Confronting a Republican Party that is divided on matters of war, the Texas governor is pretending to agree with everyone
In the Republican Party, there are deep disagreements about foreign policy, and they're ultimately going to play a role in the GOP primary. The contrasting approaches at issue are perhaps best understood by comparing some recent statements offered on the campaign trail. Let's take a look.
Unilateralism or Multilateralism
GOP Candidate A: "It's not our interest to go it alone. We respect our allies and we must always seek to engage them in military missions"
GOP Candidate B: "We must be willing to act when it is time to act. We cannot concede the
moral authority of our nation to multilateral debating societies, and
when our interests are threatened American soldiers should be led by
Interventionism or Restraint
GOP Candidate A: "I do not believe that America should fall subject to a foreign policy of military adventurism. We should only risk shedding American blood and spending American treasure when our vital interests are threatened."
GOP Candidate B: "As the 10th anniversary of the attacks of 911 approach, we must renew our commitment to taking the fight to the enemy wherever they are before they strike at home. We should always look to build coalitions among the nations to protect the mutual interests of freedom loving people."