Posted on 04/11/2017 7:47:09 PM PDT by VitacoreVision
Think the Left is antiwar? Think again. A Democratic congresswoman is under fire from liberal movers and shakers for daring to question both the rationale for and the legality of Republican President Donald Trump’s recent missile strike in Syria.
Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), shown, has been one of the most outspoken critics of the incursion. The day of the attack, she issued a scathing press release calling it an “illegal regime change war” that is “short-sighted” and “could lead to nuclear war” with Russia. She also expressed skepticism over Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s alleged responsibility for a chemical-weapons attack in northwestern Syria last week, which the Trump administration used to justify its actions.
This was too much for some otherwise Trump-hating leftists, who took to Twitter and television to demand Gabbard’s ouster.
Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, tweeted, “People of Hawaii’s 2nd district — was it not enough for you that your rep met with a murderous dictator? Will this move you?”
Tanden’s remark that Gabbard “met with a murderous dictator” was a reference to a private meeting the congresswoman, an Iraq War veteran who serves on the Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee, had with Assad in January as part of what she called a “fact-finding mission.” Of course, as the American Thinker blog points out, such a confab is hardly unprecedented: Then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also met with Assad in 2007.
Meanwhile, former Vermont governor, presidential candidate, and Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman Howard Dean tweeted, “This is a disgrace. Gabbard should not be in Congress.” During a Sunday appearance on MSNBC, Dean said that Gabbard should resign from Congress for her “outrageous” remarks suggesting that Assad’s culpability had not been demonstrated.
“If you’re on the Foreign Relations Committee and you haven’t seen the proof in the last five and a half years, there’s something the matter with you,” Dean said. “I am tired of people making excuses. This is no different than Trump making excuses for Putin. We’ve had enough of this.”
But given the history of U.S. wars, especially those of the 21st century, who is acting more disgracefully: the one who demands evidence and a proper declaration of war before launching an attack or the one who uncritically accepts Pentagon talking points and ignores the Constitution? As Gabbard put it in a Facebook post:
I and thousands of my brothers and sisters-in-arms went to war in Iraq that was based on false intelligence and lies from our leaders. I believe it is the duty of every American to make sure this never happens again. We need to learn from Iraq and Libya — wars that were propagated as necessary to relieve human suffering, but actually increased human suffering many times over.
Furthermore, she told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, Trump’s strike on Syria was nothing new but merely “an escalation of a counterproductive regime change war in Syria that our country’s been waging for years, first through the CIA covertly, and now overtly.” People were already suffering for it; the latest attack only added to their misery.
When Carlson asked Gabbard if she believed Assad was responsible for the chemical attack, she replied, “It doesn’t matter what I believe or not. What matters is evidence and facts. If the Trump administration has the evidence unequivocally proving this, then share it with the American people. Share it with Congress. Come to Congress and make your case before launching an unauthorized, illegal military strike against a foreign government.”
In her press release, Gabbard stated that if conclusive evidence were presented to her, she would “be the first to call for [Assad’s] prosecution and execution by the International Criminal Court,” although she noted that gathering such evidence may now be impossible because of the U.S. attack.
For her perfectly reasonable requests of a president of the opposing party, Gabbard, an otherwise fairly left-wing lawmaker, is being vilified by people in her own “progressive” party. Why?
First, she quit the DNC last year to endorse Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) over the party’s eventual nominee, Hillary Clinton, because of Clinton’s hawkishness. Tanden, a longtime Clinton loyalist, was heavily involved in the Clinton campaign and its efforts to deny Sanders the nomination.
Second, Gabbard met with President-elect Trump in November to discuss Syria, leading to rumors that she was under serious consideration for a position in his Cabinet — a big no-no in a party that despises Trump.
Simply put, the Democratic establishment is just as hawkish as the Republican establishment — Hillary Clinton has long favored regime change in Syria and actually called for airstrikes just hours before Trump gave the order — and anyone who stands in the way of their imperial ambitions must be silenced, even if it means empowering a Republican president. As Gabbard herself tweeted, “Those who’ve declared Trump a habitual liar now vilify those refusing to blindly follow him into another regime change war. Hypocrisy.”
I’m certain there is much that I would disagree with Tulsi Gabbard about, but she is right about Syria.
|
Click The Pic To Donate  |
Democrats anxious to topple Assad — hope Trump is asking why.
Because... “could lead to nuclear war” with Russia
The focus is back on ISIS.
And here I thought she was one of the saner Dems...
“National Security Council officials just held a background briefing with reporters on the declassified intel assessment of last week’s chemical attack on Khan Shaykhun, Syria. Full story coming soon, but a few takeaways:
Sarin confirmed as the nerve agent used via testing on victims as well as symptoms. Secondary responders also suffered exposure symptoms.
Su-22s from Shayrat airfield dropped the sarin on Khan Shaykhun; conventional weapons were dropped about six hours later on hospital treating sarin victims - “no comment” from officials on if Russia did latter.
No ISIS or other terrorists in area have sarin (just mustard gas) - attack was “not a terrorist holding of sarin or a terrorist use of sarin”
WH official on if Russia, present at airfield, knew of sarin attack: “We don’t have information on that per se... still looking into that.” Adding: “We do think that it is a question worth asking” Russians how they were with Syrian forces at airfield “and did not have knowledge” of the attack in planning/prep stages.
“Leakage inconsistent” with Russians saying sarin came from opposition stocks on ground - “we don’t see a building with that chemical residue”
On Syria hoax conspiracy theories: Body of evidence “too massive” for anyone to fabricate. Official added that videos released of attack did correspond with that date, time, location. “
Assad is a particularly horrible bogeyman for the Left. He has survived by protecting the minorities, the Christians in particular, in Syria as he is a minority Alawite and his power base is the minorities. And he is an Arab in an Arab country thus he is vicious and quick to wipe out misbehaving groups. Once upon a time I was horrified that his dad leveled the city of Homs because the population there was mounting an insurgency. I know better now, that is what Arabs do and a ruler has to be ruthless to survive and to govern/rule an Arab population. There are also Kurds and the Azeris, Druses, Alawites and more.
She’s right and hot
This thread will probably get pulled. FR seldom seems to allow an open discussion on principles of government rights or wrongs. FR has opted to be a pro war site in most cases depending on who is waging the war. Very sad!!!
To many articles pulled in that last week or so that would have been great for discussion. Pulled by moderators that will not allow discussion or a difference in belief. People with differing opinions are now enemies of the US and FR. The tail is waging the dog!! It is the corporations that are running our country, enjoy your slavery!
Thanks Jim! Not the same site that it was even 5 years ago. Although that was before the us gov rescinded its propaganda rules. So now they can propagandize us with a big budget, more trolls for their opinion making.
Blessings to God! Blessing to all of the Godly people that follow FR. The time is coming, have been stuck in the Prophets for a while. Judah came back 1st as foretold, will screw it up by not driving out the idiots (happening now).... Very bad and very, very good things come next. God’s timing brethren, it is all written.
Jim not sure of the Zot rules/removal. Thanks for all of your work and what you have done!!!!! Time to go!
Founded
Ruthless people should be governed by ruthless leaders. Not saying all muslims are ruthless, but some muslims are ruthless. They’re not a good fit with western society. It doesn’t work. Oil and water.
Tulsi Gabbard should pull a Preston Brooks on Howie "Pussy Hat" Dean.
He'd soil his little girl undergarments when he saw her.
I like Tulsi Gabbard. Plus she’s hot.
Your hand-wringing regarding the quality of discourse on this site couldn't be more incorrect.
Clearly, you're bitter about the fact that JimRob tends not to tolerate his site being used to spread counterproductive propaganda which aids and abets the Enemy.
We are at WAR. Many of the malcontents and those who like to indulge in anti-Trump masturbation seem to completely disregard that highly relevant fact.
We need to unify behind this President, trust this President, and, yes—even give him the benefit of the doubt when needed.
Anytime anti-Trump "concern" starts serving the propaganda goals of the Enemy—whether intentional or not—things have to be brought back under control.
If people aren't willing to trust this President after what he's had to go through to get here, then I daresay they should find another site to indulge their desire to tear him down.
The past several days serve as a sterling example: endless hand-wringing about one limited and perfectly justifiable military action—replete with labeling anyone who supported it as a war-mongering "neocon"—doubting the evidence (which clearly indicates Assad's guilt)—trying to spread guilt by association by saying that McCain and Graham, etc. supported it—trying to say it was unconstitutional (LOL)—in short, absolutely NO loyalty or trust shown—even after all this man has been through, and all he has accomplished, and all he has done to earn our trust.
At some point, enough becomes enough, and the boom gets lowered.
Some people need to learn to "stop worrying and love the Donald". This forum is the wrong place for gratuitous Trump skepticism—we should be long past that at this point.
Factually speaking, there have been very few articles pulled, and when they are, there's invariably a good reason for it.
Anyone who isn't interested in unity should probably reconsider their presence here. That's not to say there's no room for constructive criticism, debate, and disagreement. There's always plenty of room for that. But when undermining this President becomes a form of entertainment, and people forget that we're in the midst of an actual war here, then I applaud the policing that occurs. I have no respect for bellyaching about this site's owner or his moderation habits. Over a 20 year period, they have been absolutely exemplary.
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.