Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Calls on Congress to End U.S. Military Support of Saudi Arabia’s Genocidal War in Yemen

November 14, 2018

Washington, DC – Following a move by House Republicans to block a vote on bipartisan resolution (H. Con Res. 138), legislation that would have ended U.S. military support for Saudi Arabia’s genocidal war in Yemen, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) today spoke on the House floor, urging Members of Congress to vote against the Republican rule and bring H. Con. Res. 138 to the floor for a vote.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is also co-leading a bipartisan letter urging Members of Congress to vote later today against this rule that prevents H. Con. Res. 138 from coming to the House floor for a vote.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said:

“Last night, House Republicans on the Rules Committee voted to undermine our democracy by blocking the American people and Members of Congress from having a debate and the ability to vote on a bill that would end U.S. support for Saudi Arabia’s genocidal war in Yemen – a war that has created the world’s worst humanitarian disaster in generations, leaving 22 million people in dire need of humanitarian aid, tens of thousands of civilians killed, and many more vulnerable to mass starvation, famine, and cholera.

“Don’t be fooled: If Congress and this Administration truly were concerned about the plight of the Yemeni people and peace, all U.S. support for Saudi Arabia’s atrocities would end now. Instead, last night on the Rules Committee, Republicans voted to shut down debate and prevent a vote that would end U.S. support for Saudi Arabia in Yemen.

“Now, later today, Congress has the opportunity to do the right thing. We are faced with a choice. I urge my colleagues to VOTE NO on H.Res.1142 so that Congress can fill our constitutional role, debate, and vote on this critical issue. It is long overdue that we end U.S. complicity in Saudi Arabia’s atrocities. We must end all U.S. support for Saudi Arabia’s genocidal war in Yemen now.”

Background:

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is a leading voice for peace in Congress, advocating against counterproductive, regime-change wars. She has called for ending support for Saudi Arabia, pushed for additional oversight on acquisition and cross-service agreements (Section 1271 of the FY19 NDAA), supported H. Con. Res. 81, a bipartisan resolution that sought to stop U.S. military participation in Saudi Arabia’s war against the Houthis in Yemen, bipartisan resolution (H. Con Res. 138) to stop U.S. military support for Saudi Arabia’s genocidal war in Yemen, bipartisan legislation (H.R. 7082) to immediately stop all military sales and aid to the government of Saudi Arabia, and more.

Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Walter Jones also introduced H.Res 922, which would reclaim Congress’s constitutional right to declare war by:

  • Defining presidential wars not declared by Congress under Article I, section 8, clause 11 (Declare War Clause) as impeachable “high crimes and misdemeanors”
  • Prohibiting the President from perpetuating ongoing wars or supplying war materials, military troops, trainers, or advisers, military intelligence, financial support or their equivalent in association, cooperation, assistance, or common cause without first receiving congressional authorization

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is a leading voice for peace in Congress, advocating against counterproductive, regime-change wars, and standing up for Congressional authorization before military action. Most recently, she joined a bipartisan coalition of 88 Members of Congress urging President Trump to consult and receive authorization from Congress prior to ordering the use of US military force against Syria. She has also advocated for ending the regime change war in Syria and condemned US support of Saudi Arabia in the Yemen civil war.

16 thoughts on “Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Calls on Congress to End U.S. Military Support of Saudi Arabia’s Genocidal War in Yemen”

  1. Uh huh. While you’re at it, see about the unconditional support your colleagues give to the terrorist apartheid state with an “undeclared” nuclear arsenal. Just how illegal is it to hand tens of billions of dollars to such an entity? Hmm?

    Get real lady.

    1. Haven’t we been giving Egypt aid . even when a coup threw away Egypt’s democracy that we worked so hard to help establish .

    2. Whatever you do, don’t pay attention to an actual antiwar voice, for an antiwar bill happening now, in reality. While you play cynical “what about this” people die in Yemen.

  2. Tulsi Gabbard is one democrat I would prefer over Trump .But if she should become our president would she change like Trump and Obama changed . I suspect she is the candidate the democrats plan to run

    1. You know ? I dont know. She has one thing trump never had…a voting record. We might be surprised, will the dems run a TV star ? The GOP has set a proven winning bar.

      1. Oh, like Hillary won her seat on anything more than being Bill’s wife… Trump won with content, as a quasi Buchanan and Perot, Reform Party.

        1. Very true.

          But emphasis on “quasi.” He ran as Buchanan 2.0 in 2016 because he dropped out when he saw Buchanan 1.0 whipping his ass in the 2000 Reform Party nomination contest. Before that — and, let’s be honest, now — he’s a standard issue northeastern progressive laying on the kayfabe.

          1. It’s not first priority to oppose single-payer, prison reform that releases violent criminals, nor even legal drugs that ruin America’s children. I can be against such things without making them priority.

            Trump has been consistent on trade, since the late 80s I believe. And I hope he gets even stronger there. I do not, of course, want animosity with China. If the US truly put “America First” it would greatly cut costs, focus on enticing investment to the US and on otherwise expanding per capita well being. And of course, the Fed would be ended… etc.

            He at least picked up some of the arguments. And he wasn’t only listening to Buchanan. In an early primary, Trump argued for wages to be *lower*. He then reversed this, because the movement had a distributist flavour to it: Higher wages. Make the system work for people to thwart socialism. I wonder just how many realise Hilaire Belloc had a voice in 2016.

        2. Sure, I remember the trumpU brochures. There is no policy there, if trump had run as a dem and won, he would be a crass golfer rubber stamp for the dems

  3. Tulsi has good anti-war creds and I hope she runs on the D ticket in 2020. But where does she stand on immigration? If she’s one of those open borders kooks like the rest of the D’s, then she’d be even worse than Trump

    1. The next Democrat I meet who supports “open borders” will be the first. As a matter of fact, the Republicans used to be an “open borders” party (see Ronald Reagan and George Bush competing in debate to see who could be MORE “open borders” and therefore better in 1980), then slowly adopted the Democrats’ idiotic authoritarian anti-American immigration policy and finally, with Trump, out-Democrated the Democrats.

      1. Not to pick a fight Thomas, but your comment demonstrates why I am no longer a Libertarian. They put their ideology over common sense solutions, like enforcing who comes in to our country. Democrats have complete control over the Sanctuary State of California, yet I don’t see them siding with Trump’s anti-immigration agenda. The parties have flipped, with the GOP finally understanding that to stick with open borders is to die.

Comments are closed.