|
Both candidates said that military action would be a last resort, and shied away from explicitly saying an Iranian attack against Israel would be an attack on America itself. Obama, however, threatened the "clock is ticking" and the United States and its allies are monitoring the red line where Iran's nuclear ambitions reach the point of no return.
"We're not going to allow Iran to perpetually engage in negotiations that lead nowhere," Obama said.
Regarding Afghanistan, Romney actually shifted his previous positions to align more closely with the president. Both candidates now explicitly say 2014 will mark a significant withdrawal of troops from the region and a decrease of military action. Both candidates support the use of military drones to attack suspected militants in countries where the United States is not technically at war, such as Pakistan and Yemen.
Obama escaped criticism over civilian deaths by the drones and the huge increase in military casualties during his term. Of the 2,141 service members killed in Afghanistan over the past 11 years, 70 percent died during the Obama presidency. Under either an Obama or Romney administration, a residual military force would likely be left in the country, continuing to cost American taxpayers billions of dollars each year. Already, $90 billion has been spent on reconstruction efforts alone, with little to show for it.
Both candidates asserted that America's longest war was going well and that it was time to bring troops home.
"We've seen progress over the past several years," Romney said. "The surge has been successful, and the training program is proceeding at pace. There are now a large number of Afghan security forces, 350,000, which are ready to step in to provide security, and we're going to be able to make that transition by the end of 2014."
Obama said Al Qaeda's core leadership in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan has been decimated and that it was "time to do some nation-building here at home."
The night's sharpest exchange, and where the candidates most differed, came on military spending. Romney, as he has done at other points in his campaign, accused Obama of neglecting the military. In particular, he claimed that the U.S. Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917.
"This, in my view, is the highest responsibility of the president of the United States, which is to maintain the safety of the American people," Romney said. "And I will not cut our military budget by a trillion dollars, which is the combination of the budget cuts that the president has as well as the [proposed] sequestration cuts. That, in my view, is making our future less certain and less secure. I won't do it."
Obama pounced, mocking Romney for being out of touch with modernization.
"You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines," Obama countered.
In the end, the political sparring over foreign policy seems to have little impact on voters. Obama was more aggressive and scored more points than Romney, but polls have remained unchanged. Voters are concerned more with the domestic economy and jobs than they are with a nuclear Iran and unrest in Syria and Libya.
With a strong showing in the first debate, Romney made a good impression on undecided voters, looking assertive and presidential. He needed only to play defense in the second and third debates, and not make any major gaffes. By that measure, he succeeded. Obama faced huge pressure after a dismal performance in the first debate sent his poll numbers plummeting. He hit back hard in the second and continued his strong showing in the third. Is it enough to win back voters? History suggests that third debates do little to sway elections. Obama won the battle, but he may still lose the war.
The author is a freelance writer in New York City
Email us at: yanwei@bjreview.com | 
