All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 22, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
27:44
British Storm Shadows? Russian ICBMs? How Far Will Escalation Take Us?

Early reports (now disputed) that Russia responded to UK Storm Shadow attacks on Russian territory with the battle launch of an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) for the first time in history continues to race the world toward nuclear war. In the waning days of the Biden presidency, how far will the warmongers go? Also today, Netanyahu and Gallant may need to adjust their travel plans after an ICC indictment.

|

Time Text
Russia Fires ICBM at Ukraine 00:15:01
Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you today?
Doing well, doing well.
Better than the poor people who are living in Ukraine.
Yeah, yeah, and elsewhere.
We do want to talk about a little bit about foreign policy and what's going on in Ukraine and our weaponry.
But really, what's really rolling around in the news today, that we witness it, but there's going to be a lot of discussion, is, you know, putting the cabinet together.
I'd have to say, boy, he's found a lot of people quickly, and most of them are going to be appointed.
But right now, it's boiled down to demagoguing one or two people that they think are Satan, and they may have flaws.
But the people who are accusing him, my suspicion is they have a few of those flaws themselves that's been going on.
Anyway, that's what we'll be hearing about, you know, the final thing on that.
But I would say that's a lot of people.
He must have had a pretty good staff to start rounding the people up.
But you know, I was thinking if a libertarian took over, it wouldn't be that difficult, would it?
We know where the 250 of them would be.
But anyway, we're going to be talking about foreign policy, which is our major issue most of the time.
And there was a headline that caught our attention on Caesar Hedge, and that says Russia fires an ICBM into Ukraine for the first time.
Kiev confirms.
There's a little question about exactly the nature of the ICBM or whether it is classified correctly.
But one thing is that the evidence is very strong that the Russians are sending a message.
It's more escalation.
It's the continuation of what's going on.
And there's probably new technology in this, but the technical name of exactly what they saw is being discussed.
And this is a bother to me and to our efforts because it's more escalation, bumping it up a little bit more, and pretending that the Russians don't care and they don't have the facilities and they're going to be wiped out anyway.
So we don't have to worry about them.
But they keep getting annoyed by what's going on in the area and what's going on in Ukraine and how NATO has falsified their promises and promised to have a different relationship with Russia that was canceled out by NATO.
And I think we're living the disaster from that.
And unfortunately, the truth about exactly how this thing evolved is not well known.
But the reason we talk about it frequently is it's important.
You know, the propaganda is very, very thorough.
Every of the majors announce, you know, when Russia invaded Ukraine.
And that's it.
It was 100% invasion by Russia.
But there's more to that story than they're going to reveal.
And that's why we keep mentioning it.
Yeah, and I think, you know, when we, at least when I got up, I don't know when you got up, but that was a story.
The Russians, for the first time in history, fired an ICBM in battle.
And that's a big deal.
And that would have sent a very strong message.
And it was directly in response to the firing of storm shadow missiles yesterday by the UK and by American attacks on Monday.
So the Americans and the British fired missiles, literally fired missiles into Russia proper.
And so this would be the response.
However, since then, there have been some great analysis.
And I have a clip here from our friend Scott Ritter, who knows about weapon systems probably better than anyone.
He was a weapons inspector.
But I just wanted to pick on something, pick up on something that you mentioned from the headline you had before they altered it, which is they fire ICBM to Ukraine for the first time, comma, Kiev confirms.
That is a key phrase, I think, because what else does Kiev confirm?
Well, they confirm that there are North Korean troops fighting in Kursk and in Russia against Ukraine.
They've confirmed a lot of things like that that have turned out to be false.
And it looks, again, like this might be a false confirmation to raise the level of alarm in the West and to prompt them to send more, do more, confront more.
You can't let Russia fire an ICBM.
What are you guys going to do now?
So this is the kind of game with a very dubious, you know, dubious claims that they've had here.
So I just wanted to bring that part up.
But if you, here's the update.
Now go to Hedge has an update on their original reporting.
And they say that Ukraine's earlier claim that its territory had been struck by an ICBM fired by Russia is being hotly disputed hours after widespread reports first appeared.
U.S. officials are saying it appears to be a new intermediate range ballistic missile and not an ICBM.
So it's good news, bad news in a way.
They didn't fire an ICBM, but they have a new kind of missile, an intermediate range weapon.
That's right.
They were testing, they were doing two things, probably testing their efforts and the weapon they have.
At the same time, sending a message that they're ready to retaliate and they're not going to back down.
But the bravest person for saying we'll never back down, we'll work down as Zulinsky.
He's tough, I'll tell you.
But he knows where the lines are drawn.
He wouldn't use that American tactical missile system until Joe Biden said, oh, okay, it's okay now.
We think the world is going to survive much better if you guys can start shooting that missile.
Just the fact that the American people don't know how their money's being spent and how the military-industrial complex is benefiting, we're not going to worry about that.
We'll let somebody else deal with that because we don't even know if that's true.
Well, we've said it before, but the reason the two previous launches, the U.S. one on Monday and the UK one on yesterday, I guess it was, are significant is because these launches are initiated by American military personnel, active duty American military personnel, and active duty British military personnel.
The reason for that being, again, we've said it before, the Ukrainians do not know how to program these weapon systems because they are extremely classified.
And for the U.S. to share how to do these things would be a violation.
The same for the UK.
So there is an American at the other end turning the knobs, whatever they do, making the targeting and firing that missile.
It's an American, and it's a British military official.
So that is obviously why Russia considers these attacks by the UK and the U.S.
And I think the Russian ambassador to London said today that we now consider the UK to be part of this fight.
You know, I heard a report yesterday on Main Street Media, and they were talking about that issue.
And they said that it was somebody who wanted to be more moderate and explanatory about what's going on.
He says, well, I looked at that.
He says, and now it's been announced that the end stage of turning the final point on how these things are shot in the technology, he says, it's good that I found out that the Americans aren't involved in doing that.
But everything else was okay.
But, you know, even if they didn't have every control of this, we do know that this would not happen.
This is foreign policy of the American system.
It's the United States.
The people of this country have some responsibility.
Their elected officials have responsibility.
And some political parties have it much more than others.
But they can't duck it and say, oh, it's okay if we do this, but not if the final launching, the button is pushed by a Ukrainian, you know, or pretend that they are doing it.
Yeah.
Well, I have a couple of video clips to put up.
Now, the first one is interesting to see that there is a little bit of pushback in the mainstream British media over Kier Starmer's decision to fire the storm shadows into Russia.
And so here's a short interview of a Sky News journalist interviewing him.
A little bit more of a pushback, and let's listen to what he says.
Russia has also threatened nuclear escalation.
Are you comfortable with that when people at home are watching this, worrying that you could put us at risk?
Well, it's very important.
It's very important that we're steadfast in our support for Ukraine.
Russia is the aggressor.
Russia has to be the one that makes the move to stop this war.
It's within their gift, but we must support Ukraine.
It's impacting not just Ukraine, it's impacting the rest of the world, including the UK.
Is your message to viewers back home that there will not be a nuclear war?
Because that is what Russia is threatening.
My message is that we need to ensure that Ukraine is put in the best possible position.
This is a thousand days of conflict.
And there is a very high cost if Russian aggression is seen to pay off to do this.
So it's obvious here that there's absolutely no new thinking.
These are the same bumper sticker phrases that they said from the beginning.
But let's look at this new weapon.
Now, Scott Ritter wrote about it.
He calls it an RS-26.
It carries six independent warheads, each in turn deploying several sub-munitions.
No, don't put that on actually yet.
Put on the second video.
Because let's just watch this impact.
I don't know if there's any sound, but if you can full screen that, this is a pretty terrifying weapon.
Six.
Yeah, yeah.
I would not want to be anywhere near that.
That's terrifying.
So it's clearly meant to send a message.
And someone of very, obviously very limited intelligence like Kier Starmer, all he can do is repeat the slogans, well, we've got to help Ukraine as much as we can.
Well, you know, they're internationalists now, and they slipped up a little bit with NATO.
NATO's made up a few mistakes, but they can always rely on the United Nations.
The United Nations is supposed to end war.
But they don't have a very good record either.
So I think the responsibility, nobody wants to hear it, but it falls on the American people.
In a way, they allow the leaders to get away with this.
But of course, it's that leadership that is Rolling the dice and doing it all and putting all the effort into it, and they have the most to gain because it's money and power that they are after.
So, this is a sad story, but it does involve our foreign policy, and the people can't be at it.
People are hoping and praying that our foreign policy will improve with the new administration.
I certainly hope so, and there's been hints to that.
But unfortunately, you know, the people behind our foreign policy are very, very powerful.
And they at times will assassinate people that they don't like, just like some of the other countries.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, it's, I know I mentioned Scott, we can skip his tweet.
However, I would recommend those who have not seen it to read it because there's a lot of detail.
The one thing interesting that I noticed from Scott's tweet is that because this wasn't actually an ICBM, but an intermediate-range weapon, if President Trump in his first term had not backed out of that treaty, they would not have had this weapon.
They wouldn't have been able to develop it.
So, there are consequences from backing away.
These arms treaties don't just benefit one side, they benefit everyone.
But I just want to show one map, which is the range of the two types of missiles, if you can put that up.
Now, the darker blue is the range of the storm shadows deep inside of Russia, and the lighter blue is the Attackum's range.
So, if they continue doing this, they will be striking.
And you can see right up there in the top is, I believe, the outskirts of Moscow.
So, very, very close, very, very far into Russia if they continue these moves.
So, dangerous escalation.
Absolutely.
Policy has to be changed.
Let's hope it is.
And it's unfortunately not likely to happen quickly because the propaganda machine does have a lot of power, and we ran into it, and it was very difficult.
Even when the American people's sentiments early on in some of these clashes, when they had information, they were very much opposed.
But I'm thinking about the Middle East war under Bush, they were able to change public opinion on this.
When you go back and read this stuff that they believed, you know, what do you go?
Are we going to Afghanistan?
They're the bad guys.
They did 9-11.
No, we're going to Iraq and elsewhere.
Well, there is more news in the Middle East, and it's big news now, which is if you put that next one on, the Financial Times explains it.
This is, if you put that in the next clip, there we go.
The ICC International Criminal Court issues an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The warrant was also issued for former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
You remember in the spring, they were investigating, they held these hearings, and they were threatening.
Now they have actually introduced these indictments for these two Israeli government officials, one a former official and the other, a current prime minister.
You know, I criticize, and hopefully, rightfully so, the international stuff, you know, whether it's NATO, United Nations, or international criminal courts.
That doesn't mean that 100% of everything they do is absolutely wrong, because on occasion they might do something.
Israeli Indictments Released 00:07:26
There may be something beneficial coming from this, but we have to be cautious.
I wouldn't want to turn our whole judicial system off.
I'm tired of our own judicial system, let alone turn it out to international.
But this may call attention.
This might, because this is out in the news, and more people are going to recognize that.
But there will be ways, I'm sure, that Netanyahu and others will be able to get around it.
And besides, you know, we're half, we have a lot of influence because we have a lot of power, but we're not influenced because we were elected and we're in there offering our services for justice.
We're in there sort of keeping an eye on our interests and we're not going to allow anybody manipulate it.
So it's interesting to see how this is going to pan out.
For some reason, I think there's going to be methods to circumvent when this court is trying to bring about a sense of justice.
Well, I mean, this is one of the most telephoned and well-documented slaughters in history.
You know, 40-some thousand.
They say that some 90% of them are women that have been slaughtered in Gaza.
Now, I think it's 6,000 now slaughtered in Lebanon.
We've seen the photos.
We've seen the destruction.
So it's very, very public.
But nevertheless, here's Netanyahu's response to the warrant.
If you can put on the next one, this is from The Guardian.
Netanyahu says ICC warrant for his arrest over alleged war crimes is anti-Semitic and absurd.
So he's pulling that out again.
But the thing is, Dr. Paul, as you point out, a lot of countries, I think over 100 countries, are a party to the ICC.
Now, when you were on the Hill, we were fighting against it.
We didn't want to be part of any world justice court or anything of that nature.
Nevertheless, these countries have voluntarily signed on to this.
That means they're under obligation to arrest Netanyahu and Galant.
And there's actually one Hamas official who's on the list too, but Israel already killed him, so he's not in too much danger of being arrested.
Nevertheless, he can't go to these countries.
And that is significant.
If you go to the next one, I didn't show all the countries, but Lord Bebo on Twitter X makes a good point.
Due to the ICC arrest warrant, Netanyahu can't travel to the following 124 countries now.
And he listed all the countries that have signed on to it.
I wonder if there will be a net benefit to the environmentalists.
They'll be using less gas to do that traveling.
And here's one that's already come out.
Now, the Netherlands is one of the very strong pro-Israel.
Geert Wilderss is extremely strong pro-Netanyahu, pro-Israel.
Nevertheless, because the Netherlands have signed on to the criminal court, turn this next one up.
This is the reaction of the Dutch government.
Dutch foreign minister officially announces that they are ready to act on the International Criminal Court's arrest warrants.
Quote, if Netanyahu or Galant land, they will be arrested.
So it's a significant, we may sort of laugh it off, but it's actually very significant.
Yeah, it will be interesting.
I'll believe it when I see if it really brings about justice.
But just having this out here, the one big value is a lot more people are going to read about this and understand.
And hopefully we get them, get the people to raise questions and keep an eye on this because, of course, the thing that we've been talking about for 10 years has been, why is this thing started?
And this could get to be a mess.
Just think of the difference between, well, it is, it's 10 years since the coup.
And we suggested it's not going to go well, and it may stir up a trouble here.
It's constant, but it's been a steady line upward on the problems.
And if you measured it by people who had died, I mean, it's exponential.
And that hasn't changed yet.
And right now it's back and forth.
Who has the most sophisticated weapons?
People don't watch out.
Both sides have access to nuclear weapons.
And it's just very scary.
The problem with these Israeli indictments, though, is the fact that these leaders have themselves been on record admitting to the crimes, and that's been part of the case.
If you go to the next clip, this is Yuel Galant, the former defense minister for Israel, was just fired.
There is a recording of this, but here is him in his own words admitting to war crimes.
He said, I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip.
There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel.
Everything is closed.
We are fighting human animals, and we will act accordingly.
That's literally making a confession to the court that I'm a war criminal.
So they're going to have a tough time dealing with this situation.
And the one thing that I would say is, this is another example, because we've talked about this a lot on the show.
Another example of the U.S. doing Israel no favors.
We've said, how much weapons do you want?
How much money do you want?
We even sent Hochstein, the envoy, over when Israel was contemplating attacking Lebanon.
We sent him over there to encourage them to attack.
So we've all but encouraged them to now put themselves in such a tight corner.
They can't travel.
More of the world is against them.
And it's, you know, it's, yeah, obviously that's their fault.
They started the war, but we have been no friend of Israel by pushing them into this.
No, that's been my argument long term.
And oil will eventually be an issue because the opposition may be able to, you know, they've already messed up on oil lines because the whole area is involved with that.
But we have a long way to go.
That one statement you read, I was thinking, that's not very diplomatic.
That is just in your face and you do that.
If not, we shoot you with a shotgun.
I mean, admitting to war crimes is not smart, you know.
No, your point is, you know, well taken, that long term, I don't think Israel is always going to benefit.
It's apparent they think they have benefit over these years, but I don't think long term they're going to be benefit.
But I argue that about our own foreign policy.
People say that, oh, it's strength that we have.
Peace is strength.
That's the strength of the military is good if it's real defense, but it's not good if you're managing an empire.
So if it backfires, you might even say it started to backfire on us.
Everything isn't hunky-dory.
And, you know, subtly and correctly, more and more Americans and more and more politicians are recognizing the deadly debt that we have.
Deadly Debt Recognition 00:04:58
And it's involved in all this stuff.
It isn't just the welfare, social welfare, because that's minor compared to the damage of the foreign welfare and the military-industrial complex.
So I think the main, when we work on this, my main thoughts is, what can we do today to wake up people about what we believe is happening in contrast to what you will ever see on a television?
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, I was going to close with something, I hope, a little more lighthearted.
It's been kind of a tough day for us here with weapons and arrests and all this.
But here's a clip from John Bolton endorsing Doge.
He's endorsing, you know, he's been made fun of by Trump.
He's been put down by everyone.
Well, here he is on TV endorsing Doge with a twist.
Now, full screen.
Don't start it.
Dr. Play, you want to put your ear piece in in here.
John Bolton endorsing the Department of Government Efficiency, cutting money from the budget.
Look, Musk may have a big, big role here.
It's not entirely clear what Trump is going to do with this Department of Government Efficiency.
If we can save a couple hundred billion dollars, I'd be delighted we can spend it on the defense budget, which desperately needs an increase.
Classic, classic bullshit.
That is crazy.
Spend um billions and billions of dollars on starting wars and getting us into trouble.
Then all of a sudden, oh, we're going to save that money and use it to defend against all the evil we created and hate our guts for it.
Well, I just thank our viewers for watching the Liberty Report this week and remind you to please keep supporting the show, keep supporting the Ron Paul Institute.
I'll have a link in there to show you how you can do so.
Do a thumbs up on whatever place you're watching this, and please subscribe.
And over to you, Dr. Paul.
Very good.
And I do hope that the new president that is coming into office is very serious about cutting spending.
And they've hinted that maybe on occasion they might call me up and ask me a question.
But that remains to be seen.
And I think the answers are out there.
I don't think they really need me to emphasize cut the spending.
Look at the Constitution.
Now, use some common sense, and the answers will be there.
But the system has to be changed.
And I think everything I've heard coming out of the new administration to be is very, you know, very positive because it's cutting spending and more freedom and all these things.
But you have to have basic changes in philosophy.
You have to have a change.
Do they even understand what the oath of office means?
And I came away after the 27 years or how many years I was up there.
I don't think the oath of office, all the members, how many members I listened to taking their oath of office during that period, I don't think they have the biggest idea of what that is supposed to mean.
You're supposed to obey it.
But there were others that, you know, they told me blunt to my face when I suggested on foreign policy, we should obey the Constitution and not go to war just any old time you want.
Oh, well, that part of the Constitution, that's acronistic.
You don't need to do that.
We don't want to follow that anymore.
And that applies to about just everything they do.
At least I think the new administration is making an effort to make people think about following the rules.
And yes, the Justice Department has been corrupted, and that's one of the reasons why the Republicans want it, are looking at the corruption thrown at the president to be.
And I think that still needs refinement.
Exactly what does it mean?
Can you have a different type of intrusion into the justice system?
And I think the big intrusion is nobody cares that much about the details about what it's like if we followed a constitutional society and a system.
Most people like to go around things, and that's why we ended up with a $35 trillion debt.
And that will bring things to an end in time.
Not next month, maybe next year, maybe later than that.
Who knows?
But we do know that the time will come when there will be a liquidation of debt and all the mistakes made by the artificial monetary system we have now.
And the people should be prepared.
And like I say, get the people to read the Constitution, understand it, and get more people to follow it.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection