Horses and Bayonets
The final debate of the 2012 general election season concentrated on foreign policy. From the perspective of a naval enthusiast the debate had some grist, but was hardly ideal . Mitt Romney repeated an easily debunkable talking point comparing the current size of the U.S. Navy to its 1917 antecedent , leading to an Obama “zinger” about horses and bayonets.Romney and Obama discussed the U.S. relationship with China, with the conversation catching some of the complexity of the relationship. Romney, for example, pointed out that China and the United States both want stability. Indeed, if anything Obama sounded a slightly more hawkish note on China, suggesting that Beijing needed to accept that the United States remained “a Pacific power.”
As the challenger, the onus fell on Romney to argue for a change from Obama’s defense policies. While the broad strokes of policy in many cases remained similar (Romney echoes Obama’s arguments for confrontation with Iran, while at the same time supporting a shift to East Asia), the atmospherics, especially in the defense sector, have differed considerably. Nevertheless, the precise implications of Romney’s defense and naval policy remained unclear until relatively recently. http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2012/10/23/horses-and-bayonets/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+the-diplomat+%28The+Diplomat+RSS%29
No comments:
Post a Comment