President Barack Obama and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney debated domestic policy almost as much as they did foreign policy during the third and final presidential debate Monday night in Lynn University, Boca Raton.

Obama's barbs and policy clashes define the final debate

Obama delivered some of the harshest lines of the night, inspiring "horses and bayonets" memes across the Internet after he mocked Romney's criticism that "our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917":

"Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater — nuclear submarines":

Here's a selection of the reaction from NBC News analysts and others:

Brian Williams, anchor of 'NBC Nightly News'
"We always try to look for the phrase or expression that will live forever out of these. Tonight's has to be 'horses and bayonets.' It was during an exchange where, clearly, the president's effort was to paint Governor Romney, paint the debate as kind of a past-versus-future framing. It was specifically about the military — the governor's assertion we had fewer ships as a Navy than at any time since (1917) — a very sharp comeback from the president."

Tom Brokaw, NBC News
"What we saw tonight was Governor Romney trying to move to a less hawkish position, talking much more about winning hearts and minds than he has in the past.

"If you could have said to one of the two candidates, 'Nice tie,' he would have said, 'Yes, let me talk to you about the economy.' They got back to that subject as quickly as possible, because they know that's where the big interests of the country are.

"When it comes to foreign policy, these are very complex issues, and there are no shake-and-bake kinds of answers to them. No one has talked, for example, about the European economy and the impact it's having on our domestic economy."

David Gregory, moderator, 'Meet the Press'
"Our colleague Tom Brokaw likes to talk about voters' watching an event like this and imagining either the president or his challenger as commander-in-chief, in the Oval Office. Obviously, a sitting president has already passed that threshold test, and I think you saw President Obama trying to make it very clear that Mitt Romney, in his judgment, was not up to the test. talking about his positions' being all over the map, talking about the fact that you've never had to execute on foreign policy decisions, talking about what I've learned as commander-in-chief.

"You also saw the president determined to pick a fight ... with Governor Romney and Romney surprisingly determined to avoid a fight, playing almost as if he was ahead, determined to sound more moderate, to disagree less with the president on foreign policy.

"Where were the bright shining distinctions between these two men tonight?"

Savannah Guthrie, NBC News
"This was absolutely the Romney strategy going into this debate — to majorly tone down the rhetoric, and at times, as David observed, it seemed the president was spoiling for a fight. He wanted to draw the contrast.

"Romney, it was clear from the very first answer, wasn't going to be the Romney we've seen on the campaign trail, known for those stinging criticisms of the president on a whole host of areas of foreign policy. He was asked about Benghazi, Libya — something we've heard Romney go hard after the president on the campaign trail — but he didn't take the bait from the very first answer. Instead, Romney advisers said they wanted him to come across as measured, as moderate, as somebody who has an understanding of the foreign policy issues with some depth.

Vote: Did the final debate influence whom you'll support?

"There were times during this debate where it seemed Romney was almost delivering a book report on the hot spots of the world. (He was) clearly trying to show that he will not be caricatured as a warmonger, somebody who engages in cowboy rhetoric. But the president, by the same token, (was) determined to remind him of his past statements."

Truth Squad: The third and final presidential debate

Richard Haass, president, Council on Foreign Relations
"I found all of this somewhat odd. But again, to me, the larger bottom line of the night was that on foreign policy issues, there was actually much more agreement than disagreement.

"I found it striking how both gentlemen were talking about things domestic. Here it was a foreign policy debate, and they both kept coming back to what were the real bases of American strength: 'Enough nation building overseas; now we need to start nation building at home.' That to me was a consistent theme, and I think they're both reflecting what they're hearing and seeing out around the country."

George Pataki, former governor of New York
"When the president stands up there and says we need to put some distance between ourselves and Israel, I think you're making a very clear statement. As Governor Romney effectively pointed out tonight, on that first trip he visits Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, he goes to Iraq, but skips our closest ally. That sends a message not just to the Middle East but to the globe about Israel's standing in this administration.

"Talk about changing policies — it was President Obama's administration that fought tooth and nail to delay the sanctions that he's bragging about tonight. It was Congress that said to the president, because of the support of the American people, we're going to make sure we have these things.

"Governor Romney today pointed out differences on Iran where he would be far more aggressive on sanctions, and the president again — revisionist history — it was President Obama who, when the Green Revolution was happening in Iran, when Iranian students were holding up signs saying, 'America, help us,' this president was the one who sat on the sideline and did nothing.

"This is a president who forever in his speech was talking about how al-Qaida is on the run. Well, he's dropped that. ...

"I'm proud of Governor Romney tonight. I think he did an excellent job."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., Obama's practice debate opponent
"If you're a leader in the world, you're scratching your head tonight saying, 'How could the American people possibly elect a guy who has changed his position every few months and doesn't know what he's going to do in foreign policy?'

"I thought I was listening to the Wikipedia candidate tonight. (Romney) would say, 'Oh, there are Taliban in Pakistan. They have nuclear weapons.' But what's the policy, Governor? What are you going to do that is different? How are you going to — nothing. Absolutely nothing. Which is why I tweeted that they sunk the battleship.

"Take the ships. As a Navy guy, when I was in the Navy, we had 680-something ships. There's not anybody that questions today that our Navy is the most powerful on the seas, that we don't have the most powerful military in the world. We spent more, as the president said tonight, than the next 10 nations in the world — China, Russia, Great Britain, France all put together — we spend more. ...

"I have to tell you: I was stunned. Mitt Romney scares — he really scared me tonight. I mean, this is a guy, if people think he's ready to be president, this country's going to go back to the Bush policies that took us to Iraq."

Slideshow: Twin sons of different parties

From tramping through cornfields to munching ice cream cones to holding babies – the time-honored traditions of the campaign trail leave President Barack Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney looking surprisingly alike.

Launch slideshow

President Obama's nominee to become ambassador to Iraq withdrew on Monday in light of revelations of personal conduct that spurred questions about his fitness to serve.

Brett McGurk wrote the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday to notify them that he had withdrawn his name from consideration over the position. Conservatives had questioned McGurk's nomination after emails surfaced detailing an extramarital affair between McGurk and a reporter, whom he subsequently married.

"[A]fter much thought over the past week, and having discussed the issue with my wife ... I bvelieve it is in the best interests of the country, and of our life together, to withdraw my nomination and serve in another capacity," McGurk wrote.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council, said: "While we regret to see Brett withdraw his candidacy there is no doubt that he will be called on again to serve the country."

The withdrawal means that the president must nominate another ambassadorial candidate for the high-profile position in Iraq. The relationship between the U.S. and Iraq is at an especially important inflection point, given the transition to a post-war relationship between the two nations.

The former Secretary of State joins Morning Joe to reflect on his time spent in office and the relationships he formed. Powell said "mutual respect" leads to great teamwork. Powell also talks about America's invasion of Iraq,  why more troops were needed to take charge of the country and the lingering questions surrounding the Weapons of Mass Destruction. 

Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

President Barack Obama leads guests to a toast as he hosts a dinner for members of the U.S. military who served in Iraq in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, Feb., 29, 2012.

Joshua Roberts / Reuters

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during a dinner on Wednesday night.

Slideshow: US troops leave Iraq

See images from the U.S. withdraw from Iraq at the end of 2010 and 2011.

Launch slideshow

AP reports: The president who opposed the Iraq war from its outset thanked those who fought its battles by sitting down to a candlelit meal with a small cross section of the million-plus who served there over the past nine years.

Looking out over a sea of dress uniforms sparkling with medals attesting to years of wartime strife, Obama told the gathering: "In a culture that celebrates fame and fortune, yours are not necessarily household names. You are something more: the patriots who served in our name. And after nearly nine years in Iraq, tonight is an opportunity to express our gratitude and to say once more, welcome home."

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama heralded the end of the divisive Iraq war Monday, and warned Iraq's neighbors that the United States would remain a major player in the region even as it brings its troops home.

"Our strong presence in the Middle East endures," Obama said. "And the United States will never waiver in the defense of our allies, our partners and our interests."

Speaking after a morning of meetings with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Obama said other nations must not interfere with Iraq's sovereignty. While he stopped short of mentioning any countries by name, U.S. officials are closely watching how neighboring Iran may seek to influence Baghdad after U.S. troops withdraw.

Early signs of how Iraq may orient itself could come from how it handles the troubles in Syria, where the United Nations says 4,000 people have been killed in a government crackdown on protesters. While Obama has called for Syrian President Bashar Assad to step down, Iraq has been more circumspect, with al-Maliki warning of civil war if Assad falls and abstaining from Arab League votes suspending Syria's membership and imposing sanctions. Those positions align Iraq more closely with Iran, a key Syrian ally.

Obama said he and al-Maliki were both deeply concerned by the Syrian government's assault on its own people. And Obama said he was confident that the Iraqi leader's approach to dealing with Syria was based on his own nation's interests.

"Even if there are tactical disagreements I have no doubt those decisions are made based on what's best for Iraq, not considerations of what Iran would like to see," Obama said.

Al-Maliki's trip to Washington came as the last American troops were preparing to leave Iraq ahead of a Dec. 31 deadline. Just 6,000 U.S. forces remain, down from a high of 170,000 at the war's peak in 2007.

About 1 million U.S. troops have cycled through Iraq since the war began nearly nine years ago. Obama said the military can officially withdraw from Iraq "with honor and with their heads held high."

Later Monday, Obama and al-Maliki will remember the nearly 4,500 Americans who lost their lives in the war during a wreath laying ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery.

Mindful of what he called America's "enormous investment of blood and treasure," Obama said the U.S. would seek to build a comprehensive relationship with Iraq, with the goal of making the war-weary nation a model of democracy in the region.

• Story: NYT: Detainee in Iraq poses dilemma as US exit nears

Al-Maliki said Iraq will still need U.S. help on security issues, combating terrorism, and training and equipping the Iraqi military, as well as other areas including education and developing its wealth. He said there were "very high aspirations" for the relationship between the two nations."

The U.S. will maintain a significant presence in Iraq, with about 16,000 people working at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. The size of the embassy has been a point of contention among some in Iraq, who see the massive mission as another way for the U.S. to wield influence in their country.

Obama defended the size of the embassy, saying there were special security needs required in a country fresh off a protracted war.

"As president of the United States I have to make sure that anybody who is in Iraq trying to help Iraqi people is protected," he said. "I'm putting civilians in the field. I want to make sure that they come home, because they are not soldiers."

The White House has been eager to promote the end of the Iraq war as a promise kept for Obama. He was an early opponent of conflict, and pledged to bring the war to a close when he ran for the White House.

Obama thanked service members and their families for their sacrifices when he attended the annual Army-Navy football game Saturday, and will mark the milestone again on Wednesday when he speaks to troops at Fort Bragg in North Carolina.

The Obama-Maliki meeting got a cold reception from Republican Sen. John McCain, whose lost to Obama in the 2008 presidential election.

"The meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Maliki today cannot obscure the fact that both men have failed in their responsibilities with regard to our shared security interests. The sacrifices of both our peoples in a long and costly war, the continued needs of Iraq's Security Forces, and the enduring U.S. interest in a stable and democratic Iraq all demanded a continued presence of U.S. troops beyond this year," McCain said in a statement.

"But domestic political considerations in each country have been allowed to trump our common security interests. All of the progress that both Iraqis and Americans have made, at such painful and substantial cost, has now been put at greater risk. I hope I am wrong, but I fear I am not. It did not have to be this way, and the fact that it is has everything to do with a failure of vision, commitment, and leadership both in Washington and Baghdad."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Morefrom msnbc.com and NBC News:

• Facebook backlash over Medvedev vote inquiry
• (Some) Syrians head to the polls
• Last flight out: US vacates Pakistan base
• Brazil: 50 tons of corn stolen from moving train
• Two-legged swine hams it up in China

Ali Al-Saadi / AFP - Getty Images

A pilot climbs into a U.S. F-16 jet fighter at the al-Asad Air Base in Baghdad, on November 1, 2011.

What started more than eight years ago as a hotly debated attack on Saddam Hussein’s regime is ending as a strategic and business relationship. Even though American troops are leaving Iraq in three weeks, the Iraqi government looks likely to be a good customer for American-made military hardware for years to come, joining other oil-rich governments such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in keeping U.S. manufacturing lines humming.

“The Iraqis are going to have a lot of money and invariably in this somewhat dicey neighborhood, having a lot of money means buying a lot of military equipment. So they are going to be a significant market,” said Gordon Adams, an expert on military budgets who is a professor of international relations at American University.

“The recent decision by the Iraqis to purchase U.S. F-16s, part of a $7.5 billion foreign military sales program, demonstrates Iraq's commitment to build up its external defense capabilities and maintain a lasting military-to-military training relationship with the United States,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month during a hearing on the future of Iraq.

The Baghdad government has agreed to buy 18 F-16 fighters, made by Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, Texas.

The sale, worth about $3 billion to the company, illustrates the long time horizon that weapons manufacturing has: the production line for the F-16 started operating in 1976 and with the Iraqi contract and other work will be extended into 2015.

Although first developed for the U.S. Air Force, the F-16 has been sold to and is now flown by air forces in foreign counties from Taiwan to Denmark.

“We're continuing production with the F-16, of course, and that continues to outstrip many people's expectations for more than 30 years in production,” said Lockheed Martin executive Ralph Heath, in a recent conference call for investment analysts. “The end is almost in sight but not quite … .”

“The F-16 program was a program that was developed with the international market in mind from the get-go,” said Adams. “There’s no question from the company’s point of view the international sales of the F-16 and its sister and more expensive F-15 aircraft have always been important. The classic way for them to extend the production line is to get foreign customers and they get a lot of support from the government for trying to seek out those foreign customers.”

The Pentagon announced last week that foreign military sales overseen by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency totaled nearly $35 billion in fiscal year 2011, which ended on Sept 30. The top three customers: Afghanistan, Taiwan and India.

“There is no question that foreign sales are important to the production run” of a plane such as the F-16, Adams said. “The Air Force likes the company to do foreign sales for a couple of reasons: over time it can reduce the cost to the Air Force of buying an airplane.” The other reason the Air Force likes such sales is that it allows for interoperability with foreign militaries during joint exercises and allows the Pentagon “to keep an eye on what other people are doing with equipment…. It allows the U.S. to know what the capabilities of another country are.”

Iraq needs not just fighter aircraft, but an array of other military hardware. “The Iraqi military inventory is pretty thin; most of it we beat the crap out of during the invasion and subsequent hostilities,” Adams said. “Most of the Iraqi inventory is basically gone and they are going to have to re-stock from start to finish. Most of their former Soviet inventory is either gone or wasted, so they are going to have to buy. Being as we were the occupying power and the training power, it is at one level quite logical that we would be maneuvering to sell them our equipment.”

Despite the Dec. 31 exit of American combat troops, the United States will continue to operate ten Office of Security Cooperation base camps in Iraq to deliver military hardware and oversee the foreign military sales program.

“So F-16s get delivered, there's a team there to help new equipment training and helping Iraq understand how to use them to establish air sovereignty, “ Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Armed Services Committee. “Or there's 140 M-1 tanks right now generally located at a tank gunnery range in Besmaya east of Baghdad and the team supporting that training stays on Besmaya.”

Iraq will also need military trainers which U.S. firms such as DynCorp provide to foreign governments. The required training of the Iraqis “does not require U.S. troops. There are numerous firms that will be happy to respond to any requests for proposal from the Iraqi government for properly skilled trainers. The market will respond quickly to Iraqi petro dollars,” said Douglas Ollivant, a former National Security Council official in charge of Iraq policy in both the Bush and Obama administrations.