I guess we now have the answer….and the answer is YES!
John Bolton is out. President Trump announced on Twitter Tuesday that he had fired his hawkish national security adviser, reports the AP. “I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House,” Trumpwrote. “I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration, and therefore I asked John for his resignation, which was given to me this morning.” Trump thanked Bolton for his service and said he would name a successor next week. (Among other things, Bolton disagreed with the administration’s decision to hold talks with the Taliban.)
I cannot think of a better farewell tribute that Ray Charles…
Could not happen to a better person…a more deserving Neocon could not be found…..somewhere in the weeds or under a rock a person like Sen. Tom Cotton will be brown nosing his way up Trump’s ass for the job.
Time for Bolton to return to FOX where his bullshit will be appreciated……
CoS Bolton is going around the world drumming yup support for a possible trip to Iran (by trip I mean some sort of military action)…..
Bolton is what Bolton always does….protects Israel over the interests of this country.
Hiss newest con job on the world is about the possibility of an attack by Iran….and he has gone viral with the warmongers….
Here’s the dire warning National Security Advisor John Bolton brought Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Jan. 6: “We have little doubt that Iran’s leadership is still strategically committed to achieving deliverable nuclear weapons.”
I have found zero evidence to support Bolton’s claim. It is unclear who “we” means, but it certainly does not include the American intelligence community. They have found exactly the opposite.
While it is currently trendy to fact-check Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, allow me to suggest that it matters more — a lot more —when statements made by the national security advisor are untrue. This four-Pinocchio claim is a true whopper and has serious national security implications.
Time for all of us to start looking for that “Tonkin Moment” that will start a war with Iran over some minor incident that can be used to gin up support to the attacks.
It will not be difficult since the US and NATO pretty much have Iran surrounded….just look at the map…..
Even Pentagon officials are fearing the language of Bolton…..
Having spent decades advocating a US attack on Iran, John Bolton’s position as National Security Adviser is allowing him to push the idea hard with President Trump. For those less enamored of that war, including Pentagon leadership, there is mounting concern that Bolton might provoke such a war.
So when Bolton came to the Pentagon asking them for military options for attacking Iran, nominally in retaliation for a Shi’ite Iraqi militia firing mortar shells in Baghdad, they were reticent.
The options they delivered were reportedly very limited. They involved little more than a show of force with limited airstrikes against some random Iranian military site. This was far short of what Bolton wanted, but former Defense Secretary James Mattis argued that even this was a bad idea, and no attack has happened yet.
But the National Security Council are still saying the attack plans are being considered, and Mattis is no longer around to argue against it. This potentially would allow Bolton to push for the symbolic attack and hope it escalates into more, or to push the Mattis-less Pentagon for even bigger plans for more ambitious wars.
(antiwar.com)
Like I keep saying….watch for that one small incident that can be used to turn this from a war or words to a war of bullets and missiles.
Why would I say this? Pompeo has trotted through the Middle East beat the drums of war…..
The United States’ international windbag, Secretary of Defense (read: War) Mike Pompeo has been acting the imperial blowhard throughout the Middle East. With his boss busy denying that he’s a Russian agent, watching advisors and cabinet members come and go with dizzying alacrity, and dodging porn-star accusations, Pompeo is trotting through the Middle East, sounding war drums.
It seems that Iran, which has long been in the crosshairs of U.S. gunboat ‘diplomacy’, remains firmly targeted. In Cairo, Pompeo promised a “…campaign to stop Iran’s malevolent influence and actions against this region and the world”.
For those that want to know what went wrong and the US and Iran were at each other’s throats……all this animosity began with the hostage situation from the 1970s……if one would like to see how all this manure began then the national archives can help…..
The Iran Hostage Crisis was a major international crisis caused by the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and its employees by revolutionary Iranian students, who then held the Embassy employees as hostages, in direct violation of international law. The revolutionary government of Iran, under the Ayatollah Khomeini, supported the hostage undertaking. The crisis ended with the release of the hostages after a captivity of 444 days, from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981.
It is not a secret that I have not been a supporter of US UN ambassador, Nikki Haley (the Weasel), I thought she was the wrong person to represent the US at the UN and so far I was correct in my belief.
Then there is Trump’s new national security adviser and ex-UN ambassador John Bolton (the Walrus)…..another person that I had no confidence in when at the UN and less so as the adviser to the president.
But of the two which is the scarier? The Weasel or the Walrus?
In the Trumpean world of all-the-time-stupid, there is, however, one individual who stands out for her complete inability to perceive anything beyond threats of unrelenting violence combined with adherence to policies that have already proven to be catastrophic. That person is our own Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, who surfaced in the news lately after she unilaterally and evidently prematurely announced sanctions on Russia. When the White House suggested that she might have been “confused” she responded that “With all due respect, I don’t get confused.” This ignited a firestorm among the Trump haters, lauding Haley as a strong and self-confident woman for standing up to the White House male bullies while also suggesting that the hapless Administration had not bothered to inform one of its senior diplomats of a policy change. It also produced a flurry of Haley for higher office tweets based on what was described as her “brilliant riposte” to the president.
Trump is hiring nothing but extreme war mongers for his foreign policy team and that does not bode well for the country and the world.
Besides it has been said that the Weasel is the most popular politician in the US…….
US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley is America’s most popular politician according to a study by Quinnipiac University, CNNreported yesterday.
Haley is viewed positively by some 63 per cent of US voters, while only 39 per cent gave their approval of US President Donald Trump. Haley’s popularity also stretched to both sides of the political spectrum, with 75 per cent of Republicans, 55 per cent of Democrats and 63 per cent of Independents supporting the former South Carolina governor. She was only exceeded by former president Barack Obama, who was still held in high regard by some 66 per cent of voters.
The UN envoy has taken strong stands in favour of Israel, particularly in the aftermath of the US’ recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital in December. When the UN General Assembly voted to condemn the Trump administration’s decision, Haley slammed the global forum as ungrateful for US contributions to the organisation.
In this case it will be because of the Iranian nuke deal that the war mongers want the US to bow out. His so-called national security team is manned with war mongers and as the deal comes up for renewal that prospects of a diplomatic breakthrough is not happening…..
The new SecState has gone on record saying that the US is “unlikely to stay in the deal”……
Speaking to reporters during his first overseas trip since confirmation, new Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that he believes it is very “unlikely” that President Trump will keep the United States in the P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran past May 12.
Trump’s opposition to the nuclear deal centers on three issues. He wants limits on Iran’s civilian nuclear program to not sunset in the future. He also wants the IAEA to access non-nuclear military sites, which the IAEA has not sought to access at all. Finally, he wants the nuclear deal to “address Iran’s other activities,” like having conventional missiles.
(antiwar.com)
I have several opinions on what to do about the deal from a couple think tanks (not that I agree….just FYI)……
In the coming weeks, the Trump Administration will decide whether the United States will remain in or leave the Iran nuclear agreement. The agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is undoubtedly deeply flawed. Its sunset clause will permit Iran to enrich weapons-grade uranium in about a decade. It fails to address the ballistic missile issue, there are no “anytime, anywhere” inspections as the Obama Administration originally promised, and it has provided Tehran with billions of dollars in unfrozen assets and sanctions relief, which has helped finance its destabilizing activities in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and elsewhere. There is nothing wrong with threatening to walk away from such a deeply flawed agreement. In fact, a credible threat to withdraw is what is needed to improve it. However, leaving the agreement would be not only illogical but potentially dangerous.
Then there is the US SecDef who seems the believe that the US should stay in the nuke deal…..
Speaking to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary James Mattis praised the P5+1 nuclear deal. These comments come just weeks ahead of President Trump’s May 12 ultimatum to withdraw from the deal if changes aren’t agreed to.
Mattis told the senators that the verification system is “robust,” and that gives the IAEA “intrusive ability” to check on Iran’s compliance. He in particularly praised what he believes was a deal “written almost with an assumption that Iran would try to cheat.”
Trump and his cabinet are believed to differ on the merits of the P5+1 deal, with Trump opposing the deal and most believing it is too valuable to lose. Mattis’ comments clearly put him in the pro-deal camp, as his praise for the verification in the deal comes as oversight remains one of Trump’s main complaints. Trump has demanded the IAEA be given access to non-nuclear sites that the IAEA itself insists it doesn’t want to visit at all.
(antiwar.com)
So far I have two takeaways……one–there is no consensus on the deal….the deal may hang on the last voice Trump hears before the deadline and two–if Mattis does not concur with Trump he may be looking at the door soon.
One last thought……
The discussions at the White House with French president Emmanuel Macron about devising, in Macron’s words, a “new deal with Iran” may be an instance of different governments using similar words to mean very different things. In that regard, it may be akin to how “denuclearization” means different things in the Korean context depending on which government uses the term. Although Macron can be criticized for some aspects of how he has handled the task he has taken on, especially with respect to the effect of his moves on Iranian perceptions and intentions, give him credit for taking on the task at all. To try to preserve an agreement that serves the interests of France, the United States, and the cause of nuclear nonproliferation, Macron has had to propitiate a bully—one who in front of the press in the Oval Office even added the bullying touch of flicking alleged dandruff off Macron’s suit coat.
In Saner Thought 