Tulsi in Iowa, impresses many.

[Lechasseur]

If Neocons dislike her then it means she's doing it right.

One of the reasons I liked Trump so much was because neocons hate dhim.

This

[Lechasseur]

In the 1990s PNAC, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld were part of the "Blue Team" advocating a hawkish stance towards China.

She's not saying there is no military solution. Steve Bannon, rightly, said that. Even Trump's initial instinct was to talk with the North Koreans, until the military-industrial complex convinced him otherwise.

So my question is that you know why we invaded Iraq and are against Assad, why do you say Trump is a neocon?

"A Clean Break" doesn't mention North Korea or China once.

I never said Trump was a neocon. But the neocons still have influence in the military-industrial complex and therefore in his advice and decision making.

They want Syria, not North Korea.

The fact neocons are so against Trump shows me they don't have as much influence as one would think.

It doesn't make sense to say the reason we didn't go full out with Vietnam was because of China, but now the same people who made those decisions all of a sudden want to go to war with North Korea despite it most likely leading to a full war with China.

In fact, the reason the USA is now against Putin so much is BECAUSE of Putin's backing of Assad. That's why the USA Government became so anti-Putin.

If Putin tomorrow decided to support removing Assad all of a sudden Russia would be our BFFs again.

I think they want North Korea too but Syria's their priority. They also want to take out Iran. Otherwise this.

[Lechasseur]

the more I read about Tulsi, the more I like her.

How can anyone Democrat get mad at Bush over Iraq then be against Assad?

This too

[Lechasseur]

What's with all the hate? She is one of my favorite politicians.

Well, she has railed against "homosexual extremists" on multiple occasions so I don't trust her "evolution" on that issue.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Against civil unions? Really? Even Dubya supported those in 2004!

She has some problematic stances on foreign policy. Such as constant Assad apologism and buying into conspiracies about how he never used chemical weapons and it was a false flag.

And the cult around her is annoying. As if she's some martyr who got turned into stone by Debbie Wasserman Schultz's Medusa g

aze just because she endorsed Bernie and VOLUNTARILY resigned from the DNC.

She still endorsed SSM before the last Democratic Presidential nominee did.

Assad like Saddam is a bad person, but that doesn't justify a war. We have plenty of bad people (like the House of Saud) that are our "allies".

Yeah nice try. Hardly any Democrats opposed civil unions, much less consistently used hateful slurs like "homosexual extremists." Hell, even most Republicans didn't go that far.

Tulsi Gabbard has more sense than a good number of Democrats whose names I see here. 

Absolutely

[Lechasseur]

Gabbard is probably my most liked candidate from the Dem side, at least from those that are being discussed in an at least somewhat serious way, and there's a decent chance I'd vote for her over Trump in 2020 if she was the nominee.  That being said, her chances at the nomination are pretty minuscule, no matter how many people were "impressed" by her in IA.  She simply does not have enough appeal among the demographic groups required to win the nomination.  There is a narrow band of support in the party that does like her a heck of a lot, but I have yet to see any evidence that this faction has any wider influence in the party.

This

[Lechasseur]

the more I read about Tulsi, the more I like her.

How can anyone Democrat get mad at Bush over Iraq then be against Assad?

Many Democrats got mad at Bush over Iraq, because they need some excuse to justify their hatred of Bush.


I mean Syria and Libya were Obama's Iraq and we didnt see them get mad over that.

This