>>The UN hit its low point for me when it gave credence to Colin Powell's meaningless testimony about non existent weapons.

That's not I remember it. I seem to recall the so-called "Coalition of the Willing", "freedom fries" and other consequences after the UN and most allies apart from UK and Australia didn't give credence.

>>The problem however is that people like John Bolton, whose views on international organizations (they're useless at best and harmful at worst) tend to align with mine often have their fingers on the trigger and are ready to fire at a moment's notice.

Purpose becomes corrupted. The UN now has an absurd blinkered approach sternly lecturing first world nations while ignoring all but the most glaring human rights abuses elsewhere. Nail in the coffin for me was when Saudi Arabia was given the chair of the womens' rights commission. At the time, women were forbidden to drive themselves around in a car (let alone ride a bike) in Saudi Arabia.

>>So, if I have to choose, I'll take the internationalist who won't fight over the nationalist who does.

Why? Patriotism is back in style and internationalism never did much for the US.