Interventionism's Failures: Gabbard's Lessons Ignored Again
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 17 hours ago
**Chaos Unleashed: The Consequences of Interventionist Policy on Global Stability**
In recent events, Tulsi Gabbard's eerily accurate predictions regarding the Syrian conflict highlight the dangers of interventionist foreign policy.
Many in the mainstream media and political circles have labeled Gabbard a "Putin puppet" for her measured stance against toppling regimes without a clear understanding of who would fill the power vacuum.
Now, as the situation in Syria unfolds with alarming consequences, those criticisms seem increasingly misplaced.
Gabbard's remarks regarding the new regime's oppressive actions underscore a crucial lesson that too many politicians and policymakers seem to overlook: regime change can lead to greater instability and suffering for the very people purportedly being helped.
The aftermath of the Obama administration's disastrous intervention strategies in the Middle East has left a significant trail of chaos, exacerbating crises in nations once stable under controversial leaders.
Syria, under Bashar al-Assad, was far from ideal. However, the alternative that emerged following the push for regime change has led to the rise of extremist factions that have further persecuted religious minorities and fueled further humanitarian crises.
Meanwhile, the “devil you know” argument that President Trump articulated years ago resonates as Gabbard's insights gain credibility. Critics dismissed Trump's rhetoric as callousness, yet as we witness the new regime's brutal tactics, it's hard not to reflect on the wisdom of avoiding interventions that destabilize entire regions.
Additionally, the recent arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on an International Criminal Court warrant has sparked debates highlighting Western overreach in international affairs.
Duterte’s aggressive anti-drug campaign was aimed at addressing a significant public health crisis in the Philippines.
Critics may use his methods to label him a human rights violator, but many in the region understand the urgency of combating drug-related violence.
The ICC’s actions against leaders like Duterte serve as a reminder of the complexities involved in international law and the often selective application of justice.
As the U.S. grapples with its own foreign policy, the lessons from both Gabbard's warnings and Duterte's situation should provoke a serious reevaluation of the consequences of intervention and the need for a more judicious approach in foreign relations.
Amidst this chaotic landscape, conservatives must stand united in advocating for policies that prioritize stability, sovereignty, and the well-being of citizens over politically motivated interventions.
In this turbulent world, clarity and prudence must guide our approach to international relations.
Sources:
theblaze.com
clashdaily.com
thegatewaypundit.com
In recent events, Tulsi Gabbard's eerily accurate predictions regarding the Syrian conflict highlight the dangers of interventionist foreign policy.
Many in the mainstream media and political circles have labeled Gabbard a "Putin puppet" for her measured stance against toppling regimes without a clear understanding of who would fill the power vacuum.
Now, as the situation in Syria unfolds with alarming consequences, those criticisms seem increasingly misplaced.
Gabbard's remarks regarding the new regime's oppressive actions underscore a crucial lesson that too many politicians and policymakers seem to overlook: regime change can lead to greater instability and suffering for the very people purportedly being helped.
The aftermath of the Obama administration's disastrous intervention strategies in the Middle East has left a significant trail of chaos, exacerbating crises in nations once stable under controversial leaders.
Syria, under Bashar al-Assad, was far from ideal. However, the alternative that emerged following the push for regime change has led to the rise of extremist factions that have further persecuted religious minorities and fueled further humanitarian crises.
Meanwhile, the “devil you know” argument that President Trump articulated years ago resonates as Gabbard's insights gain credibility. Critics dismissed Trump's rhetoric as callousness, yet as we witness the new regime's brutal tactics, it's hard not to reflect on the wisdom of avoiding interventions that destabilize entire regions.
Additionally, the recent arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on an International Criminal Court warrant has sparked debates highlighting Western overreach in international affairs.
Duterte’s aggressive anti-drug campaign was aimed at addressing a significant public health crisis in the Philippines.
Critics may use his methods to label him a human rights violator, but many in the region understand the urgency of combating drug-related violence.
The ICC’s actions against leaders like Duterte serve as a reminder of the complexities involved in international law and the often selective application of justice.
As the U.S. grapples with its own foreign policy, the lessons from both Gabbard's warnings and Duterte's situation should provoke a serious reevaluation of the consequences of intervention and the need for a more judicious approach in foreign relations.
Amidst this chaotic landscape, conservatives must stand united in advocating for policies that prioritize stability, sovereignty, and the well-being of citizens over politically motivated interventions.
In this turbulent world, clarity and prudence must guide our approach to international relations.
Sources:
theblaze.com
clashdaily.com
thegatewaypundit.com
Latest News