Posted on 11/12/2016 4:20:06 PM PST by MagillaX
Looks like Ambassador Bolton is trying to promote himself for a position in Trump's cabinet. He is a Bush guy and one of the so called geniuses that got it wrong No way should he be in consideration
> Secretaries don’t take us into wars.
Secretary Clinton did. Twice.
I think Trump prizes loyalty above all else. A loyal follower will do what you ask even if it is not their preference. That is what I choose to believe at this time. If that changes, I will change my opinion.
Kellyanne Conwayvworked for both Gingrich and Cruz.
I don’t consider her unreliable at all.
"Strong CFR man" is relative, isn't it?
Aren't the intent, goals, and agenda of the CFR ambiguous if not subversive enough? The Globalist CFR goals should not be confused with America's national goals.
I'd rather American leadership NOT fall into this same old trap against of compromise.
With respect to your response to Post #39, considering the confusion and desperation for a reasonable solution in Iraq at the time, I disagree with the benefit of doubt accorded Bolton, with all due respect.
I think he’d make a good Sec of State or UN Ambassador
NO to neo-con artists.
I disagree with the war against Assad. What was happening within the nation was an internal matter. If people in our nation were marching on Washington, it would be a reasoned response for the government to loft a defense and counter attack.
That’s the way it works. You can’t go around the world to join rebels these days, simply because Syria used to be Russia’s ally.
Syria has the right to run it’s country the way it wants and to defend it’s government as it sees fit.
The government didn’t declare war on it’s people out of the blue. The same Muslim Brotherhood dynamic cropped up there. It had a right to defend itself.
I agree with that.
If Bolton was trying to back up our actions there, that is very problematic. (and I’m not inferring you are wrong)
If this took place as stated, I think he blew it here.
The problem with ruling the man out, is that by and large his decisions over the years have been very solid. We know his pluses and his minus.
Do we put someone untested in hoping for the best, or do we put him back in knowing Trump has an entirely different philosophy than Bush, and won’t let Bolton get out of hand.
To me there’s more to like about Bolton than not, despite this lapse in judgement.
I am generally very harsh on people who blow it in government. It takes a lot of other decent actions for me to stand by them still.
I believe he merits that support. If someone can be found that is better, I have not problem with it.
What we just witnessed his last year, was an almost total outing of people we thought were on our side. Who can we trust these days? I’m not even sure.
Nice picture
+1
The U.S. State Department has not been dependable or trustworthy for a VERY long time. It's time that changed. Drastically.
Bolton acknowledges that there are no good answers to the question what comes after ISIS is defeated. The main problem in Iraq is that it is now a vassal state of Iran. Iran is Shiite Muslim, so Bolton is saying is make Kurdistan a reality and a new Sunni state to counter Iran’s advances. Both Kurdistan and the new Sunni State would provide a buffer for Turkey from the Shiite threat. It makes a lot of sense.
So genius, what is your answer to what comes after ISIS? No matter what your answer is, I am confident that Bolton knows exponentially more about it than you, so I’ll go with Bolton’s solution.
This wasn’t Bolton’s only lapse of judgement. His previous lapse of judgement helped push us into the disastrous war in Iraq.
I am a firm fan of Bolton and have been for years. He is a smart, steady hand with the cojones to tell anti-American UN and any other anti-American entity to sod off.
No joke. The guy whipped the Republican party, pummeled the spunk out of the entire Democrat/Socialist/Communist left, and kicked the shriveled dingleberries off the entirety of the Western World Press.
I have my preferences too but I have learned not to second guess The Man.
Bolton played a significant role in causing all those problems.
If nothing else, catastrophic failure combined with the recent reaffirmation of poor judgment, should be disqualifying to any reasonable person.
I don’t need a magic bullet solution at hand to be certain that Bolton is the wrong man for the job.
Could you provide some proof of that, I have been following Bolton for years and I don’t think he was in the decision making loop about whether to go to war or not, that was way above his pay grade.
Some of you are far to emotional about this, Trump only really cares about the competence of the people he hires, I don’t think he cares whom they worked for previously.
I can understand where you are coming from but I still have to ask if you would be content knowing ISIS controlled all the oil from Iraq through Saudi Arabia, through the Emirates?
Nations that still need a lot of oil, would be very exposed at that time.
Bolton is one of the most consistent conservatives out there, fearlessly confronting the media. Just because he was a Bush guy shouldn’t disqualify him.
Which is why I am confident that Bolton won't be picked. He fails the competence test, miserably.
The first definition predates Reagan’s Presidency. The second materialized as a catchy term during the second Gulf War.... lol .. about the time Libs stopped calling themselves Libs and rebranded to “Progressives”.
You can call me an Old Fogey. [Shrug] Neocons are neocons and Libs are Libs.
If there ever was a swamp that needed draining, this is it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.