Mitt Romney promises war with Iran if he gets elected

news.yahoo.com...

Accusing President Barack Obama of naivete on Iran, Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney promised Thursday that if elected president he would "prepare for war" with the Islamic republic.

In a commentary published in the Wall Street Journal, Romney said he would back up US diplomacy "with a very real and very credible military option," deploying carrier battle groups to the Gulf and boosting military aid to Israel.

"'Si vis pacem, para bellum.' That is a Latin phrase, but the ayatollahs will have no trouble understanding its meaning from a Romney administration: If you want peace, prepare for war," he said.

(visit the link for the full article)

This is just outrageous, a candidate for presidency shouldn't promote murder. Why would someone in such a position even consider using propaganda like this. Do people really fall for this kind of garbage?

reply to post by AphexTwins
Nothing new here, honestly. Other than Paul, I believe the rest of the republican candidates are all hawks.

You might have to dig to be able to quibble over their respective level of hawkishness, but there is no real shortage to the sabre-rattling with most of this crew. Ignorant, unnecessary (except, perhaps, to win the nomination? Hopefully not the presidency, certainly...), and full of unintended consequences.

This crew worries me greatly.

Oh c'mon...SOMEBODY'S got to initiate the apocalypse!

2nd line

I thought Romney would be fairly benign and I wasn't too concerned about a GOP win... But that was before I heard this. This is frightening. I have always hoped Paul got the nomination, but now, more than ever!

This should give him 100% of the Zionist american vote.

Give him time and he will win the Hispanic vote by promising amnesty, and more jobs for Mexicans in America's industries.

Then he will go to Black American events to attempt to gain some of their votes and tell them things they like to hear.

In short, he lies, will say and do almost anything to win.

If he wins (like all candidates) everything he said in the campaign to get votes will be meaningless, false promises and many of them outright lies.

War is good, no? Cold blooded preemptive strikes on rogue nations! Killing insurgents, spending billions more when we have starving civilians here, so we're cutting more Winter fuel assistance and raising taxes & utility costs so we can make more bombs and bullets, to kill more people!

Woohoo Amerika we're no. 1!!!

Romney is a calculating politician playing the latest headlines to his advantage,pandering to the military/industrial complex and the politically powerful Israeli lobby in D.C.

Just another status quo talking head whose convictions and policies change to enhance his chances.

There's only one candidate who has been rock solid in his convictions and voting record who is getting my vote and I believe there are many who agree Ron Paul is America's greatest hope for recovery from the mis-management of characters like Mitt Romney.

Don't let his charming good looks fool you, even though he's Fonzie's dad, he lacks the cooool...

I wouldnt worry to much ,politicians always fail on their promises.
M r probably your best hope for avoiding war

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Using this phrase doesn't mean you plan on going to war, it means you plan to strengthen your defenses in order to discourage an enemy attack.

If every nation is 'prepared' for war, there's peace, because nobody wants to attack a well-prepared enemy.

So this thread is a misinterpretation of what was said.

I think that the OP is s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g Romney's position. In the words of former Secretary of War (now Defense) Elihu Root, whose words now are on the entrance to the Army War College at Carlisle Barracks, PA.; "Not to promote war but to preserve the peace...." is his frame of reference on Iran.

Not going to discuss the connotation of his latin remark, there's no real way of telling but do note this:

"But thanks to this shameful abdication of moral authority, any hope of toppling a vicious regime was lost, perhaps for generations."

This alone explains his intentions very clearly...

So? Obama is going to wage war against them anyway. Whoever is elected will be waging war against Iran.

YOUR VOTE DOES NOT COUNT OR MATTER.

If you aren't greasing the hands of these pigs with money like the Military Industrial Complex does through their lobbyist shills, your opinion and political ideology means jack #. Wake up America.

It's so transparent all the candidates are in the pockets of the military industrial complex, and the media say "puppet number 3 is the front runner" , even though Ron Paul has done the best in the debates and the polls.
The media bias is so transparent too, that it backfires and people will wonder what is going in, so Ron Paul get more voters.
One day America will be free again.

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Si vis pacem, para bellum

Using this phrase doesn't mean you plan on going to war, it means you plan to strengthen your defenses in order to discourage an enemy attack.

If every nation is 'prepared' for war, there's peace, because nobody wants to attack a well-prepared enemy.

So this thread is a misinterpretation of what was said.

and that's what iran is doing by developing a nuclear weapon. i'm glad to see the u.s. and iran are on the same page.

reply to post by FOXMULDER147


You are very correct. It's avoiding war by being ready.

This doesn't make any sense. Obama was elected by the populace on the basis that he would get us out of the war. While it is commonly known that the President in office during a bad recession never gets re-elected, this is not an excuse for sabre-rattling by the Republicans.

As a veteran, I think there is ample evidence that (1) Iran is likely peaceful and (2) the armed forces are tired of the war overseas.

Let's not forget that Iran is not attacking the US, nor is it attacking Israel.

Let's be careful about whom we believe in the next months. I don't want to wake up to news that the US entered another expensive war, which will likely last at least 10 years.

PTW - Peace Through War - seems to be a new battle cry for the US to justify first strike. In the 60s we would not have been caught dead doing first strike.

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
Don't let his charming good looks fool you, even though he's Fonzie's dad, he lacks the cooool...

That's it! I WANNA SEE HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE!

Was wondering what Henry Winkler was up to these days.

Seriously, at least Romney has shown his true colours by saying this...

OMG! It's almost like everything is just leading towards Ron Paul being the only viable candidate...

Even though the elections are a year away, it's crazy to think that Mitt would shoot himself in the foot this early, for I truly think that comment will be his demise. His thought process is still stuck in the Bush Brain Washed Era, and the average American is becoming fed up with it.

I'm actually quite amazed that he would say something like this, it kinda blows my mind.


What kind of politcal campaign tactics is this man being advised on? Promising war, 1 year before the elections?

This isn't even worth breaking down, rather more of a relief, truly... And to think, I at one time said that I wouldn't mind if it was Ron Paul(pres.) and Mitt Romney(vice.), well that went right out the window.

Romney is a nut-case, hopefully this is just another one of his change in positions and hes not being serious.

I can't imagine the civil backlash if the U.S nudges its head in to another major conflict, and i believe that Iran will be a much larger undertaking then Iraq. All the candidates are looking pretty crazy, except Paul ofcourse, but every candidate makes promises, just look at what Obama said then and what he's ACTUALLY done.