Bolton's a good choice for the UN

[xpat]

I got to thinking about that. Bush sends a bull in a china shop to do delicate diplomatic work in an environment where most folks are at the very least suspicious of our government.

So, what's up next on the administration's agenda? They are going to want a fig leaf from the UN to legitimize an attack on Iran. With Bolton as ambassador, the most likely chain of events will be the moral equivalent of him starting a knife fight in the General Assembly, followed by our resolution being heaved in the East River in a cement block.

Great! What happens next?

1) The administration backs down from its goal of taking over Iran. Not likely.

2) The invasion goes ahead with an overstretched military, maybe a draft, Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz, oil goes to $gazillions a barrel.

It's a win-win situation for domestic and foreign opposition to the administration. They come out further weakened militarily, economically and morally.

Go for Bolton at the UN!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51669-2005Apr13.html

[emanymton]

1. Your Scenario For Victory Is NOT A Win... All Lose !

[xpat]

10. How so? n/t

[Catholic Sensation]

2. Yes, America failing and millions of people suffering is great

how "progressive" of you

:eyes:

[xpat]

9. Be precise

The American Empire failing, not America.

You and I are America, we win when the American Empire fails.

Check carefully where your loyalties lie.

[mmonk]

3. yeah,

like Wolfowitz's appointment to the world bank was a victory.

[xpat]

7. You're not far off

with that remark, although your intention is to be sarcastic.

The World Bank's mission is to advance the American Empire's agenda. This fact has been obscured in the past, and few people who have not studied it's activities closely, understand that. By appointing Wolfowitz, the administration has let the cat out of the bag.

Remember that Robert McNamara, who cut his teeth on the fire-bombing of Japanese civilian populations then ran the Vietnam massacres for Johnson, went on to the World Bank.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

4. You're not taking into account the thousands of Innocent people

...who would lose their lives in this plan. Not to mention the number of families that would be destroyed.

[Bridget Burke]

5. Bullshit.

Oh--we're all such America haters here that we'd be thrilled by so much pain & misery, just as long as it made the Republicans look bad.

[xpat]

6. My point is not to make Republicans look bad

- they don't need my help to do that - but to weaken the American Empire. To the extent that we can bring down the empire, that is positive for most Americans and the rest of the world.

If you have some good ideas about how to do that, let's hear them.

Don't count on voting in a Democratic administration to bring down the empire, as both parties agree in principal on the imperial strategy.

Here are some other ideas that come to mind.

1) Encourage our creditors to dump dollars or stop buying treasury notes.

2) Organize boycotts of US goods and services abroad.

3) Encourage Venezuela to cut off US oil exports.

4) Encourage OPEC to switch to the euro for oil trade.

5) Build a progressive third party in the US.

I am not an America-hater, as you implied in your post, but I do, and I would think that any progressive American would, hate the American Empire. It has caused far more pain and misery in the world than any embarassment Bolton could possibly generate at the UN. Think about the 2-3 million Indochinese that we massacred.

[Bridget Burke]

8. No, I don't think YOU are an America-hater...

But your post sounded like a burlesque of those far-left Liberals the Right Wingers keep talking about. Shouldn't you spell
America "Amerikkka"?

Just like 2000, when Nader thought that things had to get much worse before the revolution could occur. Thanks a lot!

[xpat]

11. I'm not making a "things must get much worse" argument.

My point is that it would be a mistake to stop our enemy while he's making a mistake. Napoleon said something like that. These guys are increasingly losing touch with reality. To the extent that we jump up and down about something like the Bolton or the Wolfowitz nomination, we are doing them a favor. Let them gum up their works. It helps us.

By contrast, something like the bankruptcy bill should be fought and defeated, if possible. Simply increasing the misery index for poor and middle class citizens doesn't energize them, it demoralizes them.

The same thing can be said of the fight against social security privatization. If we win that battle, which looks likely, it energizes people for future fights, while concretely preserving their standard of living.

At the same time, victories in either of these battles deprives the enemy of wealth that they would like to wrest from our control, further weakening the empire.

Another administration initiative that we should not have opposed was the appointment of the demonstrably incompetent Condi Rice to succeed Colin Powell. That was a major blow to imperial prestige. Powell was respected, whereas Condi is laughed at, undermining, in the same way the Bolton appointment could, the empire's ability to carry out foreign policy.

PS: I ran spellcheck on this post, which suggested that I replace "Wolfowitz" by "halfwits". See what I mean? Even the computer sees through them.

[xpat]

12. Kick for the Friday night crowd.

Have a nice weekend.