Coming up with weird ideas is not something that's new to
John Bolton, but he outdid himself this time when he came up with the weirdest
idea yet.
To understand what's happening with him, we need to refresh
our memory about a simple mathematical concept called “vector.” It is a
quantity represented by an arrow having two properties: direction and length
(also called magnitude.) Whereas the Jews confuse past and future, thus
regularly violate the direction of time and the rules of causality as when they
put the cart before the horse, John Bolton never developed a sense of
proportionality, thus remains prone to confusing the magnitude of things.
You'll see how this affects his ability to think rationally
when you read the article he wrote under the title: “The Legal Case for
Striking North Korea First and the subtitle: “Does the necessity of
self-defense leave 'no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation'?” It was
published on March 1, 2018 in the Wall Street Journal.
Bolton says America
has the legal right to “preemptively” attack North Korea , citing the authority
on that ... which happens to be (not an adjudicated case but) the definition of
a word expressed 180 years ago by Daniel Webster. The case involved a
preemptive attack that took place on a steamboat named Caroline.
Even though Webster's definition argues against launching
such an attack on someone unless there is a necessity for self-defense clearly
shown to be “instant, overwhelming and leaving no choice of means, and no
moment for deliberation,” Bolton ends up using
the steamboat incident to layout a contrarian case. He then treated the Webster
definition as if it were a binding legal precedent. Here is how he did that:
After mentioning that Daniel Webster himself asserted that Britain had no legal right to sink a steamboat
that was sailing an American river on its way to Canada , John Bolton flipped the
argument to make the following points.
“Would a strike against North Korea violate Webster's
necessity test? Clearly not. Necessity in the nuclear and ballistic-missile age
is different than in the age of steam. What was remote is now near; what was
time-consuming to deliver now arrives in minutes; and the level of destructiveness
of Weapons of Mass Destruction is greater than that of the Caroline's cargo of
weapons”.
And that's when the confusion of the author began to
manifest itself. Whereas Daniel Webster's definition of the word “necessity”
involved the concept of what is 'instant, overwhelming, and lacking means and
deliberation,' Bolton's preoccupation involved a different concept; that of the
destructive power of different weapons … those of the past versus those of the
present. Bolton then tried to equate the two concepts in an effort to show that
America has the legal right
to preemptively attack North
Korea .
But how did Bolton try to
stitch together a narrative that holds it all together? Well, he tried to show
that in the same way that the Caroline was used by Canadian anti-British
sailors to transport weapons to actively engaged rebels fighting the Brits in
Canada, North Korea is today involved in what amounts to a shooting war with
America because modern weapons are more powerful that those of the past, and
they can be delivered faster. As you can see, my friend, this is a logic so
fragmented, only John Bolton can and would use it.
Moreover, since an armistice is holding well on the Korean Peninsula North Korea
preemptively … and so he recommended in his capacity as a non-practicing
lawyer.
We cannot escape the conclusion that John Bolton started
probing the particulars of the case having already decided that the time had
come for America
to attack someone. This motivated him to put together a legal witches' brew
that's perfectly suited for the screwed up mentality by which he is animated.