Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump Fires National Security Advisor John Bolton Due to Strong Disagreements Over Policy

Trump Fires National Security Advisor John Bolton Due to Strong Disagreements Over Policy

“I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration…”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH-K8usOOwM

President Donald Trump fired National Security Advisor John Bolton because the two men had strong disagreements over policy.

Bolton fired back on Twitter. He claimed he offered Trump his resignation. Trump supposedly responded, “Let’s talk about it tomorrow.”

Bolton served as Trump’s third national security advisor during this term. He first hired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and then H.R. McMaster. He brought on Bolton in April 2018.

Bolton also worked in the administrations of President Ronald Reagan, President George H.W. Bush, and President George W. Bush. He was the U.S. Representative to the United Nations from 2005 to 2006. Before that, he served “as an undersecretary of state for arms control and international security from 2001 to 2005.”

Trump did not specify the disagreements, but Fox News speculated it might have something to do with the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Regime Change

Reportedly Bolton and Pompeo had been butting heads recently. Looks like Pompeo won.

So is the remaining contingent pro- or anti-troop removal?

Although I was pretty happy with Trump’s appointments when he was elected, I was also pretty certain he would fire about 80% by the end of his first term.

I don’t think this is a bad thing, except that the same figures keep resurfacing from admin to admin (on both the left and right). If you want to get rid of the swamp, you need to bring in fresh water.

. . . but Fox News speculated it might have something to do with the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.

Uh-huh. And they have an anonymous source close to the White House, right?

I liked John’s warhawk positions, but we have grown tired of his ineffectiveness. I think his 2000 ideals are stale and we need 2020 ideals. He should just pardon flynn and reappoint. That would make a few heads explode.

The headlines are already started “Trump lied to Bolton” Give me a break, the press hated him with a passion. TDS right up there with Sharpie gate.

Trump was negotiating with the Taliban, behind Bolton’s back, and was ready and willing to abandon the Afghans to their tender mercies. That would have been a shameful, dishonorable thing to do; it would have followed in the same line as our disgraceful betrayal of South Vietnam (forced by the Democrats who controlled Congress), and our brutal crime against humanity in forcibly “repatriating” millions of people to Stalin, knowing very well that they were going to be slaughtered or enslaved.

But we already know that Trump has neither shame nor honor. Thankfully the Taliban committed one atrocity too many, and Trump acted surprised, as if he hadn’t known what sort of people they were. But the fact that he was entertaining the idea says it all.

    fishstick in reply to Milhouse. | September 10, 2019 at 3:10 pm

    it remains to be seen if Trump was engaged with what you described behind close doors

    doubtful considering the amount of leakage his presidency has had to put up with

    I think it more akin to the Obama Iraq pullout where Trump just wants US troops out of there, consequences be damned

    I was of the opinion of maintaining a strong military presence in that region because if there is ever a WW3 – it will likely initiate in that region

    WW2 started in part to the inaction of the alliance powers led by the UK and France being unable to hinder Hitler as he started building his war machine

    years on end

    I thought it a blunder to pull out of Iraq, and I think it the same to do so in Afghanistan

    but hey, ultimately I am not over there fighting and am in no real position to influence that decision

      MattMusson in reply to fishstick. | September 10, 2019 at 3:41 pm

      The USA is getting out of the Global Management Business. Like it or not. Just ask Japan and South Korea.

      “WW2 started in part to the inaction of the alliance powers led by the UK and France being unable to hinder Hitler as he started building his war machine”

      I would suggest “unwilling” rather than unable.

    guyjones in reply to Milhouse. | September 10, 2019 at 3:11 pm

    What is your proposal to ensure the safety of Afghan civilians, in the face of of the persistent, malignant Islamic militancy represented by the Taliban jackboots, and, Afghanistan’s decades-long status as a failed state? Short of a permanent U.S. troop presence in the country, of course.

      fishstick in reply to guyjones. | September 10, 2019 at 3:19 pm

      well the last sentence of your paragraph is the only solution

      the Afghan peoples have proven over and over to be utter incompetent when it comes to a western style of government

      it is a clash of culture and those guys are like stuck in the 1700s

      I still don’t get how that that country didn’t get a kick in the ass after Osama was revealed to be hiding near the own “Fort Knox”

      (other than Obama was the pres, of course)

        Milhouse in reply to fishstick. | September 10, 2019 at 5:54 pm

        I still don’t get how that that country didn’t get a kick in the ass after Osama was revealed to be hiding near the own “Fort Knox”

        That was Pakistan.

      Firewatch in reply to guyjones. | September 10, 2019 at 4:53 pm

      I guess the only way to insure peace in Afghanistan would be to nuke Pakistan, but the Russians might not like our nukes so near them. When bin laden was killed, the job was over.

    “behind Bolton’s back”

    You’re FOS. The president doesn’t conduct negotiations behind anyone’s back.

    Bolton can run for president whenever he is ready. That will entitle him to conduct foreign policy as he see’s fit.

    You ought to get your fat rear end over to Afghanistan to help. I’m sure they’ll appreciate your help and reward you with your head, off.

    alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | September 10, 2019 at 4:21 pm

    I am puzzled what could be accomplished with talks with the Taliban. They will never give up and what accommodations work? We are years after sell date by Sun Tzu’s admonition to not get into protracted wars. We missed the big chance to get OBL and make the large statement after 9/11 by nuking Tora Bora. Afghanistan is more tribal regions than a country. There is no nation for nation building.

    NGAREADER in reply to Milhouse. | September 10, 2019 at 6:02 pm

    Staying in Afghanistan is a no win situation.
    We need to figure out a better option to protect ourselves from the crazies there without an endless unwinnable war.

    Perhaps you want YOUR kids killed or maimed in a perpetual quagmire where WE LET BIN LADEN GO and went and tried to build a nation with our CIA narco terrorist pedophiles. And stay there forever.

    Why aren’t we invading Saudi Arabia over the greater horrors they do (in our hubrised opinion) to their citizens? Why don’t we fix our breakage in Libya and Somalia and bring peace there instead of bringing refugees from there here.

    Bolton could be replaced with a bot: Kill, Bomb, Repeat.

    Since thee caravan routes between Cathy and Europe collapsed nearly 1500 years ago, Afghanistan has been totally irrelevant to global society. The only reason that the US was there to begin with is because that is where Osama Bin Laden was supposed to be. Once it was determined that he was no longer there, the US should have packed up and left. The main reason that we did not was because the Bush II administration wanted to have troops there to put pressure on Iran.

    The first problem with remaining in Afghanistan is that the country is largely ungovernable. Between the warlord culture, in much of the country, Pakistani interference and the total inability of the Afghan people to govern themselves Afghanistan has always been doomed. The second problem i logistics. Our troops are essentially isolated in Afghanistan. Without access through Pakistan we can not support our troops there.

    The Afghans have had 14 years to establish a stable government and they still do not have one. It is time to go. Immediate unilateral withdrawal is the ticket.

John Bolton has done some good things for us, including not signing us on to the 2001 UN Small Arms Conference in Durban, South Africa.

But his support for all things involving military intervention on our part is not in our national interests today.

I wish him well.

I trust Pompeo more than I do Bolton with respect to supporting the correction foreign policy initiatives on our behalf.

Neither shame nor honor, which are the stock in trade of neocon endless war mongers.

Fortunately he has savvy and skill, and does not accept bad deals.

One good thing has come of this. With the Taliban negotiations and the possible meeting with Trump, the rats came out of the woodwork and got overconfident. They posted on social media, chatted openly among each other, gathered together in groups for selfies, and all kinds of other things that SIGINT likes.

Then they took credit for the bombing in Kabul, and the Air Force had their target list all prepared. After all, we know they’re scorpions. All we had to do is wait for the inevitable. Supposedly there have been more airstrikes in the last week than in months previous, although the press has been very quiet about that.

We’ve had a warmonger, blood thirsty, neo-con Bolt-On foreign policy for too long.

I don’t care if he went to Jared, or Veruca, I mean Ivanka said “Daddy, I want a squirrelly policy”.

Bolton probably screwed up the NK and Taliban negotiations. He wants perpetual war, but he isn’t fighting it. I’m glad bloody Bolton is gone.

I like Bolton, or rather, I did. However, the president sets the foreign policy of this country not Bolton. The president will seek advice form his appointee’s. They should give it freely when asked. When the president takes a course of action they must then carry it out to the best of their ability and not undermine it in anyway.

It was always clear that Bolton and Trump would disagree. That isn’t a problem. Seeking contrary advice is smart. The problem was Bolton deciding what policy should be and undermining the president. He then had to go. The very fact that Bolton resorted to his tweeting that leaving was his idea tells us Bolton was for Bolton first, America second. Otherwise he would just shut up.

Will Bolton still be President ofRedEye??

In both Iraq and Afghanistan, we failed when we acceded to them establishing regimes where “Islam is the dominant religion.” You want to fix those regions? Think Japan 1945. But nobody is willing to put in the time and effort, and expenditure of political capital, never mind wealth.

And EVERYBODY would hate us, even more than now.

I have been a loyal supporter of Trump up to this point, even contributing to his reelection.
Now I want my money back. He has become too inconsistent, too unreliable. He has bounced erratically from one position after another–on withdrawal from Afghanistan, on possible negotiations with Iran, on the Chinese web giant. Re the last even George Soros wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal criticizing his wishy-washiness re Huawei (or however you spell it). The first time in my life I ever agreed with Soros on anything.

Bolton did a fantastic job as our Ambassador to the UN. He didn’t put up with all their BS.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend