Posted on 08/01/2005 5:55:40 AM PDT by Chuck54
Edited on 08/03/2005 5:44:46 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
THE PRESIDENT: Nearly five months ago, I nominated John Bolton to be America's Ambassador to the United Nations. I chose John because of his vast experience in foreign policy, his integrity and his willingness to confront difficult problems head-on. I told the nation that John Bolton would provide clear American leadership for reform at the United Nations. I told them that he would insist upon results.
The United States Senate held thorough confirmation hearings, and a majority of United States senators agree that he is the right man for the job. Yet, because of partisan delaying tactics by a handful of senators, John was unfairly denied the up or down vote that he deserves.
As a result, America has now gone more than six months without a permanent ambassador to the United Nations. This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about U.N. reform. So today I've used my constitutional authority to appoint John Bolton to serve as America's Ambassador to the United Nations. John Bolton will be an important member of my State Department team, led by Condoleezza Rice.
I'm sending Ambassador Bolton to New York with my complete confidence. Ambassador Bolton believes passionately in the goals of the United Nations Charter, to advance peace and liberty and human rights. His mission is now to help the U.N. reform itself to renew its founding promises for the 21st century. He will speak for me on critical issues facing the international community. And he'll make it clear that America values the potential of the United Nations to be a source of hope and dignity and peace.
As he embarks on his new assignment, Ambassador Bolton will bring tremendous wisdom and expertise. Over the past two decades, John Bolton has been one of America's most talented and successful diplomats. He's been a tireless defender of our nation's values, and a persuasive advocate for freedom and peace. As a senior leader at the State Department in the 1980s and 1990s, he brought people together to achieve meaningful results at the United Nations -- from resolving payment issues, to helping rally the coalition in the Persian Gulf War, to repealing a shameful resolution that equated Zionism with racism. And over the past four years as Undersecretary of State, he's shown valuable leadership on one of the most urgent challenges of our time: preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
Ambassador Bolton takes up his duties at a time of opportunity for the United States and the United Nations. America and the U.N. are working to spread democracy, relieve hunger, and assist the victims of disaster. We've delivered hope to millions suffering from HIV/AIDS and other deadly diseases. We've helped to lay the groundwork for two landmark events in the history of liberty: the free elections of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ambassador Bolton will work to build on that progress by helping the U.N. continue to find effective new ways to match its good intentions with good results.
As the newest member of America's diplomatic corps, Ambassador Bolton will defend our nation's interests with character and resolve that were instilled early in life. John's father was a firefighter; his mother was a homemaker who took her son to the public library to show him the value of education. I know that Jack and Virginia Bolton would be proud today to see the boy they raised in Baltimore appointed to serve as our permanent representative to the United Nations.
I'm grateful to John's wife, Gretchen, for being here with us and to the entire Bolton family for their service and sacrifice.
Mr. Ambassador, thank you for agreeing to serve your nation once again, and congratulations.
AMBASSADOR BOLTON: Mr. President; Madam Secretary; my wife, Gretchen; our daughter, J.S, in absentia. I'm profoundly honored, indeed, humbled by the confidence that you have shown by appointing me to serve as the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations. You have made your directions for U.S. policy at the United Nations clear, and I am prepared to work tirelessly to carry out the agenda and initiatives that you and Secretary Rice direct.
We seek a stronger, more effective organization, true to the ideals of its founders and agile enough to act in the 21st century. It will be a distinct privilege to be an advocate for America's values and interests at the U.N., and, in the words of the U.N. Charter, to help maintain international peace and security.
My deepest thanks to you both for the opportunity to continue to serve America.
THE PRESIDENT: Thanks, John, appreciate you.
All right, thank you all.
Just go off and live in your dream world, but don't expect the rest of us to enable your delusions.
In the meantime, the record shows that you've presented no serious reason not to withdraw from the UN.
Get back to me when you are more knowledgeable and have grown up.
Then by all means, take the last word. Just give us all an idea of what, specifically, you think the UN will attempt to do to us should we depart, and how successful you think they'll be. If you can do that, you'll have the last word between us, whether I agree with you or not. Otherwise, the reader can look over our exchange and decide how hard you've been "trying" to back up your position.
Except that the Security Council merely consists of mouthpieces for the various governments. The better opportunity for "corraling" is at higher-level meetings, such as the G8 meetings. If they had focused more on that instead of poring more money down the hole in Africa, we might have gotten somewhere.
I haven't really made any estimates of their influence on our policy just yet, but now that you mention it, I do note that just about every military action we've taken for the last several years has either been in pursuance of some UN resolution, or directly authorized by the Security Council, or commanded by some other supranational organization, such as NATO. Perhaps we still retain the ability to say no to them, but the problem is, habits of obedience are really only what a governing authority needs in order to have effective power, and the more we keep ourselves in that habit, the harder it is for us to get out of it.
As an example of what I mean, just ask yourself what power the U.S. Supreme Court has to enforce its decisions. Yet they're obeyed unswervingly, even when they're blatantly unconstitutional.
And any postulation I could come up with, is just fantasy; albeit, based on historical facts. But yes, as you previously said, a new, moved UN could indeed propose and pass sanctions on us. The International Court, could arrest any of our government officials and private citizenry, should they travel abroad. And what are we going to then do about it? Nuke 'em ? Only in your miasmic delusions.
Would sanctions against us work ? Probably better than they did against Saddam.
Oh and here's a thought...since all kinds of garbage against Israel keeps getting brought up now, at the UN, without us, it will only get worse.
There's always all those things that get proposed, that we veto, which no longer would be vetoed. Do yourself a favor and go do some research on that aspect.
You demand that I write some ludicrous scenario, yet you have offered NOTHING for yournposition. Yes, indeed, let's let the lurkers decide which one of us is worth reading and agreeing with. Dollars to donuts, you lose. :-)
Beware the Red Queen.
For she and/or her minions
Will come after you.
IOW: Someone on this forum is an expert on virtually everything, and doesn't brook even an honest question about something. If you ask one, or suggest that perhaps there's another way to approach something, you will be attacked, often with your intelligence being questioned. Then you will be told you don't know the "facts." You will be asked if you've "READ" something! Then you will ask for the facts, and be dismissed with, I don't have time to find it for you!
To recap:
You will be challenged, often gratuitously.
You will ask a question.
You will be ridiculed and dismissed.
In extreme cases, you will be accused of being a troll, disruptor, false conservative or worse, and told to get back to DU--and that can happen even to people who've been here so long they helped Jim set up the first server.
In really extreme cases, you can be suspended.
Mad as a Hatter, I tell ya.
It really has been getting farcical, hasn't it? Thanks.
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That's just how stupidly she thinks.
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.
photo gallery