Bolton - nice selection for UN ambassador

[YogsVR4]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...un_bolton_dc_4

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) on Monday nominated United Nations (news - web sites) critic John Bolton to be the new U.S. ambassador to the world body.

"The president and I have asked John to do this work because he knows how to get things done. He is a tough-minded diplomat," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) said in announcing the decision.

Bolton, who has been a leading hawk against Iran (news - web sites) and North Korea (news - web sites) as the top arms control policies diplomat, has complained the United Nations does not take strong enough action against such nations. He also is a leading critic of international treaties.

Bolton's nomination, which must be confirmed by the Senate, shocked diplomats at the United Nations.

It comes after Bush clashed with the United Nations in his first term and launched a war against Iraq (news - web sites) without what many diplomats considered explicit authority from the world body.

-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm glad it shocked those fuckups at the UN. I hope this is just another nail in the coffin of that diseased organization.













Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[Twitch1]

Thought for a second maybe Michael Bolton was going to be using his sax music to lull them all to sleep.

[taranaki]

Nice move George.Apparently he's trying to jack up a bunch of judicial positions for other neocon cronies too.

[KustmAce]

I was hoping for Michael Bolton too...

[moslerporschefreak]

Gotta love dubs. Cut taxes up defense spending so you can send SS to the chopping block, appoint a UN critic to the UN so he can presumably discredit the institution and open the door for more unilateralism. Sweet. That's all I can say, whoopedy-fucking-doo, this man doesnt understand diplomacy at all.

[Franko914]

Originally Posted by moslerporschefreak

Gotta love dubs. Cut taxes up defense spending so you can send SS to the chopping block, appoint a UN critic to the UN so he can presumably discredit the institution and open the door for more unilateralism. Sweet. That's all I can say, whoopedy-fucking-doo, this man doesnt understand diplomacy at all.

Diplomacy without a military to back it up is called "whining." Dubya may not practice the brand of diplomacy you and other detractors are used to, but he sure doesn't whine, does he? Some people call him a bully and arrogant, but he sure doesn't whine, does he? Some countries threaten the US and its citizens, but he still doesn't whine, does he? He isn't a whining kind of president, is he? You want a whiny ambassador to the UN? The US' brand of unilateralism is better than the other brands, anyway.

[moslerporschefreak]

Originally Posted by Franko914

Diplomacy without a military to back it up is called "whining." Dubya may not practice the brand of diplomacy you and other detractors are used to, but he sure doesn't whine, does he? Some people call him a bully and arrogant, but he sure doesn't whine, does he? Some countries threaten the US and its citizens, but he still doesn't whine, does he? He isn't a whining kind of president, is he? You want a whiny ambassador to the UN? The US' brand of unilateralism is better than the other brands, anyway.

Wow, okay. So because he uses his military he isn't a whiner, because he isn't a whiner he is good. Superb logic. I mean, according to you the SALT treaties were worthless because we didn't back up our wishes with our military. Look, Iraq was not a direct threat to the US, in fact what we have done has created a greater danger in my opinion to our safety (if you can't see why I will explain later). And bullying other countries has never really worked either, just look at our current policy of interupting Sino-Indian negotiations. I will ask this once WHY DO WE WANT TO DISRUPT SETTLEMENTS ON BORDER CONFLICT IN ASIA?!?!

I maintain that the neoconservative foregin policy of the administration is not just faulty but leading to greater international conflict and a general decline in safety for the American people. And it frightens me.

[YogsVR4]

My safety is lower?

Then I'll just have to get myself another .44 for all the badies coming my way.













Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[Flatrater]

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

My safety is lower?

Then I'll just have to get myself another .44 for all the badies coming my way.

I only need my assualt rifle!

[Franko914]

Originally Posted by moslerporschefreak

Wow, okay. So because he uses his military he isn't a whiner, because he isn't a whiner he is good. Superb logic. I mean, according to you the SALT treaties were worthless because we didn't back up our wishes with our military. Look, Iraq was not a direct threat to the US, in fact what we have done has created a greater danger in my opinion to our safety (if you can't see why I will explain later). And bullying other countries has never really worked either, just look at our current policy of interupting Sino-Indian negotiations. I will ask this once WHY DO WE WANT TO DISRUPT SETTLEMENTS ON BORDER CONFLICT IN ASIA?!?!

I maintain that the neoconservative foregin policy of the administration is not just faulty but leading to greater international conflict and a general decline in safety for the American people. And it frightens me.

Your assumptions and conclusions are presumptuos and inconclusive, well, actually, misdirected.

He doesn't whine about keeping our people and interests safe, he acts on it and, yes, he used the military.

According to me, SALT, SALT II and low-SALT worked because our military presence and might facing their military presence and might prevented a conflagration and, at least, more invasions by them. Had we not the military to back our ambassadors'/diplomats' words, you think the Soviets would even have bothered to sit down for the negotiations? Let me answer that for you: Denmark wasn't present during the SALT talks.

As fo Indo-Sino relations, it's all about the oil. India and China have outpaced the US in oil consumption for their growing industries. That's why you are paying more than double for gasoline today compared to three or four years ago. Now that I've pointed you in the right direction, let's see what assumptions and conclusions you can come up with as to the "why?"

As for the decline in safety, perceived or real, here's a real fact: no attacks on US soil since 9/11. You can be as frightened as the rest of the sit-down-on-your-hands-and-do-nothingers, I prefer to take my fight to the enemy, perceived or real, and fight on their turf (as for the Iraq War II, they were the enemy with or without the WMDs while Saddam was their dictator -- wake up and smell the cordite).