Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:00 pm

https://rewire.news/article/2019/01/24/ ... gn-policy/

Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ When It Comes to Foreign Policy

Jan 24, 2019, 1:26pm Ramah Kudaimi

There is absolutely nothing progressive about siding with authoritarian rulers and states over people’s movements.

Image
Progressives must push for a foreign policy more in line with their principles, which means a foreign policy based on solidarity, internationalism, justice, and an unwavering commitment to demanding an end to all war by all states.
Drew Angerer / Getty Images


As soon as U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) announced her intent to run for the Democratic nomination for 2020, her supporters tried to present her foreign policy credentials as progressive.

But make no mistake: Gabbard is a war hawk. Her foreign policy vision is about protecting brutal dictators and regimes from accountability for their crimes, bombing countries and killing civilians in the name of fighting terrorism, and demanding “extreme vetting” for refugees. The reality is Gabbard’s foreign policy is not far off from Donald Trump’s foreign policy.

The claim that Gabbard is bringing an anti-interventionist and anti-war vision of foreign policy to challenge both Republicans and Democrats is based on a serious propaganda campaign by the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his backers, Russia and Iran. It started in March 2011, when Syrians inspired by the uprisings happening across their region rose up collectively demanding freedom and dignity in the face of tyranny and repression.

In response, Assad obliterated the Syrian resistance with catastrophic results. The United Nations estimated the death toll in 2016 based on 2014 data, and it has not tracked it since. There are more than five million Syrian refugees today living across the world. And Syrians in regime prisons are being massacred. In order to justify this brutality, Assad and his backers have insisted that there is a “regime change” conspiracy against him, thus dismissing the legitimacy of the Syrian people’s suffering under his family’s decades-long rule as well as the right of Syrians to protest against their oppression.

In the middle of this brutal dictator’s revenge, Gabbard broke with House Democrats to take a secret trip to Syria in January 2017. Her trip was organized by members of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, who are Assad sympathizers. Claiming this was a “fact-finding” trip, Gabbard went not to protest the torture of political prisoners in Assad’s dungeons or to demand accountability for the destruction the regime had wrought on cities across the country—but to meet with the dictator himself.

After her trip, Gabbard parroted the regime’s lies about the war. “I return to Washington, D.C., with even greater resolve to end our illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government,” she said. She used her platform to help Assad spread his propaganda, claiming there was no evidence he used chemical weapons against his people, and then dropping the issue once the evidence was presented that he, in fact, did—without ever admitting she was wrong or following through with her promise to hold him accountable once there was proof. In short, Gabbard has gaslit the already-traumatized Syrian people.

Gabbard’s support for fascist strongmen does not stop at Syria. She has met with others including Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt and Narendra Modi of India, and she has even been honored by right-wing pro-Israel forces at the World Values Network’s gala, which was co-hosted by influential Republican donor Sheldon Adelson.

And she was the first and only Democrat to meet with Trump after he was elected, when she was reportedly under consideration for a position in his administration. She is so loved by right-wing figures that she has received support from Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon, and Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.

As a Syrian American, I have experienced a range of emotions over the years. I felt joy and hope watching protest videos come out of Syria in 2011, as the barrier of fear was broken and people demanded the fall of the regime. More recently, I felt despair and anger, as the world seems to expect Syrians to accept life under the brutal regime that destroyed their country.

The emotions also include hurt, as many progressives have failed to engage with the Syrian revolution in a manner that centers its demands for freedom and dignity. There are those who cavalierly dismiss Gabbard’s positions on Syria as politics, saying that the situation is too complex for us to take a real position. I say that it is a failure of progressive politics that our bar for fighting imperialism is to support fascist strongmen over freedom and democracy. And we have to have a more comprehensive vision of what progressive foreign policy looks so that we do not de-center the voices of the affected and so that we do support the agency and struggles of people abroad.

In the case of Syria, while Gabbard claims she is concerned with the suffering of the Syrian people, in 2015 she voted for a GOP-backed bill to make it virtually impossible for Syrian and Iraqi refugees to come to the United States, before Trump came into power and ordered the Muslim Ban. And when she was asked this past week if she regretted meeting with Assad, she said no and again claimed she was fighting hard for peace.

Whenever Gabbard repeats the lies that what has been happening in Syria is about regime change, she is taking the side of Assad over Syrians. And there is absolutely nothing progressive about siding with authoritarian rulers and states over people’s movements.

Whenever Gabbard obfuscates about the use of chemical weapons by Assad, she is undermining efforts to hold the regime accountable for its war crimes. There is absolutely nothing progressive about siding with states over demands for accountability.

Whenever Gabbard says we need to be fighting terrorists in Syria, she is justifying the airstrikes of more than a dozen countries including Russia, the United States, Israel, and Turkey—airstrikes that have killed tens of thousands of people. And there is absolutely nothing progressive about siding with states bombing people over the people they are bombing.

We need progressives to articulate what U.S. foreign policy should be. The current status quo, supported by Republicans and many Democrats, of backing brutal regimes by selling them weapons and dropping more bombs as part of the so-called War on Terror—which has destroyed the lives of people across so many countries since 2001—is unacceptable. A progressive foreign policy to challenge U.S. consensus should be about connecting our movements in the United States with movements across the globe fighting against walls, police and military occupations, economic inequality, and climate destruction. But Gabbard is presenting us with more of the former rather than the latter. Her only change from the status quo is to suggest that maybe the United States work alongside Assad to fight terrorism instead of alongside, for example, Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia—so switching one dictator for another.

Progressives must push for a foreign policy more in line with their principles, which means a foreign policy based on solidarity, internationalism, justice, and an unwavering commitment to demanding an end to all war by all states. With authoritarianism and fascism on the rise across the globe, we cannot afford to let Gabbard’s pro-war, pro-dictator, and anti-people power vision be claimed as progressive.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Harvey » Wed Oct 16, 2019 6:31 pm

Yeah? Fuck off anyway, will you?
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby coffin_dodger » Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:16 am

Hey Harv - the thought-maggots (implanted, in this instance, by any politically-motivated piece like the one above) are designed to provoke one of two basic emotional responses - agreement or revulsion. Either way, the system wins - division is the name of the game.
Respect your reply. Sometimes it just feels right. A good release for exasperation.
Equally, the system thanks you for your feedback. You are now registered in category 9, subcat a1/w, subcat wen3 - long-term monitoring for wrongthink, violent outburts and acts of social incohesion.
User avatar
coffin_dodger
 
Posts: 2216
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:05 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (14)


Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:43 am

Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend

BY
BRANKO MARCETIC


Tulsi Gabbard is hailed as a progressive champion. But her views on Islam and support for far-right leaders suggest otherwise.

Image
Hawaii representative Tulsi Gabbard is announced at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Conservative Beginnings
Despite her progressive image today, Gabbard has conservative roots. Her father is Mike Gabbard, a former Honolulu city councilman, state senator, and high profile anti-gay activist who led a campaign against same-sex marriage in Hawaii in the 1990s. He founded the educational nonprofit Stop Promoting Homosexuality and bought himself a show on a local radio station to denounce LGBT people.

Early in her career, Gabbard took after her father. She opposed abortion and supported a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. After Honolulu Magazine emailed her father to ask about his former ties to a conservative Hare Krishna splinter group for a 2004 profile, it was Gabbard who replied angrily, accusing the magazine of “acting as a conduit for The Honolulu Weekly and other homosexual extremist supporters of Ed Case [her father’s opponent].” The same year, she used her platform as a state representative to testify against civil unions, calling the claim that they were different from same-sex marriage “dishonest, cowardly, and extremely disrespectful to the people of Hawaii,” who had voted in favor of Constitutional Amendment 2 in 1998, empowering the legislature to withhold marriage from same-sex couples.

“As Democrats, we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists,” she said at the time.

Gabbard has since done a 180, citing her military service in the Middle East as the impetus for her conversion to social liberalism.

“The contrast between our society and those in the Middle East made me realize that the difference — the reason those societies are so oppressive — is that they are essentially theocracies where the government and government leaders wield the power to both define and then enforce ‘morality,’” she wrote in a December 2011 post. “I began to realize that the positions I had held previously regarding the issues of choice and gay marriage were rooted in the same premise held by those in power in the oppressive Middle East regimes I saw.”

She effected a similar about-face on abortion, even receiving an endorsement from EMILY’S List during her 2012 congressional run despite her history of opposing reproductive rights.

And why not? Gabbard was only twenty-three when she expounded her socially conservative views, and it’s not unheard of for people’s thinking to evolve.

But suspicion of Gabbard lingers. Her state Democratic Party LGBT caucus, for instance, openly distrusts her, and backed her Democratic primary opponent in 2016. When questioned why the LGBT caucus, which had actually supported her three years earlier, had turned against her, the chairman cited two things. One was her less-than-stellar answers to a questionnaire the LGBT Caucus had sent. The other was a 2015 interview with Ozy, in which she confirmed that her personal views on gay marriage and abortion hadn’t changed, just her view on whether the government should enforce its vision of morality.

Gabbard’s campaign subsequently cancelled an interview with the LGBT Caucus, citing a number of private Facebook posts by its chairman and vice chairman in support of her primary opponent as evidence the group was “campaigning” for her. Gabbard’s press aide told Golojuch that “it unfortunately appears that your leadership is out of touch.”

This came on top of an earlier slight in 2013, when the caucus had asked Gabbard to send someone to testify at the legislative special session on same-sex marriage, only to be told that Gabbard “doesn’t get involved in state politics.” Gabbard’s Hawaiian colleagues in Congress all sent a representative to testify in support.

Gabbard does not actively work against gay rights. In fact, she’s cosponsored and supported numerous bills favoring the LGBT community during her time in Congress, from the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

Still, her questionable loyalty to LGBT and abortion rights is disquieting considering her public reputation as a beacon of progressivism.

Gabbard’s Anti-Interventionism
Much of the praise Gabbard receives is for her anti-interventionism. During her 2012 House campaign, she ran ads complaining about “endless war.” She has called for pulling out of Afghanistan, the longest war in US history, suggesting that the government invest the money instead into “rebuilding our own nation through long-term infrastructure projects.” She’s opposed US intervention in Syria since 2013, air strikes in Iraq, and arms sales to Saudi Arabia. She backed Sanders in the Democratic primary because of Clinton’s record of supporting “interventionist regime change wars.”

All of this has created the impression that Gabbard, unlike much of the Democratic Party, is antiwar.

She’s not.

Gabbard’s objections to US wars spring not from a concern for those parts of the world the US military bombs and invades, but exclusively from a concern about the Americans who fight them. As she told Truthout in 2012, her own military service in Iraq and Kuwait “changed my life completely” and revealed the “tremendous cost of war,” recounting the daily casualties and injuries to US troop she saw when she was deployed in a medical unit.

“The cost of war impacts all of us — both in the human cost and the cost that’s being felt frankly in places like Flint, Michigan, where families and children are devastated and destroyed by completely failed infrastructure because of lack of investment,” she told Glamour magazine in March last year.

This also formed the thrust of her speech at 2012’s (particularly militaristic) DNC, where she told the crowd, “As a combat veteran, I know the costs of war. The sacrifices made by our troops and our military families are immeasurable.”

There’s nothing wrong, of course, with expressing empathy for the soldiers who are sent to fight, lose limbs, and die in wars of choice launched by their political leaders. The suffering they and their families endure is heartbreaking, especially considering that many join the military because they lack any other economic opportunities. And the money spent on wars abroad would surely be better used on infrastructure at home.

But Gabbard’s almost singular focus on the damage these wars inflict domestically, and her comparative lack of focus on the carnage they wreak in the countries under attack, is troubling. It is nationalism in antiwar garb, reinforcing instead of undercutting the toxic rhetoric that treats foreigners as less deserving of dignity than Americans. (Gabbard’s brand of anti-interventionism has even received praise from former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who called for her to be named secretary of state.)

And it still produces its fair share of bloodshed. Like campaign-era Trump, Gabbard may be against miring the United States in blunderous, short-sighted conflicts that backfire, but she’s more than willing to use America’s military might to go after suspected terrorists around the world (and inevitably kill and maim civilians in the process). In the same Truthout interview, responding to a question about drones, Gabbard said that “there is a place for the use of this technology, as well as smaller, quick-strike special force teams versus tens, if not hundreds of thousands of soldiers occupying space within a country.”

It’s a point she’s repeated again and again. Responding to questions from Honolulu Civil Beat in 2012, Gabbard said that “the best way to defeat the terrorists is through strategically placed, small quick-strike special forces and drones — the strategy that took out Osama Bin Laden.” She told Fox in 2014 that she would direct “the great military that we have” to conduct “unconventional strategic precise operations to take out these terrorists wherever they are.” The same year, she told Civil Beat that military strategy must “put the safety of Americans above all else” and “utilize our highly skilled special operations forces, work with and support trusted foreign partners to seek and destroy this threat.”

“In short, when it comes to the war against terrorists, I’m a hawk,” she told the Hawaii Tribune-Herald last year. “When it comes to counterproductive wars of regime change, I’m a dove.”

In other words, Gabbard would continue the Obama administration’s foreign policy, which itself was a continuation (and in some ways ramping up) of George W. Bush’s foreign policy. She would keep up the drone bombing of seven Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa — perhaps even expand it — while also relying more on special operations forces, which are already raiding, assassinating, and gathering intelligence in 70 percent of the world’s countries.

Drones killed hundreds of civilians over Obama’s eight years, while special operations forces like SEAL Team 6 — which Gabbard specifically name-checked in her positive allusion to the bin Laden raid — are known for their fair share of brutality. It was “quick-strike special forces” conducting a “strategic precise operation,” to use Gabbard’s term, that a little less than four months ago killed thirty civilians in a botched raid in Yemen.

Not surprisingly, Gabbard has received plaudits from conservatives for her foreign policy stances. The National Review published a glowing profile of the congresswoman in April 2015, complete with a quote from American Enterprise Institute (AEI) president Arthur Brooks saying that he “like[s] her thinking a lot.”

Gabbard was subsequently one of three Democrats — the others being New Jersey senator Cory Booker and Maryland congressman John Delaney — who secured an invitation to AEI’s annual closed-to-the-press retreat, where she hobnobbed with the likes of Dick Cheney, Bill Kristol, Mike Pence, Rupert Murdoch, the DeVoses, and a host of other major conservative figures. At the AEI’s urging, she had earlier spoken at the Halifax International Security Forum, an annual gathering of national security wonks sponsored by Lockheed Martin, Canada’s Department of National Defence, and others.

Another reason Gabbard started receiving applause from the Right was her very public skepticism of the Iran deal.

The Obama administration may have continued much of the Bush approach to the “war on terror,” but it at least recognized the value of diplomacy. Not Gabbard, however, who told Fox News she was “cynical” toward the pact, and agreed with host Greta van Susteren that it was akin to Neville Chamberlain’s infamous Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938.

Breitbart gleefully quoted her in headlines expressing “many” and “great” concerns over the deal as it was being negotiated. On the day the agreement was finalized, she issued a statement saying, “We cannot afford to make the same mistake with Iran that was made with North Korea,” citing North Korea’s abrogation of the Agreed Framework agreement it had signed in 1994. When Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his unprecedented speech to Congress in March 2015 in an attempt to torpedo the deal, Gabbard didn’t join the significant number of Democrats who boycotted the speech. She attended it.

In light of this, the fact that Gabbard received a “Champion of Freedom” award at the Jewish Values Gala — an awards ceremony held by the World Values Network, which was founded by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, an enthusiastic Trump supporter — in between campaigning for Sanders is less puzzling.

On Rabbi Shmuley’s Facebook page, Gabbard’s award win is recounted in the same post that celebrates making then–Secretary of State John Kerry renounce his statements that Israeli policies contribute to terrorism against Israel. A photo from the event shows Gabbard posing with Rabbi Shmuley and Miriam Adelson, the wife of Sheldon Adelson (Adelson himself is a major Trump supporter, and happens to believe Palestinians are “a made-up people”). As her Democratic primary opponent pointed out, Gabbard has introduced Adelson-backed legislation to Congress before.

Clearly liberals and leftists who admire Gabbard’s foreign policy are mistaking her anti-interventionism for dovishness. But Gabbard’s foreign policy, while an improvement on Trump’s — and what isn’t? — would continue to foment anti-American resentment and anger around the world, with its casualties, destruction, and casual violations of national sovereignty, fueling the very “endless war” she despises.


Read more: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tuls ... atic-party
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Harvey » Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:09 pm

AD, I've defended you in the past but those days are long gone. What part of go fuck yourself is difficult to understand?
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Harvey » Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:11 pm

coffin_dodger » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:16 am wrote:Hey Harv - the thought-maggots (implanted, in this instance, by any politically-motivated piece like the one above) are designed to provoke one of two basic emotional responses - agreement or revulsion. Either way, the system wins - division is the name of the game.
Respect your reply. Sometimes it just feels right. A good release for exasperation.
Equally, the system thanks you for your feedback. You are now registered in category 9, subcat a1/w, subcat wen3 - long-term monitoring for wrongthink, violent outburts and acts of social incohesion.



Don't worry mate, I've been on that list since the day I was born.
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby elfismiles » Fri Oct 18, 2019 4:44 pm

OK THEN
Hillary Clinton Appears to Claim Russians ‘Grooming’ Tulsi Gabbard to Run as Third-Party Candidate
Olivia Messer, Reporter, Updated 10.18.19 4:26PM ET / Published 10.18.19 10:49AM ET
https://www.thedailybeast.com/hillary-c ... te?sfns=mo


@TulsiGabbard
Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton
You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a ...
3:20 PM · Oct 18, 2019

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status ... 6409406464
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8459
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Oct 18, 2019 5:44 pm

.


There are some mind-numbingly dumb comments below the tweet from Tulsi that Elfis posted above. It's no wonder this country's in the predicament it's in right now... and clearly, some of it has infested this space as well.

Lunacy.

First, Tulsi's response:

Tulsi Gabbard
‏Verified account @TulsiGabbard

Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a ... ... concerted campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know — it was always you, through your proxies and ... ... powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine, afraid of the threat I pose.

It’s now clear that this primary is between you and me. Don’t cowardly hide behind your proxies. Join the race directly.

1:20 PM - 18 Oct 2019


And a sampling of the mostly brain-addled tweets that follow:

Trish PK, Writer
‏ @tpk_writes

Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

If you love this country as you claim, you will drop out and support whoever get the Dem nomination.

But you won't do that, will you, Jill Stein 2.0?



Ian Campbell
‏ @iancampbell

Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

Holy shit the bots in this thread. Lol.


Russell Drew
‏ @RussOnPolitics
Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

Tulsi, you are not fit to shine Hillary Clinton's shoes, let alone go mano a mano against her in the Dem primary.

The more this race unfolds, the more damage you do to your own reputation and future.

Who else is going to donate to Tulsi'a #HI02 primary challenger @kaikahele?


Heather Hughson
‏ @HNHughson
Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

Russian asset says what?


Ahmed Baba
‏ @AhmedBaba_

Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

Ahmed Baba Retweeted Tulsi Gabbard

With this unhinged thread alleging the former 2016 Democratic nominee is launching a conspiracy against her, Tulsi Gabbard confirms she is not seriously running for the Democratic nomination.

Tulsi just confirmed all of the criticisms directed at her.

This is some right-wing BS


Tim
‏ @newyorksprtsfan

Yeah, I'm not gonna lie. This is COMPLETELY unhinged.


kirby stan
‏ @lmaomybad1

It’s a fair criticism of the corporate Democratic Party, what unhinged about it?


Floris
‏ @Floris_West

Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

preach. the era of Clinton corrupt politics is coming to an end.


Nicolas Falacci
‏Verified account @NickFalacci
If you ever bothered to do the research the whole Clinton corruption meme was based on a totally bogus, debunked book “Clinton Cash.”

Open your eyes. We are in the biggest era of corruption ever. The Trump Era.


SarahCA
‏ @SarahBCalif

Replying to @TulsiGabbard @HillaryClinton

Thanks Comrade Tulsi


Zach Alan
‏ @zwash300

@HillaryClinton has been right about literally EVERYTHING that she warned us about in 2016. I’m going with her.
Last edited by Belligerent Savant on Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 2765
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Agent Orange Cooper » Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:11 pm

Oh fuck off.
User avatar
Agent Orange Cooper
 
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:25 pm

^^^
What/who are you addressing?
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 2765
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Agent Orange Cooper » Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:38 pm

OP, not you. It was an instinctual reaction.
User avatar
Agent Orange Cooper
 
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Jerky » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:09 pm

What's wrong with what he posted?

I mean, for Pete's sake... is Jacobin Magazine now considered an unacceptable source of news and analysis?!

J.

Harvey » 17 Oct 2019 16:09 wrote:AD, I've defended you in the past but those days are long gone. What part of go fuck yourself is difficult to understand?
User avatar
Jerky
 
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:29 pm

.
Agent Orange Cooper » Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:38 pm wrote:OP, not you. It was an instinctual reaction.


Fully understandable. You are not alone.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 2765
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Tulsi Gabbard Is No ‘Progressive’ on Foreign Policy

Postby American Dream » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:31 pm

She is no progressive on foreign policy. That seems clear.


Links in the original:

Peel Back Tulsi Gabbard’s “Progressive” Veneer

By: Stanley Heller February 13, 2019

Image


Let’s look at the record, starting with foreign policy. Gabbard was first elected to Congress from Hawaii in 2012. In 2015 she supported Russian bombing of Syrians. “Al-Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and must be defeated,” she tweeted that October. “Obama won’t bomb them in Syria. Putin did.” She added that it’s “bad enough US has not been bombing al-Qaeda/al-Nursa in Syria” and that “it’s mind-boggling that we protest Russia’s bombing of these terrorists.” This, of course, as Russia and Assad planes obliterated neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, markets, etc. etc. Needless to say, Gabbard never criticized a single Russian bombing or any murderous act by Assad.

In the fall of 2016 all sorts of people from politicians to sports stars were properly refusing to meet with Trump. Gabbard was the lone Democratic to go to him to hustle for a job in his Administration or as she claims to discuss her absurd “Stop Arming Terrorists Act”. This ludicrous law would prevent the U.S. from arming al-Qaeda, a law without a purpose since Obama wasn’t doing that and in fact had bombed AQ from time to time.

She went to Syria in 2017 and met with Assad escorted by two American supporters of the Lebanese pro-Assad and anti-Semitic party SSNP. She came back parroting to her constituents the whole Assad line: that the whole war was a U.S. regime change effort, and there’s no difference in any of the rebels. To her none of the forces opposing Assad were different from al-Qaeda or ISIS. According to her all were terrorists.

And no surprise she was “skeptical” in April 2017 that Assad forces used poison gases. In the same article in The Hill she said, ”If President Assad is found to be responsible after an independent investigation for these horrific chemical weapons attack, I’ll be the first one to denounce him.” When the U.N. chemical weapons agency said just that, she denounced no one.

In The Nation in 2018 she gave a blanket description of all Syrians opposing Assad as “terrorists” and she made another claim that the U.S. government was the “big brother and protector of Al Qaeda”.

Her support for Assad and Russia atrocities in Syria seems to come out of a deep-seated dislike of Muslims. Here’s a piece in January by Amer Ahmed, who writes about Islamophobia on Medium. It’s entitled “My Personal Encounter with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s Islamophobia at Standing Rock.” First take a look at the picture. It shows Tulsi Gabbard joyously meeting with Narendra Modi, the prime minister of India. This is not faked enthusiasm. If anything inspires Gabbard, it is Indian “white nationalism,” Hindutva, and its leader Modi. Arundhati Roy describes Modi as a “fascist.” His government has arrested thousands of activists. As Chief Minister of Gujarat in 2002 he whipped up hatred of Muslims after Hindus were killed on a train. Shortly after his campaign there was a massacre of Muslims in his state with between one and two thousand souls extinguished! Hindutva sees its enemies as Muslims (and lower caste Hindus who don’t know their place).

In Ahmed’s article he describes Gabbard and her spouse “recoiling” from him upon hearing his name and avoiding other attempts when he tried to talk to her or even catch her eye. They were in a home in Cannonball, MN at a celebration party after Obama announced suspension of the Dakota Access pipeline. Ahmed says, “I’m not sure if they perceived me as a spy, a terrorist or something else but they definitely seemed to have a problem with my presence in the room.” I think Ahmed is believable.

On to Israel where Gabbard openly associates with the ultra-right. Here in 2015 she speaks at the wacko (but very influential) Christians United for Israel, the Hagee outfit which supposedly has two million members. Minister John Hagee welcomed world war with Iran as a step to Armageddon. John McCain had to break with him in 2008 on account of Hagee’s remarks saying Hitler had helped fulfill God’s will. In May of 2016 months after she endorsed Bernie Sanders, she attended the Champions of Jewish Values International Awards Gala in NYC where she was given a Champion of Freedom Award. Other champions included Sheldon Adelson who has said the U.S. should drop an atomic bomb on Iran, and His Royal Highness Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi who was also given an award. (If you’re wondering who this “highness” is, it’s the son of the late outsted Shah of Iran). In 2108 Gabbard issued her (first?) criticism of Israel when she made a tweet opposing the use of live ammunition against the Gaza marchers. This act is insignificant compared to her close association with the Ultras.

Look at some photos from her website. Gabbard speaks about her meeting in 2015 with Egypt’s dictator Al-Sisi. She highlights how he has “cracked down on Islamic extremism.” Yes, “cracked down.” Just two years earlier Al-Sisi’s men, after having been revved up with wild tales, massacred in one day 800 non-violent Muslim Brotherhood protesters in Rabaa Square. On her site, Gabbard posts a picture of herself merrily shaking hands with Defense Minister Sedki Sobhi. In 2013 Sobhi was Armed Forces Chief of Staff and sent faxes to commanders warning there were suicide bombers in the midst of the Muslim Brotherhood demonstrators. An article in “The New Arab” says, “One fax even claimed there 20,000 jihadists who had escaped from Gaza preparing to carry out attacks against government targets.” You can imagine the effect.

Gabbard supports some verifiable monsters. This is a “progressive”?


https://newpol.org/peel-back-tulsi-gabb ... ve-veneer/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests