Thoughts on Tulsi as DNI vs. other roles like National Security Advisor, Sec. State or Sec. Defense?

[-]

funkalunatic@reddit

Marco Rubio and Tulsi Gabbard both in the Cabinet and on the National Security Council

holy moly Trump just wants to see them fight, doesn't he.

[-]

septemberjodie@reddit

I know marco has been a neocon but atleast he’s indiciated he will follow trumps Lead on an America first foreign policy.

[-]

funkalunatic@reddit

Neoconservativism is the foreign policy that actually puts America First.

"America First" in the Trumpian sense is just belligerent isolationism.

The first one is vile and the second one is dumb. Knowing Marco Rubio, there's no way he's going to "follow Trump's lead" when Trump's attention is turned to other matters.

[-]

Well He is following trumps lead on Ukraine. This year he’s voted against further support for Ukraines war effort, he agrees with trump that the war needs to end rather than enable it to continue for years on end.

[-]

funkalunatic@reddit

Senate votes are prearranged performances. Or maybe Marco didn't want to give too much help to Ukraine, lest they end the war too quickly for his liking.

[-]

septemberjodie@reddit

End the war too quickly for his liking ? wtf are you talking about ?

[-]

funkalunatic@reddit

I mean Ukraine isn't about to lose. They're holding their own while Russia is shipping in North Koreans. It's US policy that's been holding Ukraine back from going after Russia more aggressively, even while partly funding and supplying its efforts. US wants a simmering conflict that keeps Russia occupied and weakened while not threatening the flow of oil and gas. Marco knows if the US cuts back on funding, that doesn't mean Ukraine is out of the fight, especially since Europe would then be compelled to put more aid toward Ukraine in such a scenario.

[-]

septemberjodie@reddit

Rubio has joined an administration that is looking to end the war with a peace plan that involves concessions rather than continue supporting Ukraines war effort to gain every inch of territory back which would enable the war to go on for years leading to a immense amount of more death and risk of further escalation.

[-]

funkalunatic@reddit

Ukraine's stated goal of winning everything back is a negotiating tactic. They are signalling that they won't give up, which is the only way to bring Russia to the table. Entering a negotiation with a preemptively compromised position just signals weakness, as we've seen time and time again, including in Trump-negotiated "deals" such as the unconditional handover of Afghanistan to the Taliban that resulted in disaster when it went forward under the Biden administration (though it's still good that we got out of there).

What Trump, Tulsi, and Russia want is a Ukraine that's firmly within the Russian sphere of influence, which is why they intend to subvert Ukraine's negotiating position.

What Marco Rubio wants is NATO/Western supremacy at all costs, which is why he views Ukraine as a tool to weaken Russia first and foremost.

There are no good guys in this administration. Best we can hope for is that the different factions of bad guys fight it out in a way that results in something that's not totally awful.

[-]

MonsterMash555@reddit

Why do you believe Trump and Tulsi want Ukraine to be within the Russian sphere of influence, and how do you imagine that occurs after a nearly three year war between the two countries?

[-]

funkalunatic@reddit

It's the only explanation consistent with all the facts. I don't know if they will succeed, but I imagine they will try to force Ukraine to capitulate to terms that would give new territory to Russia, bar it from joining NATO or the EU, and force a regime change in Ukraine itself to something that the Russians can more easily puppet.

[-]

septemberjodie@reddit

What Marco Rubio wants is NATO/Western supremacy at all costs, which is why he views Ukraine as a tool to weaken Russia first and foremost.

lol well he’s in the wrong damn administration then because That’s not the agenda. The agenda is going to involve concessions to Russia. Again he’s indicated he’s going to follow trumps lead on this or else he’s fucking gone, this ain’t the first trump administration where he didn’t have people like tulsi in his ear everyday.

[-]

rouphus@reddit

Is DNI director of national intelligence?

[-]

maga_vet@reddit

Yes. And I think for someone who has been outspoken about what our intelligence community is doing wrong, she's a good fit.

[-]

therin_88@reddit

Would have preferred SoS or SoD but this is a good pick.

Funny that a month ago the Dems put her on a domestic terrorist watchlist and now she's head of the Intelligence Community.

[-]

maga_vet@reddit

I like the idea of her as DNI. Her opposition to things like the Patriot Act, FISA courts, etc., means this is a great position where she might actually be able to get something changed vs. an advisory position. This is perfect for her.

[-]

leenis@reddit

probably a great idea to have a russian asset in charge of national intelligence

[-]

OpenEnded4802@reddit (OP)

exhausting

[-]

leenis@reddit

imagine how we feel

[-]

sayzitlikeitis@reddit

I've been proven wrong about her but I'm happy that she got something and wasn't just cast aside into a meme department like Vivek. I hope she doesn't disappoint in her new role like she has for the past 3-4 years.

[-]

redditmodloservirgin@reddit

I wanted SECDEF

[-]

generalhonks@reddit

Pretty sure she can’t actually have that position, being an active member of the military. She would have to wait 7 years after decommissioning/retiring to have that position.

[-]

OpenEnded4802@reddit (OP)

Wasn't there some sort of exception for Mattis? Same could have been made for her

[-]

redditmodloservirgin@reddit

I figured her current service was the issue.

[-]

glacial_penman@reddit

I’m with everyone else on the def/state thing g but she was ON the transition team with RFK. She most likely had a lot on input. As far as actual policy influence (with min admin obligations as a bonus)this is on par with state.

But I drank the kool aid. I want my daughter to see her as the first female president. I think VP to Vance is the only viable way.

[-]

Cyber-exe@reddit

You're looking at 16 years of Republicans holding down the presidency at minimum for that. 4 Trump, 8 Vance, then 4 for Tulsi, and her getting a 2nd term after so many R terms consecutively becomes a very slim chance. If this did happen the odds of her getting a 2nd term becomes even more unlikely in that scenario.

[-]