The website, must be a magazine, Foreign Policy seems to definitely lean left, just like that magazine called "The Week", here is their print article, "John Bolton Is A National Security Threat", just posting, it's an editorial, not saying I agree with it. It is very much like other articles criticizing the choice:
John Bolton Is a National Security Threat
By Colin Kahl, Jon Wolfsthal
Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster is out as Trump’s national security adviser and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (and current Fox News contributor) John Bolton is in. This is no mere rotation of on-screen personalities in the latest episode of “The Trump Show.†It is a move with potentially profound implications for the direction of U.S. foreign policy. Indeed, Bolton’s ascendance increases the risk of not one, but two wars — with North Korea and Iran.
McMaster was no dove. But Bolton falls into an entirely different category of dangerous uber-hawk. Fifteen years ago, Bolton championed the Iraq war and, to this day, he continues to believe the most disastrous foreign policy decision in a generation was a good idea. Bolton’s position on Iraq was no anomaly. Shortly before the 2003 invasion, he reportedly told Israeli officials that once Saddam Hussein was deposed, it would be necessary to deal with Syria, Iran, and North Korea. He has essentially maintained this position ever since. Put plainly: for Bolton, there are few international problems where war is not the answer.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/23/john-bolton-is-a-national-security-threat/
Good to read all sides. As far as I'm concerned, saying we should bomb Iran or North Korea as preventative measures is going to far...but that does not mean that is a policy we would actually implement, that was him talking. He is not the President, he was considering running for President.
