ren hoek
Footballguy
I just wanted to know what makes Assad an enemy or adversary of the US? You and Ivan act so appalled that Tulsi didn’t take the official line on Assad. Why?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Tulsi Gabbard 2020 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Franknbeans
- Start date
rustycolts
Footballguy
Thank you I certainly will. The author describes her self as a Rogue journalist. Bogan socialist. Anarcho-psychonaut. Guerrilla poet. Utopia prepper. That should have been a red flag. I still agree with her premise in the article though. I am still looking for voting alternatives. Not fan of Booker or Harris partly because of the way they came across during the Kavanaugh hearings.
He’s an adversary because he’s evil. If it were somebody else asking, I would direct him to google about the Arab Spring or the Syrian Civil War, etc., but I suspect you’re already familiar with the facts. So I don’t know what to tell you.
Last edited by a moderator:
If this is the standard then every post-war US president has collaborated with our adversaries.
Fair enough. Foreign policy is hard, and sometimes the least bad option includes propping up, or at least getting out of the way of, some awful actors. I don’t think getting out of Assad’s way is the least bad option here, but reasonable minds might differ about that.
Tulsi Gabbard’s mind isn’t reasonable, though. She refused to answer simple yes-no questions in that MSNBC clip, deflecting and evading instead, which I always consider a bad sign whether or not I agree with a person’s substantive position.
And all of this contrarian support for a ruthless dictator and war criminal comes after a secret (“unplanned”) meeting with him, possibly in breach of House ethics rules? It’s a terrible look. I couldn’t imagine voting for her unless her opponents were Donald Trump and Jill Stein.
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
Then you must be really proud of Syrians who are standing up to ISIS and Al Qaida.
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
This is what I've been coming around to, even before the more recent news. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something's off here.joffer said:
Dickies
Footballguy
I agree that the secret meeting with Assad is a bad look, and if it violates House ethics rules she should go, but I don't necessarily think what she said in that MSNBC interview was all that bad even though she came across very poorly. She is against regime change, the military industrial complex and putting our troops at war unless there is a direct threat to the US. That's not how we've gone about things over the last 50+ years, and I think our leaders need to be more careful with all three of those issues.Maurile Tremblay said:
As for Assad being an awful person and war criminal, it's obvious that he is both of those things. Not wanting to use our military assets to remove him doesn't equate to supporting him. There are probably 20+ leaders in the world who behave ruthlessly towards their people, but we aren't going to remove all of them (nor should we).
ren hoek
Footballguy
The reason rulers like Assad become official boogeymen is not because the US cares about human rights all of a sudden, but because they stand between US oil and the neocons. This is what the CIA does, rinse and repeat, over and over and over again. They set countries ablaze, arm violent opposition, watch the people burn, and then go in to play savior.
It wasn't long ago that Assad was the darling of the west. What changed? Did Bashar Assad just arbitrarily decide to start murdering his own people? What changed- of course, obviously- was the oil politics.
It wasn't long ago that Assad was the darling of the west. What changed? Did Bashar Assad just arbitrarily decide to start murdering his own people? What changed- of course, obviously- was the oil politics.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
That was twelve years ago. When an actual neocon was in charge. And Bush, like his dad and Reagan, would sign on with anyone who would ally up at all with the US, this time over Al Qaeda. Assad was willing to be a Middle East voice for the US in the War on Terror.
Then Obama became President and stopped supporting him, and his administration called out Assad for his support of Hamas and Palestinian terrorist organizations in addition to other Palestinian right wing militants who we considered borderline paramilitary organizations. And providing tactical ballistic missiles to Hezbollah. Obama levied sanctions against Syrian officials, companies, and banks.
And then, while the US was withdrawing support, the Syrian civil war started in 2012. After Houla, where 80 women and children were slaughtered, we effectively severed diplomatic ties and from 2011 on attempted to get the UN heavily involved, including with sanctions and a peacekeeping force, but were blocked by Russia, China, and a couple of others.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
But, you know. “Muh oil” I guess.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
And by the way, Syria has less oil reserves than Sudan, Oman, Angola, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, and a whole lot of other countries.
If we were going to turn on someone to steal their oil in 2011, in the middle of a destabilizing event, with the opportunity to get hold of 2,500,000,000 barrels of oil, the smart country to do that with would have been Uganda in the middle of a disputed election with a government still fighting an actual Christian terrorist group while they essentially set up a dictator to hand over the country to his son one day by paying off the legislature.
If we were going to turn on someone to steal their oil in 2011, in the middle of a destabilizing event, with the opportunity to get hold of 2,500,000,000 barrels of oil, the smart country to do that with would have been Uganda in the middle of a disputed election with a government still fighting an actual Christian terrorist group while they essentially set up a dictator to hand over the country to his son one day by paying off the legislature.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
or Venezuela
Franknbeans
Footballguy
rustycolts
Footballguy
The most important issue for me is never ending wars. Trump promised to bring our troops back and he didn't deliver. I am going to change my party affiliation from NPA to Democrat so I can vote for her in the primary. I am sure she will probably turn out to be the modern version of Eugene McCarthy but she is going to get my vote. She is also in favor of Medicare for all so that is a plus. I still have conservative values(probably more Libertarian) but these two issues are really important to me. I think we have had like 20 years of peace since the end of Vietnam. I don't think that's enough.
Last edited by a moderator:
Franknbeans
Footballguy
It's interesting that she seems to be the only candidate talking about peace. That issue alone distinguishes her from the others and unfortunately makes her a target of the MSM.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
https://youtu.be/8w1zf3YyXRI
She carries herself real well here, despite Meghan McCain’s absurd smear attempts.
I’m sure most of her support is going to shore up behind Bernie, but I’m glad Gabbard will push them on endless war.
She carries herself real well here, despite Meghan McCain’s absurd smear attempts.
I’m sure most of her support is going to shore up behind Bernie, but I’m glad Gabbard will push them on endless war.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
I could see a Bernie/Gabbard ticket
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Somebody's got to do it
Franknbeans
Footballguy
rustycolts
Footballguy
So why is she not getting any love from the left?
Franknbeans
Footballguy
because she's pro-peace
rustycolts
Footballguy
Well I don't see what is not to like. She is a veteran who wants to bring our kids home and keep them out of bs wars. I am not sure what I would be considered anymore I guess I would be a conservative leaning Libertarian with progressive undertones. This will be an unpopular statement but I would vote for her over Trump but I'm pretty sure she is the only Dem I can say that about.
I don’t think that’s an unpopular sentiment. Gabbard seems to be the most Trump-like of the Democratic candidates by a decent margin. Which also may answer your question about why she’s not getting more support from the left.
rustycolts
Footballguy
Wow I sure don't see that. You are much more knowledgeable on topics than I am except for maybe fishing. So I really respect your opinions but I just don't see how she compares to Trump at all. She is for bringing our troops home. Trump was supposed to do that it was one of his promises but he did not deliver. Possibly they agree on prison reform. She is for medicare for all Trump certainly isn't. The thing about Medicare for all is people seem to think it's free health care but it's not you pay for it your whole working life. When you collect Social Security they take over $100.00 a month for Medicare. That is about the same they take out per month for single coverage with some employer based health care. I don't see how that could not be something that she could possibly get done. Especially now with most Americans behind it. I doubt Trump would even try. She is for legalized Marijuana, Trump not so much. I am sure her stance on immigration reform is no where close to Trumps view. These are all things I could get behind I am sure there are policies on the issues I would not agree with her on but the ones I mentioned out weight those. I really can't see how people would think she is Trump like.Maurile Tremblay said:
Franknbeans
Footballguy
neither do I. Maybe MT will expound.
Gabbard differs from Trump on many issues: education, the environment, campaign finance issues, health care, guns, abortion, etc. But nearly all Democrats differ from Trump on those issues, so that doesn't make her less Trump-like than the others.
She actually may not be far from Trump on certain immigration issues. I don't know where she stands on building a wall (I don't think Hawaii has a dog in that fight), but she agrees with Trump on "extreme vetting" of Syrian refugees.
She seems Trump-like to me on foreign policy -- not just because both she and Trump seem generally non-interventionist compared to more mainstream establishment types, but also because they both seem to have weird romances with ruthless foreign dictators. Trump loves Vladimir Putin, Mohammad bin Salman, and sometimes Kim Jong-un, while Gabbard loves Putin's buddy Bashar al-Assad (1, 2, 3, 4).
In 2016, Kevin McCarthy joked(?) that he thought Donald Trump and Dana Rohrabacher were both on Putin's payroll. There may be other Republicans in that boat as well. If you asked me to name the non-Republican politician most likely to be on the payroll of a hostile foreign power, I'd name Jill Stein. If you asked me for my second nomination, I'd pick Tulsi Gabbard.
Last edited by a moderator:
I am just not sure how long she stays in this race:
She may be right on this - but she is swimming upstream against the establishment, and that never ends well. (and for the record - I don't think we are any closer to nuclear war than we were 2 years ago.)
Steven L. Hall - Retired CIA Chief of Russian Operations. CNN National Security Analyst. Expert for The Cipher Brief.
She may be right on this - but she is swimming upstream against the establishment, and that never ends well. (and for the record - I don't think we are any closer to nuclear war than we were 2 years ago.)
Steven L. Hall - Retired CIA Chief of Russian Operations. CNN National Security Analyst. Expert for The Cipher Brief.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
MT is much more brilliant than me but I think he's got it all wrong with Tulsi. Unless he's into more regime change war.
Making sense
Making sense
Putting aside the issue of whether she’s right or wrong on the substance, can we agree that Exhibit A in refuting the charge that she’s Trump-like should not be ... the fact that she is greatly admired by Tucker Carlson?
Last edited by a moderator:
rustycolts
Footballguy
I don't think she is greatly admired by Carlson, I think regime change is probably the only issue he agrees with her on. I never thought I would ever say this but I an going to change my voters registration from NPA to Dem so I can vote for her in the primary. I have never been registered as a Dem before so thanks Trump.
I'll probably do the same (go from NPA to Dem) since it appears that the Democratic primary will be the only game in town in 2020. If there's a Republican primary after all, I'll reconsider.
(I thought I was quoting Carlson, but I just double-checked and he said that he admires her bravery, not that he admires her greatly, so I remembered his phrasing incorrectly.)
Last edited by a moderator:
Franknbeans
Footballguy
I'll clarify my position. Anyone who supports getting us out of these stupid regime change wars will garner my support. Every time. I found it interesting when he asks her if anyone from either side has debated her on the issue and she said no. We're in a very dark place.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Similar threads
