Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bolton: Bush 'doesn't see sanctions can't stop Iran now'
The Jerusalem Post ^ | 6-27-07 | David Horowitz

Posted on 06/26/2007 5:43:33 PM PDT by Anti-Hillary

Sanctions and diplomacy have failed and it may be too late for internal opposition to oust the Islamist regime, leaving only military intervention to stop Iran's drive to nuclear weapons, the US's former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.

Worse still, according to Ambassador Bolton, the Bush administration does not recognize the urgency of the hour and that the options are now limited to only the possibility of regime change from within or a last-resort military intervention, and it is still clinging to the dangerous and misguided belief that sanctions can be effective.

As a consequence, Bolton said he was "very worried" about the well-being of Israel. If he were in Israel's predicament, he said, "I'd be pushing the US very hard. I am pushing the US [administration] very hard, from the outside, in Washington."

(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bolton; geopolitics; horowitz; iran; proliferation; sanctions; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
To: HaveHadEnough

Nah... not hardly. They... the middle east group don’t have a clue if they are pitching of catching. God love them. Simply call... teminex.

and let’s get on with what’s worth getting with.


41 posted on 06/26/2007 6:25:09 PM PDT by Bubba (Have we become to civilized to cure our problems?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary

If we do attack Iran, it must be an activity of three parts.

The first is an air war to destroy their nuclear infrastructure. But that is a temporary measure, as they are correct in assuming that they can (and have the will) to rebuild it.

So it must be accompanied by the partitioning of Iran, to deny it the oil revenues it would need to rebuild its nuclear weapons program. This would amount to a minimum of slicing off Iranian Kurdistan and Iranian Arabic Khuzestan, which has most of its oil wealth. This would also have the added bonus of denying Iran easy access to the Persian Gulf, so they could no longer easily menace the world’s oil supply.

In turn, these minimum partitioned regions would require that we reduce the Iranian military and Revolutionary Guard, so that they could not attempt to recapture the lands occupied respectively by the Kurdish Peshmurga army and the Iraqi Army.

Fortunately, almost all of the peoples in these lands would be more than glad to join with the adjacent peoples, with whom they have far more in common than Persians, who treat them as despised minorities and steal their wealth.

By not attacking, or only minimally attacking Persia proper, especially only military targets in Tehran, it might be possible to avoid inflaming the majority of Persians, who would be far less inclined to be slaughtered to defend the hated and corrupt Mullahs that rule over them. Especially considering how their lives were squandered in the Iran-Iraq War.

So the destruction of their nuclear infrastructure and armed forces can mostly be done by air, with a rapid movement of two or three of our ground divisions currently in Iraq to slice off Kurdistan and Khuzestan, followed by the Kurdish Peshmurga and Iraqi Army.

Other variants to the scheme might include the annexation of Iranian Baluchistan in the southeast by the Pakistani Army, which would further deny Iran the rich mineral wealth of that region; and to utterly destroy and use denial weapons on the Iranian uranium mines in their Azeri territories.

But it is vital that we do not just destroy what of their nuclear infrastructure we can, or else in a decade, just like with Iraq, we will have to invade and conquer the whole of Iran, at much higher cost in lives and treasure.


42 posted on 06/26/2007 6:25:48 PM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

absolutely on tag line


43 posted on 06/26/2007 6:26:18 PM PDT by Flavius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jacquej
We truly are in deep carp, and yet it isn’t yet time, if you get my drift.

Considering my advanced age, it may not be enough time before I am too old and feeble to do anything but teach the younguns how to grow edibles, can, etc

You can read this exact same doom and gloom outlooks from every older generation since the 20's.....Novels, diaries, old newspapers, etc....all have the same doom and gloom tone from time to time....

44 posted on 06/26/2007 6:26:43 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary
After the U.S. is a sanctuary country, Bush will preach tolerance to the Iranians who were afforded amnesty. I’m sure none of them would have any negative thoughts about our Country. Look what our close relation to Saudi Arabia did for the attitude of Saudis illegally in our Country.
45 posted on 06/26/2007 6:30:49 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary
Maybe Bush is hard of hearing. It wouldn’t be the first time.
46 posted on 06/26/2007 6:32:03 PM PDT by ChessExpert (President Bush might as well say "Read my lips: It is not an amnesty bill")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoeSixPack1

This is not good news. Bolton has never been a drama queen and is usually correct in his assessments. GW and crew effed up big time on this one.


47 posted on 06/26/2007 6:35:13 PM PDT by reuben kincaid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary

Mr. Bush doesnt have the time to deal with Iran now. He is too busy giving the country to the Mexicans.


48 posted on 06/26/2007 6:36:12 PM PDT by sgtbono2002 (http://www.imwithfred.com/index.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary

Bush is starting to make Lyndon Johnson look like a decent war time President.

Condi Rice is just as weak and misguided as McNamara was.

If they botch this Iran situation, they will be haunted by it forever.


49 posted on 06/26/2007 6:38:16 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative (I just became engaged...6/16/07..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary
Bush wasn't going to accept a nuclear NK either, but....
50 posted on 06/26/2007 6:40:31 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing
Bush is not a good man, nor is he a good President. He isn’t even capable of enforcing our borders. He got us into a disastrous war. He’s allowed the federal government to expand and the federal deficit to rise. He’s a fool, but I feel like a bigger fool for voting for him.
51 posted on 06/26/2007 6:41:30 PM PDT by FightThePower! (Fight the powers that be!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: se_ohio_young_conservative

“They”, will?


52 posted on 06/26/2007 6:42:00 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: FightThePower!

Use your moniker in moving your vote.


53 posted on 06/26/2007 6:46:11 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

We all will. correct that. We will. Here we are approaching a CRITICAL MOMENT in the war on terror and our president is too morally and politically weak to actully tell it as it is and prepare the American people for a huge battle.

Was he that happy with pee ing away our majority ? Now he wants to pee away the Presidency to Hillary and pee away the middle east and the world be held under nuclear hostage by the jihadists ?


54 posted on 06/26/2007 6:48:00 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative (I just became engaged...6/16/07..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

In the twenties and thirties they would have been exactly right on the money.


55 posted on 06/26/2007 6:48:43 PM PDT by ichabod1 ("Liberals read Karl Marx. Conservatives UNDERSTAND Karl Marx." Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DevSix
Yeah, but in the 20’s, 30’s, 40’s, etc. the enemy did not have nuclear weapons. Not quite the same as a machine gun.
56 posted on 06/26/2007 6:48:55 PM PDT by Anti-Hillary (Anyone but Hitlery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: FightThePower!

Don’t feel like a fool. Look to your own screen name. You never had a choice. It was the Power (Masons, Skull&Bones, CFR, Buildaburgers) that pumped Ge-orge Doubleyou Bush up to the gills with money and then made shure he won. Twicet.


57 posted on 06/26/2007 6:51:36 PM PDT by ichabod1 ("Liberals read Karl Marx. Conservatives UNDERSTAND Karl Marx." Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: jacquej
My best guess is that it is time for us to hunker down. We truly are in deep carp, and yet it isn’t yet time, if you get my drift.

Considering my advanced age, it may not be enough time before I am too old and feeble to do anything but teach the younguns how to grow edibles, can, etc.

I get your drift. The wife and I were talking about this today.

58 posted on 06/26/2007 6:51:53 PM PDT by afnamvet (The Constitution of The United States of America; Read it, Live it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl

We need to send in airborn or special forces to take out some of the targets, which are hardened, but should probably be out of most of Iran in a month or so.

We need to take out all the nuclear sites. We also need to take out the leadership and the Revolutionary Guard, to give the decent Iranians some chance of staging a revolution against the Mullahs.

Partition? Maybe so. But it could be dangerous, because that would mean that the Sunni Arabs controlled even more oil than they already do. The other solution is to prepare the way for regime change by taking out the forces that are keeping the mullahs in power.


59 posted on 06/26/2007 6:52:52 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Hillary

What freaks me out about this is that John Bolton is not some loon predicting armageddon is near and trying to start a cult.

John Bolton is a very smart and respectable man. He is somebody people should respectfully listen too, even if they dont like what he has to say.


60 posted on 06/26/2007 6:54:02 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative (I just became engaged...6/16/07..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson