Mitt Romney continues his blabbering, and this time he tried a super duper special on foreign policy. Big deal! Romney's knowledge about foreign policy could fit into a thimble. He doesn't know the history of our nation's relationships, he has no facts, and most of all, he is completely ignorant about how to behave overseas. (We cannot forget his awkward behavior and inappropriate words in Israel and Great Britain. ) Here is an excerpt from his speech, as provided by the DailyBeast:
....The size of our Navy is at levels not seen since 1916.....
Really? Romney made similar claims earlier this year and they were debunked by Politifact. Here is what Romney said in January 2012 at the Republican debate in South Carolina, as noted by Politifact:
"The most extraordinary thing that's happened with this military authorization is the president is planning on cutting $1 trillion out of military spending," Romney said. "Our Navy is smaller than it's been since 1917. Our Air Force is smaller and older than any time since 1947. We are cutting our number of troops. We are not giving the veterans the care they deserve. We simply cannot continue to cut our Department of Defense budget if we are going to remain the hope of the Earth. And I will fight to make sure America retains military superiority."
....But what do those numbers mean? Not much, a variety of experts told us.
Counting the number of ships or aircraft is not a good measurement of defense strength because their capabilities have increased dramatically in recent decades. Romney’s comparison "doesn’t pass ‘the giggle test,’ " said William W. Stueck, a historian at the University of Georgia....
Romney received "Pants on Fire" designation from Politifact for these outrageous claims about our military. Remember, today we have fighter jets loaded with missiles on our Navy ships. These are things that were not possible in 1916 or 1917. Our Navy and Air Force are hundreds of times more advanced than they were in the early 20th century. The number of ships and fighter jets are not as important as their advanced capabilities.
Another concern is about Romney's proposal to go to war with Iran. Romney protested against the Viet Nam war and took the easy way out by going to do missionary work in France instead of going into the military. His five sons did not participate in the military.
...When asked in 2007, during his first run for the presidency, about his sons' lack of military service, Mitt Romney responded, "One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping to get me elected because they think I'd be a great president."
If elected, Mitt Romney will gladly send your sons and daughters to war, but not his sons or their wives, or their children.
Finally, Romney has plans to privatize the medical treatment our veterans and active military receive. This is a very controversial idea, and in the end, our vets, active military, and their families would lose. As an example, think of the advancements made at the VA to help restore lost limbs since the beginning of the Iraq war. Things have changed dramatically because the VA learned from experience, and worked to improve outcomes. Sending injured military personnel to local hospitals would deny many of them the higher quality and specific therapy that has been developed at the VA hospitals. Romney's lack of empathy, knowledge, and experience in the area of the military would be a disaster for the country, especially with the large amount of veterans needing help. Sending our vets out to local hospitals is dismissing their specific needs and the promise of treatment when they enlisted.
We've already voted! We voted for Barack Obama! Support President Obama and give him Democrats in the House and the Senate so that we can get those jobs bills passed.
Did you know that the Republicans even refused to vote for cost of living increases for our military? Boehner and Cantor didn't even put the measure up for a vote. Shame.