Deeds, not words

America needs a debate about foreign policy; the election isn’t providing it

See article

Readers' comments



I'm curious, why are you being so generous to Mr Romney?

By now the FACT is well known that the statement was made by the Cairo Embassy in an attempt to assuage the angry violent mob that surrounded it and the consulate in Benghazi, well before the consulate was stormed.

Mr Romney's remarks were crude, incorrect, and indefensible; when given the chance yesterday morning to clarify what was by then known to be a factual error, he doubled down. Yet you don't mention that, why?

And why do you gloss over the fact that apparently according to conservatives the government of the US must meet the approval of the Israeli government at all times and the resulting hypocrisy vis a vis the "foreign apology tour".

Anakha82 in reply to Spectacularj1

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and guess that Romney believes that the US should vigorously defend the right of free speech, especially when condemning the speech of a US citizen to a nation where the near-absoluteness of that right is not taken as a given. And, that if any protesters take offense to this defense and storm the embassy, there should be enough Marines stationed there to shoot them.

If so, he's probably right.

Spectacularj1 in reply to Anakha82

This had absolutely nothing to do that, you ascribe far more virtue to Mr Romney than he is actually capable of.

But, assuming you're right - Tact is a concept a world leader needs to learn when espousing their belief. Waiting until you have all the facts before issuing an asinine statement also helps. And politicizing the murder of a US ambassador at the first opportunity on a day that both sides had agreed not to campaign, well let's say it's an indicator of Mr. Romney's scuminess.

Spectacularj1 wrote "...a world leader needs to learn when espousing their belief. Waiting until you have all the facts before issuing an asinine statement also helps...And politicizing the murder of a US ambassador..."

* * *

Mr. Spectacularj1,

When Romney made his initial statement, it was concerning Egypt and Romney was clear on that. The Libya thing occurred later. So it was not a case of politicizing on our ambassador's death.

He is right in stepping up and speak up for America. It is never early to defend American interest if it is under attack.

Where was Obama? Our campaigning again.


So, the US embassy in Cairo issues a statement condemning a video created to provoke Muslims, and Romney condemns the statement for being against American values?

Since when is it an American value to provoke others due to their religion?

A Republican value, maybe. But an American value, no.

See: First Amendment to the US Constitution.

New Conservative

How did this sentence ever make it past the copy editor?

"His outrage was sparked by diplomats who in statements and on Twitter condemned a crudely anti-Islamic feature film made in America, after that film sparked protests in Cairo and the fatal riots in Benghazi."

The embassy statement was issued before any riot started anywhere. Its purpose was to forestall them.

It's a shame that the Economist, who should know better, publish an article that suggests that American embassy officials were issuing that statement in response to the storming of two US embassies.

The timeline is here.

Spectacularj1 in reply to g. powell

So I've noticed, I guess this means they are getting ready to endorse, but want to have some prior justification. You'd think that a magazine that calls itself "The Economist" would know enough about economics to know that Romney has nothing to offer the US or the world in terms of economic prosperity.

Spectacularj1 in reply to The_Prof

TE as a whole has been tacking in this direction for a while though. True enough, during the primary an occasional article would pop up decrying the extremism of the Republican candidates, but they have largely chosen to gloss over Romney's multiple failings and hypocrisies and have lazily attributed things (i.e. the economy) to Obama when in truth the House Republicans at the very least share responsibility not to mention the multitude of other factors such as the Eurozone crisis.

Anakha82 in reply to New Conservative

Actually, the Economist's timeline is correct. The protest began outside the Cairo embassy before it issued its first statement condemning the film. It also continued to issue similar statements after the riots and storming of the Benghazi embassy.

New Conservative in reply to Anakha82

No, the timeline is not.

While they did reiterate the statement after the embassy was breached, to do anything else would have been cowardly and suggested that the embassy did not believe in it's first statement, but the initial statement was made before any protest.

From Foreign Policy,

"The official noted that the statement was posted at exactly 12:18 p.m. Cairo time -- 6:18 a.m. Washington time -- well before the protests began. Romney has said, wrongly, that the statement was the administration's first response to the protests, but the official said that the demonstrations did not begin until 4 p.m. Cairo time and protesters breached the wall about 2 hours later.

After the breach, as public criticism of the statement grew, the Cairo Embassy Twitter account continued to send out tweets defending it, some of which were later deleted. One deleted tweet, originally posted at 12:30 a.m. Cairo time, said, "This morning's condemnation (issued before protests began) still stands. As does condemnation of unjustified breach of the Embassy."


So no, their timeline is incorrect.

Alternatively, they may be getting ready to endorse Obama. And want to be clear that they gave Romney every consideration . . . before deciding that he is a disaster waiting to happen on the economy and on foreign affairs. That actually seems much more likely than an endorsement of Romney.

newphilo in reply to g. powell

'audi alteram partem' is a basic principle of our Western culture.
As such, The Economist is commendable for allowing the expression of different ideologies and opinions in articles and comments.


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
Car technology: Turbocharged
Schumpeter July 12th, 9:00
Gun laws: Prayers and pistols
Democracy in America July 11th, 17:43
Daily chart: Justice on trial
Graphic detail July 11th, 13:40


Products and events



