All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 11, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
20:11
Washington Neocons To Send Taiwan Billions In Weapons

A Bipartisan group of Congressional warmongers is pushing a multi-billion dollar military assistance package for Taiwan. The measure will include new language designating Taiwan a de-facto “major non-NATO ally.” Clearly the Ukraine model is being applied to Taiwan: fighting mainland China down to the last Taiwanese.

|

Time Text
Rattling Sabers at China 00:14:31
Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Happy Thursday, Dr. Paul.
How are you?
I'm doing well.
Thank you.
All right.
And we're going to talk about, to start off with at least, we're going to talk about a little bit of foreign policy.
But it's very domestic because we have to pay for all this intervention over the CCs.
But they had a bill going through the Senate.
And they were wanting to send more money to Taiwan, you know, because we're not antagonistic enough to China.
And China's going to invade pretty soon.
So we have to, and I didn't say where they're going to invade.
But anyway, the theory is China will invade and want to take over Taiwan.
And there's lots of history behind that.
And we've sort of ducked that issue.
We don't take a precise position.
And on purpose, they call it strategic ambiguity.
Boy, we're good at that.
We're pretty ambiguous on all this stuff.
But anyway, they had a bill for $4.5 billion, and they wanted to help Taiwan out, get them some more weapons and give a boost to the stocks of our weapons industry.
But it was delayed a little bit, and it finally came up this week before the Foreign Policy Committee, and they made a change, and the change was, give them $2 billion more.
You know, things are getting hot.
We have it.
And where are we going to get the money?
Oh, we don't have to worry about that.
We have a special operation.
You get power, you run the world, you have an empire, you have a gold standard, and then you teach people gold is old-fashioned.
You don't need to follow that.
You have control of the international reserve currency.
So that gives you a lot of more power, financial.
You can run the world.
You can put on sanctions on people and get away with it.
So this is a big argument on this is along with the money to Taiwan and playing this game.
It really is antagonistic.
There's no doubt about it.
They want to, I think they want to do it on purpose.
There's some people who would relish a little bit of conflict over there.
Their problem is they don't know what a little bit of conflict is going to lead to.
So I personally believe it's very, very dangerous.
And in a minute, either you or I will give you a hint as to exactly the senator who has issued this warning how dangerous it is.
Yeah.
Well, let's put up that first clip.
And this is by way of our good friends over at antiwar.com that we find this piece.
This is from Defense News.
Senate advances $6.5 billion Taiwan military aid bill.
And you know, Dr. Paul, the parallels between our Taiwan slash China policy and our Russia slash Ukraine policy, the parallels are astounding.
I mean, you could almost call this the actual Biden doctrine, which is kind of a passive aggressive warmongering.
You build, you fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian, and now we're looking to fight China down to the last Taiwanese.
You know, it's basically build up the weapons in a neighbor country next to the country you don't like, you want to overthrow, and then keep pumping in weapons and see what happens.
And that's exactly what happens.
And as you alluded to a second ago, they know what they're doing.
Let's put up this quote.
This is from our good friend, the senator from Utah.
Senator Mitt Romney voted in favor of the bill, and this is a bill that would give Taiwan $6.5 billion in military goodies.
He voted in favor of the bill, but also recognized how it risks provoking China.
Quote, we're doing something that's highly provocative and bellicose, he said.
Oh, isn't that just so typical?
Yeah, yeah.
Real principled ambiguity.
But yes, the threat of sanctions are going to continue.
They never ask very many questions, except there were a couple, you know, in the committee, the vote was, what, 17 to 5 or 5 voted against this nonsense.
And there was only one Republican.
Yeah, we know who that is.
Favorite senator?
I believe that I'm related in some way or another.
But the Democrats, this sort of was a little bit of a hint of the old left, progressive left, standing up against it.
So right now, it also shows that there was no pressure, or at least they didn't yield to pressure and vote for it like they've been doing lately because they have become so hawkish.
But they voted against this.
And this is trying to get together, you know, the progressives and libertarians and constitutionalists to try to take a position, at least think about it, you know, and they barely think about it.
You know, where do they get this authority?
I wonder what, if you had them in a closed room where nobody was going to hear their answer, I wonder what they say.
If you say, you know, do you think that, you know, locking people out of trade and putting on tariffs, some people would consider that actually an act of war.
Wouldn't we if somebody did that to us, if somebody blockaded our ports and we couldn't do business?
But no, that question never seems to happen.
And it's amazing.
They never really concerned about the money.
They were a little bit concerned here.
They had the 4.5 in the bank.
They were ready to send it.
So they were having them concerned.
So we've bought it $2 billion more.
So it goes on and on.
And it looks like maybe they think that the war in Ukraine isn't hot enough and maybe it'll wind on.
There are some Americans getting tired of it.
So we have to have another one ready to go and keep the activity going.
But it does not help our national security.
It does not help our economic security.
It doesn't help really anybody long term.
If there's any help to anybody short term, and it's the people who are making profits over it.
Well, I think we should change the name of the Ron Paul Institute to Taiwan, because then maybe they'll mistakenly give us $2 billion.
We won't have to be begging constantly.
The other change in this bill is essentially naming Taiwan a, quote, major non-NATO ally.
And it's kind of a funny play on words.
I think you remarked upon the childishness of this.
It says that without saying it.
They're not, but we're going to treat them as a major non-NATO ally.
Again, it's kind of pulling away a few layers of this strategic ambiguity of whether we would go to war with China over Taiwan.
The fact of the matter is we won't, and we can't because we'd lose and we know it, but we still like to push it and, you know, just basically to slap China in the face constantly.
In a way, the fact that they did that means that they were thinking that if they use that word, that they would antagonize China more, so it sort of softens the whole thing, which is pretty much of a joke.
But, you know, in diplomacy, if that's what you call it, I'm not sure that I apply that to the shenanigans that go on when our bureaucrats talk to their bureaucrats.
And the reality is this is a joke to everyone, but it's not a joke to the military-industrial complex because this is basically more corporate welfare.
And as you point out, there were some progressives that voted no, and that's encouraging, including Senator Markey, who you worked with when he was in the House.
That's good to know.
And it would be nice to have more progressives understand that our China policy as well as our Russia policy are simply a part of the corporatist mentality where we're propping up certain companies and certain industries by fomenting war.
One of the things that struck me in the China bill is, again, projectionism.
Our foreign policy, we project onto others that which we do ourselves.
And this is from the anti-war article.
One of the biggest changes in our policy toward China would be requiring sanctions if China, quote, is knowingly engaged in a significant escalation in aggression, which is what we do every single day.
How many countries?
Yeah, yeah.
You know, what is likely to happen with the progressives, they're going to come alive and they're going to be more active.
And they'll be acting more like they did in the first decade of this century.
That is when it's a Republican foreign policy.
All of a sudden, you know, if the Republicans get in and they may not get the control that they want and you really need the Republican president, but if you have a Republican president and a Republican House and Senate, believe me, the progressives will all of a sudden say, you guys are fighting too many wars.
We have to save money, which we will welcome them because they're saying things that are helpful, even though we don't really praise you for your principles.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, the other thing that happened, and this is again from anti-war.com, and we can put up that next clip, is this is how it works in Washington.
Dr. Paul, as you know very, very well, we give aid money to these countries.
These countries use some of that money to hire high-priced PR firms to propagandize and lobby lawmakers for more money.
Around and around we go.
So here's what we have.
This is from Reuters.
Taiwan hosts dozens of foreign lawmakers in Washington to push China sanctions.
We gave them the money to have a big party over there at their mansion in Washington, D.C.
And put on the next clip, it's from the anti-war article.
The meeting was attended by two representatives from Ukraine who were welcomed by the representative from Taiwan.
We certainly hope that as the international community stands with Ukraine, the international community will also stand with Taiwan.
This is what she told the gathering, the Taiwan representative in D.C.
So they are clearly making the parallels.
They think it's a good idea that we're fighting Russia through Ukraine.
And the Taiwanese, they may feel different when it actually happens because they're going to be the ones doing the bleeding and dying literally for nothing.
Yeah, but you know, this is a big event.
I've not seen it.
I'm sure they do that.
They gather and imagine there's a little bit of partying that goes on and they might have a drink or two.
But they get the group together and they start working on their strategy.
But, you know, they do that at our expense.
You know, we're paying, you know, indirectly, we're paying for all this, even if the even if it comes directly from the government and the taxes or from the military-industrial complex, that we literally pay for this.
And I keep thinking about there are technicalities in our law, you know, about foreigners being engaged in our politics.
So if a foreigner had sent me money while I was in Congress or something, it would be a serious thing.
But this seems like to be even messier, you know, because it's accepted as decent policy, shrewdness, to get together.
And the strategy is bring six or eight or ten.
That's a sign of strength.
That will all be helpful to our national security.
And yet on principle, it's probably very ugly.
Yeah.
Well, the thing is, if we back out a little bit and look at things in the proper context, what is happening as the U.S. is doing this is rattling sabers at China, is rattling sabers at Russia.
Let's look at the next clip, and we'll see what literally is taking place today.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, President Putin and Xi Jinping, are meeting in Uzbekistan, and here's what President Putin said.
Russia highly appreciates China's balanced position on Ukraine.
Russia firmly adheres to the one China principle and condemns U.S. provocations in Taiwan and attempts to create unipolar world have taken on an absolutely ugly shape, is what he said.
So basically, U.S. policy, again, is shooting ourselves in the head.
Rather than finding a way to accommodate and to work together with China and Russia, we're actually pushing the two of them into an alliance against the United States.
And the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which you and I both have followed closely since its founding many years ago when you were still in office, is becoming a serious, serious counterbalance to this kind of dying Western unipolar world.
You know, they aren't really interested in peace and prosperity.
I don't think that's on top of the list.
I think there's an organization that is designed for this whole purpose, and that is what we do is try to promote peace, believing they're good things to be for, and everybody's going to be for it.
But the truth is, is their goal, that's peace and prosperity, two P's.
Well, there's another P that says power.
I think that is what is the driving force.
And the conservatives will argue with me, and they'll say, yes, but you can't do anything if you're weak.
You know, you have to be strong, and power is necessary.
And if you have to gain it, you know, by running an empire, you do it that way.
Power Over Peace 00:04:27
If you have to control the monetary system, you have to do it.
But they will soon find out, and there's a little bit of information out already, that that doesn't last for longer.
There's cracks in the seams of the empire and the financial system.
Yeah, indeed.
Well, we're going to move on to our second and final segment.
And this is kind of a nice little nostalgia story.
It involves our favorite senator, who once again had our least favorite member of the medical community on the hot seat.
And that is, again, Senator Paul was grilling Fauci yesterday, grilling him brutally.
And Fauci, I have to say, he kind of lost some of that cockiness that he had before.
He kind of looked like a deer in the headlights.
And we won't pay the whole clip.
We're just going to play Senator Paul's part.
But when Fauci did respond, he basically was saying, what are you talking about?
It wasn't my fault, all this stuff that happened.
It was a bunch of other people that did it.
So it was kind of funny to see the change tuned.
But let's listen to Senator Paul questioning Fauci about natural immunity.
Any of the guidelines for vaccines?
Do any of the guidelines for vaccines from the government include previous infection as something to base your decision-making on with vaccines?
Do any of the guidelines involve previous infection?
That's why you're ignoring previous infection because it doesn't involve any of the guidelines.
And furthermore, we've been asking you, and you refuse to answer whether anybody on the vaccine committees gets royalties from the pharmaceutical companies.
I asked you last time, and what was your response?
We don't have to tell you.
We've demanded them through Freedom of Information Act, and what have you said?
We're not going to tell you.
But I tell you this: when we get in charge, we're going to change the rules, and you will have to divulge where you get your royalties from, from what companies.
And if anybody on the committee has a conflict of interest, we're going to learn about it.
I promise you that.
Mr. Chair?
That look for Fauci is classic.
But that was, I mean, that was great.
And I think it's a great warning.
I think that's why Fauci is trying to hightail it out of D.C. as fast as he can with his pension in his hand, because, as Senator Paul said, we are going to find out what's going on here if we take over the Senate.
I bet Fauci will be glad to be out of there if there is a major turnover.
So, you know, that's powerful stuff.
And he started this segment by playing a video of Fauci from a few years ago telling someone, and we talked about this on the show, telling someone, he was asked a question about, well, hey, if I had the flu, do I need to get a flu shot?
And he said, no, you've got natural immunity if I had a flu.
Senator Paul played that, and Fauci said, well, that was taken out of context, you know.
And Senator Paul said, no, words are words.
You know, these are the words you said.
So it's a great segment.
The only sad part about Fauci leaving is we won't be able to see him be grilled by Senator Paul anymore.
Well, it sure has been a major event, that whole mess there.
But overall, it's policy, policy, policy, whether it's monetary policy, economic policy, foreign policy, or whatever, health policy.
Why are we so involved in all this?
You know, I think it's great when Rand can get up there because, you know, he's very capable.
And it's sort of sad that this discussion has to be somebody who flip-flops, makes the most money of any bureaucrat ever on the whole issue that has been, you know, a settled issue in a sense that at least for them, it's settled.
Science has decided that.
You're not allowed to deal with that if science has settled it.
But they're the kingpins.
Fauci will have all the money he'll ever want, probably.
But he's going to find out that what he has said over the years has not settled anything.
And truth will come out.
It will come out and hopefully soon.
Well, I'm going to thank our viewers for watching the show again.
We've got another conference coming up, Lake Jackson, November 5th.
It's going to be a blast.
It's a different kind of conference.
It's a little shorter, like our Houston conference.
I'm going to have tickets on sale later today.
For more information, go to RonPaulInstitute.org, sign up for updates.
The subscribe button is up there and subscribe to free updates from RPI.
And we'll have a notice out later today about the tickets.
And we look forward to having another fun time.
Tickets On Sale 00:01:12
You know, we talked a little bit during the program about who pays all these bills and these fancy travel events and partying that goes on when the arms and manufacturers get together with the politicians.
But I see in this one article that it was very specific who paid, got the people together.
They organized Taiwan did this, and they hosted all the foreign lawmakers.
And there were 60 of them.
60 people came together.
And I'm sure that if a poor, innocent citizen did anything one hundredth of this, they probably would have been breaking a lot of laws.
60 lawmakers from Europe, Asia, and Africa.
Boy, I'll tell you what, we are scattered around the world.
And it's the whole principle is that the people in this country and the people that end up in Washington are dead set on an empire and feel that at least they convince themselves and others believe it that that power is part of our security.
That is our national security.
Without that, you can't be a strong nation.
And quite frankly, I think the opposite is true.
Export Selection