All errors should be reported to

Saturday, June 22, 2019

The tenability of Bolton

I am no fan of John Bolton because he has a reputation of being Bomb First, Ask Questions Later -- which is also why I am so glad President Donald John Trump hired him as his National Security Advisor.

Bolton serves two roles. He advises the president. He scares the excrement out of our enemies.

The former is boring, the latter is entertaining as heck once you realize how effective Bolton is. Our enemies view President Trump as this bumbling buffoon who will start a war whenever that crazy loon Bolton says so.

You have to understand, our enemies get their news from CNN and the New York Times, which is why President Trump keeps feeding stories to the Times. That I-was-gonna-bomb-Iran story was pure fiction fed to worry Iran. President Trump's way of stopping the escalation of the conflict is rare among presidents.

And it works.

Now this post is in response to an American Spectator post, "The untenability of President Bolton," by its Washington editor, Curt Mills.

He views Bolton almost the way our enemies do but realizes President Trump is not Bolton's puppet.

For now.

Mills wrote, "The current course, expertly crafted by hawkish, administration-friendly outfits like the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, is coming to the end of the line. The center cannot hold, and the US risks a belligerent overreaction — in this case, air strikes in the style Trump approved on Assad’s Syria in 2018 and 2017.

"Except Iran is not Syria; it’s center stage in the Middle East. The risk of miscalculation is immense, and war could eventually come to pass, as it did with Saddam Hussein. Iran’s population is double, its military more fearsome, its terrain more treacherous. Suiting young Americans in Kevlar in Iranian cities spooks even the most inveterate critics of Tehran.

"Except maybe John Bolton."

There was no miscalculation on Saddam Hussein in 2003. President Bush 43 wanted to finish the Persian Gulf War, which should have ended with an unconditional surrender. Hussein emerged more powerful in 1991, killed Kurds by the thousands, and financed terrorism against Israel for a decade.

Sadly, Bush 43 sold his war on mass quantities of WMD which did not exist. We should have known that because if Hussein had abundant weapons of mass destruction, he would have used them against Israel.

Which brings us to today.

Donald John Trump is a president like no other, as Conrad Black put it.

President Trump loves to negotiate and he always likes an edge in negotiating. Tariffs helped get Mexico and Canada to tear up NAFTA.

Earlier this month, he told Mexico he would impose tariffs unless they agreed to fight illegal immigration. Then he went to England, and came back a few days later to a nice agreement with Mexico.

Our super-duper smart press spent that week in a panic over the coming Avocadolypse.

Well, we cannot tariff Iran into submission because we have no trade with Iran, and haven't in 40 years.

Enter the Bolton.

President Trump sent him to Israel during this crisis. Iran went nuts. The mullahs wet themselves. There is no country Iran fears more. We won't kill 150 Iranians over an unmanned drone. Israel will.

Deploying Bolton to Israel reminded me that in preparation for D Day, Ike had Patton lead a fake army because Ike knew the Germans feared Patton most (for good reason). The decoy worked.

Maybe Bolton is a decoy. Maybe he is not. You never know with President Trump.

Which is very reassuring and very entertaining.


  1. "he would have used them against Israel." You're really pretty dense. Its like saying Russia would use them against us if they had them.

    But mutually assured destruction has been the policy for generations. That's what Iran wants they see how its been working all over the world such as Pakistan and India.

    But fundamentalists simply want a Jewish state to reign to set up their Armageddon war so they can go to heaven without dying. Let the Jews die just not us!

    Joking about Bolton is like joking about Dr Strangelove. He even looks the part. If the Russians or Chinese think they are about to be destroyed they certainly won't hesitate to launch

    And presuming we had that drone in Iranian territory spying on them why can't they shoot it down? Or do we have exclusive rights to spy on everyone?

    All it takes is a major false flag to succeed and war will be demanded by the ignorant masses so easily manipulated. Putting Strangelove close to any buttons is dangerous.

    I bought gold when Bolton made the cabinet. It took a while but its paying off handsomely. I'll cash in when Bolton is gone.

    1. Price of gold April 9, 2018: 1336.30
      Price Friday: 1399.82
      Up 4.75% in 15 months

      My stock index (S&P 500) is up 19% YTD

    2. Mr. T said the drone was over international waters and had data to back it up. You think Trump lied. That’s fine. I never believed a fucking word the Black Jesus said, either.

    3. "Fundementalists want a Jewish state etc.etc." You mean like, say, Albert Einstein?

    4. Nony the twerp, ignorantly pontificating again.

  2. It is popcorn time at my place, as watching the MSM go bananas over Trump's (supposed) cancellation of the strike against Iran is beyond entertaining. The same people who never said a word against Obozo's failure to enforce the Syrian "red line" are now criticizing The One as a way to criticize Trump's "failure." Honestly. I wouldn't be surprised if the (supposed) $100M drone wasn't the oldest one in the inventory and was sent up based on the knowledge that the Iranians would definitely try and shoot it down.

    Having spent several months in the Persian Gulf in 1984 I observed the Iranian AF up close every day when their lone operational P-3 would come out to surveil my ship. That is until the Captain had the plane lit up by the targeting radars for our long range AAW missiles and put missiles out on the launcher. We never saw them again after that.

  3. I suggest capturing the boats/crews the Iranians use to mine the tankers. Remove all weapons, intel, and every stitch of clothing, give 'em their boat back and send 'em home butt-naked.
    Disproportionate? Yes.
    Non-lethal? Yes.
    Embarrassing for Iran? Oh hell yes.
    I think they'd rather behave than get emasculated like that.

    1. That proposal is mean and twisted. I love it!!!

    2. Gets my vote too. Evil Genius level achieved!

  4. I don't get it. I'm foggy.
    Do we know if the attacks involved mines or missiles or both?

  5. Sadly, Bush 43 sold his war on mass quantities of WMD which did not exist.

    Ah, but they did, as we later learned.

    We should have known that because if Hussein had abundant weapons of mass destruction, he would have used them against Israel.

    Sad only used that stuff against defenseless civilians, remember. Israel is anything but defenseless.

  6. I'll risk being wrong, but there won't be any war with Iran. This is Christmas in June for journos. They have a lot of fear to sell. If they can make Trump look bad in the process, even better.

  7. I really don’t want to hurt you, but my friend over here wants blood and he’s a psycho... I’ll try to hold him back but you gotta work with me on this or... things could get ugly.

    1. That's it!

      I see it kinda like, "I've got this here honeybadger on a short leash, and I could just let him go- if you push me!"

      Honeybadger don't care!

  8. I would love to see the Trump drop pallet loads of counterfeit Iranian rials up and down the country.

    1. That's a great idea. Along with crates of decommissioned Beretta M9 pistols w/ ammo so the Iranian people can instill a little fear of their own. - Gary B

  9. The worst thing about the war-mongering of W. Bush was not that he went to war on a lie of WMD, but that the Failed 43rd President placed U.S. troops in an active war zone repeating the Korea/Vietnam idiocy that the troops were not allowed to fight to win, but were there only to be killed. W. Bush put them there and did not allow them to fight back, placing them in a war zone in hostile countries under rules of engagement far more strict than a beat cop in a major American city.

    At least Obama had the excuse of being an America-hating idiot when he did made that same mistake about the use of our troops. W. Bush is pure evil.

    I pray that POTUS Trump does not let feckless Pentagon bureaucrats to make the same mistake, putting U.S. troops in a war zone not to win, but just to die while making some brain-dead geopolitical "point."

    1. Luckily, Trump seems to be in complete control, unlike other presidents, who allowed their advisers lead them around by the nose. Trump actually is the smartest person in every room. It's fun to watch. - Gary B

    2. I guess you have either forgotten or forgiven Iran's capture of our embassy and our diplomats.

  10. This was a great post Don, you have a devious mind and understanding and enjoying the President's thinking/controlling of subjects.
    What a great three years it has been and more to come.

    1. Thanks. These are the best years of our lives

  11. reading your comments on Israel triggered me into pulling raid on the sun off my shelf. it's now on top of the stack next to reading chair. it's been maybe 5 years since I read it.

  12. and as far as trump-Bolton goes

    good cop- bad cop has a long history of solid results.

    as does, when you got them by the short hairs, their hearts and minds will follow.
    focuses the attention, it does.

  13. Nuts and bolts. Bolton shows his face, the media goes nuts.

  14. Can someone please remind me why we hate the Iranians? I know we are supposed to because ... well because they tell us to. Iran is no threat to the United States. The only ones who want war with Iran is Israel (and the US NeoCons). If Israel want war with Iran, let them do it themselves. Don't use American blood and treasure.

    1. Simple Simon's Stupendously Stupid cousin, Someone, says:

      Geeeeeee, bobby whatsit, whats up wit da faking the fool here????

      Or are you not faking?

      Lazy brains get eaten before the vibrant ones!!!!

      You do not want your brain eaten now, do ya?

      So, bobbywhatsit, answer your own questions!!!!





    2. @Anonymous - are you drunk? You seem to be trying to make a point, but blast if I can figure it out. On second thought, don't tell me.

  15. Unfortunately ever Tucker Carlson as gone full blown Bolton bad. I tried to E-mail my dislike of his position but his inbox is full. Funny that!

  16. Tell the Mullahs, I'll be a lot less flexible after the election.

  17. What puzzles me is that every time I read some hysterical rant about John Bolton and I go look up what he actually said or wrote, he makes perfect reasonable sense to me. At the UN he was great, calling out the evil corruption there in blunt but accurate terms. Like Trump, I'll listen to advice from anyone and everyone, then make up my own mind...and when the facts change, I'll change my mind.

  18. Kissinger famously quipped of the Iran/Iraq War that it was too bad they couldn’t both lose. It seems to me that we essentially sided with the Mullahs when Obama handed over the fruits of a hard-won Surge victory to Iran while Bush sat mute.

    Tucker is right about endless Middle East wars, the sacrifices of our troops and expensive nation-building. Absolutely right. But he’s over the top on this.

    1. He is construing any response at all as WW III. That's a leftist tactic. President Trump used missile strikes in Syria and troops with the Kurds without starting a full-scale war there.

    2. Bolton’s call for regime change in Iran isn’t disqualifying. I want regime change in Iran,too. Reagan wanted regime change in the Soviet Union and he got it without a conflagration.

    3. The personal attacks on Bolton detract from the policy argument. Bolton is there because it helps the President obtain our security.

    1. The problem with your security argument is that Iran is absolutely no threat to the United States. Iran is a threat to Israel's desire to topple the Syrian government. But if Israel wants a war with Iran, let them fight it. Don't dupe the United States into fighting their wars for them.

  19. The record needs correcting. WMD stands for Weapons of Mass Destruction. Saddam did have some. We know this because he gassed his own people. I know that may be nitpicking but we should use the right terms. It's erroneous to say we were sold a bill of goods about WMD's. That meme was created after the fact by the dems. In the Iraqi resolution, that was approved in both Houses of Congress, there's no mention of Saddam having nukes. One of the points was that he was pursuing nukes. Traitor Wilson and Plame said that Saddam wassn't getting yellow cake. All this was after the vote and used to undercut W's prosecution of the war.