Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Trump’s Military Strikes in Syria Are Reckless and Short-Sighted

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) released the following statement today (4/6/17) after the U.S. launched military strikes on Syrian government targets:

“It angers and saddens me that President Trump has taken the advice of war hawks and escalated our illegal regime change war to overthrow the Syrian government. This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a possible nuclear war between the United States and Russia.

“This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning. If President Assad is indeed guilty of this horrible chemical attack on innocent civilians, I will be the first to call for his prosecution and execution by the International Criminal Court. However, because of our attack on Syria, this investigation may now not even be possible. And without such evidence, a successful prosecution will be much harder.”

80 thoughts on “Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Trump’s Military Strikes in Syria Are Reckless and Short-Sighted”

  1. In my mind’s ear, I hear a bitterly ironic echo from just over a century ago: “He kept us out of war.”

    Some thought we had a choice last November. Indeed, it was just another…echo.

    1. It was on April 6, 1917 that the US entered WWI – 100 years ago today as I write from Phoenix.

      1. Yeah. Neocons have a wicked sense of humor.

        Like shooting down airliners to propel war. Of the same company that just lost one in mysterious circumstances.

    2. To paraphrase the late great Langston Hughes:

      So we stand here
      On the edge of hell
      In [Amerika]
      And look out on the world
      And wonder
      What we’re gonna do
      In the face of what
      We remember.

    3. Right. Like when (Bill) Clinton was running against Bob Dole, Dole had earlier said that if he were president, he’d have 500 bombers over Belgrade (then in Yugoslavia). Instead, Clinton won, and he had 1200 military aircraft in his attack on that city (and country). What a choice.

      1. You had the best chance ever with Obama but racist hate for him allowed the opportunity to slip away.

        That’s worth saying even though it will never be accepted by most.

        1. Even if he were a “best chance” he had his eight years. He cound not run again.

        2. The scary part of all this is when the USA and its “allies” get their asses handed to them by Russia and company, the USA will turn inwards and start blaming its own citizens for the “loss”, just like it did after the Viet Nam Rape. The military complained about no objective in that war because there was none! Their hands were tied because there was no objective other than the prosecution of wars for war profiteering! “Pacifists, peaceniks, intellectuals will be blamed and attacked , . . there will be a shit storm of McCarthyist proportions when the USA gets put in its place on this planet. American “leaders” will vent their anger on their own constituents instead of accepting blame for an immoral and illegal foreign policy! I’ve said this all along- the REAL war in this world is between the tax-paying law-abiding American people and “their” crooked-to-the-core” government! If Americans were REALLY in charge of this nation, you would see respect towards other nations that you don’t see when a bunch of rich, powerful disrespectful and disdainful people have power!

          1. Thank you for this well crafted statement. I would like to copy and save this so that I might quote you at a later time, if you have no objection.

          2. It really was wasn’t it! The only thing I worry about is that if the US gets it’s ass handed to them by Russia, nobody will be worrying very much about who was right and who was wrong.

          3. Well said tom but it sounds like it takes a non-american to say it. Or is that just me being too pessimistic?

    4. Actually Obama was successful in postponing wars on Syria and Iran but that will never be admitted by most Americans.

      1. To quote the Gipper, Don: “There you go again!” This site alone has been rife with columns and comments acknowledging and commending Obama’s caving in to public pressure to not attack Syria and resisting congressional pressure to attack Iran. I include myself among those who so opined. We even stifled our “racist hate for him” long enough to say he had that much right.

        Granted, that cohort–along with the many who silently agree–may not amount to “most Americans.” Heck, Don, most Americans haven’t a clue about those things one way or another. Would your country maybe accept them as immigrants?

        1. Thing stil is Marcus, Obama and Putin convinced Assad to get rid of his chem/bio weapons arsenal. And he did! Heck gee golly Marcus, if he wasn’t the black guy you would be on the same side as we antiwar people on this site!

          And too Marcus, Obama didn’t attack Syria and Iran and that’s your inconvenient truth.

          So how do you spin Obama’s success of getting a deal on Iran’s nuclear program. Undoubtedly a very bad deal right? You sick motherfu–er.

          1. Oh Don, how you have willfully ignored every point that I have made in this and another thread in order to call me a racist and a (expletive deleted). Sad! (irony fully intended)

            No longer any doubt about what you’re made of: i.e. nothing worth a second thought. Having given you several more than you’re worth, I wish you a good life, and thank you for expediting my future readings of these sections.

          2. Referring to what I said Marcus, facts are stubborn things. And so how about that deal on Iran’s nuclear ambitions? And how about Trump’s promise to destroy it?

            I’m glad we can agree on that at least.

      2. Bullshit. Russia and Putin was successful in postponing Obomber’s “no fly zone”. Obama and Hillary were all in, just like in Libya.

      3. That thought actually crossed my mind, he did delay a full out assault. Trump has only been in a short time and low and behold….

      4. In his last couple of yrs be reinvolved us in Iraq and introduced troops in Syria. And Afghanistan lurches toward a Saigon type collapse.

        1. Well, at least you could admit that he did the best he could with the odds that were mounted against him.

          It’s a lot like a nigra in the south trying to clear himself in court when he’s not guilty of rape of a white woman. The poor fu–er won’t live long enough to make it to his own lynching.

      5. He did a good job of back peddling – with a lot of help from Vladimir.

        Spassibo bolshoi, Russia!

    5. “If President Assad is indeed guilty of this horrible chemical attack on
      innocent civilians, I will be the first to call for his prosecution and
      execution by the International Criminal Court”

      Why doesn’t this ever apply to Israeli, USA and Saudi “leaders”? Their aggression on Syria led to this incident OR they were the ones behind it! American Presidents have their hands wet with the blood of innocents and no one ever calls for their accountable when their crimes are plain as day! Assad didn’t order any chemical attack and neither did any one under his command. You see the results of the “attack”? Well, don’t think for one moment Assad or even Russia DIDN’T know this would be the result of any chemical attack, so why would any one give the “war on Syria” proponents an “excuse” to attack on a silver platter, especially when such an attack has no strategic significance? It’s tough when informed Americans KNOW that this was a false flag but their hands are tied as to what “their” government can do. And what does “their” government do? ratchet anti-American hatred even more! Yep . . . this will make America Great Again as a target for pissed of “terrorists”!

      1. First of all Tom, keep Israel out of it. That just drives a wedge right through the middle of the antiwar effort in the minds of Americans.
        Or is that intentional tom?

        1. I’m a human first and foremost and when there’s an elephant in the room I like to make a note of it. International of course. Facts should come first, not religion or ethnicity or skin color or anything else. And people should keep an open mind even though they have lots of facts to back their claims. No judgments . . . only open minds. Let the criminals hang themselves so sayeth Brutus on a fortnight ago . . .

        2. keep Israel out of it.
          That tells me all I need to know about you and your agenda.

        3. Israel should FOR SURE be a part of this discussion. Criminal Israel office holders are to blame for most of the wars keeping this planet on fire with hellish wars right now. The sooner we try them for their war crimes the sooner a REAL solution will come.

      2. Why doesn’t this ever apply to Israeli, USA and Saudi “leaders”?

        Or Hindu nationalists with blood up to their elbows, for that matter..

  2. So… there really wasn’t a non interventionist choice (Democrat or Republican) in the election. Meet the new boss…same as the old boss.

    1. “If voting made any difference they wouldn’t let us do it.”

      Mark Twain

    2. Agreed. But Tulsi Gabbard may be running in 2020. If she does I would consider supporting her.

  3. Once again, the century-long Imperialist instinct in US ruling elite has overcome any practical thought or fleeting commitment for peaceful initiatives. Was it Martin Luther King who famously said that “We have guided missiles but misguided leaders”? Sadly, the (Evil) Empire Strikes FIRST!

  4. Tulsi Gabbard should consider running for president in 2020. She has intelligence, charisma, commitment and credibility. And she is committed to the antiwar and indigenous rights movements. Gabbard could be a candidate who could unite the left and the right anti war movements. My main concerns about her as a candidate is that she has lined up with supporters of Israel in the past and she has accepted the idea that the Iranian regime wants to develop nuclear weapons. Those are major impediments to being an antiwar candidate. But she is very young and has grown politically since she was the youngest woman ever elected to a state legislature about 15 years ago in Hawaii.

    1. She has intelligence, charisma, commitment and credibility.

      And an enormous capacity for hypocrisy.

  5. When a US politician comes out and says something positive on the antiwar effort, there’s a slight chance that they aren’t putting their as-es in the wringer.

    This could represent progress as maybe a few are doing it now. The opportunity may never be better because the president whose actions are being opposed by a few politicians can never be more vulnerable to attacking.

    The Dems are already switching their emphasis to opposing Trump’s actions. And the Repubs are hanging on the edge of giving up on Trump as a lost cause.

    And if Rand Paul takes a chance on turning truly antiwar then he must be seeing some safety in doing so. Not that he is yet but he just might?

  6. It is so obvious that the poison gas attack in Syria was a false-flag caper. The question is: Was Trump cognizant of the scam before or after it occurred? God bless Tulsi Gabbard.

  7. So glad i didnt vote for that traitorous POS Trump or Hillary. Thank you Tulsi. Pls do what u can to stop Trump just another Saudi lapdog

  8. I’d vote for her, provided she drop her limited support for drone strikes on the battlefield. I don’t think there’s ever a good excuse to use those nasty toys.

  9. Assad’s enemies are Al-Qaeda and ISIS and US policy is terrorism. Not to mention that there is zero proof that Gabbard did anything but meet with Assad and Trump too for that matter. I seriously suggest you unwedge your head from your ass before posting in the future.

    1. Thank you. Your check from Al-Nusra is in the mail. Your Oscar on the other hand for best performance by a jackass in a propaganda picture wen’t to Miss Lindsey Graham. I’m sure you understand why.

    2. I feel very sorry for you, pal. Bashar al-Assad’s done a lot of good for the Syrian people, and they re-elected him in a landslide as a result. He’s no Islamic extremist .. In fact, he runs a secular gov’t., allowing all religious sects in the country practice their own faiths in peace. He’s also raised the standard of living in Syria, as well as provided his people with free healthcare and free education. Do you see that in Saudi Arabia?
      I agree with Comrade Hermit .. He has a lot more knowledge and a lot less hate and prejudice .. So, go on and keep your head up your a$$, and, yes, your check from al=Nusra’s in the mail.

      1. Human Resources, you’re making up a lot of bullsh*t. What you say about Tulsi and Assad and Trump is not true. There seems to be a concerted effort from somewhere to discredit Tulsi with lies. She’s not on either Assad or the rebels’ “side”, she’s for ending the suffering of the Syrian people.

  10. As long as the fascist zionist neocon cabal dictate US foreign policy and control the Trump administration there won’t be any change coming from Washington, deja vu all over again what a shame, people have been duped again!

  11. Russia needs to stop being coy about the implicit Saudi involvement and funding of ISIS and global terrorism in general. Squeeze Israel by the balls as well

    1. Russian outlets were tougher on Saudi Arabia the previous two years than they are now. The actual government officials usually seem to sidestep calling out the Saudis by name. I guess they feel they still not to cooperate on oil issue to some degree??

  12. In short Trump or Hillary, there is no much change, because in the background the deep states controls everything

  13. Yep, she’s too kind. He is either a total idiot or bought and sold, or both. You decide.

  14. Not to fear-this world is coming to it’s end. Man has screwed everything up again! Have mercy on us Oh Lord Jesus Christ!

    1. oh dear, virgin birth, dad a deity, dead for 3 days then goes for stroll.. and ascends to heaven. He’s sure to help. but maybe just you.

  15. She is right As she so often is. For her intelligence and courage, she will wear Democrat designed Scarlet Letter.

  16. Unfortunately, no, he wasn’t. Neither was the previous nominee, Bob Barr (2008). The Libertarian Party has had a bad Republican fungal infection for the last decade or so.

    1. Which sends a pretty clear message. If the libertarian party can’t do it by riding on the coattails of the Republican party then there can’t be much harm in going it alone.

      But first of all, they have to get the message right and they are failing to do that so far. Blaming the ‘dictator’ for the gas attack before a full UN investigation is just one fatal mistake on the antiwar scene.

      If they don’t yet know the proper script for the antiwar cause then they can get it straight from Tulsi Gabbard.

      What a wonderful opportunity for the libertarian party, SQUANDERED!

      And that’s just on foreign policy! Do you wish to take it further or would you prefer to brush it off?

  17. I agree.
    zioTrump train just derailed. Each state needs to form a militia millions strong and start issuing arrest warrants

  18. Think about the animals, the insects, the living things that suffer terrible death everytime a bomb is dropped or set off? Take a moment to think about the flesh curling up on children as the heat cooks them alive. Think about a bunch of Suit’s laughing over a bottle of fine wine and think, I hate these sob’s. Then, do something about it.

  19. His talk about keeping the US out of war was the only positive thing about Trump– But, just another neo-con puppet as it turns out….It seems like endless war and death is the only policy that crosses the aisle. Notice the cable stations are full of praise for him now.

  20. Thomas is correct. Gary J was Republican lite. Not a true non interventionist. I did vote Libertarian party in 1988. Dr. Ron Paul. And other times also. Rand Paul, despite his shortcomings, is more non intervetionist than Gary J. Jill Stein is also a intervetionist. Using R2P as an excuse.

  21. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard who has served in a war and scene devastating death and destruction that the US has been deeply involved in stands heads above the media and Rep group think.
    What a concept…wait for the solid evidence to come in.
    Today/Sunday Clintoniite Howard Dean was on MSNBC’s Alex Witt’s program ripping up Gaddard’s stance. Liberal interventionist (whatever that is) like war hawk li Dean, Kushner, deadly war hawk Anne Marie Slaughter…Clinton being one of the biggest war criminals/war hawk have been focused on “regime change” in Syria from the get go. They could give a rats ass about how many innocent people have been slaughtered in this rearranging of the middle east. Disastrous….shameful

Comments are closed.