Story here.
:rolleyes: This man was our ambassador to the United Nations?!
Yeah, we did it in Iran in 1953 and look how well that’s turned out.
I’d suggest bombing John Bolton, but the Gestapo would probably think I was serious.
Ironically enough it is the SS that is responsible for John’s security.
Actually it would have been Diplomatic Security Service back when he was ambassador to the UN. AFAIK, he is a private citizen now and not entitled to any gummint bodyguards.
Amongst other things, how do you get to be ambassador to the UN without knowing that Ahmadinejad isn’t the leader of the Iran or the driving force behind their nuclear program?
By having a President like Bush, and his neocon associates, who don’t care about competence. Competence doen’t even seem to be an issue with these people.
They measure competence by certain tried and true metrics, rather simple really. They look about them and observe that truly intelligent, competent people are in complete agreement. Serious, hard-headed people. Hence, competence may be reliably measured by the extent and enthusiasm of any given candidate’s agreement.
Mr. Bolton has demonstrated that he can examine conflicting evidence and unerringly reach the correct conclusion.
Iran declared war on the U.K. by seizing 15 sailors. What did the UN do? I distinctly remember crickets chirping, on that. So what use is the UN?
He is probably being well paid to spout such garbage. And just think, he is allowed to vote when felons are not. For that matter, clams are not allowed to vote and I’ve seen smarter clams than Bolton. At the very least, I’ve never heard a clam spout the kind of crap that Bolton spews.
Nonsense. Iran did no such thing. As a classic underdog in conflicts, they resorted to the classic game of “we accidentally kidnapped your people. Wanna talk?” Even in the days of the original Great Game, Great Britain would have never gone to war over the capture and return of a handful of servicepeople in an incident that might even have been an accident. (How likely is it that Iranian patrol boats are quipped with really good GPS units.)
The same sort of thing happened with the US Navy Orion at the beginnng of Bush’s term.
Only the insane consider such actions to be “acts of war.”
Unfortunately, in time of war, it is unavoidable that the occasional innocent John Bolton will be killed during strikes against John Bolton. Whenever possible, our forces attempt to verify that any John Bolton killed in the vicinity of John Bolton is a member or supporter of a rogue John Bolton. However, the fact is that many John Boltons are guilty of offering aid and comfort to John Bolton. Also, it’s widely known that John Bolton deliberately conceals himself among large groups of John Bolton. Therefore, the ultimate blame for any innocent John Bolton casualties falls squarely on the shoulders of John Bolton.
The situation was resolved with UN involvement albeit comparatively minor. I don’t know about the crickets in your head. See a doctor.
As for “declaring war”, I guess that’s just some other shit you made up.
The 15 sailors situation was resolved diplomatically and without significant long term drama. Luckily, the English are good at that sort of thing. The current US government is totally crap at it. It probably comes from having dickweeds in control whose “macho posturing” level is at a similar level of dysfunction to your own.
Yes, and he was a good one. He’s right on target (no pun intended).
What exactly did he accomplish? Nothing here leaps off the screen.
I hope the unintended pun does not refer to Iran!
How long do we have to wait till that line gets crossed in your mind? Especially considering how many deaths of our servicemembers in Iraq can be traced to weaponry that came from Iran.
The probability that the Iranian government is involved in this it pretty troubling - and I notice that it is being talked about be Democrats and Republicans alike, so it doesn’t seem as if concern about this is overly partisan. Indeed, it fits in with a string of behavior from a hostile state aligned roughly against the West since 1979.
So while I’m certainly not suggesting we go to war with Iran, I do think we need to recognize a hostile act as a hostile act - particularly if said act sends one of our guys home in a box.
I’m sure many deaths of Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan could be traced to weapons that came from, or were paid for by, the U.S. Yet that was never considered an act of war by the U.S. against the Soviet Union.
Certainly.
A small problem here, though. We’re talking about Iraq, right? Well, everyone is getting in on the action. Most of the foreign fighters (which, all told, are rather paltry) actually come from Saudi Arabia. I don’t think we’re going to condemn them anytime soon. Syria has a lot too, even some foreign fighters from North African countries can be found here and there.
Er, how many would that be, do you think? The Iranians obviously have the easiest hand to play, but I haven’t seen any evidence that Iran is helping out all that much materially, outside of the usual black market stuff. I’d think it’d almost be as likely that U.S. weapons have killed more than Iranian weapons. It is literally U.S. policy to arm groups which either have been killing us or end up killing us later. At first we were helping the Shia, but then someone told the administration that Iran would like that, so we switched to the Sunnis, who have been massacring us for years and haven’t been coy about it. That doesn’t strike me as very smart, although I tend not to see much profit from those transactions. On the other hand, it’s really, really hard to find groups in Iraq which don’t want to kill Americans. Maybe we should stop handing out guns like candy.
As for Bolton, nothing new. He’s been wanting to bomb Iran for quite some time. Who doesn’t? Maybe Kucinich or Paul or some other crazy person. It’s the new black, it’s in style.
Well looky here it’s the new “ramping up to justify an Iran invasion” talking points.
Should we expect to see a lot of talk of “deaths of US servicemembers by Iranian weapons” in coming months?
“The evidence of Saddam’s WMD that could kill your children and your mother in 20 minutes is building. How long do we have to wait before the line is crossed and you accept we should invade?”
Nonsense yourself. Seizing another country’s men at arms is an aggresion, in voilation of every concept of civil conduct between Nations.