In a stunning display of arrogance, a Romney adviser has told?The Boston Globe that if he had won the Presidency:
“There wouldn’t be an ISIS at all, and Putin would know his place in life.”
What a wannabe-omniscient lunatic. First, we can never actually know what would happen if the loser had won a Presidential election because?this is a reality that will never, ever exist. Even if said loser wins the election in the future, it will not be with?the same?set of circumstances. Secondly, extremism as a whole dates back far?beyond 2008 or 2012. Many believe that ISIS can be dated back to 2006 where it was known as al Queda and based in Iraq. A resurgence took place in Syria around 2011. So the notion that Romney would have prevented something from as far back as 2006 ?is ludicrous to begin with. Many scholars also believe that ISIS would not exist at all if it had not been for the Iraq War that the George W. Bush administration waged.
It is also important to note that if it wasn’t ISIS specifically that started emerging on a global stage, it undoubtedly would have been something else. There are numerous terrorist organizations such as Al-Shabab and Boko Haram. Should we think that a Romney presidency would have eradicated all of these groups? Or just prevent ISIS?
Why should we even think that a Romney presidency would be better on terrorism? What basis does Mitt’s adviser have for these stunning claims? Appearing on Fox News in November of 2014, Romney said that he would have kept troops in Iraq and armed moderates in Syria. However, he didn’t have?ANY?specific plans on how to tackle these regions nor terrorism in general when he ran for office in 2012. And what exactly would he have done to make Putin know his “place in life?” I need specifics.
It is so easy for politicians to say what they “would have done” and critique what actual leaders HAVE done, but where was Romney on the key issues when he had the biggest platform as the Republican nominee for President? The positions he has taken after the fact are merely empty rhetoric as far as I am concerned; the same goes for his adviser.
Arming the moderates in Syria has been an idea passed around from numerous scholars and politicians. However, we cannot say whether that would have prevented ISIS or not. And like I said, another terrorist organization could have formed within Syria or from somewhere else. The problem of terrorism, whether it is caused by the distorted views of Islam from extremists like ISIS, or the distorted views of Christianity from people like Anders Breivik, is a complex one. It takes more than just a change in President to fix these issues. This belief that Romney would have been so much better on security and terror is the epitome of pandering to your base. Those?who watch Fox and/or would be potential Romney voters, probably actually think that this adviser’s opinions are true. And that is a very naive and simplistic way of viewing the world.
