Here are a few quotes about the guy. No his record is NOT squeaky clean. Some of his policies and associations actually suck. But as the man for this particular job, I see no better fit.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed in 1997, Bolton articulated his dismissive view of international treaties. "Treaties are law only for U.S. domestic purposes," he wrote, "In their international operation, treaties are simply political obligations." In other words, international treaties signed by the United States should not be considered as a body of law that the United States should respect in its international engagement but rather just political considerations that can be ignored at will.
In early 2001 Bolton observed: "It is a big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law even when it may seem in our short-term interest to do so because, over the long term, the goal of those who think that international law really means anything are those who want to constrict the United States ."
In 1998, when he was senior vice president of the American Enterprise Institute, Bolton described the ICC as "a product of fuzzy-minded romanticism [that] is not just naïve, but dangerous."8 Early in the first year of the Bush administration, Bolton prevailed upon Secretary of State Colin Powell to give him the honor of renouncing the Clinton administration's signature of the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC). Bolton called the moment he signed the letter abrogating Clinton 's approval of the ICC "the happiest moment in my government service."
Bolton has long dismissed the legitimacy of the United Nations--a multilateral organization that the United States played a key role in creating--not as a pet organization but as a international organization dedicated to "collective security." A longtime activist with the Federalist Society, Bolton has used this right-wing association of lawyers, judges, and legal experts as a forum to lash out against the United Nations. In a 1994 speech at the liberal World Federalist Association, Bolton declared that "there is no such thing as the United Nations." To underscore his point, Bolton said. "If the UN secretary building in New York lost ten stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."
Bolton is a militarist who embraces the "peace through strength" philosophy of international affairs. Praising Bolton in a speech he delivered on January 1, 2001 at the American Enterprise Institute, Sen. Jesse Helms, who was chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said, "John Bolton is the kind of man with whom I would want to stand at Armageddon."
In mid-2001 Bolton announced at the UN Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons that Washington opposed any initiative to regulate trade in small arms or in non-military rifles--or any effort that would "abrogate the constitutional right to bear arms." Accompanying Bolton to the conference were members of the National Rifle Association (NRA). "It is precisely those weapons that Bolton would exclude from the purview of this conference that are actually killing people and endangering communities around the world," said Tamar Gabelnick, director of the Arms Sales Monitoring Project at the Federation of American Scientists. She charged that the U.S. delegation, led by Arms Control Secretary Bolton, single-handedly destroyed any possibility of consensus around the Small Arms Action Plan.17
Bolton in February 2003 said that once regime change plans in Iraq were completed, "it will be necessary to deal with threats from Syria , Iran , and North Korea afterwards."21
Bolton is not only one of the administration's leading hawks on China policy, he is also its strongest advocate of Taiwan's independence and of U.S. defense of Taiwan.
John Bolton, a Yale-trained lawyer, rejects the legitimacy of international law--at least when international conventions, treaties, and norms constrain what he regards as U.S. national interests. Bolton also has a record of questionable legal and ethical dealings at home.
http://www.counterpunch.org/barry03142005.html
Pros:
- Told the UN Criminal Court to shove it up their ass. We do not need an international court bypassing our individual Constitutional rights.
- Told the UN to shove their arms control up their ass, recognizing our second amendment rights as provided in the US (not UN!) Constitution.
- Recognized that International Treaties can be invalid and useless, and we have the right as a sovereign nation to enforce, refuse, or maintain such treaties. For example, after the First World War, Germany was bound to the League of Nations Versailles Treaty. European nations did a great job at enforcing that! See WW 2. In contrast, I know the same can be said about Iraq, but I always say if Bush shoved the UN’s own violated resolutions into their faces and went unilaterally because the UN is a paper tiger, I would have NO complaints about Iraq. Well, maybe a better exit strategy and better nation building.
- Stated the facts about China and North Korea.
Cons:
- PNAC association.
- He can be lumped as a neocon.
You know, and then I think about where this man is going to work. The United Nations, the most corrupt and useless organization that really needs to be sent packing away from US soil. With what issues Bolton has, I think he cares about American policy, sees the UN corruption for what it is, and will kick some ass representing our country. Why do you say, read below.
Demonstrating how disconnected the UN is from reality, Rosett notes that in a recent UN survey Secretary General Kofi Anan frets over ‘tone at the top,’ a reference to the ‘less positive’ opinion most UN staffers have of their senior leaders. The problem isn’t tone, she continues, but ‘accountability at the top’ (emphasis added). In detailed testimony provided to the House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, Rosett elaborated at length the incredible web of corruption that defined and obscured the UN Oil for Food Program.
Oil for Food was in theory a program whereby Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, though under international UN embargo, could sell limited amounts of oil and in return use the funds generated to purchase needed commodities such as food and medical supplies for its population. It was established by December 1996 and continued under UN supervision until Coalition forces toppled Saddam Hussein in last year.
The fraud represented in the Oil for Food program, encouraged and virtually administered by the UN, gave Saddam funds to continue to procure missile technology from North Korea, pursue WMD research and development programs, and funnel money to his own thugs and terrorist groups like Ansar al-Islam, Islamic Jihad and suicide bombers. In short, the UN kept in power the very dictator they professed to condemn in the Security Council chambers.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14000
In other words, screw the UN except for their fantastic human rights and aid programs. I did not vote for them or Kofi Anan.
