Romney to embrace “no nuclear capability” stance on Iran

By Paul Mutter

The National Review Online has run an advance copy of the foreign policy speech GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney will give today in Virginia. In it, the former governor is expected to lay out his “red lines” for Iran that will be closer to Congress and the Israeli government’s position than the Obama Administration’s. Romney has expressed differing red lines on Iran in the past. Romney is also expected to express support for US arming of Syrian rebels:

It is time to change course in the Middle East. . . .

I will put the leaders of Iran on notice that the United States and our friends and allies will prevent them from acquiring nuclear-weapons capability. I will not hesitate to impose new sanctions on Iran, and will tighten the sanctions we currently have. I will restore the permanent presence of aircraft-carrier task forces in both the Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf region—and work with Israel to increase our military assistance and coordination. For the sake of peace, we must make clear to Iran through actions—not just words—that their nuclear pursuit will not be tolerated.

…. 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. Iran is sending arms to Assad because they know his downfall would be a strategic defeat for them. We should be working no less vigorously with our international partners to support the many Syrians who would deliver that defeat to Iran—rather than sitting on the sidelines. It is essential that we develop influence with those forces in Syria that will one day lead a country that sits at the heart of the Middle East.


Guest Contributor

Articles by guest writers.



  1. Should the fool become president he will blunder the US into a war with Iran we cannot win conventionally or otherwise, and not only eliminate any lingering pretensions real or imagined of US hegemony, but kill off the quasi empire America has become over the past hundred years or so.

    The Straits of Hormuz are the strategic key to victory, which US and allied naval, air & missile assets alone cannot keep open to tanker traffic. Not to mention that all the pipe lines being built to bypass the straits will be useless, since all the oil fields, refineries and support facilities are located in eastern Saudi Arabia and on the coast of the Persian Gulf, well within range of Iranian missiles, commando attacks and saboteurs.

    The Pentagon’s massive, multi year Millennium Challenge war game played out in 2002 had US carriers sunk and 20,000 sailors kia on the first day of battle. The results were so startling the rules where changed in mid game so the Blue team, the good guys, could win. Nothing has changed to tilt the balance, while Iran’s military industrial complex has added greater asymmetric capability, depth and mass to its defensive posture in the straits and the gulf.

    The Straits of Hormuz are literally one massive kill zone for a deep, blue water navy, which is totally unsuitable and extremely disadvantaged for fighting in a littoral war environment.

  2. I agree with RFjk’s analysis. But the outcome will be good for the majority of Americans. The 99% have nothing to lose if USG loses its hegemony over the world, but have a lot to gain. They have soldiered and carried the burden far too long for the pockets of the 1%. Time to put aside hubris and over expectation and to concentrate on the problems we are facing. Sometimes, defeat is precisely what one needs in life.

Comments are closed.