Romney's foreign policy: Restoring leadership
Many phrases come to mind when we think of Barack Obama's failed foreign policy. None is flattering.
From Matthew: “If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.”
To paraphrase Byron: Those who think they lead are most led.
Then there's this of our own coinage: “Bow early and bow often.”
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney laid out his basic foreign policy philosophy Monday at Virginia Military Institute. And it stressed, as it must, a concept foreign to the current administration — leadership.
“(H)ope is not a strategy,” Mr. Romney said, noting how steeply the stature of the United States has declined under Mr. Obama. “(T)he perception of our strategy is not one of partnership but of passivity,” he added.
Or of acquiescence, we would add.
“I believe that if America does not lead, others will — others who do not share our interests — and the world will grow darker, for our friends and for us,” Romney said.
William Shakespeare once noted that tyrants cannot safely govern at home unless they purchase great alliances from abroad. And they've been buying it from the United States at bargain-basement prices for the past four years.
The clearance sale will end with Mitt Romney's election.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The Thursday wrap
- James Foley, 1973-2014: Fighting on
- School funding canard: Money isn’t the answer
- More foreign aid is no answer to border problem
- Recasting the EPA: Devolving power to the states
- Public records: Updates needed
- Sunday pops
- Rick Perry’s indictment: The real abuse
- Another carbon credit scheme
- Tuesday essay: Sophie