is a moron. So any you interpret ambiguous, context-free story, that you can fit into that narrative, as supporting that narrative. I don't half wonder if your narrative is turtles all the down.

Yeah, or alternatively, I react badly to a person who won't give policy specifics, but when he does it contradicts what he says publicly and expresses a deep lack of curiosity.

Have you forgotten George Bush so soon? Thank, but we'll take our presidents with some intellectual heft, if you please.

 

[theprestige]

When is a bad time to pick the brain of a former SoS? The man doesn't hold a job. He's got some spare moments.

Without context, I don't know. I speculated on a couple possibilities that I thought were plausible, which is the best I can do without context. You seem to think you can do better, but so far all you've got is bare assertion and circular reasoning.

This is deeply silly. In four years, that's 25 times per year, or 2 times per month. Wow, twice a month he spends a couple of hours exercising. Again, deeply silly.

Suddenly context matters. Suddenly you can be arsed to run down the details and come up with a plausible excuse. And suddenly you've found a bad time to pick the brains of a former SoS. Q.E.D.

Yeah, or alternatively, I react badly to a person who won't give policy specifics, but when he does it contradicts what he says publicly and expresses a deep lack of curiosity.

Okay, sure. That's an alternative.

Have you forgotten George Bush so soon? Thank, but we'll take our presidents with some intellectual heft, if you please.

If that's your narrative...

 

[Unabogie]

Suddenly context matters. Suddenly you can be arsed to run down the details and come up with a plausible excuse. And suddenly you've found a bad time to pick the brains of a former SoS. Q.E.D.

The problem is you have no evidence that Obama ever turned down a chance to talk with a former SoS in order to play golf, while you do have evidence that Romney did.

So in order to defend your guy from the charge that he's an incurious moron, you have to engage in a silly ad hominem/tu quoque attack on Obama and just invent a scenario in your mind that never happened.

Face it. Romney has destroyed his candidacy over the course of many months, and this video just reinforces all of his flaws, and he really deserves to lose.

 

[Brainster]

Who's the former secstate?

My guess is Albright; I can't imagine anybody else so clueless to imagine there was a solution.

 

[Travis]

I'd like to know more context about the situation myself.

Unlike some other people I would like more information.

 

[Travis]

My guess is Albright; I can't imagine anybody else so clueless to imagine there was a solution.

Yes, let us just give up. We. Are. Defeatists.

 

[theprestige]

The problem is you have no evidence that Obama ever turned down a chance to talk with a former SoS in order to play golf, while you do have evidence that Romney did.

Every time Obama decides to do something other than talk with a former SoS, that's another chance turned down. And we have plenty of evidence that Obama chooses to do all sorts of things besides talk with former SoSs.

Sometimes he plays golf. Sometimes he campaigns for office. Sometimes he gives press conferences or tries to broker budget deals. Sometimes he even attends PDBs. We have evidence of this. "Intellectually curious" or not, he doesn't spend all of every day with anybody and everybody who has an opinion about Israel-Palestine relations.

And neither does Romney.

You have no idea if Romney didn't want to delve into it because he was about to do his twice-monthly exercise. Or because he'd already heard and considered the SoS's prospect, or because he was already fully occupied that day and simply didn't have time for an ad-hoc mideast briefing at the time the call came in.

You don't know. You don't know, and you have no way of knowing. But even so, you're convinced that he made the wrong decision.

 

[Unabogie]

Every time Obama decides to do something other than talk with a former SoS, that's another chance turned down. And we have plenty of evidence that Obama chooses to do all sorts of things besides talk with former SoSs.

Sometimes he plays golf. Sometimes he campaigns for office. Sometimes he gives press conferences or tries to broker budget deals. Sometimes he even attends PDBs. We have evidence of this. "Intellectually curious" or not, he doesn't spend all of every day with anybody and everybody who has an opinion about Israel-Palestine relations.

And neither does Romney.

You have no idea if Romney didn't want to delve into it because he was about to do his twice-monthly exercise. Or because he'd already heard and considered the SoS's prospect, or because he was already fully occupied that day and simply didn't have time for an ad-hoc mideast briefing at the time the call came in.

You don't know. You don't know, and you have no way of knowing. But even so, you're convinced that he made the wrong decision.

Yoga is good for the muscles. Glad to see you're getting in enough stretching.

 

[MattusMaximus]

That is interesting.

One has to wonder why he doesn't care.

He's waiting until after the election to care

 

[R.Mackey]

My guess is Albright; I can't imagine anybody else so clueless to imagine there was a solution.

Highly unlikely she'd be offering pearls of wisdom to Romney. The smart money's on Rice.

Is she clueless, too? She certainly seems to think there's a way forward.

I'm not a Republican, so take this in the spirit in which it is offered -- you may want to tread carefully when choosing between abandoning reasonable principles and sticking up doggedly for a flawed candidate. There will be other elections after this one.