Think Progress

Bolton Backs McCain Because He Is ‘Stronger’ Than Bush On Iran»

In remarks yesterday to CPAC, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) attacked Democrats for allegedly not recognizing “the threat posed by an Iran with nuclear ambitions,” claiming to know that Iran is pledging to “possess the weapons to advance their malevolent ambitions.”

Speaking at CPAC today, notorious Iran war hawk John Bolton emphasized his support for McCain, saying McCain proved he is “stronger” than the Bush administration with the senator’s statement on Iran. Bolton claims Bush is too “moderate” and has a foreign policy in “freefall” because he has yet to bomb Iran:

I think Senator McCain’s statement here yesterday on how he would handle the Iranian program is stronger than the current Bush administration policy. And thank goodness, because the Bush administration policy now lies on the ocean floor. … I didn’t think the policy the administration was pursuing was robust enough.

Watch it:

Echoing Bolton, this morning, McCain revealed that he was “skeptical” of the recent National Intelligence Estimate, which said that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons production in 2003. “I continue to worry about…Persian domination of the region,” he said.

Bolton also revealed today that McCain covertly pushed his nomination to the United Nations — “a nomination that was held up in Congress over Bolton’s controversial anti-UN statements and policies”:

He was very active behind the scenes…He thought I was the type of ambassador that ought to represent the United States at the United Nations.

John McCain: more hawkish than Bush on Iraq and Iran.

Right Wing Attacks Khalilzad For Not Defending Bolton’s Honor: ‘A Lack Of Testicular Fortitude’»

Last Saturday, Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, participated in a panel discussion on Iranian foreign policy with two high-ranking Iranian officials at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. The New York Times reports that the White House and Condoleezza Rice were “angered” by Khalilzad’s move because he did not receive explicit authorization. (Watch video of the event here.)

The moderator of the forum joked that Khalilzad has a “really formidable advantage of having a name that is not John Bolton.” Because Khalilzad let that comment stand without repudiating it, right-wing bloggers have erupted in full rage that Khalilzad did not jump to defend Bolton’s honor (as they surely would have). Thus, Khalilzad’s behavior was “disgusting,” “an insult to the United States” and showed “a lack of testicular fortitude”:

Powerline: “The moderator begins the panel with an insult to former United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton. Rice is apparently angry that Khalilzad participated in the panel without administration authorization. I am angry that Khalilzad participated after the insult to his predecessor in office. Disgusting.”

Captain’s Quarters: “The moderator noted in his effusive introduction of Khalilzad that among his outstanding qualities was “the further, really formidable advantage of having a name that is not John Bolton.” Regardless of whether Khalilzad had prior authorization, allowing the insult to Bolton to stand unchallenged represents an insult to the United States and a lack of testicular fortitude on the part of his replacement.”

During the panel discussion, Khalilzad “did not veer from the U.S. position” and “stuck to the administration playbook” during the entire event.

So, despite the fact that Khalilzad adhered to the Bush administration line on Iran during the discussion, the right-wing bloggers found it reprehensible that an American official would have the temerity to sit in the same room with an Iranian official and let a mild dig at John Bolton go undefended.

UPDATE: Newshoggers writes, “Poor Zalmay. He’s been a loyal neocon for years and they lauded him for his work in Afghanistan and Iraq when he was up for the UN post. … But let a slur on the Almighty Moustache slide and he’s neocon toast.”

Digg It!

Bolton: ‘The Mullahs In Tehran’ Want A Democrat To Win The Presidency In 2008»

Since the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran said the country halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has made every attempt to press on for bombing Iran.

Voicing his support for the major Republican presidential candidates — who have supported attacking Iran — today on Fox News, Bolton said Iran’s “mullahs” want a Democratic president elected in 2008 in order to ensure that they can continue to pursue building a nuclear weapon:

Well, I don’t think it’s discussed sufficiently. But I think in part what the mullahs in Tehran are thinking about, looking at the odds of who might win, or at least what the conventional wisdom is about the Democratic nominee winning. I think they’re going try and string this thing out in hopes that they’ll find some more pliable administration in the White House.

Watch it:

Responding to President Bush’s State of the Union remark that he will “confront” Iran if necessary, Bolton said Bush must either “change the regime in Tehran” or “the possible use of force against Iran” before his term expires. Bolton explained that this must be done to halt Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program.

Bolton’s fearmongering on Iran mirrors the conservative strategy around the 2006 elections. At the time, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Dick Cheney, and the White House all suggested al Qaeda was hoping for a Democratic Congress.

Bolton: ‘Pressure’ Is On Israel To Strike Iran Because NIE Made U.S. Attack ‘Highly Unlikely’»

In December, after the new NIE on Iran was released, former US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton established himself as one of the top hawks trying to undermine its credibility, going so far as to call for a congressional witch-hunt into anti-Bush “people in the intelligence community.”

During his trip to Israel this week for the the Herzliya Conference, Bolton has ratcheted up his criticisms of the report, saying on Sunday that the “illegitimate politicization” of the NIE was “a quasi-coup by the intelligence services.”

On Monday, Bolton said that the NIE put “pressure” on Israel to strike Iran because “the likelihood of American use of force has been dramatically reduced”:

“One can say with some assurance that in the next year the use of force by the United States is highly unlikely,” Bolton told AFP on the sidelines of the Herzliya conference on the balance of Israel’s national security.

“That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time… if it feels Iran is on the verge of acquiring that capability, it brings the decision point home to use force,” he said.

Reacting to Bolton, a “senior Israeli security official” told Agence France-Presse that “one should listen very closely to what Bolton has to say.”

Asked about Bolton’s comments today, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refused to refute him, only saying that Bolton is “a private citizen”:

QUESTION: (Inaudible) on Israel and he basically told us (inaudible) because they said the Bush administration (inaudible).

RICE: John Bolton is a private citizen. He can say what he wants.

Bolton’s comments join a chorus of conservative hawks who continue to argue, in the words of National Review’s Mark Steyn, that a “the bombing option is becoming the only one that will be left” in regards to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Bolton On Global Warming Conference: ‘If Anyone’s Isolated Here, It’s Al Gore’»

Recently, former Vice President Al Gore — to “rapturous” applause — slammed the Bush administration for being “principally responsible for obstructing progress in Bali” by opposing mandatory greenhouse gas caps.

Yesterday on Fox News, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton criticized Gore, claiming that he is “wrong” on the climate change issue. Bolton claimed that the U.S. was pursuing the right path by refusing to support mandatory limits on climate change, since Canada, Japan, Russia, and China also oppose them:

Well, not unusual for Vice President Gore to be wrong, either, as he is in this case. Of the G8 industralized democracies, four — the United States, Japan, Canada, and Russia — share our view. .. If you look at the developing countries, Brazil, India, and China all oppose these targets as well. So, the notion that this is the fault of the U.S. is wrong.

If anybody’s isolated here, I think it’s the Europeans and Al Gore. … This is a U.N. conference after all, and that’s principally what people like to do — blame us for all the problems.

Watch it:

Bolton is part of the fringe, discredited global warming denial community that claims there is still a debate on the causes of global warming. Just last month, he told the New York Times:

I don’t think the world has a correct temperature. It goes up and it goes down.

In 2005, he “recommended scrapping” over 400 passages from a 38-page U.S. draft prepared for a U.N. climate change summit, even requesting that “respect for nature” be cut from the document.

Bolton’s environmental cluelessness is underscored by his belief that India and China, two of the heaviest greenhouse gas emitters, are a model for the U.S. to follow at Bali. Furthermore, as “the only major industrialized nation to reject the Kyoto treaty, [the U.S.] is widely seen as the outcast of Bali,” noted the LA Times.

Bolton seems to think his ideological penchant for U.S. unilateralism can be used for war in the Middle East as well as climate change.

Bolton Calls For Congressional Witch-Hunt Into Anti-Bush ‘People In The Intelligence Community’»

Yesterday’s National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concluded that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, pouring cold water on neoconservative calls for bombing Iran. Like his ideological kin Norman Podhoretz, former U.N. ambassador and Iran war hawk John Bolton has been attempting to slander the U.S. intelligence community’s collective judgments.

Iran has been pursuing nuclear weapons “for 20 years,” he defiantly declared today. To give weight to a single intelligence estimate “would be a mistake.” On Fox News today, Bolton went even further and called for a congressional investigation into U.S. intelligence agencies, stating that the report was politicized by intelligence officials who have their “own agenda”:

I really think the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have to look at how this NIE was put together because there are a lot unexplained points in here. […]

I think there is a risk here, and I raise this as a question, whether people in the intelligence community who had their own agenda on Iran for some time now have politicized this intelligence and politicized these judgments in a way contrary to where the administration was going. I think somebody needs to look at that.

Watch it:

“I’ve never based my view on this week’s intelligence,” Bolton proclaimed today. Just as he did before the Iraq war, Bolton is attempting to discredit any intelligence which contrasts with his fixation on more war in the Middle East.

While Bolton is calling for a congressional witch-hunt into the intelligence community, VoteVets is calling for an congressional investigation into the Bush administration for warning of a false Iran threat despite knowing the key findings of the NIE.

UPDATE: Digby parses out the perpetually wrong neocon worldview: “The real question is why anyone ever takes them seriously about anything.”

Bolton Smears ElBaradei As Iran Apologist, Says ‘Even A Stopped Clock Is Right Twice A Day’»

Two weeks ago, Mohamed ElBaradei, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said on CNN that an attack on Iran would “lead absolutely to disaster.” He added that there is no evidence of a “concrete, active nuclear weapon program” going on inside Iran.

Today on CNN’s Late Edition, neconservative warhawk John Bolton responded by smearing ElBaradei as “an apologist for Iran” and said the United States is “paying the price” for not opposing him more vociferously.

When host Wolf Blitzer reminded Bolton that ElBaradei correctly warned prior the Iraq war that there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons program, Bolton derisively dismissed his warnings by claiming “even a stopped clock is right twice a day”:

BLITZER: But, you know, in fairness to Mohamed ElBaradei, before the war in Iraq, when Condoleezza Rice and the president were speaking about mushroom clouds of Saddam Hussein and a revived nuclear weapons program that he may be undertaking, he was saying there was absolutely no such evidence. He was poo-pooing it, saying the Bush administration was overly alarming and there was no nuclear weapons program that Hussein had revived. He was right on that one.

BOLTON: Even a stopclock is right twice a day.

Watch it:

Bolton insisted that “there was never any real disagreement” between the IAEA and the Bush administration on Saddam’s “physical capacity for a nuclear weapon.”

In fact, in February 2002, ElBaradei insisted that there was “no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear related activities in Iraq.” Meanwhile, Bush asserted that Saddam was meeting with his “nuclear mujahedeen” and that the United States could not wait “for the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”

Digg It!

Transcript: Read the rest of this entry »

Bolton: I ‘Absolutely’ Hope The U.S. Will Attack Iran In The Next ‘Six Months’»

Yesterday, Raw Story pointed out that former CIA operative Bob Baer told Fox News that the Bush administration will likely attack Iran in the coming months. “Iran policy is on close hold, but the feeling is we will hit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard corps sometime next six months or so,” said Baer.

Today, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton appeared on Fox News and responded. He said that while he couldn’t confirm Baer’s statements, he “absolutely” hoped they were true:

HEMMER: One final step here, too, that I want to take with you. You told one of our producers earlier today that you don’t know if it’s true — and you’ve made that clear in our interview here, that you don’t know what the odds are or are not against that — but you hope it’s true. Why do you hope it’s true?

BOLTON: Absolutely. I hope Iran understands that we are very serious, that we are determined they are not going to get a nuclear weapon capability, and unless they change the strategic decision they’ve been pursuing for close to 20 years, that that’s something they better factor into their calculations.

Watch it:

Bolton’s calls for strikes against Iran mirror those of other neocons, such as Bill Kristol and Michael Rubin, who also pushed for the Iraq invasion. Bolton’s claim that “Iran is interfering in Iraq and is posing a direct threat to our troops” is not a reason to strike the country. In reality, both Gen. Peter Pace and the National Intelligence Estimate have confirmed that Iran is “not likely” to be a major driver of violence in Iraq.

Digg It!

Transcript: Read the rest of this entry »