Why Should Foreigners Care Who Wins the White House?

By Anne Applebaum

“Is this presidential election really the most important in our lifetime?” That was the question asked, in so many words, by a concerned Brit at a discussion in London a few days ago. His words were directed at Larry Sabato, the American political analyst, whose countenance had been beamed onto a screen in a conference room like some giant electronic guru. Sabato didn’t blink. “This presidential election,” he replied, “is definitely the most important since 2008.”  

Appreciative laughter followed, but the audience wasn’t entirely satisfied. For the British—as for most other Europeans, and indeed most other foreigners—that aspect of this election is extremely hard to understand. Is the 2012 presidential race “important”—that is, will it mark a momentous change in American foreign policy and American attitudes toward the world—or will its result make no difference at all?

The source of the confusion is clear. Shards of harsh rhetoric from this nasty campaign do drift across the Atlantic, and many Europeans are aware that some Americans think Barack Obama is a Marxist-socialist bent on destroying America, while others think Mitt Romney is a vulture capitalist who will rob the poor to feed the rich. The British in particular like to “ooh” and “aah” over the stacks of cash Republicans and Democrats are spending in the apparent belief that the outcome matters a great deal.Read more.

Mitt Romney:A Looming Spectre Of New World Order

Hantu Laut

At a fund raising organised by his friend Marc Leder, presidential candidate Mitt Romney shared his thought about the 47% Americans likely to vote for Obama. 

This is what he said "All right -- there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing." 

Mitt Romney, as I have said in my tweet earlier is not a truthful person, he is what he is, playing the devil's advocate.

He is cut from the same cloth as George Bush...... rich and not care a hoot about the less fortunate American people. 

Romney said he has written off that group of voters as he would never be able to convince them to take personal responsibility and care of their lives, not depend on the government too much. 

Mitt Romney mindset is no different from that of Bush. He'll take the same hawkish policy and will widen the budget deficit by increasing military spending and bring back a pugnacious foreign policy that could bring the US into possible arm conflicts with Iran, directly or indirectly, North Korea and high diplomatic tension with China.

He has accused Obama of China coddling and failure to take retaliatory action against China, accusing China of unfair trade practices, theft of intellectual properties and currency manipulator.

Romney's tit-for-tat foreign policy will return the US back to the Bush era of global geopolitical instability. 

China's naval expedition in the East and South China Seas and her overlaying claims over islands and waters of the Spratly, which have similar claims by five other nations is cause for concern.

China's PLA Navy, which used to play second fiddle to the PLA Ground Force has undergone rapid modernization and is now the second largest navy in the world after the US and is moving fast towards becoming a blue-water naval force causing rising fear in Washington.

As a non-American citizen my big concern is not the US domestic policy but its foreign policy that can change global peace and effect countries in non-aligned pacifist region, particularly, Southeast Asian countries. 

The dispute between China and Japan over the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands was one that came nearest to blow.

Diplomatic relations between the two countries has soured to such extent that two top Chinese officials.....Central Bank Governor Zhou Xiochuan and Finance Minister Xie Xuren failed to show up at the IMF and World Bank annual meetings in Tokyo last Friday.The crisis has exacerbated to more than the eyes can see....a diplomatic snub and rising tension.

As Republican president, Mitt Romney may  return to the Bush's years of belligerency, and high probability of new hotspots in the Asia Pacific region , particularly, in the East and South China Sea. The Chinese have been adamant to exert its sovereignty over islands and waters of the Spratly.

At Tuesday debate, Romney was asked by a voter, who said she was undecided, because she is disappointed with the lack of progress in the last four years.She said she attributed much of America's economic and international problems to the failings and missteps of the Bush administration.She also said, Romney being a Republican, she fears a return to the policies of the Bush's years, should Romney win the election.

I was not wrong when I first raised the issue in my post "The US Kickass Foreign Policy And China"  before others expressed the same fear of this new kid coming on the block and a looming spectre of a new world order.

Phnom Penh

The US Kick-Ass Foreign Policy And China

Hantu Laut

He was a bright shining star some four years ago, the impeccable oratory, assertiveness, aplomb and brimming with confidence he won a decisive victory over John McCain in both the electoral and popular vote of the 2008 U.S presidential election.

Watching the debate live over TV when I was in Kathmandu it was the obvious that Mitt Romney had sprung the most unexpected surprise that caught President Obama off guard. The Romney's spell have, somehow, rattled his confidence. His facial expression clearly showed how miffed he was with Romney's unanticipated remarkable performance.

Romney is no dunce. On conclusion of the debate he sent his detractors scurrying for explanation. His moment of triumph speech, much to the anguish of Obama's campaign team, and a big shot in the arm for his team,  narrowed the gap between him and Obama. Even the staunchest Obama supporters must have been miffed by Obama muffed performance.

What happened to the man of 2008? The eloquent speeches, the "yes we can"man and the straight talk that caught not only America but the world's attention. The first black man destined to break white monopoly of the presidency.

Has Obama lost his mojo?

As Mitt Romney narrows the margin and move in for the kill can Obama still resuscitates his dwindling popularity and reignite the spark the man that he was at the next presidential debate due 16 October 2012 and give Romney a run for his money or let Romney overtake him?

Can Obama bounce back?

If Obama loses the next debate, as sure as the sunrise, America will have a new president and with it come new political mindset that can change US foreign policy and the course of world peace. 

Mitt Romney, have decided to accuse Obama of "passive leadership" in his foreign policy, particularly, in the Middle East casting aspersion on Obama's capability as president, inferring the killing of US Libyan Ambassador Christopher Stevens by fanatical Muslims as Obama's lack of will to retaliate.

The world is watching on the possible return of  kick-ass foreign policy and Bush like belligerency that could throw the US into another war if Mitt Romney win the presidency.

Under his presidency Obama only carry on his predecessor's unfinished business and has not caused any new conflicts. He restrained from opening new theatre of war. Though, some of his promises fell short he has been more careful than the previous administration in the handling of crisis with Iran, North Korea and China.

Iran and China are growing threats to U.S. foreign policy. Iran covertly seeking nuclear capability and the Chinese naval excursion in the South China Sea had caused uneasiness in Washington. 

The US have deployed its naval ships in and around the area of possible conflicts in the China Sea. The Sino-Japanese dispute over the Diaoyu Islands brought back ghosts of the Sino-Japanese War. The Americans, who usually are quick to side with Japan have taken a non-interference attitude at the moment but is in a state of readiness should the conflict escalates into open warfare between the two nations.

Some weeks ago Chinese naval vessels stopped oil drilling exploration off the coast of Sarawak. The incident went unreported to avoid unnecessary diplomatic fallout between Malaysia and China. 

The Philippines trying to act tough against China was cowed when the Chinese sent a few research vessels to the disputed waters. This poor country ravaged by every succeeding corrupt governments has no military capability and its claims on the Spartly's islands based on res nullius is not going to impress China at all of its finders keepers territorial claim.

Territorial disputes are hard to resolve unless both parties are prepared to avoid arm conflicts and use peaceful method to settle the dispute.

Malaysia's dispute with Indonesia over Sipadan and Ligitan Islands was settled in the World Court. Malaysia won the case based on terra nullius, the long occupation, administration and settlement of its people on the island. Sovereignty over territory which is terra nullius may be acquired through occupation.

Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad was smart enough to reclaim Layany-Layang in the Spratlys and stationed the navy there. He later allow a holiday resort to be built on the  island. He did it before other countries could lay claim to the island, which was an atoll, reclaimed to form a small island. It is now one of the top dive sites in the region. 

With its aggressive territorial claims spanning the whole of the China sea, from Japan right down to the Paracels and the Spratlys, China will soon have no friends in Asia. Any flare up with any of the countries would not be in China's favour.

China has territorial disputes over the Spratly Islands with Vietnam, Taiwan, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. In the North China Sea it has disputes with Japan and South Korea.

Uncle Sam will not hesitate to give support to any of those countries in the event China is stupid enough to use military force to settle the dispute.

During her recent visit to Bangladesh, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was rumoured to have discussed with Bangladesh President the possibility of setting up another base for the Seventh Fleet for strategic reason, though, they already have a Naval Support Facility for ships and submarines in the Indian Ocean at Diego Garcia. 

This move, true or not, is probably to checkmate the Chinese growing naval presence in the Indian Ocean and to counter China's ambition to set up base in the region.

USS John C.Stennis

The US Seventh Fleet have increased deployment of its ships in the region and as far south as in the South China Sea sent its naval ships regularly on pretext of friendly visits to friendly countries.

USS Makin Island docked at KK Sepangar Naval base

As component force of the US Pacific Fleet it has 50 to 60 ships including aircraft carriers with 350 aircrafts, with bases in Guam, Japan and to lesser extent, Singapore.

Kota Kinabalu, recently had the rare honour of the visit of USS John C Stennis, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier that formed part of the US Pacific Strike Force. 

Jump jets and gunships on USS Makin Island

A few months back the city also received another US naval ship, a Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Makin Island docked at KK Sepangar Naval port. 

USS Makin Island

"Ships like these are sent all over the world really to do two things; one of them to reassure our friends that we support them and Malaysia is an important friend" said the captain of USS John C.Stennis.

A Sea-Knight helicopter on USS Makin Island

That may be just a small part of the truth, the bigger grand plan is gunboat diplomacy and show of force against China rising naval power in the region.


Kuala Lumpur

Mitt Romney's Loose Cannon And A Vixen

Hantu Laut 

Mitt Romney may have too much money and think he can win the election by insulting poor working class America, literally calling them parasites.

Just as well, he is not getting much help from his tempestuous wife. 

Read the two articles below:

Why Is Mitt Romney Such A Loser?

It’s a serious question. On the basis of fundamentals, the race should be a squeaker. The Yale economist Ray Fair’s prediction model, which ignores the opinion polls and just looks at economic factors, currently puts Obama’s share of the popular vote at 49.5 per cent, implying that Romney would almost certainly get a narrow majority in the electoral college and win the election. Because the margin of error in Fair’s forecasting equation is three per cent, he isn’t really predicting a Romney victory; he’s just saying that the race should be close, really close. As of today, it isn’t. Read more.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

A letter from Romney's wife

Dear Fellow-Republican,

I’m not a happy camper.

Over the past few days, some so-called Republicans have taken it upon themselves to lob some pretty harsh words in the direction of my husband. Now, it’s one thing when Mitt gets criticized by the forty-seven per cent of Americans who are parasites sucking at capitalism’s teat. But when former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan calls his campaign “a rolling calamity,” it’s time for Ann Romney to kick some ass.

Which brings me to you. This is not a fundraising appeal. Lord knows this campaign has all the money it needs, especially since Mitt went to Vegas and promised Sheldon Adelson he’d bomb Tehran on Day One. As Mitt’s wife, I’m asking you to pledge something far more valuable:

Your silence. 

By signing the pledge form below, you become an official member of Ann Romney’s Circle of Silence, an élite tier of the Romney for President Campaign. As a member of the C.O.S., you will receive priority ticketing to the Inauguration, as well as a collectible “Loose Lips Sink Mitt” ball gag. All you have to do is shut the freak up until Election Day.

That’s right, for the next forty-six days, I’m asking you to bite your tongue every time Mitt says or does something idiotic. If you think that sounds difficult, welcome to my world.

And Peggy Noonan, if you’re reading this: you want a piece of Ann Romney? Then get in the ring, girlfriend, and I’ll mess you up good.

Vote for Mitt,

Ann

She is sure one hell of a vixen! Good luck Mitt! 

How not to lose friends, if you have a wife like Mrs Romney

Read more.

How Bad Is It for Romney? You Decide

POSTED BY JOHN CASSIDY

The New yorker

This being the Jewish New Year, a time for reflection, I’m going to heed the calls of some of our more conservative readers and refrain from passing another negative judgment on my old pal Mitt Romney. Instead, I’ll merely pass along ten headlines from the weekend. Once you’ve read and digested them, there’s a little multiple-choice test.

1. “POLL FINDS OBAMA IS ERASING ROMNEY’S EDGE ON ECONOMY” (New York Times, 9/14). From the beginning, the best thing Romney has had going for him is a widespread perception that he would do a better job than President Obama in handling the economy and creating jobs. As recently as July, a CBS News/New York Times poll showed him with an eight-percentage-point lead on this key issue, which has now been erased. According to the latest CBS/Times survey, fifty per cent of respondents said that Obama would do a better job handling the economy, and just forty-four per cent said Romney. Among “likely voters,” Obama’s lead was smaller—one point rather than six—but still.

2. “ROMNEY AT RISK OF LOSING EDGE ON DEFICIT” (Washington Post, 9/16). In most polls, the budget is just about the only other issue where Romney has held an advantage. In an April ABC News/Washington Post poll, for example, he held a whopping lead of seventeen percentage points—fifty-four to thirty-seven—on the question of who would handle the deficit better. But in the most recent ABC/Post poll, that lead has narrowed to just three points. Other polls show a similar trend.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/09/how-bad-is-it-for-romney-you-decide.html#ixzz26lqDYowr