How hiring John Bolton would once again prove Trump's campaign rhetoric to be total merde

[Miles Archer]

Hiring John Bolton Would Be a Betrayal of Donald Trump's Base
The president won the 2016 election with foreign-policy positions antithetical to those championed by the perennially hawkish Iraq War supporter.



Here’s what he told voters:

We’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that, frankly, if they were there and if we could have spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems—our airports and all the other problems we have—we would have been a lot better off, I can tell you that right now. We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East—we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away—and for what?

It’s not like we had victory.

It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the $4 trillion or $5 trillion. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, airports, and everything else that are all falling apart!

Around the same time, John Bolton was telling David Drucker of The Washington Examiner, “I still think the decision to overthrow Saddam was correct. I think decisions made after that decision were wrong, although I think the worst decision made after that was the 2011 decision to withdraw U.S. and coalition forces. The people who say, ‘Oh, things would have been much better if you didn’t overthrow Saddam,’ miss the point that today’s Middle East does not flow totally and unchangeably from the decision to overthrow Saddam alone.”

[longship]

1. A "Goo Goo G'Joob" to him, too.

Sheesh!

[Hoyt]

2. Warmongering, racist Bolton may be last one to accept an offer from trump.

[brush]

3. Just what we need. Bolton involved with NK. Nuke war here we come.

Last edited Sat Mar 10, 2018, 01:28 PM - Edit history (1)