Comments on: John Bolton's Greatest Hits Are Failures

The Nation: Outgoing U.N. Ambassador's Tenure Was A Disaster From Diplomacy Perspective

[roger_inkart]

Question: You really don't believe that Iran, Syria, or North Korea will miss him, do you?

Yes I do. The more they can point to the US acting only in its own interests and unilaterally the more they raise there own power and consolidate our enemies against us.

The dems want someone qualified for the job. Not a combative, jingoistic moron like Bolton who only served to further isolate us. If you want to fight a global war on terror it might be wise not to turn the entire globe against you.

[mrthornman]

Awww, One_American needs a hug.

[one_american]

mrthornman:

I hope the nuke lands in your town.

[mrthornman]

Maybe we could strap old bushrocks to a Nuke.
Dr. Strangelove rides again!

[one_american]

roger_inkart:

You really don't believe that Iran, Syria, or North Korea will miss him, do you?

The Democrats and terrorists want someone "warm and fuzzy" as Ambassador, so they can feel good about themselves...just before the terrorists and rogue states signal the apocalypse.

[roger_inkart]

The Bush administration will finally have to stop flipping off the world community, at least when it comes to the ambassador to the UN. The Bush apologists will have to accept that Bolton did not have the needed support in Congress to approve his appointment. Cry about the dems all you want, but several GOP members opposed his nomination. For good reason.

As far as childish threats go, I have a feeling the US will somehow struggle through without having this psychotic Muppet representing our ideas at the UN.

[mrthornman]

He was gift to our enemies. Arrogant and a bully, he represented America at it's worst.

[roger_inkart]

Bolton will be missed greatly - by the enemies of the US.

[one_american]

Maybe when Iran or North Korea sends a nuke missle straight into a major metropolitan city, Democrats will wish that they had kept Bolton on the job.

Too bad.

[mrthornman]

One_American:

Maybe you forgot, that key Republicans also stopped him. He would have gotten confirmation with full Republican support.

[one_american]

Democrats are going to find their time in power very frustrating, and really quite sobering, because they have done so much damage to the U.S. by obstructing John Bolton from his position as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.

What goes around comes around, Democrats.

The fact that the UN is largely a joke (partially thanks to the permanent Security Council members) shouldn't surprise anyone.

But that isn't the point of this opinion piece.

I'm glad to see Bolton going - Bolton (and Bush for that matter) wouldn't know diplomacy if it jumped up and hit him square in the face.

Bush needs to start putting people into positions of power based on what they can do instead of as a political favor to his friends/campaign supporters.

If they don't perform after a certain time, get rid of them.

And get rid of the "yes" men while he's at it.

[mrthornman]

He would good in a sombrero, playing a guitar. I think there is an opening at the local mexican restaurant.

[tejasdemo]

Look at this dude. Would you hire this guy to run anything at all ?

He looks like he belongs in Tombstone, Arizona with Wyatt Earp.

[macusweil]

"John Bolton is just what the U.S. needed in the U.N. Someone who would tell everybody else to Shut the F*** Up and sit the F*** Down. "

Yeah and the world just laughed in his frick'n face 'cause they know he and his boss are BIG time losers!!

[mrthornman]

gunnerv1:

That approach gets you NOWHERE in the UN, or any other organization of this type. That is why JB was not the right man for the job.

We can agree that the UN could use a lot of improvement. But getting out is not an option for the U.S.

[rafterman1]

Why is the UN useless, because they don't bow down and kiss the US's a$$ every time we demand it? The UN is the only way that small countries can avoid being f*cked over by bigger ones like the US. I know you are disappointed the UN members didn't jump onto the Iraq war bandwagon but they, like the US, also have interests to look out for.

Being the US rep requires that you, you know, actually LIKE the organiozation you are representing in. Naming Bolton to the UN would be like naming Bill O'Reilly head of the ACLU or Jim Brady head of the NRA. It was insulting to even nominate Bolton.

The UN would work better if we tried to work with it instead of always trying to get around it. It isn't perfect, but having the US try and actively bring down the UN isn't going to make it work better. Nor is putting in an ambassador who's a loud-mouth bully.

[ceekuei]

The UN is ineffective because member nations allow the US to use it as a bully pulpit to further its national interests. A fine example is the number of vetos used by the US to block anything pertaining to Israel. The UN is not useless. The founding concept is sound but its implementation is weak. Like any organization, it is only as good as the people behind it and the willingness to implement fair and sound policies and practices and not succumb to bully tactics.

[mrthornman]

Adios. And take that mustache with you.

[gunnerv1]

John Bolton is just what the U.S. needed in the U.N. Someone who would tell everybody else to Shut the F*** Up and sit the F*** Down. The John Berch Socity was right, "Get U.S. out of the U.N."
The U.N. is the most worthless org. I ever seen in my 59 years. The last time they did anything right was with Korea and that was by accident, of the Russians not being there to veto. Be nice to me or I'll send you a letter of strong protest. And we support it the most with over 50% of the U.N. budget coming from the U.S.