posted on Oct, 28 2019 @ 09:44 AM
originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Mach2
You only need generals in charge when actively fighting a war, otherwise they'll seek a war. When in peacetime we need people who understand the
horror's of war and wish to avoid it, not those who actively seek it and embrace it.
I don't consider in a war, unless war has actually been declared, or we are directly under assault as a nation.
The rotational assignments of generals in these costly, meaningless conflicts has put 2nd and 3rd stars on generals who never fight to win but are
only looking not to lose too much. In the mean time we as a nation are spending precious blood and treasure in ancient conflicts where we don't
The only thing
I agree with Tulsi Gabbard on is her stated position against constant wars in the Middle East. And that position can change just
as quickly as she changes her socks.
A decade ago she would be viewed as a hair-on-fire far left liberal, and on many things the Hawaii Congress person is still there. She is a definite
gun grabber and fully supports abortion through the second trimester. She is loosey goosey on immigration, supports taxing anything that will stand
still to fund huge government and let's not forget she raised her hand along with every other DemocRat on the stage when asked if she supports
extending free medical coverage to illegals.
"Tulsi has been given a 100% for her voting record and endorsed by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBT lobby organization in the country."
She doesn't score points with me by being a avid supporter of their "movement".
She did a nice knock down on HeelsUp during the 2nd debate and got slapped (figuratively) after by Kamie who went from 15% in the polls the first week
of July to her present 5%. That was nice.
But Tulsi is a pretty face on a far left liberal who should NOT BE TRUSTED. She is one of the crowd in my opinion and media is trying to portray her
as some sort of moderate which she is not
and is never to be trusted.