Posted on 05/08/2008 9:25:01 AM PDT by Kaslin
Middle East: Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton says we should take out Iranian camps that train Iraqi insurgents. Not a bad idea. Besides denying our enemies sanctuary, it might give pause to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
In remarks reported by the London Telegraph, John Bolton advocated an end to the policy of allowing the Quds Force of Iran's Revolutionary Guards to openly operate training camps run by personnel from Lebanon's branch of Hezbollah to train fighters from anti-government Iraqi militias.
Ending the policy would be provocative, as Bolton acknowledged, and Hezbollah has the capability to stir up trouble around the world, even in this hemisphere. But they'll eventually come after us even if we don't. Kicking the can down the road doesn't work any more than it did when the Allies failed to respond to the horse-drawn infantry of Adolf Hitler when his troops re-entered the demilitarized Rhineland of 1936.
Bolton noted the risk of a hostile response by Iran and/or its puppet, Hezbollah, but said the damage inflicted by Iran would be "far higher" if Washington continued to take no action. "This is a case where the use of military force against a training camp to show the Iranians we're not going to tolerate this is really the most prudent thing to do," he said. "Then the ball would be in Iran's court to draw the appropriate lesson to stop harming our troops."
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
When are the muzzies gonna start “taking out their own trash?”
The former official is out on his own and can look forward to never getting a job with any Admin ever again. He is on a par with Jimmy Carter except encouraging different bands of enemies.
Enough talk.
Time for action.
They can’t....they are ALL trash!
The mullahs understand one thing: Ordnance on target. We should accomodate them. Cluster bombs would be nice.
Nevertheless, he is correct.
Why would any administration want an official who has a brain and makes common sense?
Not getting Bolton appointed to the UN Ambassador is another line on the list of Bush backing down and showing no gonads.
Bolton has absolutely no comparison to Carter. Bolton has the nads. Carter lost his at an early age.
No, he is wrong. So is Carter. At least they are private citizens and speak only for themselves.
Our enemies show a blatant disregard for this "line" in their open acts of WAR against US.
Why should we give the "line" any more or less consideration? What? Are the moozies in the UN gonna condemn us? Is the NYT gonna give it front page disrepect?
Bidnezz az uzuall!! Bombs Away!!!!
Iran is also causing mischief in Lebannon. Israel is also getting flak.
When a country becomes a pain in the rear, it is time to thump them with some whooopass.
Do you have evidence for that? That Carter once had a pair?
He’s on autopilot. Out of date since 1971.
......That Carter once had a pair? .....
A rabbit got them
Rush probably has the list of the leader of the new castrade’ Jimmah Carter. As far as personally, don’t care.
Nice story, but I’m pretty sure he didn’t have them at any time while he was president.
Carter is failure in every sense of the word, that is fact...
July 15,2005
“After London attack, cleric urges: ‘Annihilate infidels’ Less than a day after the terrorist bombings in London, the Palestinian Authority’s official television channel broadcast a sermon calling for extermination of all non-Muslims. “Annihilate the Infidels and the Polytheists! Your [Allah’s] enemies are the enemies of the religion!” said Suleiman Al-Satari in a July 8 broadcast translated by Israel-based Palestinian Media Watch, or PMW. “Allah,” the cleric continued, “disperse their gathering and break up their unity, and turn on them, the evil adversities. Allah, count them and kill them to the last one, and don’t leave even one.” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1443850/posts
As for Bolton: Nevertheless, he is correct.
If oil at $300 and rationed for the next century is rational.
Bolton has made some mistakes, but his policies are usually based in reality, and he does understand that there are consequences of both action and inaction.
Carter has made nothing but mistakes, and his policies aren't remotely based on reality.
There's really not much similarity between the two.
A pig in a mud wallow doesn't recognize mud as a bad thing. They would first have to recognize the trash for what it is before they would feel compelled to take it out. It's like Clintons definition of "is".
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.