Richard Cohen has an Op-Ed in the Washington Post whose title “Obama and Romney”™s empty talk on Syria” is quite misleading. The Op-ed, with the exception of one crucial point, is quite good in fact.
That point in particular is found in one paragraph in which Cohen cites what Romney would do, on his watch, when it comes to Syria. He writes “So did Romney mean providing the Syrian rebels with anti-tank or anti-aircraft weapons? No, I was told. Not that either. A Romney administration would basically facilitate the flow of heavy weapons, but from others ”” not a big help but more than the Obama administration is doing.”
But that’s all we have been asking for Richard. For Obama to step out of the way so that others may arm us to defeat Assad instead of turning Syria into an enclave of radical Islamists just so he can negotiate with Iran. And if Romney is willing to take this courageous step, then Syria is saved because the people will dislodge Assad and maybe along the way help bring down theÂ Iranian regime andÂ Hezbollah,Â something that I do not think the President is even considering.
Republicans have always been accused of supporting an expensive military but Democrats, under Obama, are supporting enemies that cannot be defeated without a superb military. Republicans may support a hefty budget for the military but the Democrats give them the reason for that support when they open their arms to terrorists and Islamists and refuse to consider the consequences of their action.
Obama knows Syria is lost to sectarian violence that will destroy the country but do you think he will admit his mistake? That’s why Romney is better for the country. He may not do much but he will do just what it takes to avoid Obama‘s deadly mistakes.