John Bolton: Defense Spending Should Be Off The Table When Cutting Budget

[unhappycamper]

John Bolton: Defense Spending Should Be Off The Table When Cutting Budget
The Huffington Post | Nick Wing Posted: 12-28-10 10:05 AM

John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and potential 2012 GOP presidential candidate, expressed his belief this week that defense spending should be insulated from the likely wave of budget cuts spurred by a new era of GOP leadership next Congress.

"I think you've got to be just as much on the outlook for waste and fraud in defense spending as anywhere else, but the fact is we're entering a very uncertain period in the world. We've got a lot of threats out there that we're not ready for. Not just nuclear proliferation, but chemical and biological weapons," Bolton said on Fox Business, before explaining a variety of threats that he considered pertinent. "This is not the time to cut back. I understand there's a lot of pressure to get deficits down. I'm all in favor of it. But national security comes first, pure and simple, as far as I'm concerned."

While it is a commonly held belief amongst Republicans that "runaway spending" in Washington needs to be addressed, many have hesitated to call for this new focus to be extended toward the Pentagon. Last month, however, many conservatives announced that everything, including defense, should be on the table when it comes to seeking a smaller budget.

GOP senators such as Tom Coburn have also argued that the "sacred cow" of defense spending can no longer be seen as an untouchable budget area, much to the chagrin of his Senate colleague John McCain.

Senate newcomer Rand Paul has also said that the GOP must be willing to consider military spending cuts.

[Skittles]

1. FUCK YOU, JOHN

FUCK YOU

[rfranklin]

2. I'll second that...

The ridiculous bloated war budget has got to be trimmed.

[Skittles]

3. FUCKING REPUKES

FISCAL RESPONSIBLITY! DEFICIT! But don't touch the SENSELESS WARS or TAX CUTS FOR THE OBSCENELY RICH. FUCK THEM ALL!!!!!!!!!!

[Sherman A1]

7. Precisely

:banghead:

[droidamus2]

4. My questions for John

Would there ever be a time you would think it was appropriate to cut back? Would there ever be a time you couldn't come with some perceived or made up 'threat' to use as an excuse not to cut? If you decide how much the warriors get based on what the warriors want you get the kind of bloated military spending we have had for years. The decision should be based on what the civilians think we can afford and are willing to pay. If the military is taking up a large chunk of the budget and the budget needs cutting then I think we need more than vague 'there's possible danger out there' type warnings to validate the necessity of spending more than everybody else in the world does on the military. Is there any chance the Mr. Bolton now works for a company that is involved in providing services or equipment to the military?

[old mark]

5. He is running for president, I assume.... K&R .nt

[pinboy3niner]

10. Bingo!

John Bolton eyes 2012 presidential run
By MOLLY BALL | 12/17/10 7:17 PM EST

No, it's not just an attention-getting stunt. John Bolton is seriously considering running for president.
<snip>

"I'm obviously aware that people are quite focused on the economy rather than foreign policy issues, but that is something that should and can be altered as people see the nature of the threats around the world that we face," Bolton said. "Nearly all the experts I've talked to have told me that candidates, in the early days, need a discriminator -- something that distinguishes them from the rest of the candidates. I'm just not Generic Governor A or Generic Governor B."

Bolton acknowledged the conventional wisdom that holds that foreign policy doesn't generally motivate voters. "But I think the American people look at national security policy as a surrogate for larger characteristics in their presidential candidates: leadership, judgment, vision."
<snip>

"I'm going through the process of talking to people who've been involved in national campaigns, fundraisers, tea party people, friends and people I've known over the years," he said, adding wryly that, "WikiLeaks notwithstanding," he remains at this point a private citizen under no obligation to disclose his contacts.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46543.html

[spanone]

24. run john boy, run

[tomg]

6. Jesus, I can't stand

that guy.

"We've got a lot of threats out there that we're not ready for" - true, but not the ones Bolton has in mind.

[quaker bill]

8. Not just on the table, but in the center

One can always imagine "threats" we are not ready for. The supply has consistently proven inexhaustible. $5 Trillion dollars on two wars, and a good bit more on general preparedness. This is in fact something we "cannot afford". We have gutted social services and infrastructure spending and still run a substantial deficit to pay for it. Every empire of the last 3 centuries has failed through excess military spending, and my guess is that you could go back to Rome, and make the case there as well. Machiavelli pointed out in the early days of the Rennissance that this model is not sustainable, nothing has changed since.

Excess military power is the lazy intellect's answer to complex diplomatic problems. It is time we stop leaning on this crutch and grow up a bit.

[Enthusiast]

9. And why would we listen to

such an obvious spokesman for the military industrial complex?

[dembotoz]

11. he has become sort of a comic republican fucktoid

[somone]

12. End the wars and SLASH defense spending:

[RegieRocker]

13. I agree with Bolton

but I'm sure he would disagree with me. Yes defense only no offense spending! Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

[madrchsod]

14. who cares what this reject thinks...oh fox news does

[lonestarnot]

15. Fox still using the mustache. Why would anyone give a fuck about what a mustache thinks.

[Supersedeas]

16. the HUGE pink faced Elephant in the room when it comes to fiscal responsibility

Elephants have their friends on Wallstreet and in the halls of the Pentagon.

[RickFromMN]

17. The Dutch East India Company and British East India Company could wage war.

Can one argue, successfully, a number of our "wars" are for the benefit of a number of our
major corporations, like the major oil companies?

Would it be reasonable to suggest the oil companies make their own treaties, have their own military,
and wage their own wars?

Would it be reasonable to suggest they can pay for their wars?
Sure, they will pass the cost of their wars to their consumers, but doesn't this happen anyway?
Aren't we paying, through taxes, for their wars?
Wouldn't it be fair to have the price of oil reflect the cost of wars that benefit oil?

If the cost of oil were accurately reflected in the price of oil, wouldn't this be a good thing?
Wouldn't we make saner decisions about alternative energy?

This may sound radical...but isn't this what happened, in the past, with the
Dutch East India Company and British East India Company?

We give more rights to corporations, all the time.
Corporations are treated, more and more, like individual citizens, with every new court decision and law.
Recently, corporations got the right to spend who knows how much money in the political process.

Corporations use the global economy to their advantage.
They higher foreign employees. They subcontract to foreign companies.
They pretend to be global, except when they need a financial bailout or need us to fight a war.

We can still have laws, at our borders, to make corporations follow our rules inside our country.
We can treat United States corporations the same way we treat Japanese or European corporations.

Is this a radical idea? Perhaps it is a little radical...I hope it's food for thought.

[Octafish]

18. The Don Juanito of Plato's Retreat must be in line for a piece of Carlyle Group.

Inside John Bolton's head: War. War. War. Money. Money. Money. Sex. Ahh.

What makes this even more sickening is that the "news media" foist this greasy turd on the American people as an "Honorable" man.

[Vinnie From Indy]

20. +1

Cheers!

[theophilus]

19. John Bolton should be off the table and in the prison cell. n/t

[GeorgeGist]

21. FEAR, FEAR, FEAR ...

Home of the brave.

[DCKit]

22. Anything John Bolton is against is probably good for the country.

The Republicon Chickenhawks on the MSM snooze circuit aren't there to inform us.

[NYC Liberal]

23. But if it's "waste and fraud" then how is cutting it going to

hurt national security? In fact, cutting "waste and fraud" it seems to me would be BETTER for national security.

This guy is nuts.

[TBF]

25. Why is this war criminal not in jail where he belongs? nt

[social_critic]

26. We should spare nothing to cut John Bolton in half

John Bolton is considered a sacred cow, but I think we should proceed to cut Bolton in half and offer the lower half to a suitable deity, so we can be blessed in future wars.