The John Bolton Litmus Test

Next week's likely vote will be a litmus test on the values of each voting member of the U.S. Senate. Will some senators be more swayed by party loyalty concerns or by national security concerns for America? Will the conservatives desire to make some sort of politically moltivated "point" with a U.N. organization they distrust be a far greater factor than the real concerns over unsettling developments with North Korea, Iran or even China over Taiwan, which require the American ability to work well with the other 190 U.N. member states to prevent serious international disaster or war be a determining factor one way or another? Will the documents some senators desire regarding Bolton be made available before any vote?

On one hand, I reported a few days ago that former UNSCOM arms inspector, Scott Ritter has claimed that Bush has signed off for an aerial attack on Iranian nuclear research sites set for June. However some new evidence suggests that such an attack may not succeed for several reasons. While Israel has been supplied 5,000 smart bombs and 500 "bunker busters" in a large arms deal with the U.S. to arm their military for a possible attack on Iranian nuclear research sites, and has also covertly practiced for such a mission in Turkish airspace in a three way arrangement with Israel, the United States and Turkey, it is now suspected that the Iranian reactor has been buried so deep that it is invulerable to the bunker buster bombs. Israel has been the important intelligence link to the United States on Iranian nuclear research site concerns. And in a mid-April meeting with Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, brought Major General Yaov Galant, who also briefed the U.S. on the latest Iranian activity on both the nuclear enrichment and the military abilities of the 3,000,000 man Iranian army, one of the world's largest.

Iran is thought to be within weeks to months on uranium enrichment, which they claim is for electrical power generation, yet for a nation with 10% of all oil reserves, this seems highly questionable, and is likely a cover story for the military goals of Iran. Originally the Shahab-3 missiles from Iran were a poor weapon and highly inaccurate. However a strong client state status with China has helped to provide GPS(Global Positioning System) technology. This is an unfortunate development due to Clinton era sales of such technology to China for their Air Force, which they in turn supplied to Iran's missile systems. With this technology, Iran could now hit American bases in Iraq to retaliate against any possible U.S. attack against Iran with great accuracy. And these bases could hit targets as far as London currently. In addition, since Iran controls the Strait Of Hormuz, it could choke off the supply for 40% of the world's oil supply and bring the economy of the U.S. to it's knees as well.

And North Korea, another strong ally of China, is raising it's own nuclear concerns with the possible test of an device within days. And with one of the world's largest and most powerful armies, North Korea warned that the possible military preemption option is not just for the U.S. alone, they also could launch a grand scale attack as well to safeguard their nation's regime.

And China is having difficult relations with Taiwan, and the threat of a possible invasion is being backed up with six new naval destroyers added to the People's Liberation Army Navy in the last few months. Two Russian Federation build, and four Luhu and Luhai class naval destroyers are armed with nuclear cruise missiles such as the Sunburn class designed to kill American aircraft carriers with 100% mortality if the U.S. should interfere in the 90 mile sea attack to overrun tiny Taiwan by the huge military of mainland China. The massive flood of Chinese made consumer goods flooding American store shelves are being funneled into China's war machine for this 90 mile drive to overrun Taiwan. And bad relations with Japan over some Japense history books failure to accept responsibility for Japanese crimes in WWII China such as the "Rape Of Nanking", are fueling rotten relations with Japan as well.

Conservatives seem to support John Bolton based on some passion to make a "point" with the U.N. over the Oil For Food scandal, revenge against the French for opposing U.S. military action in Iraq, and a shopping bag of other right wing reasons to promote dislike for this international peacekeeping institution. And Liberals and Democrats are very concerned about both American security issues as well as the sagging reputation of the U.S. since the Bush attack on Iraq. The U.S. has some of the lowest world respect levels ever under Bush, compared to the far more popular Bill Clinton. And Bolton's confrontive style and membership in the military contractor funded PNAC(Project For The New American Century) make Bolton seem especially not at all suited to being the best possible choice to bring support for American efforts to bring in international support from the other 190 U.N. member states to prevent nuclear problems or other difficullty with Iran, North Korea or China. And the U.N. Secretary General, Kofi Annan, warns the U.S. that there is simply not the support for economic sanctions on Iran on the U.N. Security Council, where both China and the Russian Republic hold veto vote power. And other states, such as France have a vested economic interest in Iran, as well as Russia in selling nuclear reactor related goods to Iran. Conservatives seem to live in a sort of bubble, not cognitive of the weak position of U.S. relations with the world under Bush. There is no comprehension of much of the poor of the world who think more of Osama Bin Laden than the U.S. Given so many dangerous situations which could result in major war at any time this very year, why conservatives want a confrontational U.N. Ambassador representing America like Bolton is just plain bizarre and realistic. The conservatives hatred of the U.N. is little reason to further aggravate antiU.S. sentiments with the very poor choice of Bolton, and further isolates the U.S., Britain and Israel from the other 188 voting member states. The conservatives will argue up and down how supposedly "qualified" Bolton is. Yet he only understands the world in the basest "Cold War" sense, and his confrontational style will make international support for any U.S. efforts to prevent nuclear problems with North Korea, Iran or China peacefully resolve far less likely. The Republican majority has the power to improve or blow up the world with the Bolton nomination. Let's hope God will give these voting senators the wisdom to make the proper choice for the sake of world peace and reject the confrontive John Bolton.