Tuesday, April 05, 2005

 

SAEN takes four weeks to "bolt on" their thinking cap



SAEN editorial, 5 Apr 05, entitled "U.N. reform serves interests of America"

[excerpt, with my emphasis]

A revitalized United Nations is essential for global security and in the best interests of the United States, despite past differences with the international body. The United Nations is playing an important role in helping rebuild Afghanistan and Iraq.

Whatever the organization's shortcomings, whatever functions it is incapable of performing, the United Nations is uniquely suited to address some international needs. That is why President Bush's nomination of U.N. critic John Bolton as U.N. ambassador may unexpectedly amount to an act of tough love.

As with President Nixon going to China, it may require a Bolton-like figure to transform the U.S.-U.N. relationship.

SAEN editorial, 10 Mar 05, entitled "Bolton appointment sends puzzling signal"

[excerpt, with my emphasis]

With the appointment of John Bolton as U.S. representative to the United Nations, President Bush has sent a mixed message to the world.

After a tough, go-it-alone stand his first term, Bush appeared to signal a return to greater reliance on diplomacy and multilateralism when he visited Europe recently.

The appointment of Bolton, known as a controversial hard-liner who has been scathingly critical of the United Nations, calls that assumption into question...

But the world's nations — friend and foe alike — have been put on notice that they won't find a kinder and gentler second Bush administration. Is that really the message needed at this moment?


Comments:
That's your "liberal" media for you.
Actually, conservatives have it about right calling it the MSM (Mainstream media) because it generally reflects a wishy-washy, middle-of-the-road, let's-try-and-please-everybody attitude.
Bolton is still a bad choice for the U.N. and a liberal paper with convictions would know that.
 
Bolton is what we need at the UN (short of doing away with the UN). We need someone to represent the United States interests, not someone that will cow down to the dictator members of that vastly corrupt organization!
 
Mike, what are your specific problems with Bolton?
 
Like I’ve said before, I think appointing Bolton to the U.N. post is like appointing a pacifist to be Secretary of Defense. When Republicans don't like a particular government entity, rather than just shuting it down they appoint people who are diametrically opposed to everything it is supposed to be doing - like Reagan appointing James Watt to be Secretary of Interior (the guy who saw no need in preserving our national parks and wilderness because Jesus' Second Coming was just around the corner and the world was about to end anyway).

Here is some more detail on why he is wrong for the U.N. job.
 
James Watt to be Secretary of Interior (the guy who saw no need in preserving our national parks and wilderness because Jesus' Second Coming was just around the corner and the world was about to end anyway).

Mike, even the bilious Bill Moyers had the decency to apologize to James Watt for repeating that outrageous canard...perhaps you should, too.
 
When Republicans don't like a particular government entity, rather than just shuting it down they appoint people who are diametrically opposed to everything it is supposed to be doing

That's pretty rich. Bolton, in fact, supports everything the UN SHOULD be doing, but fails to do because of its corruption and coddling of dictators. That's the whole point of the SAEN editorial...even THEY realize the UN badly needs another Jeane Kirkpatrick or Patrick Moynihan to help pull it up out of the swamp of its corruption. Annan's resignation would help, too.
 
Whoa there Mike! I thought William Cohen was a pacifist, and a well-dressed one at that.
 
Well that's the first I've heard that that quote - which has been floating around for 20-plus years - was misattributed. Why is Watt just now complaining about it? And does this mean he does not (or did not) hold those beliefs or just that he didn't say that particular quote that way? Lot of questions. But in the meantime I will retract my statement above and won't use that quote again.
But I still stand by my pacifist running the DOD analogy. And no, I wouldn't call William Cohen, a Republican and long-time member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, a pacifist. Although I'll admit that he might seem like a pacifist compared to some of the war-monging chickenhawks in the GOP today.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

archives