Althouse: Tulsi Gabbard explains the military industrial complex to Joe Rogan.

October 12, 2022

Tulsi Gabbard explains the military industrial complex to Joe Rogan.

78 comments:

Dave Begley said...: Our next Secretary of Defense.; 10/12/22, 6:21 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: This is her anti-war message, but her exit from the Dem Party video rips many of the fundamental beliefs that drive the party today. She did not spare St. Barack Obama. She speaks up for normals.; 10/12/22, 6:27 AM
cubanbob said...: We spend $700+bn a year on defense of which a good portion is for NATO and NATO exists to keep the Russians out of the rest of Europe. By bringing the Russians down a number of notches by albeit limited arming the Ukrainians we are essentially part of the Defense budget to Ukraine. If the Ukrainians succeed and win the war then other than nuclear weapons they would pose no real conventional threat to Europe hence our need to be in NATO is essentially removed unless the original reason for NATO was to keep the Germans down, the Russians out and the US in is still applicable. I suspect that after this war is over a number of European countries will decide to arm themselves with nukes as a precaution against the Russians and each other which would be a great time for us to go home from Europe and that will make all the aid given to Ukraine a bargain.Perhaps if the South Koreans, the Japanese, the Australians and the Taiwanese arm the selves and go nuke then we can also withdraw back to Hawaii. As long as the Air Force can reach out and touch anyone anywhere, the Navy keep our sea lanes open and be able to pretty much sink the rest of the world's navies and have a Marine Corp that can quickly kick major ass and quickly get out then the Army can be substantially reduced and even more money can be saved. I'm sure Gabbard would approve.

We will always have a military industrial complex, it is necessary for national defense and vote buying by Congress just like we have a welfare employment complex.; 10/12/22, 6:50 AM
Kevin said...: Now do Trump’s mean Tweets.; 10/12/22, 7:04 AM
Bob Boyd said...: The good people of the mediaverse are feverishly writing hit pieces to try to destroy that damned Putin-lovin hula girl as we speak.

Mindless support for the war in Ukraine is Long TDS. Change my mind.; 10/12/22, 7:14 AM
tim maguire said...: There's a lot I like about Gabbard, but there's an annoying naivete that bleeds through her seemingly hard-nosed truth telling. Does she not realize that the US and Russia have been engaging in proxy wars for generations? This isn't new. It's not a new tactic, it's not a new danger. Proxy wars aren't how you start nuclear wars, proxy wars are how you avoid nuclear war. They enable us to pit our military strength against each other without directly confronting each other. It's a vital pressure valve.

We're using the Ukrainian military as chess pieces? No, we're enabling the people of the Ukraine to resist foreign domination. And good for us for doing it.; 10/12/22, 7:27 AM
gilbar said...: Serious Question: WHY are the americans trying to start a nuclear conflict? what's in it for them?; 10/12/22, 7:33 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: She was an insider, DNC official, Congresscritter and serves in the armed forces. She’s a highly dangerous contrast to the Let’s Go Brandon administration. Behold the clarity and depth of knowledge! Now see the despair and disfunction of the current White House. Compare her calm recitation of facts to Karine Jean-Pierre’s halting, fact free, furiously pawing her notebook to find an answer “press conferences.”; 10/12/22, 7:40 AM
gilbar said...: People Proudly say:
a) Putin is CRAZY!
b) Putin is LOSING!
c) Putin will be executed if he loses
d) Putin has NO OPTIONS except Nuclear
BUT! do NOT worry! Only a CRAZY person with NO OPTIONS, would EVER consider using nukes!; 10/12/22, 7:42 AM
Readering said...: Gabbard is repeating an analysis that goes back 75 years through Republican and Democratic administrations alike. There was something of a pause after the Berlin Wall came down and the Twin Towers fell (when Gabbard herself came of age as a strong War on Islamism proponent). The interview follows on the heels if her splashy exit from the Democratic party but she is not taking the GOP line on this.; 10/12/22, 7:47 AM
Wince said...: "Stay inside. You got this."

Nuclear war is like Covid.; 10/12/22, 7:52 AM
Temujin said...: I've had this nagging vision- and I don't know if I like it or not- of Ron DeSantis as the Republican selection for President, and picking Tulsi Gabbard as his running mate. This has crossed my mind long before she officially announced leaving the party yesterday.

I don't know if it makes sense. I don't even know if I like it...yet. But it keeps inserting itself into my mind.

You should know that none of my previous 'visions' have come to pass. Except that I did see Trump winning early on in his first run. And Barack in his first run. Early on. But then, who didn't?

On the other hand I saw the Lions winning at least 6 games this year and that seems less likely than Al Gore coming out and telling us it was all a con.; 10/12/22, 8:14 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Trump's wars?

ZERO. Didn't start a single war. No wonder the MIC wanted him gone.; 10/12/22, 8:14 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: You'd think if Trump were Poot's poodle, and Trump owed Putin - that Putin would have invaded Ukraine on Trump's watch.

Funny how Putin waited for the crooked dementia patient.; 10/12/22, 8:15 AM
khematite said...: US military spending, as a share of Gross Domestic Product, was 3.5% last year--down from 4.5% a decade ago. Weapons acquisition represents approximately 1.0-1.5% of our GDP. Still a lot of money, but not quite enough to keep me awake at night. That doesn't mean US military policies shouldn't be debated, just that the military-industrial complex isn't quite as big a deal as it's been cracked up to be.; 10/12/22, 8:17 AM
Jaq said...: Barack Obama was in charge, with Joe Biden as his point man, when we instantly recognized the new govt of Ukraine that we selected, the one that used snipers to kill 50 demonstrators against the coup, right in the street at Maiden Square. We have to remember that our side of this whole war is about ethnic Ukrainians 'right' to rule over ethnic Russians within the artificial boundaries that Stalin drew.

When Musk tweeted that he thought that maybe the people living in these areas should decide democratically, he became an enemy of the state and a Putin stooge.; 10/12/22, 8:25 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Proxy wars...enable us to pit our military strength against each other without directly confronting each other. It's a vital pressure valve. ...And good for us for doing it.

Maybe so, but we're talking Brandon as CIC now: Biden immediately reversed the support we gave Ukraine during Trump's term in order to prevent the invasion denying him defensive equipment "we" had promised; he insisted sanctions (which have never stopped a war before) would deter Putin even though Brandon admitted they wouldn't go into effect until long after the invasion; he encouraged Putin to just do "a little incursion" so not to offend anyone; Brandon actually expected Putin to overrun Kiev "in 48 hours" because his woke generals told him so, it was a fait accompli, although he "kept up appearances by pretending to support Ukraine; Joe has repeatedly promised to "speed up" supply of defensive arms to Ukraine and not done it; Biden repeatedly denied aircraft or other support to Ukraine that would have been decisive earlier.

So we are NOT exactly pitting "our strength" against Russia's at all because we've been holding back. The Powell doctrine of overwhelming force never entered the conversation. Why did Brandon and Obama let Russia get away with so much before without punishment? Everything about this bullshit "war" and the weird comments of Biden claiming to be a "wartime president" bothers me. Both sides are dirty and I truly do not know what side our CIC is even on since he's taken bribes from both and heavily interefered in both countries internal affairs prior to this "war."; 10/12/22, 8:33 AM
Humperdink said...: Tulsi is right about this. The swamp politicians have never met a defense lobbyist they didn't embrace. Gladly accepting $$$ from the aforementioned group. Miss Lindsey being one of the worst. Ramping up the war machine to the cliff's edge, expecting The Vlad to cave. I do not see The Vlad caving.

Recall spokesidiot John Kirby saying the US will destroy the Russian Black Sea fleet if Russia uses tactical nukes in Ukraine. Okay, then what? Vlad calls it a day? I think not.

BTW, who is training the Ukrainians on their newly acquired sophisticated US weapon systems? Do we have troops in the field?

Anyone miss Trump yet?; 10/12/22, 8:33 AM
Jaq said...: "Proxy wars aren't how you start nuclear wars, proxy wars are how you avoid nuclear war."

Unless your proxy war is a few hundred miles from Moscow and your proxies are begging for nuclear capable missiles as a 'defensive weapon,' missiles which could perform a decapitation strike on Russia before Russia knew what was happening. Same people who likely blew up the pipeline, attacked the Kerch Bridge in Russia,(Ukraine's claim to it is a simple brute annexation against the will of the Crimeans, and they are quite happy tot be part of Russia, burned dozens of "human candles' in that trade union hall in Odessa (google it) Oh yeah, and the people you are giving the missiles to have a burning hatred for Russia, in my opinion, due to Russia's large role in defeating Hitler.

We almost launched a nuclear war over missiles in Cuba, BTW.; 10/12/22, 8:34 AM
Jaq said...: Imagine if during the American civil war, the Union had defined anybody, no matter how desperate, who took any succor, such as food, from the Confederate Army, or who provided them food, maybe at the point of a gun, as 'collaborators' and summarily executed then and dumped them into mass graves, and then bragged about it on Telegram. We started this civil war. The Ukrainians want their country cleansed of ethnic Russians.

The Ukrainians realized their mistake about the video, and then claimed, after a clumsy edit job, that the video came from a captured Russian phone (The Russians are not allowed phones, because phones get you and your unit killed). But suppose this guy bent the rules, that phone should be presented for forensic analysis by international bodies for the investigation of war crimes, has it?; 10/12/22, 8:45 AM
Hassayamper said...: When I was a younger and more ignorant man, and the smoke still rose from the wreckage of the World Trade Center, I dismissed this issue as the ravings of a handful of college-campus commies that could be disregarded entirely.

Now I’ve seen politicians of both parties stuffing Ukraine like a piñata with American taxpayer’s dollars, sending their kids over there for do-nothing jobs that shower them with unearned millions. I see a self-serving FBI looking the other way, if not going rogue and threatening anyone who looks to be in a position to derail the gravy train. (I fully expect Tulsi to soon find herself under investigation for an improper paper-clip inventory in her Congressional office.) I see 20 years of meddling in Afghanistan ending in a pile of ashes and a lake of blood, with nothing to show for it but trillions of dollars of debt and hundreds of thousands of orphans who will seek revenge on us for decades. I look at what a paper tiger Russia’s military has turned out to be, and wonder why we still pour out our treasure to defend wealthy, ungrateful Europeans from them and from each other, nearly eighty years after the end of WW2 and thirty years after the supposed end of the Cold War. I look at how slavishly we sacrifice our wealth and our young mens’ lives to wars fought primarily for the benefit of Israel. And I think, you know, Eisenhower and Smedley Butler were right all along.

I can make common cause with this woman. And I don’t like many of her policies. But this is the big question of our time: has government become the tail wagging the dog? I trust her to get the answer right. I cannot say the same of very many other politicians in either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party.; 10/12/22, 8:59 AM
Josephbleau said...: “Imagine if during the American civil war, the Union had defined anybody, no matter how desperate, who took any succor, such as food, from the Confederate Army, or who provided them food, maybe at the point of a gun, as 'collaborators' and summarily executed then and dumped them into mass graves”

The Union burned out the Shenandoah Valley, Sherman burned out the Deep South. About the same thing as execution, but including women and children starved. The war was not a cricket match.; 10/12/22, 9:10 AM
tim maguire said...: tim in vermont said...
"Proxy wars aren't how you start nuclear wars, proxy wars are how you avoid nuclear war."

Unless your proxy war is a few hundred miles from Moscow

Yes, you've successfully countered my numerous real world examples with a made up condition. I'm sure it supports your argument super good in your head.; 10/12/22, 9:11 AM
n.n said...: MIC = Medical Industrial Complex (e.g. planned parenthood, by the millions, annually).

Some, Select [Black] Lives Matter; 10/12/22, 9:21 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: "They're engaged in constant fear-mongering... NUCLEAR WAR COULD BREAK OUT AT ANY MOMENT! THERE IS NOWHERE TO RUN! NOWHERE TO HIDE!"; 10/12/22, 9:22 AM
n.n said...: Nuclear war is like Covid.

By the numbers, nuclear war is like planned parenthood that indiscriminately aborts (e.g. one-child/State's Choice, selective-child/her Choice) human lives by the millions, annually, denies safe sanctuary, and leaves scarred lives behind under a religious (e.g. ethical) umbrella.; 10/12/22, 9:26 AM
n.n said...: The Ukrainians want their country cleansed of ethnic Russians.

Some certainly do. The Kiev-paramilitary-anti-Russia (pro-redistributive change a la South Africa, Libya, etc.) axis certainly do. Ironically, the people who "stand with Ukraine" are em-pathetic supporters of cleansing Ukraine of native (e.g. gypsy, Jew, Slavic), albeit Russian speakers, Ukrainians.; 10/12/22, 9:30 AM
n.n said...: Slavic Spring as a progression from the second Iraq War (i.e. Obaama's premature evacuation following the end of the first Iraq War) funded through summarily overridden claims in dispute with Iran.; 10/12/22, 9:32 AM
n.n said...: Trump's wars?

ZERO. Didn't start a single war. No wonder the MIC wanted him gone.

They lied to him about carrying out directives in order to sustain lucrative abortion fields.

Also, the Medical Industrial Complex, the primary forcing of progressive prices, and which conducts abortions of Fetal-Americans (i.e. 50/50 human lives) by the thousands, annually, for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes.; 10/12/22, 9:37 AM
Aggie said...: Just because she sounds more grounded and less crazy-stupid than the current crop of career politicians, doesn't mean she isn't just another career politician. For instance, you might think think buying a Tesla is a brave and forward-thinking and note-worthy endeavor, but at the end of the day, it's just another car. It won't ever be a space rocket. I remember some of Gabbard's political choices - she doesn't inspire trust and only limited admiration for being willing to refute the party line - which after all, ain't very brave considering she isn't in office at the moment.

She's a career politician, meaning she was a politician long before she ever ran for office. She has an earnest-sounding shtick, but that's all.; 10/12/22, 9:40 AM
Bob Boyd said...: Do we have troops in the field?

Report: US Special Operations Forces are on the Ground in Ukraine

The presence is part of a broad clandestine operation that includes the CIA
by Dave DeCamp Posted onOctober 6, 2022CategoriesNewsTagsUkraine

US special operations forces are on the ground in Ukraine as part of a broad covert operation that includes CIA personnel, The Intercept reported on Wednesday, citing unnamed US intelligence and military officials.

The report said that the US withdrew its CIA and special operations assets from Ukraine shortly before Russia’s invasion, although one US official said the CIA “never completely left.”

The CIA initially predicted that Kyiv would fall quickly to Russia, but after it became clear that wouldn’t happen, the Biden administration sent its covert assets back into Ukraine.

The report said that US clandestine operations inside Ukraine “are now far more extensive than they were early in the war, when US intelligence officials were fearful that Russia would steamroll over the Ukrainian army.”

Several current and former intelligence officials said that there “is a much larger presence of both CIA and US special operations personnel and resources in Ukraine than there were at the time of the Russian invasion in February.”

Back in June, The New York Times reported that there was a CIA presence in Ukraine, but it made no mention of US special operations forces. The Times report did say that several US allies have special operations troops in Ukraine, including Britain, France, Canada, and Lithuania.

The Intercept report said the covert operations inside Ukraine are being conducted under a covert presidential finding that indicates President Biden has quietly notified Congress of a “broad program of clandestine operations inside the country.” The report said that the finding President Biden is using is an altered version of a finding originally approved during the Obama administration.

It’s not clear what the US personnel are doing inside Ukraine or where exactly they are operating, but the presence risks provoking Russia. The covert operations contradict President Biden’s pledge not to send troops into Ukraine, which he said before Russia’s invasion could spark a “world war.”; 10/12/22, 9:43 AM
robother said...: As others here have pointed out, this is a proxy war on Russia's border, in which our guys have fired missiles and artillery into Russia itself--as well as carrying out a political assassination in the Kremlin. Moreover, our President has made clear that Russian regime change is a strategic objective of this proxy war. (That alone means this proxy war is far riskier in nuclear terms than any of the Cold War.)

Interesting how we see, even in this small sample of Althouse commenters, the truth of Tulsi Gabbard's statement: both parties are invested in the ideology of the military industrial complex.; 10/12/22, 9:45 AM
Jaq said...: "examples with a made up condition"

Development of the missile now known as ATACMS started in 1980, when the U.S. Air Force decided to replace Lance with a similar nuclear- (but also chemical- or biological-) tipped solid-fuel missile dubbed the Corps Support Weapon System (CSWS). Concerned that two branches were developing too many similar missiles with different warheads, the Department of Defense merged the program with U.S. Army's Assault Breaker in 1981, and with USAF's Conventional Standoff Weapon (CSW) in 1982–1983. The new missile system, designated Joint Tactical Missile System (JTACMS), soon encountered USAF resistance to the idea of an air-launched ballistic missile. As a result, the following year the Air Force ended its participation in the non-cruise missile portion of the program, leading to the missile being re-designated as the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). - Wikipedia

Remember that the US recently withdrew from the medium range treaty. Why should Putin trust the NATO that overthrew Khadaffy, for example, even though Libya hadn't attacked a NATO country? NATO was also involved in the Iraq War, those Baltic states were given NATO membership for their participation in that war. Why should Moscow separate the actions of NATO from those of the US, for instance our current war in Syria?

Or are you questioning the proximity to Moscow? It's hard to argue against general objections.; 10/12/22, 9:58 AM
Jaq said...: Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. -JFK

This was tweeted by Tulsi and it's as true today as its was when Kennedy said it. Obama said himself that Ukraine was not the vital interest of the United States, and if "our side" loses, the US will be no worse off, except for the kleptocrat cronies out our political class. Russia will be isolated geographically and we will all live a hair's breadth from nuclear war aa Russia is forced to live on the knife's edge with NATO weaponry. Russia may well find these conditions unacceptable and go nuclear. They have proven themselves exceptionally good at knocking down missiles, even artillery shells, they may prefer to roll the dice.

NATO is the military alliance that has constantly expanded towards Russia's border, It's not he other way around, we are fighting over a Russian speaking enclave, it's a border dispute. Not worth a 1% risk of nuclear war.; 10/12/22, 10:11 AM
rcocean said...: I think there are other factors involved. Ukraine seems to be a corrupt country that was being used as a piggy bank for some of our corrupt DC Pols. Money is being sent there, and some of it is ending back in the hands of these Pols. Hunter Biden, isn't an exceptional case. Many of DC Pols have family members who are getting $ from Ukraine, and also Ukrainians are funnelling money back to the DC Pols in the form of NGO's and campaign funds.

You also had mysterious Ukrainian "labs" with ties to the US Government, doing research into God knows what.

The bottom line is our elite love these foreign wars, and playing "Risk" with real people. McCain in his autobiography gushes about how he went on one of his foreign trips, and the highpoint of his political life came when a group of Israelis serrenated him with song and praise while he was on a bus touring Jewreleum (sic). Bush 43 does the same thing in his book, althought it was about his trip to Africa, and all the applause and praise he got from the africans.

Getting involved in all these wars and conflicts is so much more interesting and fun then Domestic policy for the DC Pols. Bush I was so let down after the Gulf war, he considered not running for a 2nd term. One day, he's having the time of his life playing Commander in Chief, and the next its back to boring domestic affairs. what a drag!

Tusli seems unusual in that she doesn't seem to think war and conflict is a jolly good time.; 10/12/22, 10:13 AM
hombre said...: It's interesting how many people on both sides are dumping on Gabbard now. I'm not sure that she's right on this issue. I am sure that her observations on the state of the country offered as reasons for her flight from the Democrat Party are relevant and should be discussed.

It is unfortunate that some so-called conservatives choose to focus on her past positions on abortion and weapons instead of accepting the gift she is offering. Her criticism of the New Democrats are more lucid than those we hear from many Republican politicians.; 10/12/22, 10:39 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: "YOUR CHILDREN WILL BURN IN FLAMES! ... And so, that's why this fear-mongering is so terrible. It's going to cause a nuclear holocaust. :)"; 10/12/22, 10:59 AM
gilbar said...: tim maguire said...

Unless your proxy war is a few hundred miles from Moscow..
..a made up condition

There you have It! tim (geographic expert tim!) maguire has let us know;
that the idea that the Ukraine is 'a few hundred miles' from moscow, is a "made up" geographic fact.
Respectfully, tim maguire? Are you mentally stupid?; 10/12/22, 11:03 AM
Michael K said...: The interview follows on the heels if her splashy exit from the Democratic party but she is not taking the GOP line on this.

You people don't get it. BOTH parties support the Military Industrial Complex and right now we have an incompetent senile president who doesn't know how to get off the stage. Trump was an existential threat to these people because he was trying to do things without the risks of war. He wanted to use economic pressure instead of military pressure. That's why it was so important to steal the election.; 10/12/22, 11:17 AM
Saint Croix said...: Tulsi has a lot of credibility on war issues because she served, and is very patriotic.

She's already agreed to campaign for a Republican in New Hampshire.

The more moderates who abandon the Democrats, the worse it looks for them.

The Hill manages to put "Gabbard" and "Trump" in the same headline, suggesting that she's stumping for him(!)

Greg Gutfeld predicts she will be Trump's veep.

When she said "anti-white racism," she said something that most people can't say.

Tulsi is a moderate, and has her own opinions about stuff. What impresses me is how strong she is mentally, and how fearless she is to say what she thinks.

Somebody on another thread said she was pro-choice. Back in 2020, she introduced a federal bill outlawing abortions if the baby could feel pain.

That's not something "pro-choice" people do!

I expect her to be moderate on the issue, to support abortion in cases of rape and incest. I don't know exactly where she is on the issue.

The thing is, I didn't know where Trump was on the issue, either. I literally did not believe him when he said he was pro-life. And he's been the most pro-life president in my lifetime. Not even close, really. He spoke to the Walk of Life. Nobody else did that. He was 3-for-3 with his nominees. No squishes.

I felt like Tulsi was running for veep in 2020 (that's why she went after Kamala). She literally destroyed Kamala's campaign in one debate. Nobody liked Kamala. Biden, the idiot, failed to notice and picked Kamala as his veep anyway.

Less than a month after the election, Tulsi put forward her pro-life bill. She's playing the long-game. Very impressed with her. I don't know who the Republican nominee will be, Trump or DeSantis. But I think Tulsi has a solid shot at being the moderate Republican veep in 2024.

And it's possible she will be our first female president, in 2028 or 2032. That would be nice. I like her.; 10/12/22, 11:27 AM
tim maguire said...: gilbar said...
tim maguire said...

Unless your proxy war is a few hundred miles from Moscow..
..a made up condition

There you have It! tim (geographic expert tim!) maguire has let us know;
that the idea that the Ukraine is 'a few hundred miles' from moscow, is a "made up" geographic fact.
Respectfully, tim maguire? Are you mentally stupid?

Your trolling is exactly the sort of bullshit that is killing twitter. Are you literate? Go back and read it again. Notice what I am actually saying is made up. It's not complicated, not hidden. All you need is a 3rd grade education and good faith.; 10/12/22, 11:28 AM
tim maguire said...: tim in vermont said...
"examples with a made up condition"

Or are you questioning the proximity to Moscow? It's hard to argue against general objections.

Are you seriously pretending that you don't know what your made up condition was? You claimed that the number of miles between Moscow and the Ukraine border negated the historical experience with proxy wars. You have nothing to support that claim. It's an opinion and, for all your handwaving, you know it.

I see you have gilbar running interference for you. If that doesn't alert you that you are on the wrong track, nothing will.; 10/12/22, 11:36 AM
Achilles said...: tim maguire said...

We're using the Ukrainian military as chess pieces? No, we're enabling the people of the Ukraine to resist foreign domination. And good for us for doing it.

The people of Eastern Ukraine certainly do not agree with you.

They have voted more than once to join Russia.

Thousands of people in Eastern Ukraine have been killed by the Azov Battalion since 2014 when the people of Western Ukraine supported by the US subverted a lawful election of Yanukovich who 90% of people in Eastern Ukraine voted for.

You aren't supporting a fight for sovereignty.

You are supporting ethnic cleansing. But you are ignorant enough to believe people who have made billions of dollars in graft in Ukraine.; 10/12/22, 11:46 AM
Original Mike said...: "US special operations forces are on the ground in Ukraine as part of a broad covert operation that includes CIA personnel, The Intercept reported on Wednesday, citing unnamed US intelligence and military officials."

Damn.; 10/12/22, 11:50 AM
Drago said...: Saint Croix: "Somebody on another thread said she was pro-choice. Back in 2020, she introduced a federal bill outlawing abortions if the baby could feel pain.

That's not something "pro-choice" people do!"

The pro-choicers haven't yet completed their necessary disaggregation. Until they do, the now misnomer "pro-choice" label still encompasses the entire range from "No abortion after 6 weeks" crowd all the way to the Howard/gadfly post-birth abortion-baby body-part harvesting types.; 10/12/22, 11:53 AM
Drago said...: Saint Croix: "Tulsi has a lot of credibility on war issues because she served, and is very patriotic."

The fact someone served and may be patriotic does not confer "credibility" on war issues. Otherwise, what do you do when there are patriotic vets on both sides of a war issue?; 10/12/22, 12:18 PM
fairmarketvalue said...: While I don't buy into everything Gabbard stands for, she does have extensive knowledge of the U.S. military and the military-industrial complex (and the grifting D.C. uniparty pols) our military feeds. Moreover, she is right about our (mis)adventures in Ukraine.

Like any other red-blooded neoconservative warmonger, I have no issue with spending U.S. blood and treasure on geostrategic actions essential to *truly vital* U.S. interests. As even Obama himself said, Ukraine was not (and is not) a vital interest of the United States. Even if the current Zelensky government goes down, the U.S. would be no worse off than if Zelensky stayed in power. Yet here we are, spending billions and sending some of our most advanced weaponry to "save" Ukraine.

In my opinion, supporting Ukraine has much in common with the ill-considered initiative to expand NATO. Many believe NATO has outlived its mission with the end of the Cold War, and is seeking a new raison d'etre, which just so happens to serve as a bulwark against a "gas station with nukes" and with very little else. Meanwhile, we ignore our true geopolitical enemy, China, because Ukraine serves as a neat little business opportunity for our MIC, as well as a piggy bank for our grifting pols. Ukraine is a European problem that should be solved by the Europeans.

If ever there was a time for a unity administration in the country, this is it. I have no issues with Gabbard, whether she's a "career politician" or not, serving in a significant capacity therein. (For those of you thumping the tub for DeSantis, remember that he too is a "career politician". There's nothing inherently wrong with that, except with the interests of the people are trumped by the interests of the multinationals and elites.); 10/12/22, 12:19 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: I like the way you think, Saint Croix.; 10/12/22, 12:24 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: I like the way you think, Saint Croix.; 10/12/22, 12:24 PM
JPS said...: Humperdink, 8:33:

"Recall spokesidiot John Kirby saying the US will destroy the Russian Black Sea fleet if Russia uses tactical nukes in Ukraine. Okay, then what? Vlad calls it a day? I think not."

That's been bugging me. General (ret.) Petraeus was saying similar things in an interview recently. Which I find ironic, since he used to say things like, "Tell me how this ends," and "Hope is not a plan."; 10/12/22, 12:33 PM
Jaq said...: Okay tim, I will let your comments speak for themselves. You may have heard of the Cuban missile crisis, or maybe not.; 10/12/22, 12:34 PM
MikeR said...: When are those of you still pushing the "war effort" going to take a step back and think? The lives of billions of people are in your hands.; 10/12/22, 12:45 PM
gilbar said...: tim (geographic expert) maguire? You're Much smarter than i am (i KNow this, because YOU SAID SO);
so, could you cite a few other 'proxy wars', where the american proxy Shelled russian territory?
Or, for That matter, any 'proxy wars' where the russian proxy Shelled american territory?
As i've stipulated, you are SUPER SMART.. So, you MUST know of Several of these..
right? i mean, Right?

When people pointed out Basic geography to you, you back tracked to somewhere*; but, i think you're saying that Shelling russian territory is a normal occurrence. If that is what you are saying, Could you enlighten me ? Examples, please?
IF that is NOT what you're saying, please explain What it IS, that You ARE saying?

somewhere* i don't know Where; i'm not the geographic expert; 10/12/22, 12:47 PM
gilbar said...: tim asks me
Are you literate? Go back and read it again. Notice what I am actually saying is made up. It's not complicated, not hidden

tim's Complete post (tiv's remarks in bold)
tim maguire said...

tim in vermont said...
"Proxy wars aren't how you start nuclear wars, proxy wars are how you avoid nuclear war."
Unless your proxy war is a few hundred miles from Moscow

Yes, you've successfully countered my numerous real world examples with a made up condition. I'm sure it supports your argument super good in your head.
10/12/22, 9:11 AM

Again, For those of us with Traumatic Brain Injuries; what IS it, that you are "actually saying is made up"; 10/12/22, 12:55 PM
Humperdink said...: Saint Croix: "Somebody on another thread said she was pro-choice. Back in 2020, she introduced a federal bill outlawing abortions if the baby could feel pain."

That was me.

Tulsi tweet of May 16,2019: "The #AlabamaAbortionBIll is extremely dangerous. It completely takes away the freedom of women to choose whether or not to have an abortion--even if a woman/girl is a victim of rape or incest. This law must be rejected. #AbortionIsAWomansRight"

She has subsequently changed her position in various ways. I do not trust her.; 10/12/22, 1:20 PM
Michael K said...: For those of you thumping the tub for DeSantis, remember that he too is a "career politician". There's nothing inherently wrong with that, except with the interests of the people are trumped by the interests of the multinationals and elites.)

I have similar reservations. Trump is unique because he is immune to bribes and has been thinking about this ruling class thing for years.; 10/12/22, 1:26 PM
Rusty said...: MikeR said...
"When are those of you still pushing the "war effort" going to take a step back and think? The lives of billions of people are in your hands."
That's the problem, Mike. They don't think. They just believe what they are told to believe. Putting Joe Biden in charge of our nuclear inventory is like giving a loaded revolver to a chimp.; 10/12/22, 1:53 PM
Drago said...: fairmarketvalue: "In my opinion, supporting Ukraine has much in common with the ill-considered initiative to expand NATO. Many believe NATO has outlived its mission with the end of the Cold War, and is seeking a new raison d'etre, which just so happens to serve as a bulwark against a "gas station with nukes" and with very little else. Meanwhile, we ignore our true geopolitical enemy, China, because Ukraine serves as a neat little business opportunity for our MIC, as well as a piggy bank for our grifting pols. Ukraine is a European problem that should be solved by the Europeans."

Precisely.

Although you must beware: arguing just those points, and many of us have, will get you labeled a Putin asset and possibly a coward as well from lots of Althouse conservative bloggers for some odd reason.; 10/12/22, 2:11 PM
Drago said...: fairmarketvalue: "In my opinion, supporting Ukraine has much in common with the ill-considered initiative to expand NATO. Many believe NATO has outlived its mission with the end of the Cold War, and is seeking a new raison d'etre, which just so happens to serve as a bulwark against a "gas station with nukes" and with very little else. Meanwhile, we ignore our true geopolitical enemy, China, because Ukraine serves as a neat little business opportunity for our MIC, as well as a piggy bank for our grifting pols. Ukraine is a European problem that should be solved by the Europeans."

Precisely.

Although you must beware: arguing just those points, and many of us have, will get you labeled a Putin asset and possibly a coward as well from lots of Althouse conservative bloggers for some odd reason.; 10/12/22, 2:11 PM
Saint Croix said...: the now misnomer "pro-choice" label still encompasses the entire range from "No abortion after 6 weeks" crowd

I think if you outlaw abortions at 6 weeks we would dramatically reduce abortions. It would be a beautiful thing. It would make me very happy.

I would vote for such a law. That's the Texas law.

I also think pro-lifers should talk up emergency contraception for rape victims.

The most important thing, recognizing the humanity of unborn children, we're not even close to that.; 10/12/22, 2:21 PM
Achilles said...: Saint Croix said...

Tulsi is a moderate, and has her own opinions about stuff. What impresses me is how strong she is mentally, and how fearless she is to say what she thinks.

No. Tulsi is not a moderate.

Not unless her positions on economic freedom have changed drastically.; 10/12/22, 2:32 PM
Achilles said...: tim maguire said...

Are you seriously pretending that you don't know what your made up condition was? You claimed that the number of miles between Moscow and the Ukraine border negated the historical experience with proxy wars. You have nothing to support that claim. It's an opinion and, for all your handwaving, you know it.

I see you have gilbar running interference for you. If that doesn't alert you that you are on the wrong track, nothing will.

What are you talking about?

Ukraine is directly attacking Russia with weapons we are giving them. Weapons they aren't even trained to use.

Who do you think is actually targeting those weapons? It took me months of training to use some of the systems they are sending over and I was just a grunt. They are sending over shit that takes months to learn how to use.

HIMARs? You think you just push a couple of buttons and victory?

Where do you think the people doing the targeting are getting their intelligence?

I am openly questioning just how "Proxy" this war is.; 10/12/22, 2:39 PM
Achilles said...: If they are just handing out HIMARS without US personnel attached that might be worse than having US personal shooting missiles at Russia.; 10/12/22, 2:41 PM
Achilles said...: Do we even declare wars anymore? Do we have a congress?

You warmongering fools need to step back and think about what is actually going on and the steps involved.

One way or another we are bombing Russia right now in a completely undeclared war.

Our idiot Regime is trying to start WW3.

Putin has seen the Khadafi videos. Another war mongering success there.

Putin is not going to let himself be dragged around by a mob, raped, and publicly murdered.

I know that most of you warmongers would launch nukes if that is what you had to do to avoid Khadafi's fate and you are the ones calling Putin a monster.

Well Putin is a monster. But so are you people. That line runs down the middle of every one of our hearts.

I used to hate the term Chickenhawk.

Not so much anymore.; 10/12/22, 2:50 PM
Narr said...: IKe's original draft, IIUC, had the phrase "Military-Industrial-Congressional" complex, but he was persuaded to remove trim the most important bit.

Tells you a lot about our country's history since then.; 10/12/22, 3:08 PM
Saint Croix said...: I'm listening to the whole podcast on Spotify. Really good.

Tulsi at 23 minutes: "It's so dangerous that the Biden Administration Health and Human Services Secretary is openly advocating...quote-unquote 'gender-affirming care' and treatment for kids...we have the person who's supposed to be in charge of federal health policies...encouraging parents and kids to get this treatment...it is an advocating for abuse of children. And it's something that more and more people need to stand up against, but the fact that we don't have more people speaking out against this speaks to the culture of fear that we're talking about."

Rogan: "And you can't even talk about it because that person is trans...the person who is advocating for children to transition also is trans..."

Tulsi at 25:30: "I saw a brochure that the Department of Health and Human Services put out about 'gender-affirming care'...it basically said that if parents failed to provide that 'gender-affirming care,' then child-protective services will have the authority to step in and try to intervene for the sake of the child."

Rogan: "Wow. Wow. So the kid, who is just going through a period of their life, where they decide 'I'm a girl or a boy,' and the parents say, 'hey, let's wait until you turn 18, you might grow out of this,' and the kid's like, 'fuck that, I'm calling child protective services,' then Homeland Security or whoever comes in, and physically forces the parents to do the bidding of the minor child."

Tulsi: "With the threat of taking your child away from you."; 10/12/22, 3:45 PM
Saint Croix said...: (Tulsi at 54 minutes)...She wanted to pass legislation supporting Title 9 and recognizing the difference between males and females. "They should not be competing against each other."

Now what we are seeing with the Biden administration, administratively, not even passing legislation, they're trying to back-door this move to change the rules around Title 9, to include "gender identity" rather than have it be on the basis of biological sex. And threatening schools. They will withhold federal funding, unless (the schools) adopt this rule change...not running through Congress, not allowing the people's voices to be heard...

"Not only a majority of Americans disagree with this, but also a majority of Democrats."

Rogan: "It's wild that nobody's pushing back, especially in the Democratic party...they seem like they're captive to the furtherest left."

Tulsi: "The people in charge of the Democratic party...have created this cult-like atmosphere, and fomented this fear...people (in the party) are too afraid to stop it..."; 10/12/22, 3:46 PM
Saint Croix said...: The Democratic party of the past, the Democratic party that I joined, doesn't exist anymore

Tulsi: "the party of JFK, of Dr. Martin Luther King, the party of inclusivity, the big tent party that welcomed and encouraged this marketplace of ideas and conversations and people that held different views, the party that championed women and equality, and the rights of people in our society, that party doesn't exist anymore. Instead we have a party that's being led by people who have gone insane with this ideological fanaticism."

Parents don't have...you don't have a right to raise your kids now. You don't have a right to say what they're being taught in schools now. The state, the government, the teacher's unions, only they have that right. Undermining families. They don't believe in the rule of law.

"That's the threat to our democracy they pose...they don't believe in freedom of speech, they don't believe in freedom of thought, they don't believe in freedom of religion."

at the 1:01 mark: "I don't see the Democratic party as being savable(!)"

"I can't associate with this insanity that goes on, and continues to worsen day by day."

She's registering as an independent.; 10/12/22, 3:48 PM
Saint Croix said...: 1:03: They're talking about Kamala.

Rogan: "That is where things sort of soured with you and the Democratic party, when during the debates you accurately pointed out her record."

Tulsi: "Why didn't anybody in the media ask her about her record? No one in the media did that. No other candidate on the debate stage had the balls to bring that up."

She feels her Kamala questions on the stage destroyed her in the Democrat party. You're not supposed to ask questions like that.

"I would guess, she's got friends in high places. I would guess, she's a woman of color, and no one wants to be seen attacking a woman of color."; 10/12/22, 3:48 PM
Kirk Parker said...: fairmarketvalue,

I quite disagree. There is something incredibly wrong with career politicians, and with people who want to be career politicians. They are far too eager to assume power over others, and are inherently untrustworthy as a result.; 10/12/22, 4:05 PM
Saint Croix said...: more on Kamala

Tulsi: "Our Vice-President standing at the DMZ saying, 'We are great allies with North Korea."

Rogan: "What a fuck-up that was. And it didn't even make the news."

Tulsi: "Oh my gosh."

Rogan: "People didn't talk about it."

Tulsi: "Exactly."

Rogan: "Our great partnership with North Korea. WHAT!"

Tulsi: "She didn't even say, 'I'm sorry, I misspoke."

Rogan: "Right. Well, sometimes you don't realize...I do that all the time, like Jamie will correct me. I'll say something and I thought I said another thing."

Tulsi: "Right."

Rogan: "It's just a flub."

Tulsi: "I guess the problem is it comes in a long line of flubs."

Rogan: "She is absolutely terrible. And that is, for you, that is where things sort of soured with you and the Democratic party, when during the debates you accurately pointed out her record."

Tulsi: "Yeah."

Rogan: "You basically sank any hope she had of being president, because you opened up this discussion, that many people are not aware of, about her prosecution record. And the things she has done that are absolutely illegal.

Tulsi: "Yeah."

Rogan: "Like forcing people to work as laborers, as cheap labor, for the state to fight wildfires, and they were supposed to be released."

Tulsi: "Exactly."

Rogan: "They did their time."

Tulsi: "They did their time and she kept them in prison, to use them essentially as slave labor for the state. Putting their own lives at risk, forcibly."

Tulsi at 1:04...

"Why didn't anybody in the media ask her about her record? No one in the media did that. No other candidate on the debate stage had the balls to bring that up."

She feels her Kamala questions on the stage destroyed her in the Democrat party. You're not supposed to ask questions like that.

Tulsi: "I would guess, she's got friends in high places. I would guess, she's a woman of color, and no one wants to be seen attacking a woman of color."; 10/12/22, 4:06 PM
n.n said...: at the 1:01 mark: "I don't see the Democratic party as being savable(!)"

The Democrat party is not viable. Abort, cannibalize, sequester. Karmic irony.; 10/12/22, 6:54 PM
Jon Burack said...: "Proxy wars aren't how you start nuclear wars, proxy wars are how you avoid nuclear war."

This has gotten some pushback, but I do not think it has gotten enough. Are we seriously supposed to think we eased our way into Vietnam (via at first "advisors," then gunboats and then because of some mirky skirmish in the South China Seas, full force simply as a way to avoid nuclear war with ... with, with WHOM -- the Soviet Union, China? Tell us. Was Ho carrying Nukes from Russia down the Ho Chi Minh Trial? I don't seem to recall that. My memory is we got into that pointless war, a war which has so corrupted our civil life ever since, mainly in order to avoid losing face - or do you think there really were dominoes falling all across that Southeast Asian land? And do you think had it not been for Operation Rolling Thunder bombing Hanoi the Ruskies might have launched the big one? Please.

As for Tulsi, I agreed with 97%. Which means I say, Run, Tulsi, Run.; 10/12/22, 8:01 PM
The Godfather said...: 1. I wish we had a competent US President.

2. I thank God that the Ukrainians have a competent President.

3. I wish Russia had a competent President.

4, I wish 1 out of 3 were enough.; 10/12/22, 9:34 PM
Mark said...: Saint Croix: "Tulsi has a lot of credibility on war issues because she served, and is very patriotic."

Now do John McCain.

He served and pretended to be patriotic too.

Very much like Gabbard, he shifted wildly in the political winds with seemingly no principle other than remaining in power. Turns out serving and acting patriotic does not lead to strong moral values, it might be that all that following orders bit might not lead to following ones personal moral code.; 10/12/22, 10:20 PM
Drago said...: Dumb Lefty Mark: "Very much like Gabbard, he shifted wildly in the political winds with seemingly no principle other than remaining in power."

Gabbard is the polar opposite of McCain. The good news for Dumb Lefty Mark is that he/she/xe is a mere 180 degres off the correct answer.

Again.

But I get it. Tulsi has dared to speak the truth so all the Dumb Lefty voice-actuated NPC buffoons are swarming to protect their Dear Leaders from spot-on criticism.; 10/13/22, 1:11 AM
fairmarketvalue said...: Kirk Parker:

fair market value

“I quite disagree. There is something incredibly wrong with career politicians, and with people who want to be career politicians. They are far too eager to assume power over others, and are inherently untrustworthy as result.”

Kirk, you’ll get no pushback from me for your advocacy of the Cincinnatus model of public service. I’m with you, but unfortunately that ship sailed long ago. Except for DJT, can you name one national level politician who is not a career politician? Heck, even DJT ran for, and still wants, another term. Like armies in war, you go with what you’ve got. You can’t insist on perfection to the detriment of the good (and feasible).; 10/13/22, 6:31 AM
Narr said...: Yes, Tulsi G, who occupies no office and was the D's wunderkind, will say anything to retain the office she doesn't have. McCain was a leech on the system from his Academy days, and was better entrenched in DC than the VC were on Hamburger Hill.; 10/13/22, 11:37 AM