Posted on 09/19/2019 6:21:43 AM PDT by KC_Lion
(Video) Tulsi Gabbard: Trump response to Saudi oil strikes a 'disgrace'
Wednesday on Fox News Channel’s “Your World,” Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), a candidate for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination criticized President Donald Trump’s response to an attack on an oil production facility in Saudi Arabia.
Gabbard went on to argue Saudi Arabia’s promotion of extremist Wahhabi ideology was a bigger threat to the United States than Iran.
Partial transcript as follows:
CAVUTO: All right, so the interpretation I have is that you want to bring back that Iran deal, get — move back to that.
....
GABBARD: No, I’m a fan of the United States of America. I’m a fan of the American people.
And as president and commander in chief, I would put their interests above all else, putting the wellbeing of the American people —
CAVUTO: Is it in our interests for Saudi Arabia — is it in our interests for Saudi Arabia to be protected or its kingdom to be protected? Or do you draw a distinction?
GABBARD: Well, let me tell you what is not in our interest, is this alliance that has been longstanding between the United States and Saudi Arabia, in spite of the fact that they are directly and indirectly supporting Al Qaeda, the terrorist group that attacked us on 9/11.
We just observed the 18th anniversary of that terrible attack on our country in 2001. They are continuing to spend billions of dollars every year propagating this extremist Wahhabi ideology that’s fueling the growth of terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS and others around the world.
They are directly supporting those who pose a threat to our country and the United States, that threat that we need to defeat.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“That’s true. Is there Iranian mosque preaching hate in US? There is no such thing.”
No there are just Iranian’s pretending to be expats in the U.S. while actually still having an allegiance to the Mullahs of Tehran and their leaders. They have been big contributors to a number of major Democrat figures.
Meanwhile it is the Mullahs in Tehran that do preach “Death to America” (continuing today as from the beginning in 1979).
To suggest that the Mullahs in Tehran are no threat to us is absurd.
When we ended Saddam’s nuclear ambitions, a sane person would have thought the Mullahs in Tehran would have cheered how their enemy had been overthrown and no more need they worry that that enemy would have nukes. But no, the Mullahs, through their militias in Iraq sought to increase the post-Saddam civil war in Iraq and kill as many Americans as they could in the process, hoping their sponsored Shia militias would wind up ruling all on their own, as Hezbolla pretty much does in Lebanon. Yes, the Mullahs in Tehran are empire seeking religious theocrats. Their antagonism to Israel has zero, zip, nada to do with “protecting” the security of the nation of Iran. It is 100% about BUYING the allegiance of other Muslims in the Middle East - because of their threats against Israel - in the hopes of expanding allegiance to their Shia form of Islam.
No she doesn’t. She makes ignorant and head-in-the-sand-denial points as if anything about the Saudis or the Wahabis excuses the Mullahs of Tehran in any way. Read my other posts on this thread.
“You have to give Tulsi credit, she does tend to spit out the truth once in a while.”
No. She hits a fringe idea, which when pursued in depth is an insufficient truth for the point she wants to make from it.
There may be six degrees of separation, religiously and philosophically between western culture and the Wahabi, but their is no such distance between the Wahabi and the Mullahs of Tehran. Their division is only internal to Islam and together they represent two images of the same sixth century fundamentalist Islam.
“the Saudi government knew about and was complicit with the Wahhabi inspired attack on America”
Yes, Osama bin Laden was able to recruit folks into Al Queda from all over the Middle East, including young Saudis. And yes But he was no Wahabi Muslim, he rejected the Wahabi and they rejected him. If Osama bin Laden was closest to any other current Muslim groups it would be the Muslim Brotherhood - as they and Al Queda both look back to the same Muslim philosophers for their inspiration and positions.
That the Bush family had some interests in oil, belies the facts that as “interests in oil” go they were no match for the oil industry giants.
But, in their generation, economically and politically it was clear that global industry hinged on energy, and oil and gas were at the top of the energy chain, economically, and thus a big factor in global economics & trade. Of course that thinking would find the largest source of oil reserves in the world as economically important to global trade as global trade is to the U.S. That is not a conspiracy, just the facts of the world.
And yes, the Mullahs of Tehran are seeking to restore a Shia led caliphate in the Middle East, and the equally fundamentalist Saudi rulers are one (not the only) obstacle to that. You could say we don’t have a dog in the race, and while philosophically that might be true, the Mullahs of Tehran singled us out, individually, as another obstacle of theirs, from the start. THAT was long before the rise of Bin Laden and Al Queda.
“Yes 17 of the 19 terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 were Saudi nationals”
Yes, Osama found recruits for Al Queda in Saudi Arabia, as well as all over the Middle East. There was nothing strange about that.
He also had an entire Middle East network for fabricated passports using the information of real Middle East persons whose deaths had never been officially recognized (some his own recruits who died in Afghanistan), because where and how they had died was left unrecorded.
Yes, that still does not sanction how interest in the persons who took control of the planes on 9/11 ends, at least as far as the public knows, with the mere identification that they were recruits into Al Queda. And yes, it is not sufficient that everything else about them be hidden in our intelligence systems on “national security” grounds. It is long past time that their whole histories, including 100% wherefrom they got any support, be made public - and let the chips fall where they might.
“It was the Wahhabi that took over Iran. Khomeini brought his Saudi friends in, they didn’t speak Farsi. They took control of Iran, with it all the military resources they needed.”
From what drunken source did you pull that nonsense???
Khomeini was and his followers are uber-fundamentalist Shia Muslims (as in the only “right” Muslims are Shia Muslims), and the Wahabi are uber-fundamentalist Sunni Muslims (as in the only “right” Muslims are Sunni Muslims). Khomeini no more sought the help of the Wahabi than would the Wahabi help him, even if their life depended on it.
The Iran-Saudi contest is not so much an “Iranian” rift with Saudi Arabia as it as an uber-fundamentalist Shia Muslim (the Shia Mullahs of Tehan) rift with the Saudis because the Saudis official state religion is that of the Wahabi Sunni Muslim line.
My source was a refugee friend, who’s relatives still live there near the Russian border. There was an influx of Mullahs into Iran that only spoke Arabic, brought in by Khomeini. My friend is a Muslim in name only. A MINO? he was educated here an married to a catholic? He got out shortly after the Mullahs took over.
He is a source of one in the world. I’d take it with a grain of salt. If the situation was truly as he said, there would have been dozens of investigative reports about it, way back when, and continued comments on them today. But there has been zip, other than you friend. Personally I don’t buy it one bit. There is far too much religious difference and religious animosity between the Shia and the Wahabi.
How do you know those Mullahs were Wahhais? They could well be Shiites from Iraq or Lebanon.
Iran is not building mosques in the United States. The Saudis are, and the mosques they build (which is pretty much every mosque in the United States) is of the extremist Wahhabist sect.
I don't believe so. That only works if you don't take into account that the ambition of Osama and his minions, was the overthrow of the Saudi ruling family, which exiled him.
He does not know,
The non-Persian speaking Arabs could have been Shia Arabs from Iraq, like those Shia Militias in Iraq that the Mullahs in Tehran backed. Those Shia in Iraq opposed Saddam on two grounds - the Shia not the Sunni in Iraq were and are the majority in Iraq, and Saddam was a Sunni.
His only evidence is a supposed Iranian ex-pat who claims Komeini brought Wahabis into Iran - because he witnessed non-Persian speaking Arabs in northern Iran near the border with Russia that he claimed were working for Komeini. End of evidence.
Whether it be the Muslim Brotherhood, the Wahhabi, al Qaeda, ISIS or whatever group militant Sunni Muslims choose to join, the endless parsing of these groups by Westerners has not generally been useful. Each of these groups has done violence, terrorism and cannot be placated or trusted. The individuals who are attracted to them at their core have a virulent hatred and fear of Western freedoms, institutions and progress. Modernity challenges the social and political customs of Islam. As Obama said these people are threatened by this new world, cannot ignore it and cling tenaciously to their guns and religion for solace. They of course lash out and some pathetically actually seek “martyrdom”. Western globalists are very much mistaken if they think they can incorporate these Muslim cultures, whatever the subtle differences between them, into some idealistic, peaceful one world order government. There is much more to come beyond the carnage of 9/11 from these people
It is extremely troubling that most Americans seem oblivious or even compromised by the reality of Islamic hostility and hatred of Western values. There were multiple warnings prior to 9/11 which were dismissed by people who should have known better. After 9/11 many Americans not only failed to recognize the ongoing threat but many embraced those who seek to destroy them. Stockholm syndrome on a massive scale. Credible American politicians refuse to acknowledge that there is an ongoing violent hostility directed toward America. Instead they welcome mass immigration to this country from places that hate the West, advocate open borders and demean their own heritage. Others actually want more engagement an entanglement with these peoples and espouse some sort of diffuse globalist ideology. America will suffer greatly if either become dominant and actually make policy.
Neo isolationism is a prerogative label ever since 1941. However conservatives, usually the ones who spill blood and treasure in these entanglements, should be very wary of these interventions. If true peace is to come it will only arrive after the Islamic world is transformed by the inevitable exposure to the best institutions, practices and values of the Western world. Neither the sheiks or the mullahs can control the internet and the pervasive effect of Western culture on their people. The West cannot transform them by force. It should merely contain them with serious intent.
“” “” When we ended Saddam’s nuclear ambitions, a sane person would have thought the Mullahs in Tehran would have cheered how their enemy had been overthrown and no more need they worry that that enemy would have nukes. But no, the Mullahs, through their militias in Iraq sought to increase the post-Saddam civil war in Iraq and kill as many Americans as they could in the process, hoping their sponsored Shia militias would wind up ruling all on their own, as Hezbolla pretty much does in Lebanon. “” “”
Ever heard about geopolitics? Kinda reminds the actions in East Europe and Caucasus of another country after the fall of its rival. Continues for 25 years with no end in sight.
“Whether it be the Muslim Brotherhood, the Wahhabi, al Qaeda, ISIS or whatever group militant Sunni Muslims choose to join, the endless parsing of these groups by Westerners has not generally been useful.”
No argument.
“Each of these groups has done violence, terrorism and cannot be placated or trusted. The individuals who are attracted to them at their core have a virulent hatred and fear of Western freedoms, institutions and progress. Modernity challenges the social and political customs of Islam. As Obama said these people are threatened by this new world, cannot ignore it and cling tenaciously to their guns and religion for solace. They of course lash out and some pathetically actually seek “martyrdom”.”
You fictitiously mix up Obama’s statements with who he was talking about. His “they cling to their guns and religion” statement was 2nd-Amendment believing Americans Obama was referring to, not violent jihadists.
“Western globalists are very much mistaken if they think they can incorporate these Muslim cultures, whatever the subtle differences between them, into some idealistic, peaceful one world order government.”
No argument.
“There is much more to come beyond the carnage of 9/11 from these people.”
Unlike you, while I understand the jihadists motives, I have no crystal ball.
“It is extremely troubling that most Americans seem oblivious or even compromised by the reality of Islamic hostility and hatred of Western values. There were multiple warnings prior to 9/11 which were dismissed by people who should have known better. After 9/11 many Americans not only failed to recognize the ongoing threat but many embraced those who seek to destroy them. Stockholm syndrome on a massive scale. Credible American politicians refuse to acknowledge that there is an ongoing violent hostility directed toward America. Instead they welcome mass immigration to this country from places that hate the West, advocate open borders and demean their own heritage. Others actually want more engagement an entanglement with these peoples and espouse some sort of diffuse globalist ideology. America will suffer greatly if either become dominant and actually make policy.”
No argument.
“Neo isolationism is a prerogative label ever since 1941. However conservatives, usually the ones who spill blood and treasure in these entanglements, should be very wary of these interventions. If true peace is to come it will only arrive after the Islamic world is transformed by the inevitable exposure to the best institutions, practices and values of the Western world. Neither the sheiks or the mullahs can control the internet and the pervasive effect of Western culture on their people.”
Oh, I don’t know. Culture is very strong, even in the Internet age, and China’s people are not being transformed into democracy desiring former comrades. Once the Islamist driven countries, with China’s help, adopt Chinese practices of controlling and directing their people, the fundamentalists Islamist culture may continue to reign there.
“The West cannot transform them by force. It should merely contain them with serious intent.”
No argument.
Tuli is nice to look at but as Krazy has some of our resident Putin bootlickers and RonPaulista Appeasement whiners.
She looks like an average looking girls' high school yearbook picture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.