Bolton Claims He Has ‘Always Said’ Striking Iran Is ‘Deeply Unattractive’
Bolton Claims He Has ‘Always Said’ Striking Iran Is ‘Deeply Unattractive’
On the Friday edition of Hannity and Colmes, Alan Colmes questioned former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton about his “statements over the last few months” advocating that the Bush administration use military force against Iran. Bolton denied having made such statements, replying that “would not be an accurate reflection of my view”:
COLMES: Well, you’ve said — statements over the last few months that either you believe the Bush administration is going to strike or that you would like if there were a first strike against Iran. Would that be an accurate reflection of your view?
BOLTON: No, it would not be an accurate reflection of my view. In fact, I’ve said most recently I don’t think the Bush administration will use force, and I have always said, Alan, always said, that the use of force against Iran’s nuclear program is deeply unattractive.
Watch it:
However, Bolton has not always found the use of force against Iran “deeply unattractive.” To the contrary, he has vigorously pushed the administration to attack Iran, believing it the “prudent” thing to do:
- Asked if he could imagine a scenario where Bush would strike Iran before the end of his term, Bolton responded “I think so, definitely.” [Fox News, 5/7/08]
- Bolton explained that a U.S. military strike on Iran is “really the most prudent thing to do.” [Fox News, 5/5/08]
- Bolton said that he “absolutely” hopes the U.S. will attack Iran in the “next six months.” [Fox News, 8/22/07]
But Bolton doesn’t only theorize about the U.S. striking Iran. On multiple occasions, he has suggested that Israel will attack Iran “after our elections and before the inauguration of the next President,” which he explained “makes a lot of sense.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
70 Responses to “Bolton Claims He Has ‘Always Said’ Striking Iran Is ‘Deeply Unattractive’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
WOW... Just, wow...
The depths of this man's bullshit know no bounds.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:40 pmSeeming to recognize that Iran's missiles do not have the capability to come anywhere near the United States, Bolton backtracked, saying Iran would put the missiles on steam ships and "sail" them "up the East or the West Coast" to put them in range.
This is no small feat for a country without a navy.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:42 pmBut Israel striking Iran?
Now THAT'S really attractive, isn't it, Walrus?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:43 pmBolton backtracked, saying Iran would put the missiles on steam ships and "sail" them "up the East or the West Coast" to put them in range.
"...and we'll photo shop them as proof!"
July 14th, 2008 at 3:43 pmBolton Claims He Has ‘Always Said’ Striking Iran is ‘Deeply Unattractive’
So is his appearance...............
July 14th, 2008 at 3:44 pmDeeply unattractive. Well, yeah, I guess killing the innocent could be termed as unattractive. However, to them, they would just be dead.
What a creepy guy!
July 14th, 2008 at 3:44 pmAnd Bolton would know "deeply unattractive", poor man.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:44 pmApparently, the footage of the Iranian missile launches was forged. (Either photo shopped or old footage or both).
There is speculation that the Iranians released the false footage in response to a recent drop in oil prices.
Apparently it worked, because after the footage aired in the media, oil prices shot back up.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:46 pmPoor Bolton is an endangered species due to the great demand for his whiskers as pipe cleaners.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:47 pm*snort*
I'm glad that I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that headline.It would have gone all over my laptop. But the whiplash has damaged my neck. Don't they know we've got video footage?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:48 pmWhat "drop in oil prices", twit?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:48 pmbackup Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently, the footage of the Iranian missile launches was forged. (Either photo shopped or old footage or both).
There is speculation that the Iranians released the false footage in response to a recent drop in oil prices.
Apparently it worked, because after the footage aired in the media, oil prices shot back up.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
For someone who supported the Chimpy (mal)administration for so long , I find it hilarious that you believe you know what the reasoning behind anything is , much less the Iranians and their intentions and actions.........
July 14th, 2008 at 3:48 pmGot lies?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:49 pmOh - and we have always been at war with EASTasia!!
July 14th, 2008 at 3:50 pmAny deficiencies in his looks are highly augmented by the deficiencies of his mind.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:50 pmAnother Republican who somehow doesn't realize that most of what they say is recorded for prosperity.
What an a$$hat.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:53 pmHussein McCain Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any deficiencies in his looks are highly augmented by the deficiencies of his mind.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
And all of his shortcomings are dissolved by the sporting of that stylish 'stache of his............
July 14th, 2008 at 3:53 pmFor someone who supported the Chimpy (mal)administration for so long , I find it hilarious that you believe you know what the reasoning behind anything is , much less the Iranians and their intentions and actions………
backup has been wrong on almost all posts and topics since I have been hanging around TP. After sooooo many errors, why offer any more at all, backup? I mean, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then, but your batting average has been abysmal, just awful.
Tell us again, backup. Why listen to you? Why?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:54 pmSteam ships? What century is Bolton living in?
July 14th, 2008 at 3:54 pmWhether real or not, Iran's missile testing last week has spurred enough controversy to push the price of crude oil higher yet, industry analysts say.
The missile testing, along with the U.S. Department of Energy reporting a slight decrease in fuel inventory, pushed the price of crude oil per barrel up from $145.08 to more than $147 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange July 11.
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2008/07/14/daily4.html
July 14th, 2008 at 3:54 pmCal Malenky Says:
Steam ships? What century is Bolton living in?
I think Bolton creates his own mentality. Not much of it, either.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:56 pmSteam ships sailing up the coast...
Bolton is certified. They should hang him from his 'stache...
July 14th, 2008 at 3:59 pmYou can't really fault him for that, though. He's not a member of the "Reality-Based Community".
July 14th, 2008 at 4:00 pmI've asked this question on a couple of threads here, and still haven't gotten a reasonable answer.
What strategic purpose would be served by an Iranian attack on either Israel or the US?
July 14th, 2008 at 4:02 pmThis charts not great but you get the idea. The price of oil fell from the mid 140's to the mid 130's. The news of the Iranian missles hit on Thursday. By Friday the price shot up $10 to $147.
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/intraday/CO/88
July 14th, 2008 at 4:03 pmcrackup Says:
Apparently, the footage of the Iranian missile launches was forged. (Either photo shopped or old footage or both).
There is speculation that the Iranians released the false footage in response to a recent drop in oil prices.
Ah HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Here's some more comedic gems:
"We must do something before the smoking gun of a mushroom cloud happens here"
"We know that they (WMD) are south of Baghdad, as well as west and east, and somewhat north"
And lest we forget the photoshop of president Bush in front of the troops!
July 14th, 2008 at 4:07 pmYou don't suppose those crafty Iranians have developed iron clad steam ships? Sounds like Bolt-on is auditioning for the State department job in Johnny Mac's 19th century cabinet to go along with Phil "it's all in your mind" Gramm at Treasury, Luscious Lindsey Graham as Attorney General and G.I. Joe Lieberman at the aptly renamed War Department.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:09 pmPlease...nothing would give Bolton a bigger woody than bombing the crap out of Iran, or pretty much anywhere for that matter.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
July 14th, 2008 at 4:09 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
What strategic purpose would be served by an Iranian attack on either Israel or the US?
Freedom and democracy, of course...
oh, you mean, Iran attacking another country. Oh, horrible! Inhumane! Barbarians!
July 14th, 2008 at 4:09 pmralph. This is a great question. I don't think there is one. The only thing that seems to get people worked up is the 'wipe Israel off the map comments'.
I acknowledge there is dispute that the Iranian president's comments may have been mistranslated.
Although, there may be no good strategic reason to attack Israel or the U.S., the Iranians may benefit by the increase in crude prices that accompany the sabre rattling.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:12 pmbackup Says:
Although, there may be no good strategic reason to attack Israel or the U.S., the Iranians may benefit by the increase in crude prices that accompany the sabre rattling.
Yeah, attacking the superpower of the world. That seems like an intelligent thing to do. Again, when was the last time a country attacked US soil? And what was the strategy won after that?
July 14th, 2008 at 4:16 pmYeah, that's a friggin' *great* reason to nuke a country: that country's batsh*t crazy leader said something stupid.
Uh-oh. Better be careful - we've got a batsh*t crazy leader who routinely says stupid things...
July 14th, 2008 at 4:18 pmJuan C.
maybe you didn't really read my post.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:18 pmWhat, too much pissing in his pants finally put out the fire to "cleanse" the Middle East?
Bolton, eat my country's fcuk, you worthless schmuck.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:18 pmBackup, yes, I did.
You are trying to project your warmongering self on Iran.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:21 pmStratRat. Here's me on June 16th:
And here's Obama on June 25th:
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Obama_to_announce_foreign_trip_soon_06252008.html
StratRat. I only suggest you listen to me, if your interested in what may happen in the future.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:23 pmROFL!!!!
July 14th, 2008 at 4:25 pmif your interested in what may happen in the future.
No, we're not interested in the next time you take a shit.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:26 pmGuess he was talking out of a different side of his mouth last year.
Where is some friendly fire when you need it?
July 14th, 2008 at 4:26 pmbackup = Miss Cleo
July 14th, 2008 at 4:26 pmHere's me from May 31st.
portion of post #31 from this thread:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/31/worlds-largest-confederate-flag-to-be-flown-in-tampa/
and Obama from June 1st:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/981141,obama053108.article
I mean, come on, I don't like to brag, but it's like posting with carnac the magnificent.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:33 pmBlah, blah, blah. And the drums beats on crapola spin from the psychopath Bolton. Pass the popcorn please.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:37 pmJuan. Well, than I didn't do a good job of communicating it. The point that I'm making is that Iranians might be saber rattling to up the price of oil.
In my mind, that makes the real threat from Iran, less credible. And diminishes the need for any action to the less credible threat.
It's an argument against military action.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:38 pmI mean, come on, I don’t like to brag, but it’s like posting with carnac the magnificent.
Or backup, the propagandist, who never tells the whole truth.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:40 pmJuan. Well, than I didn’t do a good job of communicating it. The point that I’m making is that Iranians might be saber rattling to up the price of oil.
First, one must believe the two are events connected by considered causality. Fact "a": Iran launches missiles. Fact "b": price goes up. Was the launch intended to raise the price of oil? On what evidence?
July 14th, 2008 at 4:44 pmAhmadinejad wants to convert all Iranian Trucks and Cars to run on Natural Gas. Why?
Because Iran has almost No capacity to refine it's own crude oil into gasoline and diesel...and is very vulnerable to an economic embargo. And converting over to natural gas is relatively easy...farm tractors have been adapted this way for years. And natural gas is abundant in Iran.
I don't believe Iran is rattling sabres to jack up the price of oil...they don't want to risk economic sanctions or an attack. I think the relative calm in Iraq is due to the same reason. Iran is trying to cool it.
The missile test.....a way to let America and Israel know they will pay a price for attacking Iran.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:54 pmBolton is a liar and the world knows it. That he lies this blatantly is shameful & shows what an arrogant fool he is.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:59 pmbarfly. It's only speculation. But, let me ask you this:
Why would Iranians release forged video of missle launches? What purpose would they have?
July 14th, 2008 at 5:01 pmI've got to go. I'll check back later.
July 14th, 2008 at 5:03 pmA misleading photo of four missiles being launched at once during the test, instead of the correct three, made its way to the front pages .
Apparently, this ham-handed effort by Iran, was to make it seem that their missiles are 100% effective instead of 75%.
Still...who wants to court 3/4ths of a disaster.
July 14th, 2008 at 5:12 pmThat's easy. Because one of the missiles didn't fire. Pretty embarrassing to show off photos of a missile test when only three out of four fired.
July 14th, 2008 at 5:18 pmbackupwomantastic wants to ask questions of the Iranian's motives while wearing a tin foil hat, but she refuses to ask questions of the motives of herr dubyah.
July 14th, 2008 at 5:30 pmOT but a must read:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/14/7569/26098/54/551162
"Since the beginning of this year, military experts that I’ve talked to argue that the fall-off in violence in Iraq had almost NOTHING to do with the INCREASE in American troop levels -- and everything to do with actually TALKING with and supporting the previous insurgents. Recent published reports confirm that talks with the insurgents began all the way back in December of 2003, when military officers met with Sunni insurgent leaders in Amman, Jordan. Not only that, but when those talks were actually opposed by the administration, the military went ahead with the talks anyway."
"The increase in American troops in Iraq had nothing to do with defeating the Iraqi insurgency and everything to do with actually talking with them. To claim otherwise is to market a myth and it’s time for John McCain to acknowledge it -- to give credit where credit is due: to those fine officers of our military who decided to talk, even as the administration continued to beat the war drums."
Lt. Gen. Robt. Gard
July 14th, 2008 at 5:51 pmTell a lie often enough.....
Just saying.
July 14th, 2008 at 6:24 pmThis bastard Bolton is an enemey of the state!!
A traitor assh0le!!
He can't stop lying just like GW Botch and Dick(head) Vadar!!!
July 14th, 2008 at 6:54 pmIf it weren't so stupid, and "concern-troll-like, and if it were more self-aggrandizing, I could almost confuse backdump for mightyaphrodite.
Either way, just as dumbfounded by reality.
July 14th, 2008 at 7:48 pmSteamships? The Iranians are sailing steamships to our coastal waters to launch missles? Come on, he must be joking.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:34 pmWell, the steamship theory might be a step more realistic than the sling shot theory.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:43 pmRalph, I've thought that very same question many times and I don't have the answer. The only one I can come up with is total world chaos.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:50 pmRalph - apologies - I glanced at your comment and was thinking what strategic purpose would be served by an US attack on Iran and all I could of was world chaos.
Reading your question as it is written, there is NO strategic purpose for Iran to attack the US. Iran saw what happened to Iraq and what happened with North Korea. Most of Iran's neighbors have nukes... it only makes sense for Iran to want to at least appear strong. Weak nations get invaded by the US.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:56 pmCats r Flyfishn Says
"total world chaos"
You get an A++
The rich get richer with chaos and war...
July 14th, 2008 at 9:02 pmJuan C,
July 14th, 2008 at 10:36 pmThe last country to attack the US on US territory was Saudi Arabia with covert help provided by a country south of Lebanon, north of Egypt and west of the West Bank.
Oops, did he say steamships ?
Bolton meant birch bark canoes - twelve of them with missiles covered with those bright blue plastic tarps like you get at WalMart. Paddle them from Iran, around Africa, across the Atlantic - them launch these ballistic missiles once - just off the coast of America.
Of course these would be STEALTH birch bark canoes.
That's what Bolton meant to say.
July 14th, 2008 at 11:48 pm.
John Bolton = NEOCLOWN
Denial is more than a river in Egypt...
... It's modus operandi for ALL NEOCLOWNS.
When in doubt... Deny, Lie, Obstruct...
.
July 15th, 2008 at 12:48 amI hope John Bolton's career isn't adversely affected by his nomination for Scuzbag of the Year.
July 15th, 2008 at 3:25 amMoustacheiou, for all his hullaballo and supposed knowledge of international affairs vis-a-vis his post at the U.N., doesn't remember that less than a week ago, Iran tested missiles with enough range to decimate Israeli targets.
Not to mention that even if he knew squat about current events, he would realize that more than one U.S. carrier is anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, the George H.W. Bush among that elite squad. Sure, Moustacheioued Gepetto pulled a McCain flip-flop, but you have to remember thAT Bolton has neither spine nor brain--only a scruff of hair on his lip three centuries old.
Anyone with half a brain knows by know that if IRan wanted a Gulf of Tonkin with us, we've given them over a year of opportunity. Simply stated, Iran is smarter than the geriatrics running the United States war policy board, and I don't think I'm alone in believing that any country with a council/board that discussed war policy on a daily basis is subject to abject failure.
July 15th, 2008 at 4:04 amThis comment is off topic but I have to rant at CNN and the other "networks" for their disgusting and public playing of "Bill's Wife Is Not A Whore" all through the day.
Everyone was discussing why Bill's Wife Is Not A Whore and why no one should pass around the rumor that Bill's Wife is A Whore. The picture of Bill's wife on the cover of a famous magazine does not depict Bill's Wife As A Whore. Rumors about Bill's Wife Being Whore have to stop and anyone who passes around these rumors about Bill's Wife Being A Whore ought to be banned from Sunday Services.
Some people think the rumors about Bill's Wife Being A Whore are exaggerated, and this should stop immediately because everyone knows that rumors about Bill's Wife Being A Whore are lies, so why advertise lies about Bill's Wife Being A Whore?
Intelligent people know that Bill's Wife Is Not A Whore so why talk about it?
July 15th, 2008 at 4:28 amDo these dates and events track with your commodities graphs?
Doesn't the Bush Administration realize that "the Iranians may benefit by the increase in crude prices that accompany the sabre rattling?"
Check the dates and see how July 2007 fits in the price of crude on your graph. It's gone up since then, I think.
July 15th, 2008 at 8:29 amI think Bolton's mustache must be growing up and around his brain. Kinda like unpotting a plant that has overgrown and seeing all the roots wrapped around and twisted together. With no place left to go, they are beginning to put pressure on his wee brain.
July 15th, 2008 at 8:38 amIt was " attractive" earlier with all of your war mongering propaganda , so when did your couture season change Pierre , when did wearing blood all over your body and limbs removed become " unattractive " and has all the orphans and Widows you want to create , become " unattractive" also .
July 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pmDoubt it , because double talking snakes think they are clever pushing their murderous agenda, but I'll tell you what would be " ATTRACTIVE ", you and your NEOCON criminal buddies wearing ORANGE , standing in front of the Hague , for WAR CRIMES .
Is Orange still in ?