Evidence for why Bolton should not be confimed

quote:

---

I am being steadfast with evidence. Saddam was in defiance of UN resolutions a decade after they came into force. The UN threatened force as a result of non-compliance & failed to actualise it.

---

False - the UN never threatened fo0rce. It threatened "serious consequences". When a move was made to submit a 2nd resolution that would contain the correct wording to indicate the use of force, France and Russia indicated they would veto any such resolution becuase of the "automaticity" of the resort to force. In the face of this opposition, the resolution was never submitted.It is factually wrong to claim that the UN threatened force and failed to actualise it. Furthermore, Saddam is now known to have been in complience. Third, many states including Israel remain in defiance of the UN for years.None of this was remotely relevant to the hawks who wanted war.

quote:

---

I am not defending the social responsibility of this tactic, but we either have a free market system or we don't.
If we do, then eventually the playing field levels for everyone, consumers benefit, and developing countries have a chance to develop.
To put boundaries on trade to protect a small job sector is politically popular, but it is not sound economics. But of course it's a hard pill to swallow if your job is one affected. This raises another question: Do any one of us have a right to expect our particular job description to be carved in stone ? I am not going to take sides on that one, but it is really a valid question.

---

Actually, it is not a valid question.The supposed dichotomy between preserving existing jobs and off-shoring them is a false one. There is an alternative - proper support for those workers compelled, through no fault of their own, to find new work. And indeed, it seems reasonable to me to expect the company who gains in profitablity to bear most of these costs.I fully agree it is a hopeless finger-in-the-dyke strategy to simply refuse off-shoring and maintain production of a non-economic good. (and btw Schraf, China has been out of the low quality mass market for some decades and is easily capable of producing very high quality goods). But eqaully, you cannot just boot workers out and leave them destitute and expect this not to have repercussions.Appealing to the abstract principle of the free market is not an adequate answer. That may be an adequate explanation for why we find outselves with this problem - but it is not an answer to the problem.