Bolton to resign

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/04/bol...n.ap/index.html

[Jenksismyhero]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/04/bol...n.ap/index.html

 

It's too bad. He seemed to be doing a good job as ambassador. He wasn't pissing anyone off and he was trying to hold the UN accountable for what it produces; namely, if you sanction someone, you follow up with it.

[NorthSideSox72]

It's too bad. He seemed to be doing a good job as ambassador. He wasn't pissing anyone off and he was trying to hold the UN accountable for what it produces; namely, if you sanction someone, you follow up with it.

I'll happily admit that he was doing much better than I thought he would.

[Balta1701]

The Economist

 

When he took up his job in August last year, there were instant fears that this scourge of multilateralism in general and the UN in particular was bent on lowering the organisation into its grave. Others dared to hope that a tough-talking Washington heavyweight was just what the UN needed to shake it out of its lethargy and push through unpalatable reforms. Now, as Mr Bolton struggles to keep his job, even some of his natural supporters are wondering what really drives him.

 

“If Bolton left tomorrow, progress would be possible on almost every front where it is now stalled,” one senior Western diplomat fumed. “He has succeeded in putting almost everyone's backs up, even among some of America's closest allies. His main achievement has been to break the unified coalition of the North and unify the previously fragmented South.” Hitherto seen as weak and divided, the UN camp known as G-77—in fact, a loose grouping of 131 developing or “southern” nations plus China—has begun flexing its muscles and speaking with one voice.

 

...

Not everything about Mr Bolton is viewed in a negative light. Many observers of the UN share his criticism of its appalling waste, mismanagement, and costly ineffectiveness. His ideas for reform are often sensible, such as rationalising the overlapping functions of different UN departments and agencies, and selecting officials on merit rather than by country of origin. And even foes admire his intelligence, wit and energy. But his rigidity, coupled with an abrasive arrogance, has been counter-productive. “The big problem with Bolton,” says one formerly well-disposed UN official, “is not what he's trying to achieve, but his style. It is extraordinary how badly he has served American interests. To be embraced by America is now seen as a kiss of death.”

[Jenksismyhero]

The Economist

 

That should have read:

 

"He's an American, so everyone dislikes him to begin with."

 

and

 

"His style rubs people the wrong way. He envisions the UN as a functional organization and manages towards that end. He should know the UN is designed only to pass meaningless resolutions with no balls to enforce them."

[Balta1701]

"His style rubs people the wrong way. He envisions the UN as a functional organization and manages towards that end. He should know the UN is designed only to pass meaningless resolutions with no balls to enforce them."

But when you go in with that belief as your primary outlook, then that prevents you from being able to squeeze any good out of what there actually is in that organization, and it makes it easier for everyone else to demonize you.

 

You don't get people to enforce resolutions by walking into a room, yelling out "You all have no balls to enforce resolutions", and then asking people to join you in doing things. Some people may not like it, and to the "with us or against us at all costs" crowd such nuance is sickening, but that doesn't mean that no good can come from it, and that doesn't mean that doing the opposite won't make things worse.

[Soxy]

That should have read:

 

"He's an American, so everyone dislikes him to begin with."

Please.

[southsider2k5]

But when you go in with that belief as your primary outlook, then that prevents you from being able to squeeze any good out of what there actually is in that organization, and it makes it easier for everyone else to demonize you.

 

You don't get people to enforce resolutions by walking into a room, yelling out "You all have no balls to enforce resolutions", and then asking people to join you in doing things. Some people may not like it, and to the "with us or against us at all costs" crowd such nuance is sickening, but that doesn't mean that no good can come from it, and that doesn't mean that doing the opposite won't make things worse.

 

Heck I'd be happy if the UN had actually passed a resolution with balls, let alone having the balls to enforce them. I am not much of a fan of his techniques, but the UN needs a kick in the ass. Right now they are a nuetered organization that is too easily tied up into special interests of as few as one country, to actually be effective. When you have to argue as long as they have, over whether what is going on in Darfur is technically a genocide or not, that tells me everything I need to know about the UN in its current form.

[Jenksismyhero]

Heck I'd be happy if the UN had actually passed a resolution with balls, let alone having the balls to enforce them. I am not much of a fan of his techniques, but the UN needs a kick in the ass. Right now they are a nuetered organization that is too easily tied up into special interests of as few as one country, to actually be effective. When you have to argue as long as they have, over whether what is going on in Darfur is technically a genocide or not, that tells me everything I need to know about the UN in its current form.

 

 

This is what I was getting at. I remember reading a Time or Newsweek article on him a while back. Basically it said that he was upsetting people and cited a meeting where everyone was arguing over something trivial and he basically yelled 'why are we wasting our time with this.' I think he shocked the culture that was there and people didn't like that.

 

 

But when you go in with that belief as your primary outlook, then that prevents you from being able to squeeze any good out of what there actually is in that organization, and it makes it easier for everyone else to demonize you.

 

You don't get people to enforce resolutions by walking into a room, yelling out "You all have no balls to enforce resolutions", and then asking people to join you in doing things. Some people may not like it, and to the "with us or against us at all costs" crowd such nuance is sickening, but that doesn't mean that no good can come from it, and that doesn't mean that doing the opposite won't make things worse.

 

True, but pandering to them and playing their game hasn't been successful either. I'm just not sure that the Dems are basing their vote on anything he's done but rather the fact that he's a Bush appointee. To me, he's done an amiable job considering the circumstances (that everyone seems to despise anything the US does in the world arena) and not reaffirming him for the job is going to set us, and the role of the UN back a little.

[sox4lifeinPA]

does this thread have anything to do with Michael....BOLTON?

[southsider2k5]

does this thread have anything to do with Michael....BOLTON?

 

I am a Michael Bolton FAN!

[Balta1701]

This is what I was getting at. I remember reading a Time or Newsweek article on him a while back. Basically it said that he was upsetting people and cited a meeting where everyone was arguing over something trivial and he basically yelled 'why are we wasting our time with this.' I think he shocked the culture that was there and people didn't like that.

About 2 weeks ago, a group of Carribbean nations wanted the U.N. to say something to recognize the 200th anniversary of the ending of the Slave Trade. Simple commemorative resolution, the sort of thing that every Parliamentary body does all the time.

 

Guess who created the hangup. John Bolton. Why? As far as I can tell from the copy of the letter he sent, he insisted that the word emphasizing needed to be changed to the emphasis. And for some reason, he decided this was so worthy of a fight that he stopped the whole thing until a bunch of people from the Congress noticed what he was doing and basically told him to stop being a moron.

[EvilMonkey]

About 2 weeks ago, a group of Carribbean nations wanted the U.N. to say something to recognize the 200th anniversary of the ending of the Slave Trade. Simple commemorative resolution, the sort of thing that every Parliamentary body does all the time.

 

Guess who created the hangup. John Bolton. Why? As far as I can tell from the copy of the letter he sent, he insisted that the word emphasizing needed to be changed to the emphasis. And for some reason, he decided this was so worthy of a fight that he stopped the whole thing until a bunch of people from the Congress noticed what he was doing and basically told him to stop being a moron.

If the wording change was so minor, why didn't they just change it and go on?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

But when you go in with that belief as your primary outlook, then that prevents you from being able to squeeze any good out of what there actually is in that organization, and it makes it easier for everyone else to demonize you.

 

You don't get people to enforce resolutions by walking into a room, yelling out "You all have no balls to enforce resolutions", and then asking people to join you in doing things. Some people may not like it, and to the "with us or against us at all costs" crowd such nuance is sickening, but that doesn't mean that no good can come from it, and that doesn't mean that doing the opposite won't make things worse.

 

 

Whats the matter with calling a spade a spade? If the EU nations and others are too cowardly to stand behind their own sanctions that what is Bolton supposed to do? Give em the red badge of courage? Fact is that the U.N. is a completely inept organization and its for the exact reason that Bolton so colorfully espoused.

[Gregory Pratt]

Bolton is a pervert, a liar and a bully. I don't care if he hasn't set the UN on fire as some suspected he might -- he isn't fit for diplomatic work or any civilized work and I don't want such a man representing this country.

 

(See: his first wife, and the intelligence analysts he used to harass, for more information.)