Baltics, Syria, Ukraine, South China Sea, Black Sea, Hungary — so many flash points. With our current economic crisis and a failure of the interventionist enterprise, will desperation spark one of these flash points?
Ron Paul: Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report. Daniel McAdams is with me today. It’s good to see you Daniel.
Daniel McAdams: Good to see you Dr. Paul. Good morning.
Ron Paul: I’d like to talk today a little bit about some various events going on around the world, because there’s a lot of propaganda out there, a lot of threats and intimidations and sometimes I think we just invite it, because we are involved in so many places, but we heard the story about the Chinese are coming, the Chinese are coming, are they going to invade Alaska and we want to try to put the proper balance on that, of course, there’s always propaganda on how the Ruskies are about to invade and I haven’t seen them having getting ready for a beachhead and I haven’t seen the Russians doing what the Soviets did, on putting missiles down in Cuba and, of course I read a story about us placing drones in Latvia. It’s on and on and the question is, are these war drums beating? Are they real or is it imaginary? Is it propaganda or should we ignore it?
Let’s start with the headline about China, putting ships near Alaska. What kind of significance can we place on that?
Daniel McAdams: There is one and you might say that they are sending a signal. I think there’s a strange symbiosis among the beltway think tanks and the Chinese military, because CSIS for example, which is a beltway think tank and gets a lot of defense money. One of their experts said the Chinese Navy is going global, it’s a big threat, they are right off our shores. Of course, that might be a departure, but I was looking in July, the U.S. launched a major littoral combat ship that they said it’s going to be great, because it’s going to be patrolling the South China seas.
Ron Paul: Yeah. I think they want to let everybody know that they are not a bunch of wimps and they don’t want to be pushed around. I’d like them to react more like the Swiss react. They are not so insecure that they have to show they are strong and yet they have been able to defend themselves. That’s not yet to come and, of course, we have to deal with the constant antagonisms between Russia and United States, in spite of the fact that we depend on Russia to go to the space station. It amazes me that we go back and forth. I would call it provocative for the United States to put drones, not a ton of them, but right on the borders of Russia and Latvia. I don’t know if you noticed, but the people who were going to man these drones are the Texas Air National Guard. I thought they were supposed to be here protecting us or something. Here we have the Air National Texas Guard over in Latvia, it seems like the Russians should have a little bit to complain about on that.
Daniel McAdams: You’d think that in a sense, that Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, being in NATO, confirmed the worst fears of Russia why they didn’t want them to join NATO, which is they didn’t want offensive military weapons on their border. This is exactly what the case is. Of course, CNN, I was reading earlier was talking about this and they portray it as that this is a response of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Whether you believe that they invaded or not, there’s not much evidence of it, but in what way does it affect the U.S.?
Ron Paul: Yes and we have to question exactly where some of the information comes in particular and stirring the pot about the Russians ready to send the troops, power ready troops to Syria, a big announcement and the next day it was denied and I am sure Russia has an interest in Syria, they have a station there and we know they are sympathetic to Assad, but the way the headlines were written was that they were sending, implied combat troops, but then when we looked around to find out where they got this information, all of a sudden it was a single source and was not very thorough in telling us exactly who knew these troops are on their way to Syria.
Daniel McAdams: Yes, it was a fellow with the name Fishman and he wrote for a news cycle called YNet, which is an Israeli news outfit and if you look at the original article, which was copied by many other articles in their publications, there really was no sourcing forward, it was all unnamed sources. It was very scary, thousands of Russians ready to land in Syria. Interestingly enough, we talked about the Chinese, this also in a way appeals to both the U.S. neocons and these super pro- Russia people who think Russia is going to save the day and both of them have a lot of wishful thinking that I think clouds their analysis and doesn’t let them see things. They are reading into this what they want to, but I certainly have seen no evidence. I think even the U.S. military spokesman said that there’s really no evidence that they…
Ron Paul: I don’t think we are at a point where in a short period of time, a week, a month, a year, that we are going to massive movement of troops, as a matter of fact I am not sure that’s ever going to happen again like it did in World War I and World War II, but I can see the world becoming more dangerous and these Para-government forces, the independent sources and the terrorist approach has a reaction to what we do. I think that’s going to continue.
We will see the propaganda building up, mainly to put fear, fear is always a driving force, it’s a political tool that people use, but it’s also a political tool used to enhance people who make profits. The danger that I see is that they don’t have control of it. Let’s go back and forth here, the Russians are going to do this, we still do business with them, we still can travel there. They are not going to do it, but someday something might get out of hand and as conditions worsen, yesterday we talked about the mass migration into Europe, which is an explosion, an invasion and destabilizing and, of course, the wars are not ending in the Middle East, so this continues and it would not be too difficult to see some of this stuff getting out of control and having an unintended consequence or a false flag even if, maybe there’s somebody in our government or some other government that said let’s do this and this justify an escalation. That to me is what I think is the real danger.
Daniel McAdams: I think as the interventions failed one after the other, we see now Libya, that was supposed to be easy, we see Iraq, that was supposed to be a cake walk, we see Syria, it was supposed to be a smooth transition to democracy. As these failed, I think that there’s some desperation that sets in, because I don’t think there’s really an articulated strategy of the United States for foreign policy, but I think unfortunately and you’ve said this before, this desperation comes in something like we talked about yesterday when Petraeus says maybe we need to ally with Al-Qaeda. The sad thing is what you’ve always said, when this crisis comes, it probably will not immediately not turn to us and turn to you and non-interventionism, first they turn to someone like Petraeus and go even further down the path toward disaster.
Ron Paul: That’s what is sounds like, the fact that Petraeus is getting this much attention, you’d think maybe he discredited himself a little bit, but no, they still look to him and he of course was claiming and others claimed that he solved the problems of Iraq and brought about a peaceful settlement, when they had the escalation and the surge and also, though he was very much involved in the CIA when the difficulties started in Ukraine when the elected government was thrown out. You are right, they go back to these same people again and this further escalation. I think sometimes it’s difficult, I don’t think I personally can say that these war drums are not real at all, forget about them, but I don’t think they are imaginary either. I think there’s stuff going on and I worry about the unintended consequences and things getting out of control and not knowing exactly what the other side might do, because it could change rather suddenly.
Daniel McAdams: One of the solutions in Syria is really to do what you’ve said all along in Iraq, which is just to come home and that we don’t have troops on the ground there, but if were to stop trying to prop up an imaginary force over another imaginary force, if we’d step back maybe Syria would look to Iran, we certainly wouldn’t have to encourage it, but if we stepped back out of there, there would be a solution to the problem. ISIS would be defeated in one way or another and maybe some of these people that have gone to Europe might come back and help rebuild their country.
Ron Paul: There was a very famous person in our recent history, George Kennan, a foreign policy expert. He was sort of the realist leader and he was considered the author of containment and the conditions back then might have made a stronger argument for containment, even though I wouldn’t agree with all the foreign policy, but it was you don’t invade Russia, but you can contain Russia and stuff. At least, he was very well known for that. As he got older and I know you are very much aware of this, when he got older he was writing things different and one of his statements was rather interesting. He says yes, he says we still need to deal with containment, we have to contain the United States and he was putting the blame, he would be a very interesting person to interview today, wouldn’t it? To talk about containment, he probably wouldn’t agree with our total non-intervention, but he would, I bet we could find a lot to agree with that we need to contain some of our policies, like why are we putting drones in Latvia? Maybe it’s time to do more talking.
Daniel McAdams: They wanted to tag us, we are always complaining about the U.S., we are somehow anti-American and unpatriotic, but it is patriotic to contain the un-American instincts of a globalist foreign policy of the military industrial complex that’s impoverishing us and irritating the rest of the world. They are not making us any safer.
Ron Paul: Right. I think we are more or less on a collision course in many areas of the world today, because I’ve said many times that the Keynesian economic model doesn’t work. The model that we have for foreign policy of constant intervention and spending and deficit, that doesn’t work either. The world’s been engulfed by our policies and our influence, both with our military and our influence, because we have the reserve dollar. If we’d have spent a lot more energy, voluntarily of course, to probably convince more people say in Africa, to accept the ideas of liberty and free markets, maybe we could have had a Hong Kong or something like that that could develop in Africa, but instead we have this failed system and this leads to then the breakdown. We ended up with competing devaluations and protectionism and also mass migrations. This is what we are up against right now. This leads, because people are getting poorer and it’s very popular politically in this country, as well as elsewhere to be a populist. I am going to take care of the people, without changing policy, just more government redistribution of wealth and we are in the midst of that and they are not really considering seriously a policy that makes sense, which would be free markets and individual liberties.
The protectionist model usually ends up into war propaganda, if we could just spend more money on weapons we’ll get out of this mess. Then, there are some people who actually believe the answer to this is war. People still believe that we got out of the depression because we killed millions of people in World War II. What an answer, but there are people who believe that believe that and too often this set of standards go and they move us in that direction, that first you hear these problems, the economic problems and you lead to military problems and then you have a military interventionist foreign policy, that we have, that just aggravates and makes the Middle East chaos and whether it’s just in the Middle East or the Ukraine or wherever, leads to a very, very dangerous situation.
Yes, this talk of war and the militarization of other countries now is serious. I think we have enough time now to bring some common sense to people. What we need to do is work much harder and present the case for liberty and free markets and get away from this dependency on more government, more spending and more war. That is what is dangerous and that’s not what America is not about, hopefully so.
Anyway, I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report and please come back soon.