Ah, now I see your point. Well, it is 'partisan', sure, in that Bolton and a number of other people genuinely believe that electing Obama is a threat to national security. I don't particularly share that view (though if he is serious about trying to revoke the immunity for the telecoms I might) but I'm not sure that Bolton's observation would particularly motivate someone to vote a particular way.

It may be he is passing a message to Iran that the time to cut a deal is before November or to the Europeans, Russians and Chinese that they need to get serious about adding to the pressure to preclude such an action and that it would be very bad for anyone to believe that waiting it out until November or January might not get the result they want.

I think it is more to the point that whoever is elected may find that they are handed a fait accompli by Israel. You'll notice he also says that if McCain were elected the Israeli's would still feel constrained as the new admin gets up and running therefore would probably go before January if they felt that a window were closing.

That may be just hardcore analysis. As to why he would say it publicly ... may be more due to personality than politics <s>




>He may very well be right, but messages like this are not made public without some political purpose - what do you suppose the political purpose is behind his making this statement?
>
>
>>>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/2182070/Israel-%27will-attack-Iran%27-before-new-US-president-sworn-in%2C-John-Bolton-predicts.html
>>>
>>>Is he an idiot or a puppet?
>>
>>Aren't you kind of shooting the messenger? He could very well be right and his reasoning sounds at least within possibility. Israel has *at least* the 100 GBU-28 bunker busters they got from us 2 years ago and I imagine local engineering has fancied those up a bit with aftermarket stuff that couldn't make it through the sale because of technology export restrictions. They really are determined Iran will not get nukes (unless delivered in from Israel ) I am not sure why people don't take them seriously on this. Osirak should have been seen as a token of sincerity.
>>
>>I think it would be a mistake to not see how much US policy in the area has been affected over the last 20 years by attempting to avoid exactly this kind of thing. Our invasion of Iraq may have been ill-advised (and was certainly incompetantly followed-up) but there is also a chance that it forestalled another thread unreeling in which Baghdad would now be glowing in the dark or would look like the surface of the moon.