Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Condemns New US Arms Sale to Saudi Arabia

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) today condemned the Trump Administration’s new $460 billion arms deal with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – $110 billion immediately and $350 billion over the next 10 years – a country with a devastating record of human rights violations at home and abroad, and a long history of providing support to terrorist organizations that threaten the American people. Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest sponsor and propagator of the extremist Wahhabi Salafist ideology that fuels terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Based on Saudi Arabia’s history and track record, there is a significant likelihood these weapons will be used against innocent civilians or end up in the hands of terrorist groups.

“Saudi Arabia has spent hundreds of billions of dollars spreading their extreme Wahhabi Salafist ideology around the world, creating fertile ground for terrorist organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda to recruit, while simultaneously providing direct support to terrorist groups who pose a direct threat to US interests and who are fighting to overthrow the Syrian government. The hypocrisy in the Trump administration’s actions toward Saudi Arabia began in February 2017 with the newly-appointed CIA Director Mike Pompeo presenting Saudi Crown Prince bin Nayef with the George Tenet Award in recognition of Prince bin Nayef’s ‘excellent intelligence performance, in the domain of counter-terrorism and his unbound contribution to realize world security and peace.’ This hypocrisy continues now as the Trump administration talks tough against ISIS and terrorism, while selling weapons to, supporting, and praising a country that beheads dissidents, oppresses women, persecutes religious minorities, atheists, and LGBT people, and is the greatest supporter of terror groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS in the world today. This arms deal will enable Saudi Arabia to use U.S.-made weapons in their war crimes against Yemeni civilians in a brutal civil war, and continue perpetuating human rights atrocities at home and abroad,” said Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.

Background: Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has introduced H.R. 608, the bipartisan Stop Arming Terrorists Act, which would prohibit any Federal agency from using taxpayer dollars to provide weapons, cash, intelligence, or any support to armed militants who are allied with al-Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist groups, and it will prohibit the U.S. government from funneling money and weapons through other countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar who are directly or indirectly supporting terrorists. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard also recently sent a letter to Secretary Mattis urging an end to the United States’ military participation in Yemen’s civil war, where 19 million people need emergency support and which has never been authorized by Congress, and calling for a Congressional briefing on the White House’s strategy in Yemen.

26 thoughts on “Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Condemns New US Arms Sale to Saudi Arabia”

      1. Because for the first time in a very long time I’d be voting for someone who shares my foreign policy views. If she gets co-opted after becoming President, I will be disappointed, but at least I will have voted for someone who can articulate a good foreign policy.

  1. All of this is true! This cannot be said enough. I don’t think the US will unilaterally stop aiding terrorist sponsoring states. Beyond the obvious profits from funding Saudi aggression there is the Saudi and Iran feud that needs to be addressed. The US has taken sides on it. The US won’t leave the region and the 5th column in the US wouldn’t let it anyway. Is dialogue possible between Iran and Saudi Arabia since there are profits to be made from war? The US Empire is rather wimpy. You’d think that the only remaining super power could snap its fingers and everyone would get in line, but that just isn’t the character of the US. Its more like a combination of a slut and a hitman for certain countries. A slut because America works for free (in many cases pays) and a hitman because it takes out someone else’s perceived enemies. This is not the actions of a benevolent empire that would command respect no matter how much the ruling class likes to pretend otherwise.

  2. Tulsi Gabbard has the courage, commitment and charisma to be a great antiwar candidate for President in 2020. She quit he position as co-chair of the DNC to protest the rigging of the election for Clinton and became the first elected official to endorse the Sanders campaign. Gabbard accused Obama of running a “Neocon foreign policy” and travelled to Syria where she met with Assad and victims and partisans in the civil war. She introduced the “Stop Funding Terroirists Act” which would cut off US aid to any country or individual who supports terrorists in Syria, including Saudi Arabia. But I have two reservations about Gabbard.

    1: Gabbard was a co-sponsor of HR 23 the House resolution affirming US commitment to Israel and calling on the US to continue to veto UN resolutions that ” seek to impose solutions to final status issues or that are one-sided and anti-Israel”. On the other hand, Gabbard supported the Obama administration’s decision to abstain on the December resolution that condemned Israeli settlement activity.

    2. Although Gabbard supported the Iran deal, she did so reluctantly because she believes that Iran needs to be restrained from obtaining nuclear weapons.

    To be an effective antiwar candidate Gabbard needs to reject the lies about Iran’s nuclear program and find the courage to expose and oppose the Zionist lobby’s influence over US Middle East policy. But Gabbard is still very young and is growing politically and I hope she can reevaluate her positions on Israel and Iran.

      1. Thane,
        It would be more precise to say Gabbard is less pro-war than 99.9981 percent of Congress. Unless there is one other representative or senator who is as anti-war as Gabbard. She seems to be the best hope for an anti-war candidate with mass appeal in 2020.

        1. The Democrats will seek to bury her, they would rather be represented by Warren, Brown, or Booker.

          1. Will Tulsi Gabbard be effective enough to connect to the hearts and minds of America? She is doing a good job so far. Warren certainly is favored by they, them, those. Booker certainly hasn’t captured much interest but tomorrow is a new day.

        2. I can’t offer an example of a better Democrat in Congress. Here in Arizona I have Raúl Grijalva as part of the Arizona delegation to DC but he doesn’t pursue attention or put out written pieces for people to learn more about what he is passionate about.

          1. How is K. Harris doing in CA? Is she coming up next to Gabbard, or is she going to be another taker like Feinstein and Pelosi?

          2. I read her foreign policy page: http://kamalaharris.org/issues/foreign-policy-military-veterans/
            I’ll give her one point for having a detailed policy. That policy fails to impress me. I found nothing anti-empire on that page save “After nearly 15 years of war, Americans understand the heavy human and financial toll of war. Kamala staunchly opposed the war in Iraq from the very beginning and believes strongly in the power of smart diplomacy.” I would think that the conclusion would mean that she wouldn’t vote for funding the continued war. Did she vote for continued funding of the war (and everything else)? Yes she did. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2017/s121

          3. You can’t say one thing and then do another. That has been the problem with the Democrat all along. They promise one thing and then let the Repukes suck them in and go along with their sleaze. I don’t understand how the people are so stupid that they see these same people year after year getting richer and giving us less and taking more from us.

            Think it is time to put our government as well as military on a $10 per hour payroll and see how they all fare. So sick of government waste and the people having to FIGHT tooth and nail; while government looks at us and says give us your money and make us rich, now shut your face, you have no say and you have no vote that counts.

    1. The more Trump “reevaluates”, the more he moves in the wrong direction… The same happened to Obama. Whether these changes were due to inexperience or fraud, we can’t say.

      Is Gabbard different? If she somehow wins in 2020, I suppose we’ll find out. The Dem would fight her tooth and nail, just as the GOP fought Trump. It’d be Gabbard vs. most every significant power in the US.

    2. ‘But Gabbard is still very young and is growing politically and I hope she can reevaluate her positions on Israel and Iran.”
      Tulsi, if she has aspirations for a higher office she will only get worse, not better.

  3. If Tulsi runs, she should maybe consider trying to win Trump’s supporters also. Maybe promise no illegal immigration or suggest protectionist trade. The GOP usually doesn’t retain us with much, and the Dems usually seem to try chasing us away by flirting with the idea of reparations money or of thwarting “white racism”.

    If the Dems declined to play the race card, they could win white voters. People don’t want to end up like in South Africa. Treat us all as human, and you’ll have white voters.

    I couldn’t care less about taxes. The easiest way to cut spending is to end the warring. We can always cut domestic spending at a later date.

    1. Tulsi Gabbard is clearly the most sane Democrat in the public eye on foreign policy. As for immigration if the US stopped bombing other countries the push to allow immigrants from the Middle East could be effectively ended. As for trade We The People do not gain from increased taxes on imports. Rollback the US empire and all else will improve. It would be great if the US Department of Education was really abolished but that would require Gabbard to realize that all good things do not come from Washington, DC. Could that happen.. unlikely but sometimes unlikely things do happen.

    2. Enough on the immigrants already! I have heard enough out of Trump for a lifetime. If she DARED come out against immigration, she would lose in a heartbeat. We have seen enough out of the Mafia Don. Enough is enough. Real people with courage would be joining the Women’s march and out in the streets every chance you get. If you are against immigration why would we want you? Why do you feel the need to be so racist and yes that is what it is called.

      1. Just a note: I assume you’re a Democrat. The guy who upvoted is great on foreign policy, but he wants dramatically less government in general.

        Politically, if you’re a Democrat wanting single-payer and free education, he’s your political opponent. Open borders and free trade leads to poverty and less government.

  4. Bravo Zulu Rep. Gabbard. Couldn’t have said it any better. Nice to see a woman have more balls than Trump and the ilk within the GOP. Don’t get me wrong, the men in the Dem side absolutely have none either. You run in 2020 Tulsi you will have my vote!

  5. The dude is a socialist George W. Bush. “Yes, we have to get rid of Assad…But we cannot do it unilaterally.” – He is ready so long as there is a Coalition of the Willing.

  6. Wow! Just wow! How did Tulsi Gabbard anticipate that our oppressors are sociopaths victimizing the 99% for the benefit of the 1%.

Comments are closed.