Mitt Romney should be the next President of the United States (continued)

"I argue that Ron Paul has far more than just an interest in the economy. Politically speaking, Paul has more economical experience than Romney, only his is at the federal legislative level instead of at a state executive capacity. Though I agree that endorsements alone do not qualify a candidate for the presidency, Paul's experience as well as endorsements from multitudes of prestigious experts in the economic field speaks loudly for Paul's economic principles." - The difference, however, between legislative experience and executive experience is huge. Ron Paul learned how to pick out the good ideas from the bad ones. In that respect, he understands what may be good for the economy. His lack of executive experience however is what I feel makes him less qualified to revive our economy. Ron Paul has never had to manage an economy. He has only helped decide how it should be managed. Romney however, not only has helped decide how an economy should be managed, but he has manged one. He knows what to expect. He knows how the economy changes and reacts to certain stimuli. Romney has hands-on experience that Ron Paul just doesnt have. "I agree that a candidate MUST HAVE experience in the economy, but I argue that the candidate MUST HAVE experience in more than the economic field alone. If you apply this logic to military affairs, Romney is in now way qualified to be commander in chief because he has no military experience. The Bush Administration is totally lacking of military experience, which explains all of the "unforeseen consequences" of the war, such as the Iraqi insurgency. Those within and around the government with military experience advised against thrusting our nation into war in the first place, as well as The UN, and every country in the Persian Gulf. Like Bush, Romney is out of touch with the military and the vast majority of Americans. Ron Paul not only is against the war and is therefore potentially appealing to the majority of Americans, but he also gets more donations from active military personal than any other candidate." - I will give you that Romney is not the most experienced candidate when it comes to military, but Ron Paul is no Eisenhower either. His only military experience is that a flight surgeon. That hardly resembles that of a field commander. Being entangled with the military myself, all I can say about Ron Paul's experience is that he learned how to take orders, not how to give them. He never had to command a battle, or lead troops into a conflict. He is no more qualified to command our military than Romney. The only jump Ron Paul has on Romney militarily speaking is that Ron Paul could surgically operate on wounded soldiers. If thats the case than I give the trophy to Romney who has at least commanded the Massachussetts State Gaurd... "The attacks on 9/11 were committed by a hand full of Saudi thugs. How will our military presence in Iraq prevent another couple dozen extremists from entering the country? Granted, we haven't had an attack on American soil since 9/11, but that's not because we've kept the extremists so tied up with our military presence that they can't spare a couple dozen more radicals to fly across the pond to strike us. The people who are claiming that the terrorists are going to follow us home are the same people (lacking of military experience) who claimed that Iraq had WMDs, links to al Qaeda and 9/11, and that they were an eminent threat to our national security. They try to paint this picture that extremists will follow us back in droves and terrorize our cities. The problems of today are not going to be solved by those who created them. Even if terrorists wanted to follow us home, if our military was actually protecting this country instead of being spread all over the planet like butter, they wouldn't be any more of a threat than they are right now. In fact, we would be much safer. The Sunnis and the Shiites have been battling each other for centuries, and they will continue to do so whether we're there or not. It's far more likely that, if they continue to fight, they will go back to fighting each other when we pull out. The true threat to our national security is maintaining our presence overseas which gives the extremists incentives to continue the blowback the CIA mentions in the 9/11 Commission Report." - I will give you that the 9/11 attacks were executed by Saudi thugs, but thats not the only group we are fighting now. We have the whole of radical Jihadism writhing with hatred. Now, if one terrorist group was pissed enough to attack us before we agitated radical islam, how hard would it be to believe that all of these terrorist groups would strike now? Im not talking about 9/11s either. Im talking about biological warfare, cyber-hacking such as firesales, and violent riots from domestic supporters. This will follow us home on way or another, whether we are fist-fighting Osama Bin Laden or texting "stfu" to his cell phone. "Unfortunately, it's far too late for the US to save face on that one. Our CIA has declassified information under the Freedom of Information Act going back to the period between the end of WWII and 1983 about American activity in foreign countries. There is a very long list of regimes our CIA has helped overthrow, assassinations, coups, etc, and many of these countries ended up war-torn. Vietnam would be one of the most blaring examples. It is because of this meddling in Middle Eastern affairs our enemies believe we struck first, and have continued the blowback mentioned by the CIA." - Its obvious that the United States as screwed up both in the distant past and within the last decade. That doesnt mean that we need to keep up the trend. The worst possible outcome we could have in this war is to have walked out leaving Iraq with less stability than it had before, and leaving it to an inevitable civil war that will cost the lives of millions of people. We would be dooming all of the middle-east to decades of incredible violence even greater than what they are feeling now. Worst of all...that would come back to haunt us. If we leave the job unfinished now, we will just be back to finish it later.