Trump Doesn’t Need Bolton; He’s got Tucker Carlson, Tulsi Gabbard, and retired Colonel Douglas MacGregor (maybe all those rumors from last summer were true?)
Also below is a response to Gabbards et al’s false presumptions and false analogies about the Gulf of Tonkin and the Persian Gulf. The only true analogy is that they both warrant(ed) military responses. Both involved ruthless enemies of freedom. The extent and duration of response is debatable.
Daily Beast:
Tucker Carlson Tells Trump in Private: No War With Iran
As tensions with Iran escalate and his advisers clamor for a hawkish approach, the president has been taking foreign-policy advice from a Fox News host.
“Colonel Douglas MacGregor appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show to discuss the prospect of a war with Iran, and he warned President Trump of another ‘Gulf of Tonkin’ event, which was a total lie* by the foreign policy establishment that was used to ignite the Vietnam War. Carlson agreed and mentioned the dubious gas attacks in Syria that were used by neocons to pressure Trump into bombing Syria twice.”
“How does a war with Iran serve the best interest of the American people of the United States? And the fact is it does not,” Gabbard said. “It better serves the interest of people like [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Bibi Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia who are trying to push us into this war with Iran.”
With “experts” like Tulsi ‘Swalwell’, oops, Gabbard, a retired Army colonel (MacGregor), and a TV host (Carlson), comprising a foreign policy team, what more do you need?
Let’s hope that President Trump has some more heavy hitters on national security, foreign policy, threat analysis, now that John Bolton is gone, than these lightweights.
Admittedly Tulsi Gabbard is the cutest Democratic Party’s presidential hopeful, and Tucker is obviously smitten with her. Let’s hope, though, that her analysis that, while Iran isn’t ‘nice’, the US can save a lot of money if we just let the world’s number one sponsor of terrorism take over the entire Middle East, doesn’t become US policy.
And Douglas MacGregor, a former military officer, a bit higher up the command chain than Ms. Tulsi when he was active, is Tucker’s “go-to” guy when analyzing all those past mistakes by former presidents.
No more of those “false flag” incidents (as Tulsi calls them) like the ‘Gulf of Tonkin’ and the Assad “gas attacks” on his own people, which all three of the would be ‘policy makers’ seem to agree were probably contrived by “neo cons’ or maybe those wily Israelis like Bibi, to ‘con’ the US into a war it had no stake in.
By the way, where are all those European allies (coalitions are great…as long as the USA foots the bill)? With folks like that on your side, who needs enemies?
DLH
A little about Gabbards statement that the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was a “total lie” that “was used to ignite the Vietnam war“. Woke-ettes like Gabbard are ignorant of or dismiss so much. Key facts and background to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution are that:
1] Communism and most communists are threats to freedom, then and now.
2] The nation-state adherents to communism then (and now) sought and seek regional and world domination
3] Communist North Vietnam was infiltrating and terrorizing the South in pursuit of its aims (with the help of Russia and China) in violation of provisions of the First Indochina War
4] Indochina (including the Vietnams) were under the purview of SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization signed in 1954), a treaty we were part of which was intended to stop Communist aggression. This was very important to our involvement.
5] American naval vessels were legitimately in international waters (Tonkin Gulf) monitoring North Vietnamese (and their sponsors) activities in 1964.
6] North Vietnamese vessels did attack the American vessels on Aug 2nd whether out of umbrage over what they perceived as US support for South Vietnamese’ retaliatory efforts against the North matters not as our naval vessels were not militarily engaged against them.
7] The North Vietnamese attackers were under orders and knew what they were doing and who/what they were attacking.
8] Since then and as regards the Persian Gulf, no international relations “expert” has defined how many acts of war must be tolerated, how long must threats and violations of international law and agreements must go on before definitive military action is taken,– nor what the price of waiting, of toleration is.
As regards Gabbard’s calumny that the various US led coalition Gulf War operations were based on lies, we will start with the thought that if Gabbord is merely oblivious to the true history as a now Major in the Hawaii National Guard and a veteran of the effort (assigned to a medical logistics unit as an enlistee and later in a military police roll as an officer) that in itself represents disgraceful ignorance and is an insult and embarrassment to our nation’s armed forces. But then she is a Democrat.
Several years ago we posted about the “WMD’s were a lie” LIE and these links will provide plenty of documentation refuting Gabbard and her ilk.
Also: More About The False Narrative of No WMD’s
R Mall
