(PNN) PPSIMMONS News and Ministry Network: FACT CHECK: Fox News Examines Some Key Statements From Last Night’s Foreign Policy Debate

President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney faced off last night in the third and final presidential debate – focusing on foreign policy – at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida.

The Fox News Brainroom provides us with a fact check and in-depth analysis of some of the key claims made by the two men.

Topic: Military spending

Obama: “We spend more on our military than the next 10 countries combined.”

PROBABLY TRUE.

* As the Washington Post clarifies, it is REALLY difficult to get (a) reliable and (b) comparable figures:

“However, raw numbers can be misleading. The official Chinese figure of less than $100 billion a year is believed to be dramatically understated; SIPRI pegs it at around $100 billion. The Defense Department believes the real number for the Chinese military to be $150 billion.

Even that doesn’t tell the whole story, because it costs China less money to buy the same goods and services as the United States. Carl Conetta, co-director of the Project on Defense Alternatives, who edits a Web page on Chinese military power, says that using a rough calculation of purchasing power parity, the correct figure for Chinese defense spending would be as much as $240 billion.

That’s still less than the United States spends, of course, but it is an indication of how fuzzy some of these calculations can be. The comparison to China also does not include the fact that because it is not a global power, Beijing may actually spend more on its military in the western Pacific than does the United States.

There is also a question of whether one counts just the base military budget or also the spending on the wars such as in Iraq and Afghanistan.

An administration official said the president’s statistic was derived from an examination of a classified version of the CIA Factbook, which presumably would show higher levels of spending for countries such as China.

If war spending is included, then the U.S. military budget is larger than those of the next 12 countries combined, the official said. If only base budget outlay is counted, the U.S. military budget is larger than those of the next eight countries. So the White House decided to split the difference, which is why the president said the U.S. budget was larger than the budgets of “roughly” the next 10 countries combined.

[source: Washington Post]

Topic: Romney’s investments in a Chinese oil company working in Iran

Obama: “And the fact is, while we were coordinating an international coalition to make sure these sanctions were effective, you were still invested in a Chinese state oil company that was doing business with the Iranian oil sector.”

CORRECT. (Romney will say the investment was in a blind trust over which he had no control, despite the fact that the blind trust liquidated these investments right about the time Romney ratcheted up his anti-China rhetoric).

* Starting in October 2009, Romney’s trust made three investments in CNOOC (the Chinese national oil company) with significant dealings with Iran. He sold the investments in August 2011 for a profit of about $11,000.

* As the Financial Times reported on September 24, 2012:

“Mitt Romney’s trust invested in Cnooc at a time when the US was growing concerned about the Chinese oil company’s multibillion-dollar dealings with Tehran, according to the 2011 tax return released by the Republican nominee for president.

…

Mr. Romney has repeatedly said he had no control over the decisions by the blind trust that held the investments, which are controlled by a trustee named R. Bradford Malt.

…

The first investment by Mr. Romney’s trust in Cnooc Limited, in October of 2009, was made about seven months after the group’s state-owned parent company was widely reported to have signed a deal with Iran to develop the huge North Pars gasfield for an LNG export project.

Mr. Romney’s blind trust made two subsequent investments in Cnooc and then sold all the shares – for a profit of about $11,000, in August of 2011.

That was about the same period when Mr. Romney began ratcheting up his campaign rhetoric against China.”

[source: Romney’s China holdings criticized, by Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Financial Times, September 24, 2012]

Topic: The killing of Usama bin Laden

Obama: “Romney said he would not move ‘heaven and earth’ to get bin Laden.”

PARTIALLY TRUE. He used those words, but the quote ignores the larger context.

* As Politifact states:

“An Obama campaign ad suggested Mitt Romney wouldn’t have aggressively pursued Osama bin Laden by citing Romney’s statement that, “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.”

The Obama campaign is right that Romney used those words, but by cherry-picking them, it glosses over comments describing his broader approach. Romney said he wanted to pursue all of al-Qaida, not just its leaders.”

[source: Politifact]

Topic: Trade with China

Obama: “We doubled exports to China since I took office.”

NOT QUITE – an increase of 49% from 2008 to 2011 ($69.733 billion versus $103.94 billion in 2011) and we are on track for an increase to approximately $105 billion in 2012.

* This also ignores that fact that, despite our increase in exports, our trade deficit with China has increased under President Obama (from $268 billion in 2008 to $295 billion in 2011 – an increase of about 10%).

Year Exports to China Trade deficit
2008 $69.733 billion -$268.040 billion
2009 $69.497 billion -$226.877 billion
2010 $91.881 billion -$273.0632 billion
2011 $103.939 billion -$295.423 billion
2012 (thru Aug) $69.9995 billion -$203.1215 billion

[source: U.S. Census]

Related Debate Posts:

Topic: Would Romney have let U.S. auto companies go bankrupt?

Romney: “I said that we would provide guarantees, and — and that was what was able to allow these companies to go through bankruptcy, to come out of bankruptcy. Under no circumstances would I do anything other than to help this industry get on its feet. And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry, of course not. Of course not.”

CORRECT.

* In his New York Times op-ed, Romney called for a managed bankruptcy, with the federal government providing guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing.

* Here is the relevant part of the op-ed:

“The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.

In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.”

[source: New York Times op-ed, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt," by MITT ROMNEY, November 18, 2008]

* He further clarified that he was not prepared to let the companies liquidate in a November 28, 2008 interview with Wolf Blitzer:

Blitzer: Richard Wagoner, the GM CEO says if they were to do any of those things, go into Chapter 11 or file for bankruptcy, it would even make matters worse because people would be reluctant to buy a GM car knowing that they could have problems getting spare parts or warranty guarantees along those lines. Is he right?

Romney: Well actually, him going to Washington and saying that the companies are going to disappear unless they get $25 billion is already a signal to consumers.

Going into Chapter 11, I’m not convinced would have that big of an impact, particularly if Washington were to say quite clearly we’re not going to let these companies go away. We’re going to guarantee the warranties for anybody who buys a U.S. made automobile this time going forward for some period of time.

We’re going to help with the post-bankruptcy financing that allows these companies to thrive and grow. We basically need to restructure them and then help them get back on their feet and make sure that their future is bright. But just putting money into them as is, is not going to help anybody and frankly is going to lead to these companies losing market share long term and perhaps facing liquidation way down the road. That’s the wrong way. That we don’t want to see.

Blitzer: If these companies don’t restructure very, very quickly, are you willing to let the U.S. auto industry, in effect, die?

Romney: Well, I don’t want to see it die, that’s the wrong course and the union and management and the state officials are not going to let that happen. There’s no reason for that to happen. The U.S. automobile industry is making very good cars these days. They’ve been, actually, really remarkable in designing cars like the Chevy Malibu, the Ford Mustang. There are some — you know, the Chrysler 500.

These are really innovative designs, they’re ranked very well. The companies don’t have to go away. But what has to go away is the excess burden we’ve laid on them and that’s the burden that’s the cause of managers that show up in corporate aircraft and eat in executive dining rooms. That spreads the resentment throughout the company that makes it difficult for labor to do what needs to be done on that front. These are companies that are not going to go away. We shouldn’t have them go away. But we should help them get on their feet so they can compete and finally beat back Toyota and Nissan and Honda and BMW, all of whom make cars right here in the U.S.

[source: Interview With Mitt Romney, November, 23 2008, CNN]

Topic: The 2009 protests in Iran

Romney said that Obama was “silent” on the protests in Iran.

FALSE. However, similar to Libya, there was an evolving language and response to the protests in Iran by President Obama.

On June 13, 2009, Iran announced that incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won a landslide victory, prompting mass protests from supporters of the key opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi.

Here is how Obama put it in an interview with CNBC on June 16: “Although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual positions may not be as great as has been advertised. We’ve got long-term interests in having them not weaponize nuclear power and stop funding organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas. And that would be true whoever came out on top in this election.”

Obama finally toughened his stance a week later, on June 23, after more violence erupted.

“The United States and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, the beatings and imprisonments of the last few days,” Obama said. “I strongly condemn these unjust actions, and I join with the American people in mourning each and every innocent life that is lost.”

Topic: How many ships does the U.S. Navy want?

Romney stated that the Department of Defense has asked for 313 ships and President Obama only approved the building of 282.

FALSE

* In February 2006, the Navy presented to Congress a goal of achieving and maintaining a fleet of 313 ships, consisting of certain types and quantities of ships. On March 28, 2012, the Department of Defense (DOD) submitted to Congress an FY2013 30-year (FY2013-FY2042) shipbuilding plan that includes a new goal for a fleet of about 310-316 ships.

The Navy is conducting a force structure assessment, to be completed later this year, that could lead to a refinement of this 310-316-ship plan.

Because of the retirement and decommissioning of some ships and the building process of new ones, the Navy’s size is constantly varying.

The Navy reached even lower levels during the Bush years, hitting a bottom of 279 in FY 2007.

FY
2005………282
2006………281
2007………279
2008………282
2009………285
2010………288
2011………284

With programs like the Littoral Combat Ship increasing production, shipbuilding is higher now than in previous years

FY…………..ships procured/requested
07……………5
08……………3
09……………8
10……………7
11……………10
12……………11
13……………10

President Obama has never said that the Navy’s size should be at 282 ships, and the size of the Navy will increase, not decrease.

[Source: Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress, 8/9/2012 CRS]

Topic: U.S. troops in Iraq

Did Mitt Romney say recently that he wanted to keep troops in Iraq?

MOSTLY TRUE.

Romney’s Remarks at Virginia Military Institute in Lexington, Virginia, 10/8/2012:

“In Iraq, the costly gains made by our troops are being eroded by rising violence, a resurgent Al Qaida, the weakening of democracy in Baghdad, and the rising influence of Iran. And yet America’s ability to influence events for the better in Iraq has been undermined by the abrupt withdrawal of our entire troop presence. The president has tried. He tried, but he also failed to secure a responsible and gradual drawdown that would have better secured our gains.

The president has also failed to lead in Syria, where more than 30,000 men, women and children have been massacred by the Assad regime over the past 20 months. Violent extremists are flowing into the fight. Our ally Turkey has been attacked. And the conflict threatens stability in the region.”

[Source: CQ]

Topic: The defense budget under Obama

OBAMA: (paraphrase) Defense budgets have gone up every year under my administration.

TRUE. But in the FY2013 request, the base budget will decrease

Defense Base Budgets Under President Obama
…………………
FY2009………513.2
FY2010………527.9
FY2011………528.2
FY2012………530.6
FY2013………524.4 (request)

[Source: Defense Department Comptroller]

2) Obama: “First of all, the sequester is not something I proposed, it’s something that Congress proposed. It will not happen.”

In fact, the idea may have come in part from Obama’s current chief of staff, Jack Lew. The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward reported in his book “The Price of Politics” that Lew, then-Office of Management and Budget director, and White House Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors broached the idea of a defense sequester as a threat to Republicans during negotiations over raising the debt ceiling.

The resulting Budget Control Act, which allowed the U.S. to borrow more money but set caps on federal spending over the next 10 years, was passed with bipartisan support in the House and Senate, and signed into law by the president. It led to the creation of the deficit-reduction “supercommittee,” which failed to agree on $1.2 trillion in debt reduction and as such triggered the automatic onset of those cuts on Jan. 2 – unless Congress averts them. Rep. Paul Ryan, Romney’s running mate, voted for the Budget Control Act.

Obama’s avowal on sequester that “it will not happen” is the strongest statement that he or any Democrat has made in the more than year-long standoff over the potential cuts, but it wasn’t immediately clear whether Obama was taking his veto threat off the table or expressing confidence that lawmakers could reach an agreement when they return next month.

[Source: Politico]

The Moderator Scorecard

At all three debates, President Obama spoke for longer than Mitt Romney. However, last night’s forum was nearly even, with Obama speaking for 42:11, just 41 seconds more than Romney.

According to the CNN debate clock, Obama spoke for a total of eight minutes longer at the three debates combined. Last night, CBS’ Bob Schieffer interrupted Mitt Romney eight times, while cutting off the president six times.

Who do you think was the best moderator? VOTE.

source http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/23/fact-check-foreign-policy-debate/