Tweet
Caterpillar faced NAZI John Bolton urges Israel to NUKE Iran "for peace"
John Bolton's idea of peace: A nuclear first strike on Iran
October 16, 2:24 AMMadison Independent Examiner
Gregory Patin
John Bolton, former ambassador to the U.N. under the Bush administration, apparently has a novel idea of "ensuring peace" in the middle east. A nuclear first strike on Iran.
During a conference at the University of Chicago sponsored by the University Young Republicans and Chicago Friends of Israel, ironically entitled "Ensuring Peace," Bolton stated once again:
Negotiations have failed, and so too have sanctions. So we’re at a very unhappy point — a very unhappy point — where unless Israel is prepared to use nuclear weapons against Iran’s program, Iran will have nuclear weapons in the very near future.
While Bolton coyly avoided explicitly advocating the use of nuclear weapons by Israel on Iran, the logical conclusion of his statement is clear. If negotiations have failed, then a nuclear first strike by Israel on Iran's nuclear power plants is justifiable. Bolton, however, fails to mention that Iran shares a border with Russia, the country that helped Iran build those facilities and who actually does possess nuclear weapons capable of striking the U.S. and Israel.
Exactly which negotiations Bolton is referring to remain unclear. Iran has already agreed to inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA and is a signatory of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Israel, on the other hand, has not done either.
Before being ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton has a history of taking the most "hawkish" stances on foreign policy. He was a signatory of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) document entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses that advocated ongoing war in the middle east as a means of protecting America's strategic interests. In a response to a comment made by former CIA operative Robert Baer in 2007, Bolton stated on Fox News that he "absolutely" hopes the U.S. will attack Iran. When a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report was released in 2007 saying that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, Bolton was one of the first to criticize it.
It is nothing new for John Bolton or any of his neoconservative cohorts to advocate an Israeli strike against Iran. What is new, however, is the use of the word "nuclear," especially in the context of a conference about "ensuring peace." Hopefully it was just a ploy to spread the parameters of the debate about Iran. An Israeli nuclear strike on Iran is highly unlikely without U.S. approval and there are undoubtedly saner minds in the administration that would prevail. But the mere suggestion of a nuclear first strike should wake people up to the fact that maniacs like Bolton, who would risk starting World War Three, are given air time in our media and access to our young minds.
John Bolton's idea of peace: A nuclear first strike on Iran
October 16, 2:24 AMMadison Independent Examiner
Gregory Patin
John Bolton, former ambassador to the U.N. under the Bush administration, apparently has a novel idea of "ensuring peace" in the middle east. A nuclear first strike on Iran.
During a conference at the University of Chicago sponsored by the University Young Republicans and Chicago Friends of Israel, ironically entitled "Ensuring Peace," Bolton stated once again:
Negotiations have failed, and so too have sanctions. So we’re at a very unhappy point — a very unhappy point — where unless Israel is prepared to use nuclear weapons against Iran’s program, Iran will have nuclear weapons in the very near future.
While Bolton coyly avoided explicitly advocating the use of nuclear weapons by Israel on Iran, the logical conclusion of his statement is clear. If negotiations have failed, then a nuclear first strike by Israel on Iran's nuclear power plants is justifiable. Bolton, however, fails to mention that Iran shares a border with Russia, the country that helped Iran build those facilities and who actually does possess nuclear weapons capable of striking the U.S. and Israel.
Exactly which negotiations Bolton is referring to remain unclear. Iran has already agreed to inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA and is a signatory of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Israel, on the other hand, has not done either.
Before being ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton has a history of taking the most "hawkish" stances on foreign policy. He was a signatory of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) document entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses that advocated ongoing war in the middle east as a means of protecting America's strategic interests. In a response to a comment made by former CIA operative Robert Baer in 2007, Bolton stated on Fox News that he "absolutely" hopes the U.S. will attack Iran. When a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report was released in 2007 saying that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, Bolton was one of the first to criticize it.
It is nothing new for John Bolton or any of his neoconservative cohorts to advocate an Israeli strike against Iran. What is new, however, is the use of the word "nuclear," especially in the context of a conference about "ensuring peace." Hopefully it was just a ploy to spread the parameters of the debate about Iran. An Israeli nuclear strike on Iran is highly unlikely without U.S. approval and there are undoubtedly saner minds in the administration that would prevail. But the mere suggestion of a nuclear first strike should wake people up to the fact that maniacs like Bolton, who would risk starting World War Three, are given air time in our media and access to our young minds.
John Bolton's idea of peace: A nuclear first strike on Iran
Comment