John Boltin'

Steyn Online ^ | 11 Sep 2019 | Mark Steyn

[Rummyfan]

On the eve of the annual 9/11 observances, America's National Security Advisor John Bolton was either fired (per Trump) or resigned (per Bolton). The dispute is being portrayed as one between a Bush-era neocon and an "America First" Trump. But that is something of an over-simplification. As I wrote upon Bolton's appointment a year and a half ago:

Bolton is viewed with suspicion as a 'neocon', which is not a term of much practical use these days. But then so was his predecessor - H R McMaster. So the substitution might be of no more significance than a neocon whom Trump likes the company of taking the job of a neocon whom Trump finds a bit of a cold fish. There may be a little more to it than that: McMaster was complacent, and conventional to a fault; Bolton is a realist, and harder-headed about the illusions of mankind. Beyond that, McMaster belonged to the group of foreign-policy panjandrums who expected Trump to move towards them; Bolton has moved towards Trump.

And, having moved towards Trump, he came to have ever more reservations about what he found there. Whatever the President now says, at the time Bolton's appointment was a Trump choice reflecting a desire to regain control of an administration in danger of being neutered by the GOP establishment...

[Rummyfan]

A good long read on Bolton. Sorry he's gone but when you work for The President you have a constituency of one. If you don't please him for any reason whatsoever...

Some good Bolton quotes:

The UN building?

'If you lost ten storeys, it wouldn't make a bit of difference.'

Reform of the Security Council?

'If I were redoing the Security Council, I'd have one permanent member ...the United States.'

The International Criminal Court?

'Fuzzy-minded romanticism ...not just naive but dangerous.'

International law in general?

'It is a big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law.'

Offering incentives to rogue states?

'I don't do carrots.'

[wastedyears]

No more war mongers.

[faucetman]

“was either fired (per Trump) or resigned (per Bolton)”

WRONG! Bolton, according to Bolton, OFFERED his resignation, he didn’t resign PERIOD!

Then, Trump FIRED him.

It’s not unclear in any way. There is no question.

Trump said “You’re FIRED!” just like on The Apprentice.

Mark, you can be very funny sometimes, but then you can be a real A$$, like your anti-birther rants. You lost me over that. Have a nice day, actually have a lousy day.

[Wuli]

When I read Bolton’s comments I think it most resembles Reagan. I guess Reagan was warmonger - to you.

[zeugma]

Great article. As usual, Steyn is a gem.

I don't know what went wrong between Bolton and Trump. I would suspect that Bolton was undermined by the weasels he was surrounded by.

[Lisbon1940]

It would have been better if he had never accepted the job to begin with.

[nicollo]

Short article by Steyn w/ two longer one he wrote from past years. Still worth the time to read it.

I do like this one:

At one event, a startled British cabinet minister said to me afterwards, 'He doesn't mean all that, does he?'

Reminds me of a conversation I had with a former PM of the Netherlands during the 2016 election on Trump's promise to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. I reminded his Honourableness that Bush and Obama had promised the same. "This man is dangerous becuase he means it!" he replied.

Yep.

[Robert DeLong]

A realist is more like it. It's a nasty world out there and he is quite attuned to that fact.

I didn't care that President Trump let him go, however, I disagreed with President Trump when he went on twitter to bash Bolton. There was no need for that, and it served the President in no way. Now I suspect that you will call me anti-Trump. Keep in mind that has been my only complaint of President Trump to date.

[rxsid]

International law in general?

'It is a big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law.'

=========================================

The irony is, without "international law," there would be no United States of America as there could be no recognition of our Declaration of Independence.

British common law specifically, and expressly forbid such an action, so our founders had to turn to internationally recognized law & legal treatise.

[rxsid]

"I didn't care that President Trump let him go, however, I disagreed with President Trump when he went on twitter to bash Bolton."

I'm glad he let Bolton go...surprised he hired him in the first place if his goal really is to work toward peace on the Korean peninsula, get substantive talks going with Iran and improve our relations with Russia.

I agree though, Trump should not have sent out those tweets bashing him. IMV, makes Trump look more like he didn't know what he was doing when he hired him, than making him look tough on his subordinates.

Trump has a tendency to shoot himself in the foot with unnecessary tweets. That's the double edge sword of being able to "immediately" take a message to the people in the modern world.

[wastedyears]

Was Reagan willing to throw away American lives?

[wastedyears]

It is indeed a hostile world, but does that mean we should be the world’s police? Should we go to Venezuela and “free” them? Maybe we should parachute into South Africa and tell them that persecuting people for their skin color is wrong.

[Robert DeLong]

President Trump probably listened to someone he shouldn’t have. Wouldn’t be the first time heh. 8>)

[Robert DeLong]

No of course we shouldn't be the world's policemen, just as we should not be totally disengaged from conflicts.

I agree with President Trump that Bolton's statement regarding how we will deal with Kim would be the Libya response, was not a wise statement at all. Why would Kim want to engage any further with a plan to get rid of nuclear weapons, after that statement?

My point was not really to stand with or justify Bolton, but that I understand Bolton. Bolton makes a lot of good points, but it does not necessarily mean he wants to act on every one of them, just as President Trump makes statements that he no intention of carrying forth.

My point was to say that President Trump did not need to get nasty on twitter. Let him go, and then move on. He did not enhance himself in that situation, in my opinion. In other words, there is no need to engage in name calling. By the President of others.

John Bolton deserves better than to be called a warmonger, even if he might be. To my knowledge he has never started any wars, even though the press is quick to say that is what he wanted to do. But believing the press these days is probably not a bright thing to do either. 8>)

[wastedyears]

Of course he can't "start" any wars, but he never saw a potential conflict he didn't want us involved in.

[Robert DeLong]

Of course he can't "start" any wars, but he never saw a potential conflict he didn't want us involved in.

And you know your statement is accurate, how exactly? Let me guess, you read it in the press. Often times the press lies, so we can't trust them to tell us anything, even as it pertains to John Bolton.

But you only make the case, that he should never be President, just in case the press happened to tell the truth this time. 8>)

[bagman]

Trump’s use of Twitter has to stop. It does not serve him well.

[bagman]

Who has recognized the Declaration of Independence? What legal standing does it have?

Did France enter the War of Independence due to some legal doctrine?

[bert]

Foolish comment by a paleo dry cod

It is not 1953

[ssaftler]

Trump’s use of Twitter has to stop. It does not serve him well.

It may not serve him well, but it's a damn sight better than expecting the Lame Stream Media to get his real message out there.