there is a big ugly head blocking parts of it

the RW defense of Romney is a bit convoluted (of course) but goes something like this...

Iran wants to destroy Israel
Israel is on the Mediterranean coast
Iran can destroy Israel by seizing naval control of the Eastern Mediterranean
Iran can seize control of the Eastern Med by using Syrian ports

Thus, Syria is Iran's route to the sea it's trying to control

Of course, if RMoney really wants to argue the geopolitical significance of Syria in terms of military control of the Mediterranean he had ample time to lay out the argument. Seems like he wanted to talk about anything but foreign policy last night...

The actual issue is getting Iran's gas to the Mediterranean Sea to help remove Europe's dependence on Russia for gas supplies. It needs to go either via Iraq and Syria or Iraq and Turkey. The Syrian route would make the most sense.

I agree that thinking about moving gas makes more sense, but they're not making the more sensible defense. See, for instance, this Washington Post "Fact Check" piece that's ultra-friendly to Mitt, as well as the National Review Online's toy soldier amplification of the same argument.

Fat lot of good reaching the Med physically would do Iran unless they wanted to open a tourist resort.

we've got another Palin on our hands.