Former Hawaii Dem. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, took heat and backlash last week, after Speaking out against the true cause of Ukraine invasion.
Gabbard stated it was NATO expansion rather than Vladimir Putin’s naked aggression that sparked the invasion of Ukraine.
Even after being barraged with bipartisan outrage, Gabbard said she refused to back down and claimed critics aren’t living in ‘the real world’.
Even as Putin’s tanks and troops stormed through Ukraine, Gabbard, 40, urged President Biden to meet with the ex-KBG strongman, during an exclusive interview at the Conservative Political Action Conference, where she was a guest speaker.
“As leaders you have to be willing to have a dialogue and conversation to address the real issues at hand,” Gabbard said. “There is always a path for diplomacy. What is the alternative? The alternative then is continued escalation.
“Putin has said for years his security concerns are about NATO increasingly approaching and surrounding Russia on all sides,” Gabbard continued. “The Biden administration has failed to outline for the American people how does this serve your best interests? What will the costs be?”
Gabbard stance has earned her widespread ire from critics on both the left and the right.
“As recently as last week he once again demanded NATO leave every country that joined after 1997 including Bulgaria, Romania & 12 others. After weeks of posturing, Putin launched a full scale invasion of the country Wednesday evening and has been condemned by Biden and leaders around the world,” Florida GOP senator Marco Rubio said in a tweet responding to Gabbard.
“I even think your pals at CPAC disagree with this psychotic take,” added Nomiki Konst, a former progressive candidate for New York City Public Advocate.
Gabbard brushed off the comments and hate thrown her way. “They are not living in the real world,” she said, claiming fears of Putin establishing the old Soviet empire were unfounded.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States has moved aggressively to expand the NATO alliance into the the eastern bloc nations of the old Soviet sphere of influence. Once Communist dominated nations like Poland, Hungary and Romania are now within the alliance. The issue has long chaffed at Putin, who has called the breakup of the Soviet Empire a “tragedy.”
A longtime liberal Democrat, Gabbard was pro-choice and supported gun control, environmental regulations and universal health care during her presidential campaign in 2020.
She was invited to the annual gathering by longtime CPAC boss Matt Schlaap and given a coveted speaking spot during the event’s Ronald Reagan dinner on Friday.
“I think it’s important that we have conversations whether they’re with people from our political party or people from a different political party,” Gabbard said, touting her bipartisan bonafides.
Though she remains a Democrat and endorsed Joe Biden for president over Donald Trump, Gabbard has since become a ferocious critic of the president.
“I am very disappointed with the decisions and the policies he put forward as president. His whole platform was based around trying to unite the American people and unfortunately he’s not only not carried out that promise, but so many of his policies have been divisive.”
Gabbard declined to offer any 2024 speculation. She’s working on a book and hasn’t ruled out getting involved in the midterm elections later this year. She might even be voting Republican.
“I have always been of the mindset that the interest of the country and the American people should come first before any political partisan interests,” she said.
It has been long-standing Russian(Soviet) governments to oppose vigorously the creation of hostile states on its borders, particularly the western borders. Given their experience with Hitler and Napoleon, the idea of buffer states makes a lot of sense. This is a very serious matter for the Russians and always has been. The “West” makes no effort to understand the policy and yet even the presence of an island 90 miles away from the US border and backed by an adversary state (Soviets) was just too much for Americans and led to assassination plots, an invasion and an embargo so grotesque as to throttle the little state and the Cuban people for generations just to punish Cubans for its socialist underpinnings. Therefore, a little understanding here is in order.
Putin will use all Russian assets to keep Ukraine from NATO and NAO from Ukraine. The current invasion is a message to other erstwhile Warsaw Pact states, now NATO members, that from the Russian POV, that while they are no longer a “buffer” for Russia, the Russians will not sit still while they become the potential invaders themselves! After Ukraine is pacified and under the sway of Moscow, not Washington, it is likely that Putin will stir up trouble in the border NATO states, looking to justify intervention in such states, intervention intended to change their allegiances. The US instigated and pursues the idea of Warsaw Pact members joining NATO in opposition to Russian domination of the region. The US does this, and now supports the idea in its “democratic” costume in Ukraine and this even though the US promised to not place a NATO camp at Russia’s border. So much for US promises. This concern about possible invasion is a primary Russian concern just as of Cuba was a primary US concern in the fifties and thereafter. In the latter case, the US exercises its domination of the region by installing dictators throughout Latin American, and failing this in the case of Cuba, nonetheless perceives Cuba as within its “sphere of interest” and was therefore not challenged by international opinion when it illegally intercepted missiles bound for Cuba. Likewise, Ukraine is within Russian sphere of influence and the US should not interfere politically in Ukraine and by doing so, dispute an analogous Russian claim to its “sphere of influence.” This is the same game as played with China, that is, imagine China invading Taiwan. Taiwan is populated by Chinese and is indubitably within China’s “sphere.” When the US gives up its 60+ year brutal blockade of a neighboring sovereign state and its militaristic guarantees for Taiwan, then perhaps the US will be in a position to block Russia from regime change in Ukraine.
Gabbard is an idiot, though not near to the degree that biden or harris are. Having said that, she’s absolutely right in this instance. NATO has picked at that scab for years. Would we allow a communist alliance ( such as the Warsaw Pact) in Canada or Mexico???? Not hardly.
Though we do tolerate dimocrats which are only slightly worse that communists.