Custom Search

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Where do the presidential candidates stand on terrorism?

Originally posted at Right Truth

Some of the presidential candidates 'get it' in this war against Islamic terrorism. I want to know each candidates beliefs, because I will not vote for anyone who does not fully understand who our enemy is. Nor will I vote for anyone who is not strong on sealing our borders against illegal aliens and potential terrorists entering the country.

Mitt Romney delivered a major address on the subject of terrorism to the Seventh Annual Herzliya Conference. Pipeline News says "Romney's presentation demonstrated an acute grasp of the threat that Islamism presents to the West and how that challenge has fundamentally changed our security paradigm."

Contrary to the Baker-Hamilton Commission, resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict will not magically mollify the jihadists.

What we should have realized since 9/11 is that what the world regarded as an Israeli-Arab conflict over borders represented something much larger. It was the oldest, most active front of the radical Islamist jihad against the entire world. It was not really about borders. It was about the refusal of many parts of the Muslim world to accept Israel's right to exist - within any borders." [snip]

"I think it is critical that we understand that as far as our enemies are concerned, there is just one conflict. And in this single conflict, the goal of destroying Israel is simply a weigh station toward the real goal of subjugating the entire world. Jihadism - violent, radical fundamentalism - has emerged as this century's nightmare It follows the same dark path as last century's nightmares: fascism and Soviet-styled communism. " [snip]

"In those previous global wars, there were many ways to lose, and victory was far from guaranteed. In the current conflict, there is only one way to lose, and that is if we as a civilization decide not to lift a finger to defend ourselves, our values, and our way of life. "

Concluding his remarks Romney characterized the Ahmadinejad regime as singularly dangerous and also chided Democrat opposition to the newly announced policy of hot pursuit of Iranian meddlers in Iraq, calling it "folly."

Of the Iranian nuclear threat he said, "I believe that Iran's leaders and ambitions represent the greatest threat to the world since the fall of the Soviet Union, and before that, Nazi Germany."

In this address Mr. Romney has taken not-a-small step towards elevating himself intellectually above his rivals. His remarks reveal him to be thoroughly conversant with the threat that radical Islam represents and willing to speak plainly and forcefully about it.

As such he is not only the first of the 2008 presidential hopefuls to broach what is arguably the most serious challenge of our time he is the only presidential candidate from either party so far who seems to fully understand the implications inherent in a failure to defeat it. (source)

Access a transcript of the speech here - Governor Mitt Romney Address On Terrorism

Rudy Giuliani has an exploratory committee together, but hasn't yet announced he will be running. I think he would probably be very good on terrorism, but I want to hear him talk about it. Unfortunately, Giuliani's beliefs on several other important topics differ from mine, so I would have a hard time voting for him. At this point I'm willing to listen to all the candidates. Well, maybe not Chuck Hagel. The Bear says:

Pardon my bit of crassness but before I could vote for Chuck Hagel I would have to be dragged away by the guys in white coats, handcuffed and put into a padded cell. Senator Chuck Hagel has replaced former Senator Lincoln Chaffee in my book as the number one RINO in the Republican Party and we don’t need any more stink’in RINOs.
Amen Bear, Amen!