John Bolton and the no-name nukes
Just before I returned from DC I went to a media breakfast with John Bolton, US ambassador to the UN.
That title is significant, because one of the points Bolton made was that he regarded the post as precisely that - not as the UN ambassador to the US.
I wrote up my observations here: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23432
I wrote:
"Asked about the possibility of a “no-name nuke” falling into the hands of terrorists who would use it against the US, Bolton said that the possibility is very real: Iran is the international finance house of terrorism, North Korea is a criminal regime that will sell anything to anybody for hard cash, and nuclear Pakistan may fall into the hands of Islamic fundamentalists.
Bolton said that the only defense is prevention, keeping criminal regimes from getting nuclear weapons in the first place, and that that means adopting a policy of pre-emption. Unfortunately he said, not even all Republicans are on board with that and the Bush administration has shown signs of wavering lately. "
Later, I was asked if the phrase "no-name nuke" was my own. Well, I can't remember hearing it elsewhere, so I guess it is. Remember, you read it here first.
Bolton answered my question thoughtfully and straightforwardly, as is his custom, and the reason he is so intensely disliked by those who prefer evading reality. But though he mentioned the horrible eventuality of a nuclear weapon of unknown provenance going off on our soil, he didn't pursue that line of thought further that that.
So, what if in spite of everything we do (or don't do), the unthinkable happens?
I was going to press him further, but thought better of it. Fact is, at this point in time no public figure can raise that subject in public, and had better be damned careful about doing it in private. Doing so would be career suicide, and damaging to America's image abroad. (Nice understatement that!)
The thought of having to respond to a nuclear attack, based on probability of origin is horrible to contemplate. Too horrible for people to deal with at this point in time.
But, as ambassador Bolton pointed out, time is running out.
That title is significant, because one of the points Bolton made was that he regarded the post as precisely that - not as the UN ambassador to the US.
I wrote up my observations here: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23432
I wrote:
"Asked about the possibility of a “no-name nuke” falling into the hands of terrorists who would use it against the US, Bolton said that the possibility is very real: Iran is the international finance house of terrorism, North Korea is a criminal regime that will sell anything to anybody for hard cash, and nuclear Pakistan may fall into the hands of Islamic fundamentalists.
Bolton said that the only defense is prevention, keeping criminal regimes from getting nuclear weapons in the first place, and that that means adopting a policy of pre-emption. Unfortunately he said, not even all Republicans are on board with that and the Bush administration has shown signs of wavering lately. "
Later, I was asked if the phrase "no-name nuke" was my own. Well, I can't remember hearing it elsewhere, so I guess it is. Remember, you read it here first.
Bolton answered my question thoughtfully and straightforwardly, as is his custom, and the reason he is so intensely disliked by those who prefer evading reality. But though he mentioned the horrible eventuality of a nuclear weapon of unknown provenance going off on our soil, he didn't pursue that line of thought further that that.
So, what if in spite of everything we do (or don't do), the unthinkable happens?
I was going to press him further, but thought better of it. Fact is, at this point in time no public figure can raise that subject in public, and had better be damned careful about doing it in private. Doing so would be career suicide, and damaging to America's image abroad. (Nice understatement that!)
The thought of having to respond to a nuclear attack, based on probability of origin is horrible to contemplate. Too horrible for people to deal with at this point in time.
But, as ambassador Bolton pointed out, time is running out.
posted by Steve @ 6:41 AM
2 Comments:
At 4:56 PM,
TheWayfarer said…
Let's see, Crap-lick CHARities Irrational is importing ragheads like they're going out of style with Dubya's blessing, we have no southern border, the only requirement to get into Mexico in order to sneak a nuke into the U.S. is "con mucho dinero" and terrorist Middle Eastern states are swimming in scratch thanks to $3/gallon go-juice in the USA...
More a question of WHEN than whether, I'd say.
And also to look for it sometime just before the election!
At 4:45 AM,
J. Sullivan said…
I've always been impressed with Bolton's bluntness.
Post a Comment
<< Home