Tulsi Gabbard’s Nomination Is a National-Security Risk

[u/Emperor-Commodus]

https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2024/11/tulsi-gabbard-nomination-security/680649/

[u/rcglinsk]

It's a violation of the laws of war to use tear or other riot gas to flush soldiers out of bunkers or trenches. But It is not central to the notion of war crimes. The Syrian army, the Ukrainian army, and the Russian army, have all been using the tactic in recent wars. During the US occupation of Iraq, our army used the tactic in at least a handful of battles, though regular use I don't think is documented (see the white phosphorous controversy).

As such, it doesn't make sense to offer the observation with the moral weight you're giving it.

[u/Individual_Bridge_88 → u/rcglinsk]

Assad didn't just use tear or riot gas in a military context. He used Sarin gas (a neurotoxin) on civilians multiple times (see below). The fact that you're lumping Sarin gas in with police crowd-control measures is incredibly discrediting.

The Ghouta chemical attack was a chemical attack carried out by the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, in the early hours of 21 August 2013 in Ghouta, Syria during the Syrian civil war.[17] Two opposition-controlled areas in the suburbs around Damascus were struck by rockets containing the chemical agent sarin.[16] Estimates of the death toll range from at least 281 people[3] to 1,729.[15] The attack was the deadliest use of chemical weapons since the Iran–Iraq War.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Shaykhun_chemical_attack

The Khan Shaykhun chemical attack took place on 4 April 2017 on the town of Khan Shaykhun in the Idlib Governorate of Syria.[6] The town was reported to have been struck by an airstrike by government forces followed by massive civilian chemical poisoning.[5][7] The release of a toxic gas, which included sarin, or a similar substance,[8] killed at least 89 people and injured more than 541

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Shaykhun_chemical_attack

This is what Sarin gas does to the human body:

Sarin (NATO designation GB [short for G-series, "B"]) is an extremely toxic organophosphorus compound.[4] A colourless, odourless liquid, it is used as a chemical weapon due to its extreme potency as a nerve agent. Exposure can be lethal even at very low concentrations, where death can occur within one to ten minutes after direct inhalation of a lethal dose,[5][6] due to suffocation from respiratory paralysis, unless antidotes are quickly administered.[4] People who absorb a non-lethal dose and do not receive immediate medical treatment may suffer permanent neurological damage

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin

[u/rcglinsk → u/Individual_Bridge_88]

They Syrians still maintain they were framed in Ghouta. But whatever, they dismantled and destroyed all their chemical weapons. Afterwards the allegations don't match any potential reasoning, no matter how vile the people involved.

This is how the OPCW describes the people treated at Ltamenah Hospital after the chemical weapons attack on farmland south of the city.

All casualties are reported to have presented with shortness of breath, miosis, cough, oral hypersecretion, and perceived agitation. There were no reported skin, pulmonary, or vital sign abnormalities. All cases are described as being mild presentations and patients were discharged within 24 hours.

The casualties were sleeping in caves around the farmland. The OPCW did not collect any forensic evidence directly, and it's hard to tell from their report who did. The soil samples, etc., tested positive for Sarin and chemical byproducts of its manufacture.

Obviously making Sarin is trivial for any nation state (the chemical was first synthesized in 1937, unsettling as it may be, better part of a century later, it's not hard). But I just can't imagine what they had against that farmland and why it was worth making the banned and ridiculously hated chemical.

[u/Individual_Bridge_88 → u/rcglinsk]

This is the original statement you were trying to reframe:

Being an apologist for Bashar Al-Assad, a monster who gases his own citizens including children, should be disqualifying for dogcatcher let alone a high level national security official.

The Syrians subsequently dismantling their Sarin gas/chemical weapons program doesnt change the fact that they did, in fact, gas their civilians with a potent neurotoxin. Since Tulsi Gabbard is an apologist for the Assad regime, the original statement is still 100% accurate. It's unconscionable to defend this regime because they used these chemical weapons at all, no matter their subsequent actions.

[u/rcglinsk → u/Individual_Bridge_88]

I can buy Maher Al-Assad being a monster. Bashar is an ophthalmologist. And I'm not apologizing for attacking farmland with sarin, I'm saying I don't think it's worth so much emotion.

Does your term "defending" include any opposition to continued support for the antigovernmental side of the civil war? Sentiment like "The Assad family has ruled Syria for the better part of a century, almost no one in America even knew the name for four fifths of it, and rightly so because it doesn't matter." Disqualifying for national security office?