Heinous Meghan McCain Calls Tulsi Gabbard "Assad Apologist", Gets Wrecked

[Ethereal]

Tulsi Gabbard explains, using facts, evidence and logic, how US "regime change" wars in places like Iraq, Libya, and Syria have done far more harm than good. The heinous McCain responds by calling Gabbard an "Assad apologist", but not before McCain perfunctorily and tepidly thanks Gabbard for her military service. Gabbard admirably maintains her calm and proceeds to wreck the arrogant McCain with more facts, evidence and logic. Kyle Kulinski provides a breakdown:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsRz3ZAYBOM

To be honest, I'm considering supporting Gabbard based on her foreign policy views alone. Nothing in this country can be truly fixed unless we address the evils of the US empire. Not only does the empire waste inordinate amounts of American resources, but it serves as the primary pretext for attacks on the life, liberty, and property of Americans, to say nothing of the horrors it visits upon foreign peoples.

[midcan5]

A very complex and mixed issue, anyone who has read the history of Iraq under Hussein must realize maybe it is better now? Libya and Syria fall in the same area of complexity. Read some history and then judge. It is so easy to name call and point fingers when topics are complex.


https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/06/10-years-after-saddam/277362/

[Green Arrow]

I like Tulsi a lot. She’s not my preferred candidate at this juncture but I would not at all be disappointed if she won out.

[Ethereal]

A very complex and mixed issue, anyone who has read the history of Iraq under Hussein must realize maybe it is better now?

Even if that were true, it would not remotely justify what was done to Iraq by the US, nor would it remotely justify the enormous amount of American resources that were expended on that war.

The Iraq war was a disaster of epic proportions, as were the US wars in Libya and Syria. What's the old saying? Three strikes and you're out?

I think the US experiment with "regime change" has proven to be a horrible failure. I think it's time for the US to seriously reconsider the assumptions underlying its foreign policy.


Libya and Syria fall in the same area of complexity. Read some history and then judge. It is so easy to name call and point fingers when topics are complex.

Before the US waged its illegal war on Libya, Libya was one of the most stable and highly developed countries in Africa. Now, Libya is a failed state where terrorists, sectarian death squads, and slavers constitute the bulk of that society's government. What "complexity" do you think my factual description is overlooking?

As for Syria, much the same can be said. Prior to the US proxy war against the Syrian government, Syrian society was relatively stable as far as the region went. Westerners could travel safely to Damascus and enjoy one of the few cities in the Middle East that somewhat embodied western values and customs. Now Syria is a blood-soaked nightmare where armies of savage terrorists - Al Qaeda and ISIS - are run amok. I fail to see how "complexity" mitigates any of that. Feel free to enlighten me.

[Just AnotherPerson]

This helps...…


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y1nylDLW-Y

[Tahuyaman]

Assad is not a particularly good guy. I don't know why some people here seem to be so in love with the guy.

While it's not our place to remove him from power, it's also not our place to ensure he stays in power. This guy has committed many heinous acts. He should not be supported.