The Candidate Who Can See the Enemy, Can Defeat It.  Dr. Phares makes a compelling case for Mitt Romney:

Probably I am among the few who see the clouds gathering around theglobe and thus have been urging leaders to act fast, decisively andearly on to avoid the future Jihad –that has began already. Had what Isee wasn’t there I would be fully excited -- like any citizen -- toargue forcefully about the crucial matters of our existence: health,environment, nutrition, scientific discoveries, animal protection, andwhy not space exploration. Had I not realized that all that debate washinging on what Bin laden and Ahmedinijad were preparing, I would havebeen looking at a whole different roaster of Presidential candidates.But that is not the world I see ahead of us, in the immediate future.

Hence,I’ll leave the debate about the best economic and technologicaldirections to their experts and I would postpone the social andphilosophical dreams to better times. Right now and right here I aminterested in who among the candidates can simply understand the tragicequation we’re in and may be able to use the resources of this nationto cross the bridge ahead of us. President Bush was elected before 9/11neither on the grounds of avoiding the Jihadi wars nor winning them.Very few even knew that we were already at war. He was reelected on theground of being a better choice than the defeatist politicalalternative. This year I suggest that Americans deserve a more daringchoice. They need to see and certify that the next occupant of theWhite House lives on this Planet, at this age, knows that we are at warand above all knows which war we are fighting. The margin of error istoo slim to allow hesitations.

By 2012 the Jihadists may recruit one million suicide bombers and couldalign two nuclear powers. By 2016 they would deploy 10 million suicidebombers and seize five regimes equipped with the final weapon. In thenext eight years NATO’s European membership could be battling urbanintifadas and US task forces lacking shelters worldwide. To avoid theseprospects of apocalypse the offices on Pennsylvania Avenue must catchup with the lost opportunities as of next winter.

Thus, andunlike traditional commentators in classical US politics I am notlooking at who said what and who flipped flopped when. Frankly, itdoesn’t matter at this stage if it is a he or a she, of this or otherrace, of this or other church, and if the President is single, has alarge family or has divorced twice. The stakes are much higher than thesweet but irrelevant American usual personality debate. I want to knowif the candidates are strong willed, smart, educated about the world,informed about the threat, can define it, can identify it, can fightit, are not duped by their bureaucracy, cannot be influenced by foreignregimes, have the right advisors, can run an economy while commanding awar and still see the threats as they handle daily crisis and takedrastic measures as the hard times are approaching. I want to know ifthe candidates are very specific when they inform their public aboutthe menace. Yes, it is indeed a vital function of national securitythat we need to insure for the next few years, so that all other issuescan be addressed thoroughly. In short I don’t want to see the fall ofConstantinople being repeated on these shores in the next decade ortwo. Humanity will not recover from such a disaster.

Dr. Phares discusses the qualifications of the four remaining contenders for President, two Democrats, two Republicans.  "I am looking at the scariest item on any Presidential agenda and check out if they are conscious about it: national security."  Here is his conclusion:

This is why I have come to the conclusion that -based on what wasprovided to the public by the four leading candidates- Governor Romneyhas the capacity of managing the counter strategies against theJihadists, only because he stated to the public that he sees the enemyas to who they are. And if a President can see them, he can defeatthem. His Republican contender, now leading the polls, can sense thembut haven’t shown them. The leading candidates on the other side aremaking progress in the opposite direction: One wants to end the Warunilaterally and the other wants to make Peace with the oppressors. Inshort, if elected, Romney will try to destroy the mother ship, McCainwill supply the trenches, Clinton will pull the troops back to thebarracks and Obama will visit the foes’ bunkers.

Hence, asis, I have recommended Governor Romney for the Republican Primaries asfirst among equals while considering Senator McCain as a genuineleader. If Romney is selected I believe America may have a chance totry new strategies. If his contender is selected, we will have four oreight more years of the past seven years. On the other side, I havesuggested to counter-Terrorism experts to help Democratic candidatesrestructure their agendas on national security in line with the realityof the enemy: For I would like to see both Parties presenting a unitedvision of the threat while differing on how to confront it. That wouldbe the ideal situation America can be in and a response to the deepestwill of the American public.

I would add that considering John McCain's position on illegal immigration he is not serious about national security.  He gets A+ on the war in Iraq but national security goes way beyond that.  He has a blind spot when it comes to our borders. 

McCain has also said he would close Guantanamo Bay on his first day in office.  His reasoning for closing Gitmo is reason enough to derail his "Straight Talk" Express: because "there's a lot of anti-Americanism" around the world.  According to John McCain we should bring a bunch of terrorists to the United States (Ft. Leavenworth to be exact.  Are Kansas voters listening?) so everybody will like us again.  Call it the Mealy-Mouth Express:

John Weaver, Sen McCain's chief strategist, confirmed his plans for amarkedly more conciliatory foreign policy. "The next president willhave to work extra hard to unite our friends and divide our foes. Sadlythe opposite has occurred in recent years," he said, as Sen McCainaddressed a crowded hall in the farming community of Cedar Falls.

"John believes that you can accomplish a lot more in this world bysticking to your principles, while adopting a much more humble tonewith your partners."

Humble with your partners?  I guess John McCain doesn't consider U.S. citizens his partners. 

The endorsement by Dr. Phares is significant:

Inshort, if elected, Romney will try to destroy the mother ship, McCainwill supply the trenches, Clinton will pull the troops back to thebarracks and Obama will visit the foes’ bunkers.

Yes, John McCain is a war hero.  That does not automatically make him the best choice for President and Commander-in-Chief of the United States.

Labels: Endorsement, mitt romney