That does not make any damn sense.

Oh, wait, context.

Monday from briefing the Security Council on rights violations in the Darfur region of Sudan, saying the Council had to act against atrocities and not just talk about them.

Yea, I guess I do like that. Well, depending on what the next step is. Looks like making a judgement now is a little too hasty.

haha thanks for the context, Henry. That IS why I like John Bolton!

Kyle had this to say:

But how does this lead to action? I can appreciate if he wants more than just talk, but that doesn't mean it's bad to talk about it. Sometimes talk can lead to action.

I just can't see the leap in logic that he's making. Talking about it may not do much, but blocking talks does even less.

And then I had this to say:

I completely agree with Kyle.

It is also hard for me to buy Bolton's arguments when he aligned with China - who have a clear financial (oil!) interest in Sudan. On top of that the Bush administration has put forth much effort to block much of the action regarding Sudan, first because of their cozy relationship with the Sudanese governement and then because of their refusal to support an international court.

Bolton's refusal to hear a briefing is a slap in the face to anyone who is attempting to get anything done in Sudan.

Kyle said it best: Talking about it may not do much, but blocking talks does even less.

It is difficult to trust Bolton and the Bush administration when they have done everything they can to limit actions to stop the genocide.

Then I cannot wait and see who's suspitions are correct! I hope it is mine, not for the sake of being right, but for the sake of the people dying over there.

Kyle said it best: Talking about it may not do much, but blocking talks does even less... Unless it leads to actual action.