Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Politics

Romney is wrong!

Mar. 6, 2012 6:00pm

Dr. Mike D. Evans, a New York Times bestselling author, has for decades served as a key liaison between millions of evangelical Christians and Israel.

[ x ]

jwnwebsite@gmail.com

Author's Website

Mike Evans: Romney is Wrong!

Mitt Romney’s recent opinion piece in the Washington Post was titled, “How I would check Iran’s nuclear ambition.” As a conservative Republican and the one who recommended Benjamin Netanyahu to Prime Minister Menachem Begin for his first political post, I find Romney’s Iranian plan deeply troubling.

The Republican front-runner states that the Iranian hostages taken during the Carter administration were released in essence because of Reagan’s “peace through strength” stance. Romney declared: “On Jan. 20, 1981, during the hour that Reagan was sworn into office, Iran released the hostages. The Iranians well understood that Reagan was serious about turning words into action in a way that Jimmy Carter never was.”

Romney is wrong: Shortly after 4:00 A.M. on Inauguration Day, January 20, 1981, the Carter administration relinquished $7.977 billion to the Iranians through the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. The transfer required fourteen banks and the participation of five nations acting concurrently. This was done to buy the hostages’ release.

At the same time, Carter signed the 1981 Algiers Accords which stated that the US “would not intervene politically or militarily in Iranian internal affairs.” This simply meant that the US agreed not to attack Iran. This effectively eliminated any first-strike options and reduced the US to retaliatory action only. Carter had tried for months to pull this rabbit out of the hat, all the while knowing his presidency was at stake. The Iranians waited until just before Reagan’s inauguration to accept the deal. It was an opportunity to further humiliate Carter, while putting their eggs in the basket of a man they saw as only an actor. They weren’t at all frightened of Ronald Reagan.

After having interviewed over one hundred Iranian leaders including Empress Farah Pahlavi, many of the remaining cabinet ministers who served under the Shah, the majority of current cabinet ministers in Iran, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and having written three books on the subject, I am extremely well-aware of these facts.

Romney states that his policy would be the same as that of President Reagan. I was in Lebanon on October 22, 1983 with a camera crew. We were sleeping on the US Marine beachhead. On the following morning we were horrified by the sounds of a massive blast. A terrorist driving a truck laden with explosives drove it into the barracks at the airport killing 220 Marines, 18 Navy personnel and three Army soldiers. The president’s only response was to pull the troops out of Lebanon—even though many thought Iran Hezbollah terrorists were behind the attack.

Romney’s plan to press for tighter sanctions is laughable. President Obama has done an excellent job in playing the sanction card. He has been even more effective than President George W. Bush. Romney says he would demonstrate his commitment to Israel by making Jerusalem his first destination on any foreign trip, and that he would persuade the ayatollahs in Iran to abandon their nuclear ambitions by buttressing any policy with military options. The Republican candidate has also indicated that he would restore the presence of aircraft carriers in the Eastern Mediterranean and Persian Gulf.

Many of the Iranian ayatollahs in authority are “Twelvers,” men obsessed with the belief system that they can usher in the Mahdi through an apocalypse. They do not fear war; they welcome it. These men also seem to think that under no circumstances would the US fight a ground war. Why? It is likely that such a conflict would last a decade and require at least 250,000 body bags for US troops.

In essence, Romney has said absolutely nothing substantive. Conversely, the best possible plan was articulated by Mitch McConnell during a speech to AIPAC when he said: “If Iran, at any time, begins to enrich uranium to weapons-grade level, or decides to go forward with a weapons program, then the United States will use overwhelming force to end that program.”

This country desperately needs a man with moral clarity, integrity, fortitude, and strength of character behind the desk in the Oval Office—someone who is unafraid of the saber rattling and threats emanating from the terrorists in control in Tehran.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (12)

Jokari
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:00pm
“who recommended Benjamin Netanyahu to Prime Minister Menachem Begin for his first political post”

BN has been one of the most skilled political figures in my lifetime, and if 2% of us stood up for America the way Dr. Evans does for Israel, we’d be as strong as in days of yesteryear, gone by.

John Gibson, Romney supporter said, “He really wants to be liked.” I found that creepy and depressing. We need a no-holds ball buster to right these wrongs of the DNC via “barry soetoro”.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/photo-exclusive-when-george-romney-met-saul-alins

Photo Exclusive: When George Romney Met Saul Alinsky

In the wake of the devastating Detroit riots of the summer of 1967, Michigan Gov. George Romney — a liberal Republican — met the radical organizer Saul Alinsky to discuss the grievances of the urban black poor. Now Romney’s son is fighting for the Republican nomination, and his main rival, Newt Gingrich, has made Barack Obama’s alleged ties to Alinsky a centerpiece of his campaign.

Mitt Romney is in the awkward position of believing he cannot afford to acknowledge the two things in his life about which he ought to feel proudest: his universal medical plan for Massachusetts, and his father. When Newt Gingrich rails, “I believe in the Constitution; I believe in the Federalist Papers. Obama believes in Saul Alinsky and secular European socialist bureaucracy.” Mitt Romney says nothing. He dare not put in a word on Alinsky’s behalf.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ritamweep
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:49pm
This is from the author’s website….

‘According to the report, at their Oval Office meeting earlier this week, US President Barack Obama promised Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to supply Israel with the latest deep-penetration bombs as well as airborne tankers to enable Israel Air Force jets to reach Iran and return home.

The deal: In return, Israel agreed to not unilaterally strike against Iran until at least the end of 2012, after the upcoming US presidential elections.’

This is Mr. Obama’s tactic. Fighting for women’s free birth control is a tactic. Women have been able to get free or low cost abortions and birth control from Planned Parenthood ‘like for…ever.’
Forgiving homeowner’s debt and soon letting them rent, in those homes for a small fee to the government, their new ‘land Lord’ is a tactic.
Promises made are tactics to buy votes, to get him reelected and gain more power over the people. There is no intention of keeping those promises. How many promises has he kept that were constructive for America, or Israel?
The puppet masters of Mr. Obama have to keep him in office four more years. They have not finished the transformation of America into a socialist/communist country. They have not yet demolished her Constitution.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
nadine0915
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:15am
In the two most devastating attacks on US soil —9/11 and Pearl Harbor—the US was caught unaware and had to spend precious time strategizing. Should we wait until Iran has an atomic device and uses it against Israel or the East or West Coast of America before we take steps? I think not. Even the Bible poses the question: “How can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house.” The strong man keeps watch in order to protect his family.

President Obama has approved increased sanctions against Iran, only to make its leaders thumb their noses in the face of more stringent restrictions. Any further moves on the part of the US or European allies would likely produce the same results. The first sanctions were imposed on Iran in 1995, seventeen years ago, and with what results? Are its leaders any more compliant? Do we know any more about its nuclear program? Have all of its facilities been inspected by the IAEA? The answer is obviously “no.” Sanctions only work against reasonable leaders who care more for their citizens than for the sound of their own rhetoric.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
gladys906
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 8:32pm
Let me continue my truncated comment below.

Whoever is in office must be first a skilled negotiator, and last, unafraid to make the choice that will preserve our land and heritage. When faced with the possibility of a nuclear Iran, a country that has declared its intention to “wipe Israel from the map” and to bring the Great Satan (the US) to its knees, the policy of Mitch McConnell becomes applicable: “use overwhelming force to end that program.”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
gladys906
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 8:11pm
In response to the comments above, I would like to say that nowhere in his op-ed does the author endorse any candidate for president. Given the content of this op-ed, it would seem that none of the presidential candidates—Democratic or Republican—are experienced in dealing with the concept of war. The last president with that experience would have been George H.W. Bush who fought in World War II. No thinking man—politico or otherwise—would seek war as a first response. Negotiation is always preferable if the opponent is in any way reasonable. The leaders in Iran are completely unreasonable. It was the Ayatollah Khomeini who said, “I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.” This is the mindset of those charged with negotiating for Iran.

As much as the United States may want to settle this by sitting down across the table from Iranian leaders, there is little chance they will capitulate on any point. These men believe they have the upper hand. War is hell; just ask any soldier from any campaign. Reality is that whoever is elected in November may well be forced into a pre-eminent strike or retaliation. Whoever is in office must be first a skilled negotiator, and last, unafraid to make the choice that will preserve our land and heritage. When faced with the possibility of a nuclear Iran, a country that has declared its intention to “wipe Israel from the map” and to bring the

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
roadrunneraz
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 2:10pm
I’m afraid if the Republicans cannot come up with a courageous Presidential candidate we will be subjected to another 4 years of of a lukewarm President concerning Iran and Israel. I am tired of America tip-toeing around so as not to offend or anger the opposition. Mike Evans has a strong message and his other books on this subject will open your eyes. Read them all……he is a true champion for Israel!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
TheOldTimer
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 2:04pm
It pleased me to see that there are those like Dr. Evans who have taken the time to research what is REALLY going on and is willing to share with the rest of us. Kudos, Dr. Evans, for clarifying the position we need to take considering Iran – - and pointing out that, to date at least, Mr. Romney is not doing so.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
birdingfan
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 12:09pm
I read Evans book on the subject a few years back, Jimmy Carter, the Liberal Left and World Chaos. Basically he outlines how Carter failed in his foreign policy in regard to Iran, because he undermined the Shah of Iran, who was our ally, and instead helped get the Ayatollah Khomeini into power. Details of those incredible turn of events are in his book. Since then Iran has evolved into the #1 State sponsor of terrorism in the world – a real serious threat and problem to the democracy of Israel, and also to America. We are the Great Satan to them. Israel is the Little Satan. Iran has made it clear that once the have the bomb they will use on Israel. In addition, what really would prevent a Nuclear Bomb built in Iran from making its way into the US via Mexico or Canada? If anyone doubts this, go see Act of Valor in the theaters now. I think Evans is saying ANY president or presidential candidate that is unwilling to take direct action to TAKE OUT the nuclear capacities of Iran, or support Israel in taking them out, is not really stepping up to the serious nature of the threat that exists to America and our allies in the world like Israel. Iran is bent on the bomb, and is not going to back off because we huff and puff and blow smoke in their faces. I think it’s going to take a courageous president who’s willing to take definitive action to thwart the Iranians from their quest for Nuclear weapons. If we don’t torpedo their nuclear efforts NOW then get ready for 9-11 X 1000 LAT

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
christianUSA
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 8:20am
Opinion: Romney as far as seen in his bio has no military experience little international/diplomacy experience and has never had the personal experience of deciding life/death of someone being there was no death penalty in Massachusetts when he was governor and he was in France during 67 riots; until someone is personally faced and experiences this how he will deal with it is an unknown. Theoretical campaign political policy is a poor guild to real dynamic life policy of high pressure nuclear war issues that test the true moral and character of any person. Quote someone else or nonexperience events only read about does not equal personal conviction that will be put in to action in a fast short time of pressure of confrontation of such. How will he do in regard to the Constitutionality of war actions? Therefore to vote based on his war policy now is questionable he may or may not so do.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
louie louie
Posted on March 7, 2012 at 3:35am
I’m having real trouble understanding the point this author is trying to make. But he’s written three books on the subject so he must be the expert with all the facts. First he says it’s wrong for Romney to advocate Ronald Reagan’s “peace through strength” policy when it comes to the Iranians. Then he says that “Romney’s plan to press for tighter sanctions is laughable.” He adds that “President Obama has done an excellent job in playing the sanction card” (which is itself laughable.)

He dismisses Romney’s statement about “buttressing any policy with military options” by claiming that the Iranian ayatollahs “do not fear war; they welcome it.” But then he concludes by stating that the best possible plan was articulated by Mitch McConnell when he said: “If Iran, at any time, begins to enrich uranium to weapons-grade level, or decides to go forward with a weapons program, then the United States will use overwhelming force to end that program.”

How is Mitch McConnell’s plan any different than Romney’s? The author dismisses Romney’s talk of military options because Iranian leaders do not fear war. But he praises McConnell’s talk of using “overwhelming force” as “the best possible plan”. Can’t “overwhelming force” be considered a military option? Or does the author think it means sending Biden and Clinton over to Iran to negotiate? Dr. Evans seems so anxious to criticize Romney that he is willing to contradict himself. In essence, Dr. Evans ha

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RushEcho2
Posted on March 6, 2012 at 8:51pm
Did the author miss that Romney said he would stand with Israel ?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Grannie4news
Posted on March 6, 2012 at 8:29pm
It looks like this guy thinks Carter was good at what he did and Reagan had nothing to do with it at all. I strongly disagree and I do think that Romney will be strong; but not a hothead.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.