“Yesterday’s attack was a new low, even for the barbaric Assad regime,” she said, after holding up photos of children killed in the attack, noting that this chemical attack was more lethal than previous ones committed by government forces.
I had thought that anyone appointed by dt would be a bad admbassador, but I am wrong.
Looking at her bio on Wikipedia, I see several points of interest.
Yes, she is anti-abortion and a big supporter of the Netanyahu government in Israell, but I see some good in her other positions.
On February 2, 2017, Haley declared to the U.N. Security Council that sanctions against Russia for its Crimean conflict would not be lifted until Russia returned control over the region to Ukraine.
On March 15, 2017, Haley said she would not support a Muslim ban should President Trump choose to enact one. Haley said she did not believe "we should ever ban anyone based on their religion" and that a Muslim ban would be "un-American".
On March 30, 2017, Haley stated that the priority of the United States policy concerning Bashar Assad is to no longer force him out of power in an apparent policy shift, since under former president Barack Obama’s administration, the US made the departure of Assad a key policy aim.
On April 5, 2017, speaking to the U.N. Security Council a day after the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, Haley said Russia, Assad, and Iran "have no interest in peace" and attacks similar to this would continue occurring should nothing be done in response.
Haley has said that Trump is not dictating her actions in the UN: “He is not stopping me from beating up on Russia...He’s not stopping me from talking about the pressure that China needs to be putting on North Korea,” she told Bloomberg, adding that she thinks Russia was “certainly” involved in the U.S. election.
Also I learned that Fortune magazine offers a blog called The World's Most Powerful Women, written by Claire Zillman.
See also: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-attack-un.html