I’ve been considering a post titled “Late-Blogging the GOP Debate.” I’m using the term late-blogging as opposed to live-blogging. I wasn’t able to watch the foreign policy debate over the weekend and had it saved on my DVR for later viewing. I’m not really sure anyone would appreciate “late-blogging” since the debate has already been well-covered so I’ll just let it go. And since the FPA is a non-partisan organization, I don’t feel it’s appropriate to offer pointed political commentary (I’d like to think that you can read my posts and not know if I’m a Republican, Democrat or Independent), although it’s certainly fair game to question how the candidates view the U.S. role in the world. So I will venture a quick summary of my impression of the debate spin.
I think the average viewer would conclude from the debate that the U.S. under Republican leadership would be much more likely to use military force, much more likely to waterboard detainees, and much more likely to attack Iran. On the subject of Iran, I was surprised at the support for covert operations against that country. There’s something a bit comical (or perhaps farcical) about the candidates talking publicly about their desire to increase covert operations. Perhaps they are under the impression that the Iranian intelligence agency will be unaware of their comments? Or perhaps the candidates are unaware that covert operations are already underway? Here’s a statecraft tip guys (and gal), don’t talk about covert operations.
If you missed the debate, don’t feel bad, there will be another debate on November 22nd on the topic of national security and foreign policy. The debate will be hosted by CNN, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and the Heritage Foundation. AEI put together the following video outlining what they see as the major foreign policy challenges (and the primary enemies) facing the U.S.
Image Credit: The New York Times
