General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Ok, Tulsi Gabbard; help me understand [View all]oberliner
(58,724 posts)I think she is an apologist for the Assad regime.
As to what should be done with respect to Syria, I agree with you that it is tremendously complex and that our military intervention is not necessarily what is called for.
Pretending that someone other than the Assad regime (with Russia's support) was responsible for the recent chemical weapon attack is BS, in my opinion, and that is what Gabbard is trying to do with her comments (similar to the message from other pro-Putin folks).
If she came out strongly and said that Assad is obviously using chemical weapons contrary to all international law and is responsible for the deaths of countless innocent people, but that the US should not get involved militarily for reasons X, Y, and Z, then I would not be raising this kind of objection to her remarks.
But, instead, she seems to be quite literally parroting the pro-Assad, pro-Putin propaganda (i.e. maybe Assad didn't use chemical weapons, the people fighting Assad are ISIS/terrorists, etc).