Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran

Say what you will about John Bolton, I think he has an admirable tendency to avoid mincing words and just say what he thinks:

Mr Bolton said that striking Iran would represent a major step towards victory in Iraq. While he acknowledged that the risk of a hostile Iranian response harming American’s overseas interests existed, he said the damage inflicted by Tehran would be “far higher” if Washington took 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.”

That's about a hundred times better than all the kvetching you hear from certain quarters about Iran -- Bolton wants war and he's not afraid to say it. Nor has he been afraid in months past to say that he loves John McCain because he thinks McCain agrees with him about the need to start a war with Iran. I think Bolton's right about this, but McCain's the kind of guy who'll want to start a war with Iran, and who'll say things that sort of indicate he wants to start a war with Iran, and who'll even joke about how eager he is to start a war with Iran, but then get pissed off if you suggest that's his policy.

Comments

You think Bolton is correct, that the U.S. should openly instigate armed hostilities with Iran?

Posted by steve duncan | May 8, 2008 11:12 AM

No, he means Bolton is correct, that McCain agrees with Bolton.

I had to read that twice to get it right myself.

Posted by Grunthos | May 8, 2008 11:15 AM

If I ever ran into John Bolton, I would tear that mustache right off his god damn face like a bandaid.

Posted by drjimcooper | May 8, 2008 11:18 AM

You know, a guy graduates magna cum laude from Harvard I shouldn't have to read what he writes twice to be sure of his meaning. Clarity Matt, clarity please.

Posted by steve duncan | May 8, 2008 11:19 AM

I think he is certifiably insane and have heard second hand from people that know that he is a piss-poor manager with zero people skills. His policy analysis has also been proven wrong again, again and again. I'd love to ask him just how many one million dollar cruise missiles we should expend on a firing range, a physical fitness area and a school house.

He is aiding and abeting Osama Bin Laden through his idiocy - allowing Osama to goad us into bankruptsy.

And only a fucking clown who shouldn't be taken seriously would wear such a stupid fucking moustache. Its like listening to policy analysis by Ron Burgandy.

Posted by calipygian | May 8, 2008 11:28 AM

these guys live in a different world. As if they are surrounded by demons. one thing they forget is that man created demon himself.

Posted by Hamed | May 8, 2008 11:34 AM

“Then the ball would be in Iran’s court to draw the appropriate lesson to stop harming our troops.”

I'm sure that's the lesson they'll draw, right. Cause, certainly, all the various factions warring against us in Iraq have stopped harming our troops immediately after we dropped a few JDAMs on 'em. The Iranians will react the same way.

Posted by Ugh | May 8, 2008 11:37 AM

Similarly not mincing words, John Bolton is an evil bastard with the blood of millions already on his hands, and having him rot in a cell in the Hague would be an ideal fate.

Actually, I'd be only slightly less satisfied if he were locked in that Austrian basement for the rest of his life.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 8, 2008 11:37 AM

This is a reminder that until HRC has in fact formally withdrawn, events in the ME, like a US or Israeli attack on Iran, have a potential to scramble the US democratic nomination fight again.

Posted by otto | May 8, 2008 11:38 AM

Its like listening to policy analysis by Ron Burgandy

"Ladies and gentlemen, can I please have your attention. I've just been handed an urgent and horrifying news story. I need all of you, to stop what you're doing and listen. Cannonball!"

Posted by drjimcooper | May 8, 2008 11:42 AM

Praising someone for "not mincing words" is trite. To use an analogy that I'm sure has never occurred to anyone, Hitler did not mince words. Furthermore, quoting Bolton's "plan" without comment implies that you think that it could work. The Israelis have been employing Bolton's "strategy" in Lebanon for decades. Bolton is simply living in a fantasy world where military action by the U.S. automatically causes our enemies to cower in fear. This guy should be ignored, not praised. And spare us the snappy head shot.

Posted by Alan Vanneman | May 8, 2008 11:51 AM

...an admirable tendency to be stupid. WOW.

Yeah, McCain's got tht admirable tendency too. SO Sorry, I just don't want it for president anymore. The brainlessness shines through and through - it's a Repug wave of tendencies that I'm truly sick and tired of seeing.

That fact that Obama pauses before speaking (most of the time) is a much more admirable tendency, at least in my book.

Posted by me-again | May 8, 2008 11:58 AM

Bolton - Go ahead punk - make my day.

Posted by Ahmedinijad | May 8, 2008 11:59 AM

This guy is nothing more than an evil, warmongering Zionist agenda pedaling piece of garbage. He advocated war but has never fought in one or even picked up a gun.

If you think Iraq is bad now, just imagine when Iran takes the gloves off after we attack them.

Bin laden's strategy is working to perfection. We'll be stuck in the Middle East for decades until we finally go bankrupt.

American people continue leading their ‘American Dream’ lives while being led to their own destruction along a road paved with celebrity trivialities and banal stories of nothingness that passes for news in their country.

Never has it been more true the age old saying, “For those who do not learn history they are doomed to repeat it.”

Posted by Kyle | May 8, 2008 12:07 PM

This guy is nothing more than an evil, warmongering Zionist agenda pedaling piece of garbage. He advocated war but has never fought in one or even picked up a gun.

If you think Iraq is bad now, just imagine when Iran takes the gloves off after we attack them.

Bin laden's strategy is working to perfection. We'll be stuck in the Middle East for decades until we finally go bankrupt.

American people continue leading their ‘American Dream’ lives while being led to their own destruction along a road paved with celebrity trivialities and banal stories of nothingness that passes for news in their country.

Never has it been more true the age old saying, “For those who do not learn history they are doomed to repeat it.”

Posted by Kyle | May 8, 2008 12:09 PM

This guy is nothing more than an evil, warmongering Zionist agenda pedaling piece of garbage. He advocated war but has never fought in one or even picked up a gun.

If you think Iraq is bad now, just imagine when Iran takes the gloves off after we attack them.

Bin laden's strategy is working to perfection. We'll be stuck in the Middle East for decades until we finally go bankrupt.

American people continue leading their ‘American Dream’ lives while being led to their own destruction along a road paved with celebrity trivialities and banal stories of nothingness that passes for news in their country.

Never has it been more true the age old saying, “For those who do not learn history they are doomed to repeat it.”

Posted by Kyle | May 8, 2008 12:09 PM

This guy is nothing more than an evil, warmongering Zionist agenda pedaling piece of garbage. He advocated war but has never fought in one or even picked up a gun.

If you think Iraq is bad now, just imagine when Iran takes the gloves off after we attack them.

Bin laden's strategy is working to perfection. We'll be stuck in the Middle East for decades until we finally go bankrupt.

American people continue leading their ‘American Dream’ lives while being led to their own destruction along a road paved with celebrity trivialities and banal stories of nothingness that passes for news in their country.

Never has it been more true the age old saying, “For those who do not learn history they are doomed to repeat it.”

Posted by Kyle | May 8, 2008 12:12 PM

I think we should have an award for outstanding one liners. Calipygian, you get one.

Posted by Sefrankel | May 8, 2008 12:19 PM

You should've added that McCain will sing a song about starting war with Iran.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | May 8, 2008 12:30 PM

Ah, I see that that was the subtle message of the post title.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | May 8, 2008 12:36 PM

Who is paying Bolton's salary at whatever think-tank he is now ensconsed? Follow the money. Just another goyish lackey serving a millionaire zionist warlord.

Posted by del | May 8, 2008 12:38 PM

I agree with Yglesias, Bolton's candor and clarity is actually quite refreshing. His insanity is out there for all to see. It's good to know exactly what the nut job hardliners are thinking and why.

Posted by mike | May 8, 2008 12:41 PM

Could you really not sort that out yourself Steve Duncan? Maybe Matt higher functioning commenters.

Posted by crack | May 8, 2008 12:48 PM

You know what makes someone a tough guy? Going to Yale Law School to get deferments.

This is a guy who pounds on the hotel room doors screaming his lungs off at female colleagues and employees who dare disagree with him. He spent a lot of his life condemning the UN for not representing democracies enough vis-a-vis dictatorships, yet he collaborated with dictator's UN reps against our allies' reps to kill attempts to make the UN function better because that would possibly make the UN more powerful vis-a-vis the US.

Posted by Reality Man | May 8, 2008 12:52 PM

for those of you who disagree with my opinion that our mid-east policy is "diplomacy-at-gunpoint," meet john bolton

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 8, 2008 1:11 PM

"Mr Bolton said that striking Iran would represent a major step towards victory in Iraq."

Uh, hu. Yeah.

So launching airstrikes against Iran, the BFF and long-standing supporter of the Shia groups currently forming the same Iraqi government that it's supposed to be undermining - according to super-secret US intelligence that the Iraqi government has openly said it doesn't believe - would be so shockingly awesome that it would undoubtedly convince those same Iraqi Shia groups to line up with the Iraqi Sunni warlords who want to overthrow them, and their backers amongst the Sunni autocracies, against the only country in the region that can send representatives to Baghdad without worrying about them getting shot at or blown up.

What could possibly go wrong?

Posted by Tony J | May 8, 2008 1:51 PM

Really good comments guys, keep it up.

Posted by Altaf Ahmed, India | May 8, 2008 2:41 PM

Really good comments guys, keep it up.

Posted by Altaf Ahmed, India | May 8, 2008 2:41 PM

Really good comments guys, keep it up.

Posted by Altaf Ahmed, India | May 8, 2008 2:41 PM

Matt writes:

"Nor has he been afraid in months past to say that he loves John McCain because he thinks McCain agrees with him about the need to start a war with Iran."

As Maynard Keenan asked in that Tool song, "what became of subtlety?" Yglesias and John Bolton both lack it. The question isn't whether we need to "start" a war with Iran, but what we should do about the proxy war Iran is fighting against U.S. troops in Iraq. Should we continue the status quo of doing nothing? Should we bomb some training camp in Iran where masked men are shimmying across monkey bars as we speak, as Bolton wants? I vote for option #3: we fuel a proxy war against the Iranian government in Iran. There's no shortage of minority groups who would be willing to turn our money and supplies into ruckus on Iran's side of the border (e.g., Iranian Kurds, Arabs, Baluchis, etc.). If we had a CIA that were actually an instrument of American power and not simply a source of bad intel and politically-motivated leaks against Republican administrations, Bush could have already initiated this.

Posted by Fred | May 8, 2008 3:28 PM

I think this was edited for purposeful confusion. Possibly edited by the neo-con passing as progressive Jewish editor. I hate to make this a Jewish issue but it is, due to the unwarranted fear of Iran obliterating Israel. Iran would do no such thing!

Posted by Yap Dog | May 8, 2008 4:03 PM

I think this was edited for purposeful confusion. Possibly edited by the neo-con passing as progressive Jewish editor. I hate to make this a Jewish issue but it is, due to the unwarranted fear of Iran obliterating Israel. Iran would do no such thing!

Posted by Yap Dog | May 8, 2008 4:03 PM

Bolton loves McCain and Hamas loves Obama. Your choice. It's idiotic to let Iran keep attacking Iraqi and coalition forces and suppling weapons and training to terrorists. The war won't stop till Iran is stopped (or slowed down). As for the "unwarranted fear of Iran obliterating Israel" Iran's the one marching missiles down the street with "death to Israel" painted on them and calling for Israel to be wiped off the map. Sure, Iran may not have the guts to openly attack Israel but they surely will (and do) provide weapons and training and money to others to do their dirty work.

Posted by Chad | May 8, 2008 4:41 PM

Iran is marching them but Israel is dropping them.

Posted by Hamed | May 8, 2008 4:50 PM

Bolton reminds me of the mad professor in Felix the Cat Cartoon!!

Posted by Ken | May 8, 2008 4:51 PM

The only way to take care of Iran permanently.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1250049890259073110&q=+%22nuclear+bombs%22&ei=HWwjSKavH6S-rALK053QAg&hl=en

Posted by SLC | May 8, 2008 5:13 PM

When you hear such awkward,bastardly and irrational statement coming from a washington boy you know why Americans are considered around the world as a nation that lacks intellect and finesse. May be that is the result of too much greasy fat chicken and rotten hamburgers.
The boy does not realize that recently Ahmadinejad said he can launch 11000 missiles per minute to Israel. And guess what he is not bluffing..And how many will he launch to Irak?
Did the boy forget that there are 165,000 GI IN Irak, another 40000 around the middle east, more than 100000 civilians workers overthere.Even if we retaliate -tough, too bad that what he wants and please let us not fight a war for Israel for the result will be an Himmalaya of cadavers from the Tigis till the Sinai and every one will be a loser

Posted by movezanj | May 8, 2008 5:40 PM

When you hear such awkward,bastardly and irrational statement coming from a washington boy you know why Americans are considered around the world as a nation that lacks intellect and finesse. May be that is the result of too much greasy fat chicken and rotten hamburgers.
The boy does not realize that recently Ahmadinejad said he can launch 11000 missiles per minute to Israel. And guess what he is not bluffing..And how many will he launch to Irak?
Did the boy forget that there are 165,000 GI IN Irak, another 40000 around the middle east, more than 100000 civilians workers overthere.Even if we retaliate -tough, too bad that what he wants and please let us not fight a war for Israel for the result will be an Himmalaya of cadavers from the Tigris till the Sinai and every one will be a loser

Posted by movezanj | May 8, 2008 5:41 PM

Matt: "Say what you will about John Bolton, I think he has an admirable tendency to avoid mincing words and just say what he thinks:"

Unlike Matt, who STILL has not answered my two questions, plus Dan Kervick's three, plus Duncan's one today.

"That's about a hundred times better than all the kvetching you hear from certain quarters about Iran"

And a hundred times more direct than anything you've said, Matt.

" -- Bolton wants war and he's not afraid to say it."

Whereas, you are afraid to say what should be done about Iran.

"McCain's the kind of guy who'll want to start a war with Iran, and who'll say things that sort of indicate he wants to start a war with Iran, and who'll even joke about how eager he is to start a war with Iran, but then get pissed off if you suggest that's his policy."

And Matt's the kind of guy who'll babble on about "proliferation" without once mentioning Iran, and who'll say things that sort of indicate he thinks a military option against Iran could be justifiable, and who'll even joke about how other people talk around the subject, and then refuse to answer the question when he's asked about his own opinion, directly, dozens of times.

Grow some balls, Matt, and make a definitive Iran statement that answers the questions of your readers before you just look like some lame college punk nobody should bother paying any attention to.

Stop being terrified of repeating your stupid Iraq mistake of listening to the "Big Dog Democrats".

Remember the line from the movie "Hitch" - where the younger Hitch begs his ex-girlfriend to explain what he did wrong - and the new boyfriend says, "Dude! You're doing it now!"?

That's you, Matt.

Become an adult and take responsibility for your opinions.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 8, 2008 6:51 PM

And now, you Bolton asking to Bomb Iran. What is your problem with Iran? I know what it is. You are not an American, I prefer to call you and most of current politicians of America, Imericans, stands for Israel-Americans. Then you will be very pleased to use U.S. power against a potential enemy of Israel. As you used it already about Iraq. And who know, may be you was one of those Israels that orchestrated the 11-Sep to have enough excuse invading Iraq.

Posted by Arash | May 8, 2008 6:55 PM

I have to take issue with Calipygian, above. I think it's more like listening to policy advice from Gene Shalit. But admittedly it's a fine distinction. One could also cite Ron Jeremy, though I suspect the mustache is probably where the similarity ends.

Posted by DrBB | May 8, 2008 8:17 PM

Killing Iranians

Iranian government had reported that last month's explosion in a mosque that killed 14 people and injured more than 200 in Shiraz, Iran, had been planted by a group in contact with Britain and the United States. Is this true?

We are spending a lot of our national money to create an unstable Iran. Would we accept if Iran would use their national money to bomb one of our churches and create social unrest in US?

For every action there is a reaction. Where are we going to stop? How many Iranian should we kill first?

American patriots are proud of our country's virtues and eager to correct her deficiencies, but not blinded by nationalism cloaked by symbols.

"Nationalism is power hunger tempered by self-deception." George Orwell

We must be true to our national character: Justice, Peace, Respect for Human Life, ans Fair Treatment of all Other Nations.

Posted by St Michael Traveler | May 9, 2008 10:52 AM

As a muslim, I find it with disturbing increasing frequency saying to myself internally "f**k it, just let them bomb iran, iraq, saudi arabia, and syria all to pieces" just to appease guys like these, and maybe guys like these would be rendered irrelevant in the larger discourse. But thankfully, I come to my senses and head over here to this blog to read the sane voices.

Posted by Sid | May 9, 2008 12:16 PM

Remember that Hezbollah got second rate weapons, and the good stuff is in Iran. Hezbollah send only one anti-ship missile, with a pretty bad result of an Israeli naval vessel. Iran has a lot of that, and better.

If we attack them symbolically, they will not care (but surely, there will be a retaliation). But if we will really hurt them, I am almost sure that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz until we will say "sorry, we were bad, we will not do it again".

The tactics of Hezbollah are hard to understand if they were not geared toward making such a threat credible. Yes, they can send anti-ship missiles. No, bombardment will not stop lobbing of the missiles. No, sending Marines in will not help much either.

Posted by piotr | May 9, 2008 4:31 PM