My heart has been global in these busy months, with elections here in North America, the Olympics in Europe, wars waging in the Middle East, and fellow missionaries spread over numerous continents. This morning I read an article from The New York Times, Romney Blasts Security Leaks as a Betrayal, which addresses the topic of foreign policy.
In summary, the Obama administration has allegedly leaked details of cyber attacks against Iran’s nuclear program as well as leaks about the prevention of a plot by Al Qaeda to bring down an airliner. “Republicans appear to be hoping the controversy over leaks will snowball into a major political issue before the election.” Romney’s address was “the most expansive foreign policy speech of his candidacy and opened a new and aggressive attack on President Obama on national security.”
But to be quite honest with you, when I read articles such as these I have a hard time discerning the truth. To me this article was based on hearsay, and I do not trust hearsay. But then again, what more are elections (or a majority of politics) than idle talk and unconfirmed information? I am a source-seeker. I would like to know whether these “leaks” are leaks at all, and if they are in fact risking national security, or compromising our men and women in the field. In consequence, I believe Romney’s accusations were followed by the only logical demand, “a full and prompt investigation by a special counsel, with explanation and consequence [is required].”
As for the accusation that Mr. Obama has betrayed some of America’s closest allies, that I cannot say for sure. But I do know my alliance with Israel stands firm and a belief that we must stand up to adversaries, be that China, Russia, or Iran, no matter how unpredictable that stance may be. I would encourage you to read this article, and this one, both from a different sources and different perspectives.
On a more personal attack, Romney characterized Mr. Obama as a leader who has “given trust where it is not earned, insult where it is not deserved, and apology where it is not due.” I believe this is based on Romney’s disapproval in lenient lines with Iran, unfriendly positions with free enterprises, and misguided pushes for a greater government role in the economy.
In election year I have observed that citizens typically take one of two stances: either they hear what they want to hear, or they hear nothing at all. For example, a conservative may read this article or hear Romney’s speech and run with it, without taking the time to analyze the facts or validity. On the reverse side, a liberal may dismiss it entirely because they do not believe it could possibly be true. Either of those responses are easy, they take no special intelligence.
I believe Romney’s upcoming foreign trip will give us an opportunity to better assess his potential leadership abilities as Commander-in-Chief. With so much happening in the world, foreign policy has been, and will remain, a major component for debate. I would love to see the United States become once again the respected and acclaimed nation it once was, and our president, an esteemed leader of the free world.
