Down By The Bay

Context, as they say, is everything.

On Wednesday, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton told CNN's Lou Dobbs that Iran and North Korea "face stark choices" regarding their respective nuclear sabre-rattling:

Iran is confronted with choosing between negotiations with the United States and its European allies and being increasingly isolated, U. S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton told Lou Dobbs on last night’s Lou Dobbs Reports.

Commenting on Dobbs’ remark that Iran faces a very stark choice Bolton said "If they choose one path, they have the possibility of the United States sitting down at the table with them to talk about their nuclear program.

"If they choose the other path, then they are going to be increasingly isolated internationally, with increased economic and political pressure. So, that's why the President really has put the ball back in their court and said, we're waiting for an answer."…

Turning to North Korea, Bolton said: "The principal thing that we're focusing on right now is convincing North Korea not to launch that missile and a variety of governments in the region and around the world have all made the same point. I don't think there's any support for North Korea proceeding with that test.

"But what we've made clear is, if they do, we're beginning preliminary discussions in the Security Council, the launch of a missile, particularly if it goes over Japanese territory, is clearly a threat to international peace and security, something we can't accept."

So, the "stark choice" that the mullahs and NoKos have is knuckling under to the "international community" voluntarily or….face - what was it he said again? - "international isolation," primarily through the vehicle of the U.N.

This would be the same U.N. that wants to globally regulate just about everything; refuses to even define "terrorism" (lest it offend its A-list dictators, terror-sponsors, and thugs) but goes out of its way to demand that "all states [have a mandatory] duty to ban torture and give all security detainees a fair trial" - which itself ignores the clear stipulations of international law as it relates to "illegal combatants"; and at the same bloody time wants its own army, euphemistically called an "international rapid {heh} reaction force," that could be deployed within forty-eight hours to intervene in "emergency situations around the globe." Emergency situations like liberating Guantanamo Bay, I'm guessing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that John Bolton is our man at Turtle Bay. But my first choice was always getting out of the UN just on general principles (you know, having standards for membership like not allowing in dictators, terror-sponsors, and thugs) and evicting it from our territory for the same reason. Its original ostensible purpose - to provide a peaceful means of settling international disputes short of war - is U-S-E-L-E-S-S. The Russians and ChiComms (and the French when the impudent mood strikes them) use the Security Council against us like a straitjacket to defeat that very raison d'etere. They were protecting Saddam Hussein while he built the means to plunge the world into Armageddon, and now they're doing the same thing with both Iran and North Korea. And the gelded Bushies, their days of unilateralism and preemption looooong gone, are meekly and almost penitently allowing themselves to be tied down and restrained while the mullahs and Kim jong-il progress toward the the climax Saddam left unfinished.

It is profoundly dismaying to see John Bolton - the erstwhile straight-talker, bottom-liner, and king of blunt - make statements like the following:

"I think Russia and China are committed to the proposition that Iran should not be allowed to have nuclear weapons. That's the most important strategic area of agreement.

"They've also committed to Secretary Rice that if Iran chooses the wrong path, that they'll support measures against them.

"Now, the test will come if Iran does choose the wrong path and we get to the Security Council. That's something we've been prepared for, we remain prepared for, but it will be a test of the Security Council to see whether it can deal with an Iran that doesn't want to give up that nuclear program."

…and…

"The [ChiComms] have explained to us that they have tried to persuade North Korea not to do this test launch, but they say, as they frequently do, you know, we don't have a lot of influence over North Korea. We think they do, we hope they'll exercise it."

The only part of the above two quotes that wasn't brain-dead diplospeak was the last sentence, where Bolton essentially calls the ChiComms liars on their control over North Korea. The rest of it is a joke. Russia and Red China will never - N-E-V-E-R - back any Security Council sanctions against Iran. Even if they did, or simply abstained, France would probably block them in turn. And if sanctions did win approval, so what? When have economic sanctions ever prevented a dictatorial, imperialistic regime from pursuing military buildups and WMD? Did they even slow down Saddam Hussein? Anybody remember the $21 BILLION U.N. Oil for Food scandal? That the Russians evacuated Saddam's WMD to Syria? That the Russians are the prime architects of Iran's nuclear program? HELLO????

Ditto the "six-party talks" with North Korea. The whole thing is frakking pointless. It's the epitome of five-knuckle shuffling. No quantity of "carrots" is ever going to persuade Kim to give up his nukes. You might as well offer him incentives to get himself castrated, because that's pretty much the psychological purpose they serve for him. And no fusillade of "sticks" is ever going to dissuade Kim from building more, or using them, for that matter, because the only "stick" he would take seriously would be the kind with fins and warheads full of all manner of cans of whup-ass. Given the history of the past twelve years of US-NoKo relations, what reason does Kim have to believe that we would lift a finger to militarily defend South Korea or Japan?

That's the reality, folks. North Korea has nukes and now, apparently, ICBMs, and they're helping the mullahgarchy to follow in their footsteps. And nothing is going to stop them from eventually, and inevitably, plunging the world into chaos except U.S. military action to topple both regimes. The rest of it is all playing out the string until the war begins - on the bad guys' terms.

Perhaps the lamest irony is Bolton fretting over Iran dithering on a response to the latest danegold offered up by the Eunuchs. Time is indeed running out, but not for the details of the West's pre-emptive surrender to the mullahs. They'll never settle for it being less than unconditional anyway.

And the hell of it is, John Bolton has got to know it. Yet he has to go through these motions anyway.

Makes me wonder if he's having second thoughts about his current career path.