Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
As rumored last week. Bolton has advocated war with Iran in the past. Having US bases in Syria would be advantageous for such a war I suppose. But the soldiers there would become targets.
Bolton in, McMaster out
- Thread starter Musburger1
- Start date
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
McMaster has always had troubling ties to Soros, plus he ran a very leaky ship. So his ouster is a plus, plus.
Bolton is a different element entirely. Ive already seen some people call him a neocon. He is not that. He is definitely hawkish on foreign policy, but never a neocon. For example, neocon Bill Kristol hates John Bolton. So, that's a pretty good endorsement on its won.
I also think/hope this signals the end of the NSC leaks
Bolton is a different element entirely. Ive already seen some people call him a neocon. He is not that. He is definitely hawkish on foreign policy, but never a neocon. For example, neocon Bill Kristol hates John Bolton. So, that's a pretty good endorsement on its won.
I also think/hope this signals the end of the NSC leaks
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
I dislike McMaster but fear Bolton will be worse, if that’s possible. He looks and talks like a kindly grandfather but he’s a warmonger deluxe. What a circus atmosphere. Meanwhile Trump is going after Muellar. That, I like.
Clean
5,000+ Posts
I like Bolton, except for the droopy mustache, which I assume he still sports.
It's hilarious to hear the Left screaming about Trump surrounding himself with yes men and "like thinkers". As if Obama didn't; Eric Holder, Susan Rice, etc. etc. Didn't hear too many complaints back then.
It's hilarious to hear the Left screaming about Trump surrounding himself with yes men and "like thinkers". As if Obama didn't; Eric Holder, Susan Rice, etc. etc. Didn't hear too many complaints back then.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
John Bolton:
Leaks by "some munchkin in the executive branch" is "completely unacceptable"
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
It seems there are but two choices.
You have the Neocon faction as exemplified under Bush and now apparently Trump, whose ideology is world domination under the guise of spreading democracy, American values, and opening markets to US capitalism.
The other choice is Neoliberalism as emphasized under Obama/Hillary whose ideology is world domination under the guise of defending human rights, multiculturalism, etc.
Trump’s pre-inauguration promise to scale down interventionism and move away from globalism to “America First” is filled with contradictions. Virtually all his advisers and appointments (other than perhaps Ross) have been filled with interventionists (warmongers) and globalists.
You have the Neocon faction as exemplified under Bush and now apparently Trump, whose ideology is world domination under the guise of spreading democracy, American values, and opening markets to US capitalism.
The other choice is Neoliberalism as emphasized under Obama/Hillary whose ideology is world domination under the guise of defending human rights, multiculturalism, etc.
Trump’s pre-inauguration promise to scale down interventionism and move away from globalism to “America First” is filled with contradictions. Virtually all his advisers and appointments (other than perhaps Ross) have been filled with interventionists (warmongers) and globalists.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Better hope this analysis is wrong.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/john-bolton-a-man-with-a-hammer-looking-for-nails.html
John Bolton - The Man With A Hammer Is Looking For Nails
March 23, 2018
President Trump congratulated Vladimir Putin to his reelection as president of the Russian Federation. It was a matter of simply courtesy to do so. The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (aka the National Security Advisor), three star general McMaster, had advised him to not congratulate Putin. (McMaster now claims differently.) That was bad advise. But it became even worse when McMaster, or someone in his shop, promptly leak this to the press. The usual Republican nutters like John McCain grumbled and Trump was furious.
Trump decided to fire McMaster the very next day. He had it coming. Both the White House Chief of Staff Kerry as well as the Secretary of Defense Mattis wanted McMaster out. Unfortunately for them Trump chose a replacement that they did not want and will find difficult to live with.
bigger
John Bolton is not a neo-conservative. He does not dream of 'spreading democracy' or 'nation building'. He is a 'smash, burn and leave' libertarian hawk. He is also an exceptionally avid bureaucrat who knows how to get the things he wants done. That quality is what makes him truly dangerous. Bolton is known for sweet-talking to his superiors, being ruthless against competitors and for kicking down on everyone below him.
Soon Netanyahoo will have the cabinet in place in DC he always dreamed of. A hawkish Pompeo at State, a real torturer as head of the CIA and now Bolton are already sufficient to protect Israels further expansion. Kelly and, only later onMattis will likely be the next to get fired. That will eliminate the last people with access to Trump who have some marginal sanity on war and peace issues. Trump will be completely isolated and easy to manipulate.
Bolton has a hammer and he will find lots of nails. Like Hillary Clinton he will want to fight with Iran, North Korea, Russia, China and others in no particular order. He will want to destroy Syria. He is cozy with the Kurds and the Iranian terror cult MEK. He addressed (vid) their congress eight years in a row and made lots of money for saying things like this:
"efore 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran.”
Bolton has little concern for U.S. allies except, maybe, for Israel.
His first priority will be to prevent the announced summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un. He will want more sanction on North Korea and may argue for a 'preventive' strike against it. He does not care that such a strike will certainly kill tens of thousands of Koreans in the north and south and several thousand U.S. soldiers and civilians.
New sanctions on North Korea are problematic as Trump has just putadditional tariffs on $60 billion of U.S. imports of Chinese goods. (The Chinese response is smart: Tariffs on U.S. agricultural goods from states that Trump won.) Why should China and Russia (and South Korea) help the U.S. to strangulate North Korea when they themselves are under fire? To prevent a U.S. strike that may anyway come the very next day?
The Europeans who were part of the nuclear agreement with Iran have to answer a similar question. Why offer Trump a 'compromise' over the JCPOA when the chances are now high that he will destroy it anyway?
What will Bolton do on Syria? Will he try to find a new agreement with Erdogan and drag Turkey away from endorsing Russia's polices in Syria? If he manages to do so, Syria's north will become a shared Turkish-U.S. entity and will be lost for a long time. New attacks on the Syrian government, from the north, south and east, where the U.S. re-trains ISIS into a new 'moderate rebel' army, would then open the next phase of the war.
So far the mean time of survival for Trump appointees is some six to eight month. Let us hope that John Bolton's appointment will - in the end - lower that average.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/john-bolton-a-man-with-a-hammer-looking-for-nails.html
John Bolton - The Man With A Hammer Is Looking For Nails
March 23, 2018
President Trump congratulated Vladimir Putin to his reelection as president of the Russian Federation. It was a matter of simply courtesy to do so. The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (aka the National Security Advisor), three star general McMaster, had advised him to not congratulate Putin. (McMaster now claims differently.) That was bad advise. But it became even worse when McMaster, or someone in his shop, promptly leak this to the press. The usual Republican nutters like John McCain grumbled and Trump was furious.
Trump decided to fire McMaster the very next day. He had it coming. Both the White House Chief of Staff Kerry as well as the Secretary of Defense Mattis wanted McMaster out. Unfortunately for them Trump chose a replacement that they did not want and will find difficult to live with.
John Bolton is not a neo-conservative. He does not dream of 'spreading democracy' or 'nation building'. He is a 'smash, burn and leave' libertarian hawk. He is also an exceptionally avid bureaucrat who knows how to get the things he wants done. That quality is what makes him truly dangerous. Bolton is known for sweet-talking to his superiors, being ruthless against competitors and for kicking down on everyone below him.
Soon Netanyahoo will have the cabinet in place in DC he always dreamed of. A hawkish Pompeo at State, a real torturer as head of the CIA and now Bolton are already sufficient to protect Israels further expansion. Kelly and, only later onMattis will likely be the next to get fired. That will eliminate the last people with access to Trump who have some marginal sanity on war and peace issues. Trump will be completely isolated and easy to manipulate.
Bolton has a hammer and he will find lots of nails. Like Hillary Clinton he will want to fight with Iran, North Korea, Russia, China and others in no particular order. He will want to destroy Syria. He is cozy with the Kurds and the Iranian terror cult MEK. He addressed (vid) their congress eight years in a row and made lots of money for saying things like this:
"efore 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran.”
Bolton has little concern for U.S. allies except, maybe, for Israel.
His first priority will be to prevent the announced summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un. He will want more sanction on North Korea and may argue for a 'preventive' strike against it. He does not care that such a strike will certainly kill tens of thousands of Koreans in the north and south and several thousand U.S. soldiers and civilians.
New sanctions on North Korea are problematic as Trump has just putadditional tariffs on $60 billion of U.S. imports of Chinese goods. (The Chinese response is smart: Tariffs on U.S. agricultural goods from states that Trump won.) Why should China and Russia (and South Korea) help the U.S. to strangulate North Korea when they themselves are under fire? To prevent a U.S. strike that may anyway come the very next day?
The Europeans who were part of the nuclear agreement with Iran have to answer a similar question. Why offer Trump a 'compromise' over the JCPOA when the chances are now high that he will destroy it anyway?
What will Bolton do on Syria? Will he try to find a new agreement with Erdogan and drag Turkey away from endorsing Russia's polices in Syria? If he manages to do so, Syria's north will become a shared Turkish-U.S. entity and will be lost for a long time. New attacks on the Syrian government, from the north, south and east, where the U.S. re-trains ISIS into a new 'moderate rebel' army, would then open the next phase of the war.
So far the mean time of survival for Trump appointees is some six to eight month. Let us hope that John Bolton's appointment will - in the end - lower that average.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Is this what you want? Is this what we’ll get?
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/03/23/bolton-bad-gets/
Bolton: As Bad As It Gets
As I wrote, if Trump appoints John Bolton National Security Adviser, prepare to die. Diana Johnstone explains why in
Bolton: As Bad As It Gets
If Trump is good at firing, it is because he is so bad at hiring.
Donald Trump came to office having made noises favorable to normalizing relations with Russia and cutting back foreign military adventures. Despite his manifest personal and professional inadequacies, that vague promise offered a glimmer of hope to a number of congenital optimists.
But to turn around U.S. foreign policy so drastically, supposing he honestly wanted to do so, a President would need a team possessing the necessary knowledge, wisdom and courage to produce and impose a coherent alternative. Trump had no team at all. He did not seem to have any idea of where to find appropriate men and women to do the job. He has flailed about, using each choice to demonstrate that the previous one was a mistake, while meanwhile the Deep State connives to destroy him for all the wrong reasons.
Now Trump has chosen as his national security advisor a man who personifies exactly what candidate Trump hinted he didn’t want: a man with the reputation of being the worst war hawk in Washington. John R. Bolton is not merely hostile to North Korea, or to Iran, or to Russia, but is exorbitantly hostile to them all. Bolton is the perfect national security advisor to get the United States into war against most of the world.
Trained as a lawyer, like just about everybody in Washington, Bolton has no particular scholarly background for messing around in foreign affairs. Rather, he is the perfect denizen of the galaxy of think tanks that have essentially seized policy-making away from academia and serious diplomacy in order to satisfy rich private donors, the military industrial complex and the Israel lobby.
Bolton has run the gamut of neo-con think tankery, from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the American Enterprise Institute, the war-mongering Committee for Peace and Security In the Gulf, to JINSA, the Jewish Institute for National Security of America – although Bolton is not Jewish.
A particularly sinister connection is Bolton’s leading role for the past ten years in something called the Gatestone Institute. This propaganda group specializes in spreading alarm about Muslims taking over the world, especially Western Europe. The obvious point here to identify Palestinians as part of this Muslim threat, the better to strengthen the Western NATO alliance with Israel. Gatestone’s anti-Muslim crusade does not extend to condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s sponsorship of extreme Islamists from the Africa to Indonesia. Nor does it advocate cooperating with Russia in an international police effort against genuine Islamic extremism. Quite the contrary.
Bolton opposes any deal with Russia, China, Syria, Iran or North Korea on the grounds that they are “regimes that make agreements and lie about them”. Any such agreement is “doomed to failure”, he recently told Fox news. This attitude rules out diplomacy and implies that force is the only way to settle differences. It overlooks the fact that Moscow has been far more faithful to international agreements than Washington, but all those D.C. lawyers are there to argue the contrary.
Bolton’s view of relations with Russians is to “make them feel pain”, as he has said on various occasions.
Such ignorant arrogance should disqualify Bolton from any serious governmental position – except in Washington with its pathology of unlimited global hegemony. Bolton has as much understanding of the psychology of other peoples as a factory robot. He doesn’t want to understand them. His manly pose denies that people with different histories and different circumstances have a right to their own point of view. We are good and they are bad, we are right and they are wrong. This is an attitude copied from Superman comics, and fits the American illusion of possessing the might that defines right. This can only lead to disaster.
There is not much left to be optimistic about.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/03/23/bolton-bad-gets/
Bolton: As Bad As It Gets
As I wrote, if Trump appoints John Bolton National Security Adviser, prepare to die. Diana Johnstone explains why in
Bolton: As Bad As It Gets
If Trump is good at firing, it is because he is so bad at hiring.
Donald Trump came to office having made noises favorable to normalizing relations with Russia and cutting back foreign military adventures. Despite his manifest personal and professional inadequacies, that vague promise offered a glimmer of hope to a number of congenital optimists.
But to turn around U.S. foreign policy so drastically, supposing he honestly wanted to do so, a President would need a team possessing the necessary knowledge, wisdom and courage to produce and impose a coherent alternative. Trump had no team at all. He did not seem to have any idea of where to find appropriate men and women to do the job. He has flailed about, using each choice to demonstrate that the previous one was a mistake, while meanwhile the Deep State connives to destroy him for all the wrong reasons.
Now Trump has chosen as his national security advisor a man who personifies exactly what candidate Trump hinted he didn’t want: a man with the reputation of being the worst war hawk in Washington. John R. Bolton is not merely hostile to North Korea, or to Iran, or to Russia, but is exorbitantly hostile to them all. Bolton is the perfect national security advisor to get the United States into war against most of the world.
Trained as a lawyer, like just about everybody in Washington, Bolton has no particular scholarly background for messing around in foreign affairs. Rather, he is the perfect denizen of the galaxy of think tanks that have essentially seized policy-making away from academia and serious diplomacy in order to satisfy rich private donors, the military industrial complex and the Israel lobby.
Bolton has run the gamut of neo-con think tankery, from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the American Enterprise Institute, the war-mongering Committee for Peace and Security In the Gulf, to JINSA, the Jewish Institute for National Security of America – although Bolton is not Jewish.
A particularly sinister connection is Bolton’s leading role for the past ten years in something called the Gatestone Institute. This propaganda group specializes in spreading alarm about Muslims taking over the world, especially Western Europe. The obvious point here to identify Palestinians as part of this Muslim threat, the better to strengthen the Western NATO alliance with Israel. Gatestone’s anti-Muslim crusade does not extend to condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s sponsorship of extreme Islamists from the Africa to Indonesia. Nor does it advocate cooperating with Russia in an international police effort against genuine Islamic extremism. Quite the contrary.
Bolton opposes any deal with Russia, China, Syria, Iran or North Korea on the grounds that they are “regimes that make agreements and lie about them”. Any such agreement is “doomed to failure”, he recently told Fox news. This attitude rules out diplomacy and implies that force is the only way to settle differences. It overlooks the fact that Moscow has been far more faithful to international agreements than Washington, but all those D.C. lawyers are there to argue the contrary.
Bolton’s view of relations with Russians is to “make them feel pain”, as he has said on various occasions.
Such ignorant arrogance should disqualify Bolton from any serious governmental position – except in Washington with its pathology of unlimited global hegemony. Bolton has as much understanding of the psychology of other peoples as a factory robot. He doesn’t want to understand them. His manly pose denies that people with different histories and different circumstances have a right to their own point of view. We are good and they are bad, we are right and they are wrong. This is an attitude copied from Superman comics, and fits the American illusion of possessing the might that defines right. This can only lead to disaster.
There is not much left to be optimistic about.
I35
5,000+ Posts
Cracks me up when the MSM liberal networks jump on a group train to bash Trump every single time any news coming out of the White House. Even when he got two scoops of Ice Cream. They have already looked foolish 100% of the time bashing Trump's foreign policy moves only to look like morons.
"Trump will start a Nuke War with NK"
A few short months later Kim Jong-un has agreed to stopped his nuke testing and is begging to meet with Trump. It must've been Trumps "Fire and Fury" comment and docking to Warships in Vietnam. Little sissy rocket man that Obama was so scared of must've had fear his life was in danger. Because rocket man sure doesn't give a damn about the people of NK.
So in other words if the Liberal Media hates the Bolton move then it must mean Trump did well appointing him to that position.
"Trump will start a Nuke War with NK"
A few short months later Kim Jong-un has agreed to stopped his nuke testing and is begging to meet with Trump. It must've been Trumps "Fire and Fury" comment and docking to Warships in Vietnam. Little sissy rocket man that Obama was so scared of must've had fear his life was in danger. Because rocket man sure doesn't give a damn about the people of NK.
So in other words if the Liberal Media hates the Bolton move then it must mean Trump did well appointing him to that position.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
Well, if Russia's putting out the anti-Bolton messages, then I'm for him.
Like I've said previously, his pre-inauguration promises were all over the map. He was a scattered mess and was very obviously talking out his ***, and nobody cared. He talked about scaling down interventionism in general and about your favorite topic of crapping on NATO and fawning over Big Vlad, but on specifics, he was never in that camp. He talked about dramatically strengthening the military, destroying ISIS, and having a much more confrontational policy toward China, Iran, and North Korea. True non-interventionists don't take those positions.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
It’s not Russians trying to get out the warning Prodigal, it’s patriotic Americans who are no longer given a voice on MSM who are trying to wake up the zombie public.
Yep. Honestly, I was never a huge fan, but if Moon of Alabama is crapping on him, then he can't be too bad.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
I’ve given examples why I think Bolten will push Trump toward war. Either you think escalating threats and more sanctions will bring about acquiescence rather than war, or you think war is the best approach. If the former (you think we haven’t been tough enough) state what you think he brings to the table and why that is good.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
The disastrous Iraq War while trying to rout the Taliban in Afghanistan was Bolton's baby. Great pick! 
He might be the only person that can unify the parties in Congress.
He might be the only person that can unify the parties in Congress.
I don't think he brings much good to the table. I wouldn't have hired him.
The disastrous Iraq War while trying to rout the Taliban in Afghanistan was Bolton's baby. Great pick!
He might be the only person that can unify the parties in Congress.
True, but not everybody who dislikes him does so for the same reasons. Mus and the Putin lackeys he cites to only dislike Bolton because he's not a Mike Flynn-style Putin hack. I'm not a big Bolton fan in spite of that, not because of it.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Agreed. I think Trump hired him for the singular reason that he's an ******* and his supporters love ********. In fact, it may be the only resume requirement.
Have you submitted your resume yet?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Nah, is this your application? You've had better, more witty *******-ish comments. This was a little forced. All feedback is a blessing, right?
It's what I like to call "vice signaling."
Oh
Oh, if your original comment was true, I could be a star in the Trump administration. But I wouldn't ever wish to live anywhere near DC.
I have many friends who promised never to live in DC, got offered jobs there and promised to leave as soon as they could find something back in Texas. None ever came back. I don't like the sleaziness if the culture, but if you make good money, DC is a cool place to live.
I say the same about Austin, Houston, SF, or any other large city. Don't want to live there. 30 miles south of Austin is just fine by me.
I understand that, but it's a matter of preference. Some people like places that have things like opera, symphony orchestras, theater, museums, lots of nice restaurants, etc. If you're one of those people (or become one of those people), DC is a cool place to live.
If I need any of that, I'll go visit.
What I do not need is to live daily with all of the big city drawbacks (traffic, crime, rudeness, oversized and stupid local government, poorer school systems, just to mention a few).
What I do not need is to live daily with all of the big city drawbacks (traffic, crime, rudeness, oversized and stupid local government, poorer school systems, just to mention a few).
But what if you want to be around that consistently? Visiting isn't adequate.
The people I know don't drive into DC. They take the Metro and walk, so they don't deal much with traffic. In fact, they sit in traffic far less often than I did in Austin and Dallas.
Lol. They don't live in high crime areas. Tolerance for local violence is for other people, not for them. They find areas that are wealthy, low crime, and mostly white. They aren't flocking to the DC ghetto.
They're only rude to people who think differently than they do.
Again, they mostly don't live in those areas, and those who do have enough money not to care.
Again, that's for the black kids of the DC ghetto, not for white liberals with money. Their kids go to school in other districts or attend private schools.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
