Mitt Romney Just Hammered Obama On Libya In A Big, Wide-Ranging Foreign Policy Speech

[Pork_Roll]

In Syria, I will work with our partners to identify and organize those members of the opposition who share our values and ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat Assad’s tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets.

Our Holy Father adamantly opposes the arming of the rebels in Syria. He supports neither Asad nor the rebels but calls for the international community to create a peaceful solution.

“Arms imports to Syria need to stop once and for all. Without this, the war cannot end. We need to import creativity and ideas for peace, not arms,” Ratzinger said when asked about the situation of the refugees escaping Syria. He went on to define the arms market a “grave sin”.

If Romney is gravely wrong in his Syrian policy of arming rebels according to our Holy Father, how can we be sure his entire middle east foreign policy is not going to create more violence and suffering like what happened when Bush invaded Iraq preemptively? It certainly sounds at odds with our Catholic faith.

 

[_Abyssinia]

That is not the title of the article

Bishop Gracida in his voting guide says

Since abortion and euthanasia have been defined by the Church as the most serious sins prevalent in our society, what kind of reasons could possibly be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion? None of the reasons commonly suggested could even begin to be proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for such a candidate. Reasons such as the candidate’s position on war, or taxes, or the death penalty, or immigration, or a national health plan, or social security, or AIDS, or homosexuality, or marriage, or any similar burning societal issues of our time are simply lacking in proportionality

 

[katcecelia]

Neither party believes in non-intervention, esp in the Middle East… just matter of degree and reason behind involvement
Although, yes that is scary and counter-intuitive… any guns will be available to either side
And why are we the world’s armory anyway?

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

Our Holy Father adamantly opposes the arming of the rebels in Syria. He supports neither Asad nor the rebels but calls for the international community to create a peaceful solution. If Romney is gravely wrong in his Syrian policy of arming rebels according to our Holy Father, how can we be sure his entire middle east foreign policy is not going to create more violence and suffering like what happened when Bush invaded Iraq preemptively? It certainly sounds at odds with our Catholic faith.

This is just one reason I can’t support Romney. His foreign policy will result in the murder of many innocents.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

That is not the title of the article

Bishop Gracida in his voting guide says

Right, so even though Obama is a little less pro-war, you can’t vote for him because of his view on abortion.

But Romney’s views on war, IMO, preclude voting for him. Bishop Gracida is not saying that Catholics should only consider view on abortion and euthanasia when considering whom to vote for; rather that these other concerns wouldn’t make up for bad views on these extremely important issues.

 

[BroomWagon]

I heard the news on the hour on the radio and it does seem like they said Romney’s speech said to arm the rebels. I don’t agree with that.

“Hope is not a strategy,” the Republican nominee said, attacking the president’s 2008 campaign slogan of “hope and change.”

Romney called for more direct intervention in Syria, including making sure anti-government opposition forces have weapons.

cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57527962/romney-proposes-new-sanctions-on-iran-new-help-for-syrian-rebels/

I’ll vote for Romney but this is kind of being hawkish to me. We don’t really know who the rebels are.

Maybe a friendlier source is the Washington Times:

washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/romney-sees-retreat-obamas-foreign-policy/

He also said he would commit America to the goal of a “prosperous Palestinian state” and support opposition groups fighting against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime by making sure they have access to arms.

Read more: Romney sees retreat in Obama’s foreign policy - Washington Times washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/romney-sees-retreat-obamas-foreign-policy/#ixzz28jfaZuNk
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

[katcecelia]

This is just one reason I can’t support Romney. His foreign policy will result in the murder of many innocents.

That is understandable. I don’t think anyone should fault you for that decision, even if they feel that any vote not for Romney is one for Obama

 

[katcecelia]

Maybe Catholics in the Rep party can lean on their reps and senators if he is elected to show disapproval for such an extreme measure… I for one don’t want our country entangled in the Mid east anymore than it has to be, and less than it is. I do believe in showing support for Isreal because it is a free nation, or any other free nation, but not with guns and troops, unless it is the last option.

 

[estesbob]

Right, so even though Obama is a little less pro-war, you can’t vote for him because of his view on abortion.

But Romney’s views on war, IMO, preclude voting for him. Bishop Gracida is not saying that Catholics should only consider view on abortion and euthanasia when considering whom to vote for; rather that these other concerns wouldn’t make up for bad views on these extremely important issues.

Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

 

[BroomWagon]

We supported Rebels in Libya, now shown to have included Al Qaeda who in fact, I guess killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and 3 other Americans.

Romney talked of arming the rebels in Syria. Basically, I can’t make a decision on this myself. I would also carefully examine what the Vatican said and what are the implications.

 

[BroomWagon]

Right, so even though Obama is a little less pro-war, you can’t vote for him because of his view on abortion.

But Romney’s views on war, IMO, preclude voting for him. Bishop Gracida is not saying that Catholics should only consider view on abortion and euthanasia when considering whom to vote for; rather that these other concerns wouldn’t make up for bad views on these extremely important issues.

Obama supported arming the Libyan rebels. So in this, it’s a bit of the same thing.

 

[KP3243]

Right, so even though Obama is a little less pro-war, you can’t vote for him because of his view on abortion.

But Romney’s views on war, IMO, preclude voting for him. Bishop Gracida is not saying that Catholics should only consider view on abortion and euthanasia when considering whom to vote for; rather that these other concerns wouldn’t make up for bad views on these extremely important issues.

Abortion and euthanasia are both intrinsic evils, Catholics cannot support anyone who will vote for or sign into law legislation that promotes either because you would be complicit in the evil and that will affect your salvation. There is a difference between intrinsic evils and prudential judgments like the economy and national security both home and abroad.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

Obama supported arming the Libyan rebels. So in this, it’s a bit of the same thing.

Except that Romney has criticized him for not going far enough.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

Abortion and euthanasia are both intrinsic evils, Catholics cannot support anyone who will vote for or sign into law legislation that promotes either because you would be complicit in the evil and that will affect your salvation. There is a difference between intrinsic evils and prudential judgments like the economy and national security both home and abroad.

But in being against abortion and euthanasia, you are not forced into voting for someone who has a horrible record on foreign policy, civil liberties, economics, etc. Voting for neither is fine. You can’t vote for someone who supports abortion, but neither do you have to vote for someone only because they don’t support abortion while on everything else they are horrible.

 

[KP3243]

Except that Romney has criticized him for not going far enough.

Well lets be serious, the US has failed to strong arm Russia and China in cooperating with the US on ending the war. I am Russian American and I can tell you Putin is testing Obama’s will and leadership strength right now and I give Romeny credit for a least sniffing out what Putin is really trying to do to the US.

 

[KP3243]

But in being against abortion and euthanasia, you are not forced into voting for someone who has a horrible record on foreign policy, civil liberties, economics, etc. Voting for neither is fine. You can’t vote for someone who supports abortion, but neither do you have to vote for someone only because they don’t support abortion while on everything else they are horrible.

I have to first support the person who is against intrinsic evils like abortion and euthanasia first and foremost our salvation is a risk if we vote otherwise. God will not punish us for voting for the pro life canidate.

 

[estesbob]

But in being against abortion and euthanasia, you are not forced into voting for someone who has a horrible record on foreign policy, civil liberties, economics, etc. Voting for neither is fine. You can’t vote for someone who supports abortion, but neither do you have to vote for someone only because they don’t support abortion while on everything else they are horrible.

Just as long as Catholics understand the difference between “cant” and “dont have to”

 

[KP3243]

Just as long as Catholics understand the difference between “cant” and “dont have to”

Father Mitch went deeper and has said if your vote leads to the abortion canidate being elected because you didn’t vote for the pro choice guy, you are getting into an area you might not want to be in, I am just throwing this out there because of the severity of this vote on our souls.

 

[Vouthon]

I agree naturally with the Holy Father. Romney’s foreign policy aims in Syria are at odds with Catholic teaching. I believe that this is important to remember if one is going to vote for him.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

Well lets be serious, the US has failed to strong arm Russia and China in cooperating with the US on ending the war. I am Russian American and I can tell you Putin is testing Obama’s will and leadership strength right now and I give Romeny credit for a least sniffing out what Putin is really trying to do to the US.

Why is it our responsibility to end the war? How do you even accomplish it when there are no clearly defined “good guys” and we probably won’t have the support of the local people for going in there?