John Bolton - U.S. Ambassador to UN nominee

I figured there would be a thread about this guy by now...

I saw this on the news yesterday and thought it was pretty hilarious to be honest. Bush has nominated John Bolton as the new U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton is a long time critic of the UN and its ways. The UN is not happy at all with this. :hihi:


> Article <

I love this move by Bush. A real slap in the face to the UN. A much deserved one too I might add.

 

My bet is this nomination will make Sourdough Man's day. :hihi:

 

I guess Carrot Top was already booked. Great move.

 

I don't mind a slap to the bureaucracy of the UN, but really. . .

We need to start mending fences with the other nations of this planet at some point. But no, Bush is above extending olive branches. He'd rather antagonize.

Countdown to nuclear Armageddon = < our lifetimes

 

OMG. Not another Kerry disciple. Bush is not antagonizing our (so-called) allies. He's antagonizing the Kofi Klique. Did he not just return from a boot licking Euro tour? The F*cking French, Germans and Russions ought to be kissing Bush's ass, not the other way around.

 

Geez, I should have stuck to my sports knowledge/opinions and known better than to post my retarded political opinions in a forum where the majority of posters are closet minded southern conservatives.

Although much comedic value was gained from Bush's recent tour, all it did was strengthen the world's opnion that we are a bunch of morons who voted for this loser in a majority vote win.

That view of "do you know who we are" only exacerbates the problem at hand.

And for the record, I voted for Dean. :lol:

 

What should he do though? How in the blue hell can we possibly pacify a group of UN pacifists, hellbent on doing the exact opposite of us, despite our funding of them?

What fence are we trying to mend with the Europeans? And to what end? I get diplomacy, and I get the importance of quality relationships. But at what cost?

And before you tag me as a Bush fan, I'm not. I voted Badnarik.

 

I respect your opinion:

 

I don't think we should pacify the UN. I think we need to work with (and not make a mockery of the UN, which we all know is a mockery of itself) the tools we have at our disposal, and as far as global coalitions, they're kinda all we got. The rest of the world has to live with us, as we do it.

When we wade into the inevitable land of Iran or whether we wait until the China/North Korea situation heats up, we're going to need allies, real allies.

I mean, gee, look at what those terror cells managed to do this season on "24". :lol:

And touche', Saban Fan, touche'. . .

 

Seeing as we're the ones who always have the open checkbook, it seems to me that it would behoove the OTHER nations of the world to start mending fences with and extending olive branches to US. Sound a bit arrogant? I can see how some might think so. But that doesn't alter one bit
the fact that it's also reality. If we cut them all off without a cent, they'd be in a world of hurt...and whether they want to admit it or not, they know it's true.