22 reasons Tulsi Gabbard is NOT an anti-war candidate
Unlike other candidates who are honest and open about being soulless warmongers, Tulsi's campaign is being deceptive and masking a pro-war history
Tulsi Gabbard pushes "anti-war message" at first Democratic debate, CNN boldly proclaimed in a June 2019 headline.
Gabbard is the "most anti-war candidate to come along in decades" reads a February 2019 headline from the Maui Independent.
This junk narrative about Tulsi being a peacenik has been repeated over and over not only in the mainstream media, but also across Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
When will this finally stop? At this point, I've written two articles on Tulsi's hawkish foreign policy views. I reiterated many of those points in a separate article chronicling the laughably idiotic statements made by various candidates at the first Democratic debate. I'm not going to write a lengthy third article about Tulsi's foreign policy - but below, what you will find is a fairly comprehensive list of reasons why calling her "anti-war" simply doesn't jive with any form of reality.
1. Tulsi has supported economic sanctions against North Korea.
2. When asked for her view after the release of the gruesome CIA torture report, Tulsi struggled to give a concise condemnation of their tactics, saying she was "conflicted".
3. She voted for a bill to provide "counter aggression measures" against Iran, Russia, and North Korea.
4. She voted to appropriate $600 million to the Syria Train and Equip Fund and $715 million to the Iraq Train and Equip Fund to provide training, equipment, and support for Syria and Iraq under the justification of of "countering ISIS".
5. She criticized Obama in 2015 for not being aggressive enough in Syria, tweeting: "Al-Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and must be defeated. Obama won't bomb them in Syria. Putin did. #neverforget911" and "Bad enough US has not been bombing al-Qaeda/al-Nusra in Syria. But it's mind boggling that we protest Russia's bombing of these terrorists."
6. Gabbard is against boycott and divestment campaigns targeting Israel.
7. She continues to push the narrative that Iran is building nuclear weapons, directly in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary: "The objective must remain at the forefront: we must work together to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran."
8. When Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his speech to Congress in March 2015 in an attempt to torpedo the US-Iran nuclear deal, Gabbard attended the speech instead of opting to boycott it like many other politicians chose to do.
In 2015, Gabbard addressed the Christians United for Israel summit, and that same year said that the US should remain a strong ally of Israel.
9. Tulsi appeared on Fox News in March 2015 for an enlightening interview with Greta Van Sustern. Greta asked Tulsi: "Do you believe that Iran wants a nuclear weapon - no matter what?" Tulsi replied: "Yes." Later into the conversation, Tulsi said she was "cynical" about whether the Iran-US nuclear deal could happen. When Greta asked Tulsi when she expects Iran to have a nuclear weapon, Tulsi said the "break out period" is likely around three months, which is "frighteningly" short.
10. Gabbard was interviewed on Fox News in 2015 and criticized Obama for his unwillingness to use the term "Islamic extremism" when referring to the so-called War on Terror.
11. Asked in 2012 by Foreign Policy In Focus whether she thinks the United States would be a more credible advocate for nuclear disarmament if it got rid of its own nuclear weapons, Gabbard replied:
"I think we, um … that's a good question. You know, working toward nonproliferation is definitely an objective that we need to continue to pursue. That's a good question. I don't know. I'd have to give that one some thought."
12. She voted to limit funding for the implementation of a new START treaty to reduce US and Russian nukes.
13. In 2012, Gabbard said she thinks it's important to look at how the use of drones in certain scenarios has "saved lives" and how, "when strategically placed and properly used, [drones] are an asset to national security." Gabbard is for "limited" use of drone strikes: "surgical" she calls them, just like Obama.
14. Gabbard supported the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act which called for $300 million to the Secretary of Defense to provide the military and other security forces of the Government of Ukraine with security assistance and intelligence support and another $89.2 billion to the overseas contingency operations fund.
15. Gabbard originally backed Bernie Sanders in 2016, but then switched at the last minute and decided to support Hillary Clinton, arguably one of the biggest warhawks in US history.
16. In 2004, she voted to authorize funds for operations at Guantanamo Bay, which was well-known (even at the time) for being a disgusting torture camp.
17. In 2018, she voted in support of HR 6157, a defense appropriations bill that, aside from stuffing obscene amounts of money into the pockets of the military-industrial complex, prohibited any funds from being used to transfer prisoners from Guantanamo Bay and also prohibited funds from being used to close the camp.
18. Following the death of life-long warhawk John McCain, Gabbard joined a shameful chorus in helping to whitewash his legacy of bloodshed, tweeting that McCain "lived his life dedicated to serving our country."
19. She attended an American Enterprise Institute closed-door event where she shared a space with the likes of Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, Mike Pence, and Rupert Murdoch.
20. She was one of 47 Democrats to join Republicans in passing the SAFE Act in 2015, which would have added extra requirements to the vetting process and nearly halted the admission of Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the US.
21. She received campaign cash between 2012-2016 from employees of various defense companies, including Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.
22. Tulsi voted in support of a bill that included $738 billion for “defense” spending.
Unlike other candidates who are honest and open about being soulless warmongers, Tulsi's campaign is being deceptive and masking a pro-war history either behind newer viewpoints or by saying she has "evolved" on older viewpoints.
And that's fine: they can call it "evolving" if they want to.
But I'll continue to call it what it actually is: more of the same pandering, flip-flopping, lying, deceptive garbage we should all very much expect from Democrats and Republicans, especially during an election.