Israel may attack Iran nuclear facility by August 21 - Bolton

[Liberty]

John Bolton-’Israel may attack Iran by August 21′ the Jerusalem Connection Blog

News that Russia will load nuclear fuel rods into an Iranian reactor has touched off a countdown to a point of no return, a deadline by which Israel would have to launch an attack on Iran’s Bushehr reactor before it becomes effectively “immune” to any assault, says former Bush administration U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton.

Godspeed, Israel.

 

[johnrocks]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

 

[Liberty]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

Google = cool website.

 

[jillian]

Are you surprised that Bolton is making that speculation?

Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites
Hugh Tomlinson

Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times can reveal.

In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran.

To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defence systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defences will return to full alert.

“The Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way,” said a US defence source in the area. “They have already done tests to make sure their own jets aren’t scrambled and no one gets shot down. This has all been done with the agreement of the [US] State Department.”

Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites - Times Online

 

[GHook93]

John Bolton-’Israel may attack Iran by August 21′ the Jerusalem Connection Blog

News that Russia will load nuclear fuel rods into an Iranian reactor has touched off a countdown to a point of no return, a deadline by which Israel would have to launch an attack on Iran’s Bushehr reactor before it becomes effectively “immune” to any assault, says former Bush administration U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton.

Godspeed, Israel.

Not going to happen. The Israeli government has shown that they will listen to America and no way in hell the Obama administration has green lighted an attack!

 

[jillian]

John Bolton-’Israel may attack Iran by August 21′ the Jerusalem Connection Blog

News that Russia will load nuclear fuel rods into an Iranian reactor has touched off a countdown to a point of no return, a deadline by which Israel would have to launch an attack on Iran’s Bushehr reactor before it becomes effectively “immune” to any assault, says former Bush administration U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton.

Godspeed, Israel.

Not going to happen. The Israeli government has shown that they will listen to America and no way in hell the Obama administration has green lighted an attack!

saudi arabia wouldn't have cleared its airspace if we hadn't, imo. but it will be condemned by all if it happens...

 

[Wry Catcher]

John Bolton-’Israel may attack Iran by August 21′ the Jerusalem Connection Blog

News that Russia will load nuclear fuel rods into an Iranian reactor has touched off a countdown to a point of no return, a deadline by which Israel would have to launch an attack on Iran’s Bushehr reactor before it becomes effectively “immune” to any assault, says former Bush administration U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton.

Godspeed, Israel.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QasOIsL7ig]YouTube - John Bolton gets Questioned on PNAC[/ame]

John Bolton, neo-con extraordinaire

 

[PoliticalChic]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

Don't ya just love the broad accusation by libs, as though they had actually studied, or understood the subject?

Possibly you meant a different John Bolton...
This one, Ambassador Bolton has a B.A. from Yale College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has written for numerous publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and is the author of Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad.

He writes:

"In Iran we see another example of the outstretched hand being slapped away. Indeed, there is now at least anecdotal evidence that the regime in Tehran saw the Obama administration as so eager for negotiations that it would overlook any harsh steps Iran might take internally. So in response to the administration’s friendly overtures, the mullahs in Tehran conducted a grossly fraudulent presidential election on June 12 and have spent the subsequent months repressing their opponents. Close observers believe that there is no longer a power struggle in the Iranian government between hard-liners and moderates—if any moderates are left—but rather that power is flowing away from the ayatollahs and toward the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In other words, Iran is being transformed from a theological autocracy into a theological military dictatorship. And given that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps controls both Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its funding of international terrorism, this means that Iran will only become more dangerous as time goes on."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=10

 

[jillian]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

Don't ya just love the broad accusation by libs, as though they had actually studied, or understood the subject?

Possibly you meant a different John Bolton...
This one, Ambassador Bolton has a B.A. from Yale College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has written for numerous publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and is the author of Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad.

He writes:

"In Iran we see another example of the outstretched hand being slapped away. Indeed, there is now at least anecdotal evidence that the regime in Tehran saw the Obama administration as so eager for negotiations that it would overlook any harsh steps Iran might take internally. So in response to the administration’s friendly overtures, the mullahs in Tehran conducted a grossly fraudulent presidential election on June 12 and have spent the subsequent months repressing their opponents. Close observers believe that there is no longer a power struggle in the Iranian government between hard-liners and moderates—if any moderates are left—but rather that power is flowing away from the ayatollahs and toward the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In other words, Iran is being transformed from a theological autocracy into a theological military dictatorship. And given that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps controls both Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its funding of international terrorism, this means that Iran will only become more dangerous as time goes on."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=10

talk about broad brushes. what 'libs'? so far i saw one person make a comment about bolton.

and if bolton is correct about this, still doesn't mean he's not a neo-con. it would be silly to say he isn't.

as for the link to hillsdale college... really?

The National Review has described Hillsdale as a "citadel of American conservatism.

Hillsdale College - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[johnrocks]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

Don't ya just love the broad accusation by libs, as though they had actually studied, or understood the subject?

Possibly you meant a different John Bolton...
This one, Ambassador Bolton has a B.A. from Yale College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has written for numerous publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and is the author of Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad.

He writes:

"In Iran we see another example of the outstretched hand being slapped away. Indeed, there is now at least anecdotal evidence that the regime in Tehran saw the Obama administration as so eager for negotiations that it would overlook any harsh steps Iran might take internally. So in response to the administration’s friendly overtures, the mullahs in Tehran conducted a grossly fraudulent presidential election on June 12 and have spent the subsequent months repressing their opponents. Close observers believe that there is no longer a power struggle in the Iranian government between hard-liners and moderates—if any moderates are left—but rather that power is flowing away from the ayatollahs and toward the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In other words, Iran is being transformed from a theological autocracy into a theological military dictatorship. And given that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps controls both Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its funding of international terrorism, this means that Iran will only become more dangerous as time goes on."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=10

I'm not a lib, I'm not the one who supports a foreign policy actually called LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, Bolton and his merry band of neo cons do, the only difference between them and the Democrats foreign policy is the Democrats have more of a Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam flare about em, they both are the world's biggest "nosey neighbor"..

 

[PoliticalChic]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

Don't ya just love the broad accusation by libs, as though they had actually studied, or understood the subject?

Possibly you meant a different John Bolton...
This one, Ambassador Bolton has a B.A. from Yale College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has written for numerous publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and is the author of Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad.

He writes:

"In Iran we see another example of the outstretched hand being slapped away. Indeed, there is now at least anecdotal evidence that the regime in Tehran saw the Obama administration as so eager for negotiations that it would overlook any harsh steps Iran might take internally. So in response to the administration’s friendly overtures, the mullahs in Tehran conducted a grossly fraudulent presidential election on June 12 and have spent the subsequent months repressing their opponents. Close observers believe that there is no longer a power struggle in the Iranian government between hard-liners and moderates—if any moderates are left—but rather that power is flowing away from the ayatollahs and toward the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In other words, Iran is being transformed from a theological autocracy into a theological military dictatorship. And given that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps controls both Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its funding of international terrorism, this means that Iran will only become more dangerous as time goes on."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=10

talk about broad brushes. what 'libs'? so far i saw one person make a comment about bolton.

and if bolton is correct about this, still doesn't mean he's not a neo-con. it would be silly to say he isn't.

as for the link to hillsdale college... really?

The National Review has described Hillsdale as a "citadel of American conservatism.

Hillsdale College - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Let's see what has been established by your post...

Ambassador Bolton, is conservative.

I fail to see that as a pejorative.
Now, being liberal, on the other hand...


Further, writing of the ambassador seems to be on the head.
Or do you find some errors contained therein?

No...then I'll assume you agree with the ambassador.

 

[zzzz]

Isreal does not need our permission to bomb Iran. And why do they need to fly ofver SA, why not Jordan and Iraq and they could park refuelers in orbit over Iraq. Iraq won't touch them (with what?) and we will not interfere with any Israeli planes. For us, image wise, it is better to have them take the reactor out and we could act suprised when they do it. It is all about face.

My question is why hit it before the rods get there. Wait till the fuel gets there and hit it then so the whole area will be a radioactive wasteland and they would have to rebuild it somewhere else, if ever.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Has Bolton ever been right about anything?

Don't ya just love the broad accusation by libs, as though they had actually studied, or understood the subject?

Possibly you meant a different John Bolton...
This one, Ambassador Bolton has a B.A. from Yale College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has written for numerous publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and is the author of Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad.

He writes:

"In Iran we see another example of the outstretched hand being slapped away. Indeed, there is now at least anecdotal evidence that the regime in Tehran saw the Obama administration as so eager for negotiations that it would overlook any harsh steps Iran might take internally. So in response to the administration’s friendly overtures, the mullahs in Tehran conducted a grossly fraudulent presidential election on June 12 and have spent the subsequent months repressing their opponents. Close observers believe that there is no longer a power struggle in the Iranian government between hard-liners and moderates—if any moderates are left—but rather that power is flowing away from the ayatollahs and toward the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In other words, Iran is being transformed from a theological autocracy into a theological military dictatorship. And given that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps controls both Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its funding of international terrorism, this means that Iran will only become more dangerous as time goes on."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=10

I'm not a lib, I'm not the one who supports a foreign policy actually called LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, Bolton and his merry band of neo cons do, the only difference between them and the Democrats foreign policy is the Democrats have more of a Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam flare about em, they both are the world's biggest "nosey neighbor"..

I can't begin to tell you how pleased I am to see the exhibition of good sense contained in your exclamation "I'm not a lib,..."

Bravo!

But, enough chit chat...
As my post was a response to your hyperbolic query "Has Bolton ever been right about anything?"

Care to rephrase same after reading the Bolton quote?


Now, to add Pope's imprecation about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing, "Liberal Internationalism emerged during the second decade of the 20th century under the auspices of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson....Examples of liberal internationalists include U.S. Presidents Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."
Liberal internationalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your argument is that Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."are members of the 'Bolton and his merry band of neo cons ' lonely hearts club band?

And, thanks so much for revealing your educational background: "... Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam..."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Isreal does not need our permission to bomb Iran. And why do they need to fly ofver SA, why not Jordan and Iraq and they could park refuelers in orbit over Iraq. Iraq won't touch them (with what?) and we will not interfere with any Israeli planes. For us, image wise, it is better to have them take the reactor out and we could act suprised when they do it. It is all about face.

My question is why hit it before the rods get there. Wait till the fuel gets there and hit it then so the whole area will be a radioactive wasteland and they would have to rebuild it somewhere else, if ever.

While I understand all of the attention being given to the reactors, George Friedman of Stratfor made the following interesting point...

one cannot see the underground reactors, and the enriched material is no danger where it is.

Until it is assembled on a missile....

and US and Israeli satellites can see missiles ready to launch.
That event would be the opportune time for an attack.

 

[johnrocks]

Don't ya just love the broad accusation by libs, as though they had actually studied, or understood the subject?

Possibly you meant a different John Bolton...
This one, Ambassador Bolton has a B.A. from Yale College and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has written for numerous publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and is the author of Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad.

He writes:

"In Iran we see another example of the outstretched hand being slapped away. Indeed, there is now at least anecdotal evidence that the regime in Tehran saw the Obama administration as so eager for negotiations that it would overlook any harsh steps Iran might take internally. So in response to the administration’s friendly overtures, the mullahs in Tehran conducted a grossly fraudulent presidential election on June 12 and have spent the subsequent months repressing their opponents. Close observers believe that there is no longer a power struggle in the Iranian government between hard-liners and moderates—if any moderates are left—but rather that power is flowing away from the ayatollahs and toward the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In other words, Iran is being transformed from a theological autocracy into a theological military dictatorship. And given that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps controls both Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its funding of international terrorism, this means that Iran will only become more dangerous as time goes on."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=10

I'm not a lib, I'm not the one who supports a foreign policy actually called LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, Bolton and his merry band of neo cons do, the only difference between them and the Democrats foreign policy is the Democrats have more of a Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam flare about em, they both are the world's biggest "nosey neighbor"..

I can't begin to tell you how pleased I am to see the exhibition of good sense contained in your exclamation "I'm not a lib,..."

Bravo!

But, enough chit chat...
As my post was a response to your hyperbolic query "Has Bolton ever been right about anything?"

Care to rephrase same after reading the Bolton quote?


Now, to add Pope's imprecation about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing, "Liberal Internationalism emerged during the second decade of the 20th century under the auspices of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson....Examples of liberal internationalists include U.S. Presidents Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."
Liberal internationalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your argument is that Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."are members of the 'Bolton and his merry band of neo cons ' lonely hearts club band?

And, thanks so much for revealing your educational background: "... Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam..."

He's a liberal interventionist just like former Democrat ,Walter Mondale supporter Charles Krudehammer and former Daniel Patrick Moynihan supporter/weekly Standard Founder Bill Kristol is, if people consider that "conservative", then...he's conservative, there's not much difference in the Wilson,LBJ,Clinton lonely hearts club and Bush.

 

[johnrocks]

Here he is taking a beat down.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqNWG9sbuE&feature=related]YouTube - John Bolton gets pwned[/ame]

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm not a lib, I'm not the one who supports a foreign policy actually called LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, Bolton and his merry band of neo cons do, the only difference between them and the Democrats foreign policy is the Democrats have more of a Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam flare about em, they both are the world's biggest "nosey neighbor"..

I can't begin to tell you how pleased I am to see the exhibition of good sense contained in your exclamation "I'm not a lib,..."

Bravo!

But, enough chit chat...
As my post was a response to your hyperbolic query "Has Bolton ever been right about anything?"

Care to rephrase same after reading the Bolton quote?


Now, to add Pope's imprecation about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing, "Liberal Internationalism emerged during the second decade of the 20th century under the auspices of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson....Examples of liberal internationalists include U.S. Presidents Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."
Liberal internationalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your argument is that Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."are members of the 'Bolton and his merry band of neo cons ' lonely hearts club band?

And, thanks so much for revealing your educational background: "... Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam..."

He's a liberal interventionist just like former Democrat ,Walter Mondale supporter Charles Krudehammer and former Daniel Patrick Moynihan supporter/weekly Standard Founder Bill Kristol is, if people consider that "conservative", then...he's conservative, there's not much difference in the Wilson,LBJ,Clinton lonely hearts club and Bush.

This post seems rather far afield compared to "Has Bolton ever been right about anything?"

I see an interesting new thread aborning in this response, and I'll assume you are withdrawing the Bolton comment.

 

[johnrocks]

I can't begin to tell you how pleased I am to see the exhibition of good sense contained in your exclamation "I'm not a lib,..."

Bravo!

But, enough chit chat...
As my post was a response to your hyperbolic query "Has Bolton ever been right about anything?"

Care to rephrase same after reading the Bolton quote?


Now, to add Pope's imprecation about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing, "Liberal Internationalism emerged during the second decade of the 20th century under the auspices of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson....Examples of liberal internationalists include U.S. Presidents Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."
Liberal internationalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your argument is that Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush..."are members of the 'Bolton and his merry band of neo cons ' lonely hearts club band?

And, thanks so much for revealing your educational background: "... Mr. Rogers neighborhood feel to it and the neo cons have more of a Yosemite Sam..."

He's a liberal interventionist just like former Democrat ,Walter Mondale supporter Charles Krudehammer and former Daniel Patrick Moynihan supporter/weekly Standard Founder Bill Kristol is, if people consider that "conservative", then...he's conservative, there's not much difference in the Wilson,LBJ,Clinton lonely hearts club and Bush.

This post seems rather far afield compared to "Has Bolton ever been right about anything?"

I see an interesting new thread aborning in this response, and I'll assume you are withdrawing the Bolton comment.

Assume what you want, I've yet to see him right about anything, of course; like most things; that is a matter of opinion.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Bolton has not been playing with a full deck for a while.

Iran has no intention of bombing anyone.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here he is taking a beat down.
YouTube - John Bolton gets pwned

The vid is interesting, if poorly titled...
as Ambassador Bolton defended himself, while unable to claim 100% rectitude...

is that your definition of pawned?

If so, I claim that you have been pawned in light of my original post.

Probably would have been more accurate for you to have posted, originally, that you have serious disagreements with the ambassador, rather than the broad-brush smear of the ambassador.

That, of course,is what marked you as a liberal.