PDA

View Full Version : Tulsi Gabbard: The United States needs to stay out of Venezuela




Peace Piper
01-26-2019, 08:30 AM
1088531713649713153

1088531560926711811

1088530977226440706

A control+F search of Rand Paul's twitter page at the time of this posting shows no returns for "Venezuela"

On 20 AUG 2018, Rand found time to tweet the following:

1031701143926259713

If there are any pages on Rand's Senate Website that discuss Venezuela they aren't easy to find, and the search function there isn't working on my browser.

Anyone know were Rand stands on this Venezuela situation? A Google search "Rand Paul Venezuela" filtered to the last week was not successful but I didn't go past page 3


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9HaosbHQyI

Stop the illegal wars NOW- Tulsi 2020

revgen
01-26-2019, 09:40 AM
Rand's positions have been very clear for the past several years.

1) He doesn't support intervention in other countries. War without approval from congress, sanctions, foreign aid, etc...
2) He doesn't support socialism.

He doesn't approve of Venezuela's economy, but he doesn't support intervention in their affairs either.

juleswin
01-26-2019, 10:25 AM
Rand's positions have been very clear for the past several years.

1) He doesn't support intervention in other countries. War without approval from congress, sanctions, foreign aid, etc...
2) He doesn't support socialism.

He doesn't approve of Venezuela's economy, but he doesn't support intervention in their affairs either.

And what about his opinion about the sanctions on Venezuela? does he even know that we have had sanctions of Venezuela since 2012? does he even know what sanctions can do to an economy?

These are questions I would like to get to him. This is like when he talks about Syria by ignoring all the foreign interference in the war and just mention how Sunni and Shia have been at war. Even though Assad married a sunni lady and the majority of the Syrian cabinet and army is Sunni. But forget all of that, its just Sunni vs Shia battle that has been going on for hundreds of years to is to blame :mad:

Itsback
01-26-2019, 10:27 AM
Tulsi Gabbard will be good in India. India stays out of other countries matters and conflicts

jkr
01-26-2019, 10:55 AM
...and stay IN syria..
f
u
bitch

RJB
01-26-2019, 10:59 AM
I tend to agree strongly with this woman's words, but not so much on her votes and actions.

UWDude
01-26-2019, 11:28 AM
...and stay IN syria..
f
u
bitch

yup

Peace Piper
01-26-2019, 05:43 PM
And what about his opinion about the sanctions on Venezuela? does he even know that we have had sanctions of Venezuela since 2012? does he even know what sanctions can do to an economy?

These are questions I would like to get to him. This is like when he talks about Syria by ignoring all the foreign interference in the war and just mention how Sunni and Shia have been at war. Even though Assad married a sunni lady and the majority of the Syrian cabinet and army is Sunni. But forget all of that, its just Sunni vs Shia battle that has been going on for hundreds of years to is to blame :mad:

Many here don't seem to care much about these excellent questions.

Rand is concerned with fitting in. Doesn't want to rock the boat. So his sycophants feel the same, because that's their job.

It's a terrible shame that Ron tarnished his brilliant legacy by pushing his kid on the nation.

NO MORE NEPOTISM

Peace Piper
01-26-2019, 05:48 PM
...and stay IN syria..
f
u
bitch

Source please for this bullsh*te

Did Rand stop by Syria when he went to Israel?

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/50eccb776bb3f7cf43000010-750-500.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XALBP9c-49g

vita3
01-26-2019, 05:52 PM
Tulsi is gold standard for foreign non-intervention. Been following her for years

Krugminator2
01-26-2019, 06:52 PM
Many here don't seem to care much about these excellent questions.

Rand is concerned with fitting in. Doesn't want to rock the boat. So his sycophants feel the same, because that's their job.

It's a terrible shame that Ron tarnished his brilliant legacy by pushing his kid on the nation.

NO MORE NEPOTISM



Great points. It is awful that Ron helped elect the most libertarian Senator in US history.

Here's what we need. We need a woman like Tulsi Gabbard who is signing on to bold ideas like a Green New Deal, free college, free health care, banning fracking, an assault weapons ban, and who wants to tax the hell of those corporate fat cats.

Make America Venezuela Again.

UWDude
01-26-2019, 08:39 PM
Source please for this bullsh*te



https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1075912984654946304

We need to get our troops out of Syria ASAP, but it must be done responsibly. Turkey will see this as an invitation to invade northern Syria, decimate our Kurdish allies, & strengthen jihadists like AQ/ISIS/etc, undermining our national security and causing more suffering.


And just in case you want to play stupid, this was the CIA talking point going around when Trump made his "surprise" announcement the US was leaving Syria.

The left were told to say "we need to leave, but only after we are done protecting the Kurds"

dannno
01-26-2019, 08:49 PM
Tulsi is gold standard for foreign non-intervention. Been following her for years

LOL... obviously you haven't seen her voting record on foreign policy, it is ATROCIOUS!!

dannno
01-26-2019, 08:55 PM
US Sanctions Against Venezuela Will Hurt Americans (http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2017/september/20/us-sanctions-against-venezuela-will-hurt-americans/)

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2017/september/20/us-sanctions-against-venezuela-will-hurt-americans/

vita3
01-26-2019, 11:02 PM
Post her "atrocious" foreign policy voting record please

jkr
01-26-2019, 11:15 PM
Source please for this bullsh*te

Did Rand stop by Syria when he went to Israel?

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/50eccb776bb3f7cf43000010-750-500.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XALBP9c-49g


who?

what?

she *didnt* bag #orangeMANbad for pulln out ear'ly?

hmmmm....

Anti Globalist
01-26-2019, 11:29 PM
Well shes never going to be president so...

dannno
01-26-2019, 11:30 PM
Post her "atrocious" foreign policy voting record please


Just as a reminder:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/freedom-index

Dist.2: Tulsi Gabbard (https://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=828&nameid=G000571) - 31%





H RES 397: NATO (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hres397)


Vote Date: June 27, 2017
Vote: AYE (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll328.xml)
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/0.jpg
Bad Vote.


This legislation (H. Res. 397) “solemnly reaffirms the commitment of the United States to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s principle of collective defense as enumerated in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.” Under Article 5, the member nations of the NATO military alliance “agree that an armed attack against one or more of them ... shall be considered an attack against them all.”

The House passed H. Res. 397 on June 27, 2017 by a lopsided vote of 423 to 4 (Roll Call 328). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because the United States should stay clear of entangling alliances such as NATO, but also because the NATO provision that obligates the United States to go to war if any member of NATO is attacked undermines the provision in the U.S. Constitution that assigns to Congress the power to declare war. Moreover, the number of nations that the United States has pledged to defend under NATO has grown from 11 to 28 over the years, as the alliance itself has grown from 12 member nations (including the United States) when NATO was created in 1949 to 29 today. Although NATO was ostensibly formed to counter the threat from the Soviet bloc of nations, some of the nations the United States is now pledged to defend under NATO were once part of that bloc, including Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic (as part of Czechoslovakia), Hungary, Poland, and Romania.








H R 5293: Authorization for Use of Military Force (http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2016/h/330)


Vote Date: June 16, 2016
Vote: NAY (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll330.xml)
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/0.jpg
Bad Vote.


During consideration of the Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 5293), Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the use of funds in the bill for the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act. Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the AUMF authorized the president to “use all necessary and appropriate force” against the terrorists involved, as well as those who aided or harbored them. It was used as the authorization for U.S. military entry into Afghanistan in 2001, and over the years has also been invoked on other occasions by the executive branch to justify U.S. military intervention abroad.

The House rejected Lee’s amendment on June 16, 2016 by a vote of 146 to 274 (Roll Call 330). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because presidents have been able to claim broad authority to go to war whenever or wherever they choose under the AUMF, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers never intended for one man to make this decision, and under the Constitution only Congress may “declare war.”









H R 4909: Use of Military Force (http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2016/h/210)


Vote Date: May 18, 2016
Vote: NAY (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll210.xml)
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/0.jpg
Bad Vote.


During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4909), Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was enacted in 2001 for the purpose of authorizing U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks. Since then, however, the AUMF has been invoked numerous times by the executive branch for U.S. military intervention not only in Afghanistan but elsewhere.

The House rejected Lee’s amendment on May 18, 2016 by a vote of 138 to 285 (Roll Call 210). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because presidents have been able to claim broad authority to go to war whenever or wherever they choose under the AUMF, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers never intended for one man to make this decision, and under the Constitution only Congress may “declare war.”




H RES 162: Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hres162)


Vote Date: March 23, 2015
Vote: AYE (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll131.xml)
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/0.jpg
Bad Vote.


Ukraine Military Aid.
House Resolution 162, which calls on the president "to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity," allows President Obama to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons to defend against aggression from Russia.

The House adopted H. Res. 162 on March 23, 2015 by a vote of 348 to 48 (Roll Call 131). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because foreign aid is unconstitutional but also because this bill would further interject the United States into a foreign conflict. Allowing the U.S. president to provide lethal arms to Ukraine in order to fight Russia is tantamount to waging a proxy war on Russia without the constitutionally required congressional declaration of war. The House, by giving such power to the president, is relinquishing one of its constitutional responsibilities.




H R 4870: On Agreeing to the Amendment 51 to H R 4870 (http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2014/h/328)


Vote Date: June 19, 2014
Vote: NAY (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll328.xml)
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/0.jpg
Bad Vote.


Weapons to Syrian Rebels.
During consideration of the Defense Appropriations bill, Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) introduced an amendment that would have prohibited any funding in the bill from being used to provide weapons to Syrian rebels. Fortenberry noted on the House floor that "the rebel movement is a battleground of shifting alliances and bloody conflicts between groups that now include multinational terrorist organizations," that "sending our weapons into this chaotic war zone could inadvertently help these extremists," and that "it has already happened." He added: "The naive notion that we can deliver weapons to vetted, moderate opposition groups at war with other rebel militias gives no guarantee that our weaponry won't be seized or diverted."

The House rejected Fortenberry's amendment on June 19, 2014 by a vote of 167 to 244 (Roll Call 328). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because arming "moderate" rebels in a foreign country is tantamount to going to war, which would require a declaration of war by Congress. Also, the United States should follow the Founders' advice not to become involved in foreign quarrels















H R 4152: To provide for the costs of loan guarantees for Ukraine (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr4152)


Vote Date: April 1, 2014
Vote: AYE (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll149.xml)
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/0.jpg
Bad Vote.


Ukraine Aid.

This bill (H.R. 4152), as amended by the Senate (see Senate vote below), would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine.

[ The Senate version of this legislation - offered in the form of a substitute amendment to the House version, H.R. 4152 - would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that the U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine. ]

The House voted for this legislation on April 1, 2014 by a vote of 378 to 34 (Roll Call 149). We have assigned pluses to the nays because foreign aid is unconstitutional. The rationale for providing U.S. aid to Ukraine is that the country needs our assistance to resist Russian hegemony and build "democracy." Yet the oligarchs wielding power in Ukraine are hardly "democrats," and (because money is fungible) U.S. assistance could effectively be funneled to Russia in the form of Ukrainian energy and debt payments.




..

kona
01-27-2019, 12:42 AM
Who is she speaking to?

The anti-war crowd? She voted for AUMF twice. The anti-terrorism crowd? She voted for weapons to jihadis (I mean "moderate" rebels). The anti-regime change crowd? She voted to overthrow Ukraine. The anti-policemen of the world crowd? She voted to continue NATO.

Stratovarious
01-27-2019, 02:46 AM
...and stay IN syria..
f
u
bitch
Good point;
Killing Venezuelans is of no benefit to Israel......:frog:

Stratovarious
01-27-2019, 02:50 AM
... Been following her for years
Via the Photo Gallery?

kona
01-27-2019, 03:12 PM
Did Gabbard just vote to reaffirm commitment to NATO again?!?!

dannno
01-27-2019, 03:43 PM
Did Gabbard just vote to reaffirm commitment to NATO again?!?!

She declined to vote on this one:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll044.xml

clint4liberty
01-27-2019, 04:06 PM
We need to balance our opposition to foreign intervention and opposing communist governments. Maduro again was re-elected to a second term of six years via corruption at the ballot box. So, at the very minimum we should support free, fair, and fresh elections in Venezuela. We can debate whether or not President Trump was correct in recognizing a interim leader. Personally, I fully believe Donald Trump was correct in recognizing the National Assembly exercising their constitutional power to oust Maduro.

juleswin
01-27-2019, 06:13 PM
We need to balance our opposition to foreign intervention and opposing communist governments. Maduro again was re-elected to a second term of six years via corruption at the ballot box. So, at the very minimum we should support free, fair, and fresh elections in Venezuela. We can debate whether or not President Trump was correct in recognizing a interim leader. Personally, I fully believe Donald Trump was correct in recognizing the National Assembly exercising their constitutional power to oust Maduro.

Lol, corruption at the ballot box. Are u talking about the election most of the opposition boycotted? Who do u think won the election?

Who knew you could get CIA talking pts on RPF

Swordsmyth
01-27-2019, 06:31 PM
Lol, corruption at the ballot box. Are u talking about the election most of the opposition boycotted? Who do u think won the election?

Who knew you could get CIA talking pts on RPF
Why did the opposition boycott the election?
Was it because Maduro banned his main opponents from running?

Who knew you could get communist talking points on RPF?

Peace Piper
01-27-2019, 07:25 PM
Lol, corruption at the ballot box. Are u talking about the election most of the opposition boycotted? Who do u think won the election?

Who knew you could get CIA talking pts on RPF

Ideally, clint4liberty would be asked for sources. But that's the new "talking point" so it's good enough for some of the "liberty" supporters at RPF.

All these people- especially here of all places- buying into YET ANOTHER FOREIGN INTERVENTION

And Rand is AWOL on this one for now at least. I suspect it's because he's all about regime change in Venezuela but he knows it will be a tough sell. SO why not play some golf instead. His supporters will rubber-stamp anything he says anyway.

What's even more hilarious (while being sad at the same time) is all these rabid anti-commies that have houses full of stuff made in Communist China. The US is a laughingstock these days. And Trump is dumber than a box of hammers, he doesn't know what he thinks about anything really, until he gets his latest brief from his NEOCONMAN Team.

Bomb Syria! Invade Venezuela! Fold like a Lawn Chair for the New Queen of the House!

Disgusting.

kona
01-27-2019, 07:35 PM
She declined to vote on this one:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll044.xml
Supposedly Tulsi was in-flight from Hawaii during the vote. Her Twitter mob said she supports NATO, and her vote wouldn't have mattered.

kona
01-27-2019, 07:38 PM
1088560388499591168

Can someone please reply to this a**hole and let them know Tulsi voted to arm the rebels?

oyarde
01-27-2019, 07:41 PM
Tulsi Gabbard will be good in India. India stays out of other countries matters and conflicts

Actually she would like Venezuela , just the kind of socialism that is up her alley .

oyarde
01-27-2019, 07:43 PM
Who is she speaking to?

The anti-war crowd? She voted for AUMF twice. The anti-terrorism crowd? She voted for weapons to jihadis (I mean "moderate" rebels). The anti-regime change crowd? She voted to overthrow Ukraine. The anti-policemen of the world crowd? She voted to continue NATO.

About New Hampshire she will find she is talking to nobody that is listening .