Topic of the day: Was Mitt Romney right about Russia?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • FT salt lake city, UT
    March 21, 2014 9:59 a.m.

    Is America more likely to get a nuke sent their way by Russia or have another terrorist attack on our home soil? The answer is obvious.

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    March 20, 2014 4:24 p.m.

    I remember Walt Kelleys' character 'Pogo' saying "We have met the enemy; and he is us".

  • freedomingood provo, Utah
    March 20, 2014 3:19 p.m.

    Broken clock.

    We should have invaded Crimea to make sure Russia didn't. This is republican philosophy. Nay, that is Neocon facist philosophy.

  • riverofsun St.George, Utah
    March 20, 2014 11:13 a.m.

    Have you considered checking with anyone besides Mitt Romney about this?
    Could be lots of various opinions among the many rich and famous out there.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    March 20, 2014 10:45 a.m.

    Romney was spot on. You just can't stand it. Oh and Obama's track record for telling the truth is so good also.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 20, 2014 8:50 a.m.

    clearfield, UT

    But the truth is, and America is now finding it out, Obama was, is, and always will be unqualified to lead anything. He is the biggest Presidential mistake in American history and as time goes by, that truth is becoming more and more apparant to everyone.

    7:19 a.m. March 20, 2014


    But the truth is, and America already knows...

    Pres. Obama was elected in 2008.
    American waited and watched what he did for 4 years,
    and then RE-elected him OVER Mitt Romney.

    If what you say is true --
    and if Obama is the loser you calim he is,
    Where does that place Mitt?

    perhaps you might be the one out of sorts.

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    March 20, 2014 8:47 a.m.

    "Was Mitt Romney right about Russia?"
    Is water wet?

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 20, 2014 8:46 a.m.

    @Noodlekaboodle – “In 1994 the US signed the Budapest Memorandum…”

    I stand corrected… thank you.

    Still not sure what our options are since one of the treaty signatories is refusing to uphold their end of the deal. We’ve spent a lot of lives & treasure being the world’s police force and not always to good results.

    But I am all for making the moral argument that countries should uphold treaties and should pay a penalty when they do not.

    @wrz – “Because of what's next. The Ukraine, then Estonia, Latvia. Then Poland.”

    I assume you don’t mean this in the context of the Domino Theory given that communism is no longer an issue. But even as a slippery slope argument this is dubious.

    Are you suggesting we start a full scale war because of what they MIGHT do?

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 20, 2014 8:17 a.m.


    "....Obama was, is, and always will be unqualified to lead anything...."

    The American electorate had a good four years to size up Obama and then chose to give his a second term. Romney made his case that he had something better to offer but failed to persuade enough voters to buy it. Romney is a smart and capable man who should have known better than to traffic in half truths when he had his shot.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    March 20, 2014 7:19 a.m.

    So many of you are so defensive about Obama. Just keep on attacking Mitt. But the truth is, and America is now finding it out, Obama was, is, and always will be unqualified to lead anything. He is the biggest Presidential mistake in American history and as time goes by, that truth is becoming more and more apparant to everyone. Face it, he's a failure as a leader. He should never have left the classroom. Obama is the Peter Principle times 10.
    And a very good reason why affirmative action is a bad thing.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    March 20, 2014 6:33 a.m.

    There is a huge difference in what a candidate can say, and what the standing leader of a nation can say. To pretend that Romney was right is like saying 4 out of 5 dentist prefer "what ever it was". Prefer what to what is the question.

    We did the whole calling "the axis of evil" thing, and it achieved us nothing. Iran amd North Korea continued on with their nuclear programs, and Chavez called Bush names back in the UN. It achieved nothing. Bush was trying for a "tear down these walls" moment that didn't work. Romney was trying to channel Romney in his calling out of Russia. He also said London wasn't prepared for the Olympics... He said a lot of stuff... that as president of the United States, he would not have been able to say.

    I do not believe for one instant that this administration took Russia as a "friend". That is nonsense. At the same time, I am not sure we have executed very well yet on Ukraine...but time will tell.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    March 19, 2014 9:47 p.m.

    @Irony Guy:
    "And what, pray tell, would Mitt have done differently? Would he, ahem, nuke 'em?"

    For one thing, Mitt would not have canceled the US missile defense complex plans for Poland.

    "To declare Russia as a foe rather than an inconvenient but necessary ally was the wrong thing to do."

    Russia has never been an ally, inconvenient or otherwise. They have always been a 'geopolitical' foe back to the cold war, WWII, and beyond. China is not a foe. In fact, China is a US creditor. Japan is not a foe. The US liberated Japan. Australia is not a foe. Nor is Europe or Antarctica. Thus, if the US has a geopolitical foe it has to be Russia. Mitt was correct.

    @Tyler D:
    "Can anyone explain why we should care if Crimea secedes from the Ukraine.."

    Because of what's next. The Ukraine, then Estonia, Latvia. Then Poland. As for Ukraine, the Ruskies have already seized their military port.

    "Just another useless article from the DN that won't let go of the fact that Romney lost."

    You mean like the Democrats who endlessly blame all bad things happening on Dubya?

  • Unreconstructed Reb Chantilly, VA
    March 19, 2014 6:54 p.m.

    No, a single event does not prove Romney was right. Not even a sequence of events from Georgia to Syria to Crimea make him right. China remains the preeminent rival of the US, and it's not even close.

    What's happening now is a failure of 20 years of foreign policy. Instead of engaging Russia as a partner, we have fed its deep paranoia that we're all out to get it.

    We indulged the mess that was Yeltsin while insisting on economic reforms that resulted in shockwaves that sent millions of Russians into nostalgia for the good old Soviet days.

    We ignored the resentment we created in Russians who perceived us as arrogant victors eager to take advantage of them.

    We viewed the dilapidated Russian military with glee instead of working for mutual security cooperation.

    We ostracized it when integrating the rest of the Soviet Bloc into the EU and NATO.

    We naively ignored Russia's kleptocracy with misplaced optimism in the inevitable triumph of democracy.

    We failed to see the rise of Putin, a man we didn't understand whose objectives were never aligned with ours.

    We've missed our window of opportunity to make good with Russia.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    March 19, 2014 6:31 p.m.

    Precisely what would Mitt have done if he was president?
    I'll answer it for you: Not. One. Thing.

  • Objectified Tooele, UT
    March 19, 2014 6:18 p.m.

    @ Noodlekaboodle:

    Spend some time learning before posting. Romneycare was/is not Obamacare.

    Romney didn't make unfulfilled lies about his program. Obama did and does.
    Romney's program had the layout kinks fixed before being released. Obamacare is still a work in progress 6 months later.
    Romney's program was created as a local state-sized program, and therefore workable. ObamaCare is trying to socialistically swallow the country and is economically imploding as a result.

    Romney never once said his program was "terrible". If so, when? I'd like some proof you're not still making things up to defend your personal ideology.

    @ GaryO:

    Though some undoubtedly exist, it's difficult to immediately find Obama's wrong quotes toward Russia because he's so passive regarding them. He often refuses to take a stand.

    Russia (Putin) has him intimidated and most countries of the world are now recognizing it. Putin made him look weak in Syria after his red-line statement and then later in dealing with Iran in not receiving anything in return from one-sided negotiations. Iran is still laughing about that as they proceed unabated with their nuclear program.

    And so it continues...

  • Objectified Tooele, UT
    March 19, 2014 5:32 p.m.

    @ LDS Liberal:

    Your obsession with liberal ideology apparently makes it difficult to recognize noble causes. It doesn't matter if one is willing to sacrifice for a noble cause if it can't be recognized.

    You obviously never spent much time learning about Romney, which makes it extremely ironic you would even try to say what he would or wouldn't do in any given situation. In truth, you really have no idea whatsoever what Mitt Romney would currently be doing as president.

    That fact you think Romney "trampled the Constitution" shows how very little you actually know of the man.
    In actuality, he's one of the few high level politicians who would've sacrificed his personal political career to save it.
    To the contrary, the current administration seems willing to sacrifice the Constitution in order to save it's political agenda.

    @ GaryO:

    Since you bring up "filling the air with useless blather", your personal example is one of the best I've seen. A lot written, but almost none correctly stated.

    Russia continues opposing the USA at every turn... with Syria, Iran, Ukraine... all AFTER 9/11.

    Romney is actually moderate, less boisterous, much more correct than most politicians.

  • Objectified Tooele, UT
    March 19, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    @ Schnee:

    In the grand scheme of things, the differences between Obama and Romney would've been substantial and very noticeable in their results. To think otherwise is naive. Their ideologies are mostly like night and day. Romney is a get-it-done sort of person. Obama... well, not so much. He's more of a smooth talker and vacationer.

    @ Mike in Sandy:

    Unless you were being sarcastic, that's a great example of exactly what a low-information voter is.

    @ two-bits:

    Yes, he was right. And yes, it most certainly does matters. It matters a lot in that we can use this as an opportunity to learn from our mistakes for the next election.

    @ slcdenizen:

    You bias is unbelievable. To the point that all credibility becomes lost.

    @ Craig Clark:

    Russia has been and continues to be our foe. They were with North Korea, Syria, Iran and now regarding Ukraine.

    @ OtisBDriftwood:

    If it doesn't matter, then why take the time to both read and comment on the article? It obviously matters to both you and lots of other people posting.

    @ LDS Liberal:

    Yes, it does depend on how one looks at it. In your case, not correctly.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    March 19, 2014 4:28 p.m.

    Can anybody give an Obama quote that shows he was "Wrong about Russia?"


    I didn't think so.

  • Back Talk Federal Way, WA
    March 19, 2014 2:19 p.m.

    to do anything other than treat Russia as our most "Geopolitical foe" and never trusting them as we did during the official cold war is a mistake. Lesson Learned. Now go forward and try and stop the Russian attempt to recover their lost empire whereever possible.

    Russia never helped our position with other countrys anyway.

  • DEW Cougars Sandy, UT
    March 19, 2014 2:12 p.m.

    Why does it matter if he was right? He's not the president. I would have love Mitt to be President RIGHT NOW!

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:49 p.m.

    Was Mitt right about Obamacare when he implemented it in Massachusetts? Or when he changed his mind, and said it was terrible, even though it's a very popular program(that he created) in Massachusetts.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 19, 2014 1:38 p.m.

    @2 bits – “Now they are sandwiched between Russian Crimea and Russia itself.”

    Looking at a map of the area I’m not seeing what you apparently are. They are bordered by a number of countries to the west and have a number of ports in non-Crimean Ukraine (e.g. Odessa). Even Kiev has river access to the Black Sea.

    What am I missing here?

    But assuming you’re right on all accounts, what do you suggest we do? The Europeans don’t seem interested in doing anything substantial, although I like what they’re doing in the area of international transparency laws (i.e., a public registry for multi-national corporations) in an effort to stamp out corruption, money laundering, etc… which given the current state of the Russian economy may do far more to isolate (and change) their regime than any military pin prick will do.

    And Putin talks big but as Sochi made abundantly clear, Russia is still little more than a third world county with a gas pump and a bomb. If they go too far, a full European isolation would ruin their economy.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:31 p.m.

    Mitt was right about ...

    The economy
    Tax reform

    Yes Mitt was right about all of this but who listened to what Mitt was saying?? Maybe 20% of America. The other 80% were more caught up in the cool cat president who appears on Leno and Letterman and gives free stuff out to everyone. I'll tell you another thing Mitt was right about...the 47% comment he made about people who see themselves as victims and are owed a living by the government. The dummbed down America of today is only a faded shadow of what it was even 30 years ago. The real question is how much longer can that "dummbed down America" continue to exist living off of other peoples money and pretending the world is a safe place???

  • Ken Sandy, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:25 p.m.

    LDS Liberal,

    I too am a veteran

    I too would throw myself on a grenade for a noble cause


    I'm LDS also

    I've noticed you post almost word for word the same thing as some other poster who goes by Open Minded Mormon. You also employ a similar formatting, a very unusual formatting, as does he/she.

    Probably just coincidence though

    Isn't it interesting that these liberals want to tell us it doesn't matter that Mitt was right on and Obama as usual didn't have a clue when he was talking about Russia during the presidential race. Yes, it does matter that Obama once again has shown he doesn't know what he's talking about. And yes, we'll continue to remind people when Mitt was right about something.

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:11 p.m.

    @Tyler D
    In 1994 the US signed the Budapest Memorandum, a treaty where Ukraine(and Kazakhstan and Belarus) agreed to give up nuclear weapons that were left over from the USSR days. So we(and to be fair also Russia) agree to protect Ukraine's sovereignty.

  • slcdenizen t-ville, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:10 p.m.

    @ 2 bits

    Wrong on both fronts. He used the term "foe" and referred to it in the context of America's world position, not Europe's.

    The reason our economy is stagnant isn't because businesses don't trust the president. That claim does not even deserve a response. The economy functions fluidly with your spending increasing my income and vice versa. There is unused capital and high unemployment, with the resulting loss of transactions. It's very simple and doesn't require voodoo explanations that are coming from your side of the aisle.

    Perhaps if our discussions were more rigorous and false assumptions more easily dispelled, our political atmosphere would be less toxic. American conservatism was once a viable and coherent political philosophy but has since devolved into conspiracy-mongering and hate-filled diatribes toward the unpure. It's a shame our news outlets have become an echo chamber for it.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:08 p.m.

    It depends on which audience he was speaking to. I have no idea what Mitt said about Russia since he said so many different things about it. Flip Flop! He could never make up his mind. So chances are, he's both right and wrong.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:51 p.m.

    Ostriches put their head in the sand when they are afraid of what they see, so they can pretend it isn't going to hurt them.

    Obama lovers here look just like ostriches.

    The still ailing economy, that would be the Obama economy, is a dead weight on our foreign policy. It is hard to argue for a better way when we aren't exhibiting one. Pretty sad when the Russian economy looks inviting. Of course the armed Russian soldiers undoubtedly had some effect on the vote too.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    March 19, 2014 12:47 p.m.

    The bottom line is that Obama thought to appease Putin by derailing the defensive missile system in Poland, going on his infamous apology tour, sending Hillary to Russia to do the stupid "re-set" button embarrassment and promising Russia that he would be more "flexible after his election". Obama's mistake was that he thought all this was a message of co-operation and thus currying the good will of Russia and our enemies. Putin and our other enemies see it as weakness which they are now fully exploiting! Which nation will Putin annex next?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:46 p.m.

    I feel like quoting the immortal words of Sec of State Hillary Clinton... "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans," Clinton said. "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"

    At this point, what difference does it make if they were right or wrong???

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    March 19, 2014 12:43 p.m.

    Yes, I know, Romney filled the air with useless blather. And now "Conservatives" are braying about him being "right?" Well, even a broken clock is right twice a day, and Romney has not been right nearly that often.

    I really don't buy that Russia is America's greatest "foe." Russia didn't knock down the twin towers.

    Was Romney right? Not really. Russia is a country with its own interests. Sure they and we (the US) are opposed on certain issues, but we share the same greatest "foe." And that is Islamic radicalism of the kind that created 911 and and the Muslim terrorist attacks in Russia.

    If radical elements in the Middle East (including those in control of governments) had their way, they would wipe us "the great Satan" off the face of the earth, even if they destroyed themselves in the process.

    And Russia actually has that ability and does not use it.

    No Romney is just another loud and boisterous "Conservative." He's politically right wing, but as usual, far from right.

    That doesn't mean that Russian could not become America's greatest foe. With Romney as President, that certainly would have already happened.

  • lex loci Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:43 p.m.

    Irony guy makes Romney's point. Today there is nothing we can do. And that is why Putin acted and that is why Crimea fell.

    The time for effective action was long ago, when even the likes of Sarah Palin were predicting Russia's incursion into Ukraine. Obama's foreign policy is feckless and the Ukrainian's are living its consequences.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:41 p.m.

    Tyler D,
    Yes, yes... this is a win for the pro-western Ukrainians.

    Now they are sandwiched between Russian Crimea and Russia itself.

    Their ports are controlled by the Russian military. IF they expect to have any form of economy or trade with the West, or even get food or fuel to the pro-western Ukrainians... they need Russian permission. A Russian block-aid of Ukraine would be simple at this point. They could starve them out in a heartbeat.

    How long do you think pro-western Ukrainians will remain pro-western Ukrainians? Or have an independent country, or an independent economy? (hint... it's almost over for them).

    I would be getting out now if I were them. Many already are.

  • Christopher B Ogden, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:40 p.m.

    And once again barack was completely wrong

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:39 p.m.

    It depends on how you look at it...

    a "President" Romney would be too busy deal with Russia --

    With all the troops still in Afghanistan,
    Those he would have never pulled out of Iraq,
    The newest forces he just deployed to Syria,
    the gearing up for massive invasion of Iran,
    to begin
    the planning for the liberation of Crimea from Mother Russia.

    [all without raising taxes, paying down the Deficiet, and creating new jobs]

    It would seem the ONLY GOP plan for creating American jobs is to just keep sending the poor into the military and sending them far away into conflicts around the globe.

    Who's...buying up all those Armies and Navies?
    because, after all -- you can buy anything in this world with money.

    FYI --
    I'm a veteran.
    Like Mormon or Capt. Moroni,
    I will gladly throw myself on a gernade for a righteous and noble cause.


    What is the America interest in Crimea?

    Our Borders?
    Our People?
    Our rights?
    Our Constitution?

    Thanks for Trampling the Constitution -- Mitt.

  • Canadiandy Alberta, CA
    March 19, 2014 12:40 p.m.

    Hey Obama,

    The 30s are on the phone, they want their foreign policy back.

    How would Romney have addressed Russian aggression? With serious economic sanctions. Barack's sanction is probably refusing to allow Russia to buy adspace on his Healthcare website. Ever. Although after the next election they could maybe talk about it.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 19, 2014 12:27 p.m.

    Who would not want to be under the US umbrella. A conflict occurs and we spend all of our money and lives fighting for them.

    We are in debt. We borrow money from China to fight wars.

    At what point do we stop going out of our way to involve ourselves in every world conflict?

    This mindset must change. One way to change it is to pay TODAY, for the wars that we get into TODAY.

    If they are worth our lives and our money, pay for them TODAY. Cut other spending or raise taxes.

    Then we will see how "necessary" all of these "conflicts" are to the American people.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 19, 2014 12:20 p.m.

    Romney didn't declare them a "foe". He said they were a ego-political threat, not just to the US, but mostly to their neighbors in Europe and Asia (and obviously they are). That doesn't declare them our foe. It means we know who they are, and don't see them with the rose-colored-glasses Obama did.


    It doesn't matter if Romney was right or not. He's not President.


    People say it wouldn't matter if Romney or Obama won. I agree on foreign policy. But I think on the economy... there would be a BIG difference.

    I think the leaders of nations would be gathering around Romney at economic summits wanting to hear what he has to say, instead of our President sitting in the corner with not much to say, and nobody really caring what he has to say.

    I think trade with the huge markets in the United States would be seen as an asset and used to attract friends (even Russia and her satellite nations).

    I think it's presumptive to assume that Romney would have gotten us into a war every time something happened.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 19, 2014 12:07 p.m.

    Can anyone explain why we should care if Crimea (populated mostly by Russians) secedes from the Ukraine (apparently by overwhelming popular vote)? Seems like this could be a win-win for everyone including the remaining pro-western Ukrainians (now free from the shackles of the Crimean vote) to elect who they want without Russian interference and form closer ties to the EU.

    I mean other than a conservative obsession to constantly show the world how Reagan-like tough we are, I don’t see what the problem is here, and I certainly don’t see how this negatively impacts our national interest.

    I’m open to being convinced otherwise…

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 19, 2014 11:52 a.m.

    During the Presidential campaign, the wars Iraq and Afghanistan were working to Obama’s advantage because they were winding down after a decade. In an effort to divert attention from those wars, Romney cited Russia as America’s number one geopolitical foe. It wasn’t true then. It isn’t true now. It only seems true to some at the moment because of Russia’s seizure of Crimea.

  • slcdenizen t-ville, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:47 a.m.

    To declare Russia as a foe rather than an inconvenient but necessary ally was the wrong thing to do. He could just as easily have labeled China as our greatest geopolitical foe and when they moved ships toward the disputed territory to the north of Japan the discussion would have been the same as it is regarding Crimea. Mr. Romney told one half-truth for every three false statements during his campaign. Let's not get carried away and revise things too much.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:43 a.m.

    Obviously he was right. We know that now. It's not a question anymore.

    The question is... does it matter?

    The answer is... NO.

    What does it matter if he was right or not? ZERO!

  • Mike in Sandy Sandy, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:41 a.m.

    If Mitt said it, It's wrong.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:39 a.m.

    In the grand scheme of things nothing would be substantially different between an Obama Administration and a Romney Administration on this matter. The Romney one would be more antagonistic towards Russia but since we still wouldn't choose war anyway a more blusterous bluff or a missile defense shield in Poland doesn't do anything to deter Russia from its' current course of action. (There's also a chance we'd be less able to even bluff if Romney got us involved in a war with either Iran or Syria, the latter would be more supported by conservatives if a Republican was proposing it than when Obama was proposing a limited air campaign similar to that used in Libya).

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    March 19, 2014 11:36 a.m.

    And what, pray tell, would Mitt have done differently? Would he, ahem, nuke 'em?

  • raybies Layton, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:34 a.m.