All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 14, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
28:54
What Will Trump Do On Ukraine?

Incoming President Trump's National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, has signalled that Ukraine must start recruiting even younger men into the meat grinder. After the loss of an estimated 600,000 men, Waltz is calling for even more killing, even as it is becoming obvious to even the mainstream media that Russia is winning the war. Is Waltz speaking for Trump? Also today: troops on the border? Will it work?

|

Time Text
Why We Keep Fighting 00:09:16
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Doing well.
Let's stop a war before it starts.
And it's the hardest quarter.
It's hard to quit after they get started.
And there was a famous general that once says, it's good that wars are so terrible because we agree with that.
I think it happened in the Civil War.
Slaughtering 800,000 people.
Anyway, Americans aren't dying quite like that, but there's so many vulnerabilities here.
And we participate in so many wars, whether it's the coups and taking over or sending troops here and there and setting the stage for wars.
It is true that, you know, massive troop deployments with a lot of deaths probably was Vietnam.
And they were bragging about the Middle East, and the Bushes were bragging, oh, we put that Vietnam, you know, loss of victory behind us now.
We can win wars and we're going to win it.
And in the Middle East.
Well, that was short-lived.
We're still talking about the Middle East or the European theater or the Middle East.
Same old story.
It's aggravation.
And if I only had one thing I could influence people to accepting is we should just mind our own business.
You know, don't look for a war.
And just think people now are starting to say, why are we sending this money to Ukraine?
And the people are suffering here at home.
You know, and they're taking money out of LA and sending it to Ukraine and all this crazy stuff.
So there is some, there are more people waking up now, but it's going to be a mess because it's always painful to clean up their act because you have to cut back spending.
And right now there's a sincere effort to do that in the new administration.
But, you know, I'm holding my breath here and just waiting to see because I'm not convinced until I see it because we've heard talk of this almost every time.
And yet, the choices shouldn't be, are we going to bite the bullet and cut back or just go on doing this?
And I think the results are the same.
You know, if you cut, at least if you do it in the right way, if you're cutting and backing off, it'll eventually transition to a growing economy again.
But if you wait until the end and let it collapse, you know, with a currency crisis and competition for the reserve currency of the world, it might not snap back quite as easily.
So the one incident that many of us used to point out that if you bite the bullet and let it go and let the market wipe out the bad stuff and go back to work was 1921 when they had a deep depression, but it only lasted for a little over a year.
But right now, they're talking about the new administration.
Stop the war.
We don't want to start any new one.
We're going to end the old ones.
And NATO, they still blame Russia for the invasion.
But NATO, who's no friend of ours, and NATO now is saying, Ukraine, we can't negotiate.
It's essentially saying, The NATO chief says, oh, Ukraine is not strong enough.
We've got to get more.
We're going to have to bargain from a strong position.
Well, if they were in a strong position, don't you think they'd have been able to fight a better war than they did?
So I think this is, you know, just messing around, prolonging the agony.
And let's hope they have some type of miracle and have a good peace and they walk away from it.
But the odds of that are I wouldn't put a lot of money on that happening.
Yeah, the big speculation really is what will Trump do about Ukraine, about the Ukraine war?
Will he continue Biden's policy of financing, training, getting ever more involved, giving U.S. weapons, which we don't have much left.
Will he continue the Biden policy when he was clearly, clearly elected, pardon me, on a different policy, which is to end these wars?
And he was elected on a campaign promise of ending the wars.
That's a huge question.
And we're starting to see some things emerging, and some are encouraging and some are discouraging.
Now, the first one, pardon me, if you remember, Trump was saying to the campaign, I'm going to end this war in 24 hours.
No problem.
I'll fix it.
Well, he doesn't say that anymore.
And I think he understands the, I think he's starting to understand more the complexity of the war and the fact that he's not going to tell Russia or Putin to jump and he'll say how high.
So what they're saying now is they'll get something going within the first hundred days.
It's going to take 100 days, but they'll end the war, which was more realistic depending on how you move forward.
There's a realization that that won't happen that way.
And now we're hearing the possibility of a Trump and Putin discussion, which is, I think, a move in the right direction so they can start communicating, figure out, you know, maybe Trump will hear with his own ears why Russia is doing what it's doing.
We talked about it on the show that Trump seems to understand and be able to relate in a way that Biden was never able to do to the fact that if you put enemy troops on your doorstep, it's going to make you nervous and irritated.
And he said that very clearly.
So if he goes into these talks with Putin with that in mind, that could be a positive thing.
It could be an educational experience for him.
But at the same time, we're seeing these movements here.
We're seeing some of the people who want this war to keep going no matter what making up new things to continue.
Now you mentioned it, we'll put it on here if you can, this first clip.
This is Mark Rutte, the Secretary General of NATO, a failed Dutch politician.
There are always failed politicians that go and run these things, you know, who says Ukraine is not yet in a strong enough position for negotiations.
Now, of course, the question would be, Dr. Paul, if you are losing a war, which clearly even the mainstream media now is accepting it, if you are losing a war, the momentum is going against you, and someone argues for you to keep doing this as you're losing, how will they ever get in a better position?
It's just basic logic, which Rutte seems to not have.
That next clip will tell you exactly what he said.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Monday described that Ukraine is not yet in a strong enough position to begin talks now with less than a week before Trump enters office.
Quote, at this moment, clearly Ukraine is not there because they cannot at this moment negotiate from a position of strength.
So, Ruta, when will they be?
They're losing.
You know, this is not rocket science.
And when you think about where Russia's coming from and what they have to put up with is the history of the last 30 or 40 years of promises by NATO, the West, the United States, and, oh, no, we'll never get near your borders.
We're going to Leave end the Cold War and leave Eastern Europe and we'll not touch you.
Well, now, no matter what they say, do you think the Russians forget that?
No, no.
They're not going to forget that.
And that's why, and then that'll be turned into an evil because the Russians keep saying, we have to protect our borders.
And, you know, on.
There are different ways that they could have done it, but that's secondary to the whole thing, the whole lies that this is based on.
Because even in these articles, they're talked about, obtain security guarantees so that Ukraine can never be attacked by Russia again.
Boy, that's a good idea.
And maybe we should make sure that NATO never attacks any nation again, and we could save some dollars and spend it on something else.
And it's not only the old lies at the very end of the Cold War that NATO wouldn't move forward.
It's more recent lies, you know, the Minsk process, where, you know, where it was admitted by Angela Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany, she admitted just last year, well, we actually never intended to implement the Minsk agreement.
We were just buying time so that we could rearm Ukraine.
And Russia understands that.
They've lost all trust in Europe and in NATO and in the U.S.
And so to have a negotiation, have a real peace settlement, you have to find a way to rebuild that trust.
I'm not sure if Trump can do it.
Need for Stabilization 00:15:43
I think probably if anyone can, he can, but it's going to be a difficult process.
Yes, and we've also already have heard some of the diplomacy that will come out of the new administration.
And that is it's a threat, threatening people to do it.
And it is true.
We are powerful.
And, you know, but are we powerful in the sense that we have control philosophically and that we are going to do the right thing?
Or are we facing all this and being able to throw our weight around with the bank account going down and down?
People, you know, not only they distrust us on the foreign policy, there's a lot of distrust now in the world that blends in because I don't believe you can separate the militarism and the economic situation.
So now the economic opposition is there, and also, you know, the ability for us to keep doing all this, it'll end with a bankruptcy.
We are bankrupt.
It's just that, you know, it's sinister.
It's slow.
It's steady.
And people suffer in many ways until a final calamity hits.
But, you know, there'll be groups that will suffer first.
And we see them in the streets.
We see the homelessness building up.
And the many people we see not the most astute firefighters and fireplanners in a state like California.
And that just is another symbol of the foolishness of domestic affairs as well as military affairs.
And here's a little bit more from Ruta showing that either he's not the brightest bulb out there.
I don't know what else it shows, but go to the next clip because we have had three years of war, almost three years of war.
Ukraine has consistently lost territory, with the exception of a surge that was very brief early on in the northern part.
But here's Ruta.
He says, so we spent, we put in 200 billion.
The Europeans have put in 150 billion, whatever.
We've emptied all the arsenals of Europe.
We've emptied the arsenals.
No more high mars, nothing left.
Sorry, Netanyahu, we've got nothing left to give you either.
We've emptied everything in a war that continues to be lost.
And here's Ruta.
It's too early now to exactly sketch out what exactly this will mean.
Also, something we have to discuss with the incoming administration.
Now, here's the part I underlined, Dr. Paul.
But let's hope we get to that point as soon as possible.
That is an insane statement.
As they continue to lose, Ruta is saying, well, let's hope they're in a really strong position real soon so they can start negotiating.
And you said it, I don't want to steal your line, but it's appropriate here, I think.
You said it when we were talking about the show beforehand.
Who's going to be the last man to die for this failed, failed war?
You know, I think people who get behind the eight ball, and they don't know, and I would say that Ukraine are really behind the eight ball more.
I think Russia is in a better driving position.
But when they get into this desperate situation, it could cause them to do two things.
They could wise up and change their policy and say, we've had it, we'll work out something, and we're laying down our weapons, and that's working back and there.
That's, you know, that's a daydream.
And the other thing is being very, very desperate and deciding that we'll decide who the last man will be to die and let loose with whatever they can get.
One thing that's good is it's a bad thing they're doing, begging and pleading to get more weapons.
That is Ukraine.
But they have access to it.
And somebody, you know, there's a lot of anti-Russia attitudes.
So there's people who do it.
And then that's when the thing could really, really burst open.
And the ducks are lining up.
And, you know, even during World War II, to think about Sweden, the attitude has changed with Sweden.
They used to be thought to be peacenicks, you know.
And whoever worried about Greenland?
Well, it looks like we need it.
We need it.
What are we sitting around here with?
So why?
Let's grab it.
We could handle those Greenlanders, you know.
Yeah.
Well, we wanted to talk today about what do we think he might do?
What do we think he should do?
Well, one sort of disturbing thing as we read the tea leaves is Mike Waltz, his national security advisor, incoming national security advisor, reminding our viewers that this is not a Senate-confirmed position, so he will get this job.
There's not a question about it.
But he's a big hawk.
He's got neocon tendencies.
And it's disturbing because it sounds to me like he's listening to Mark Ruta, who makes zero sense.
And if you go to that article from Blue Apples, we saw it on Zero Hedge.
There we go.
This is worrisome, Dr. Paul.
Trump administration to lobby Ukraine to lower the age of conscription to 18 years old.
Now, that seems to me like if Waltz is actually speaking for Trump, that he's saying you guys got to get hundreds of thousands of more kids in the trenches to get killed because that'll put you in a stronger position.
Blue Apples writes, it's an auspicious omen of his new administration's forthcoming foreign policy.
Go to the next one.
According to Trump's incoming National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, Trump's new administration will lobby for Ukraine to lower the minimum age of conscription from 25 to just 18 years old.
Bring the young kids in.
And here's what he said.
If you go to the next one, sorry, Dr. Paul, but he told ABC News over the weekend, I think it was.
The other thing we're going to need to see is really stabilizing things on the battlefield.
And one of those things we'll be asking the Ukrainians is they have real manpower issues.
Their draft age right now is 26, which is not true, it's 25 years old, not 18.
I don't think a lot of people realize when they could generate hundreds of thousands of new soldiers.
So when we hear about morale problems, when we hear about issues on the front line, look, if the Ukrainians have asked the entire world to be all in for democracy, we need them to be all in for democracy.
It's just disgusting.
You wonder how people can adjust to making these decisions.
They're so grotesque.
But they're literally talking about we need more cannon fodder.
We need more troops.
We have to do that.
And for what?
Oh, for the state.
Oh, yeah.
The states are in charge.
They are for, not the people, the state.
And the states had a difficulty.
And then the real evil is when these states band together.
We have 20 states here against 20 states over here.
We count up the West weapons and find out what happened.
So they think they can adjust to that, but unfortunately, I think it's going to continue.
And it's no way to know exactly what will happen.
But usually wars, just like in Afghanistan, you know, the Russians were in there, the Soviets.
We helped them.
We helped Osama bin Laden.
And they were there a couple decades.
Then they leave.
And we helped get rid of him so we could go in and do it for 20 years.
You know, they never learned.
And they don't adjust because their goal isn't peace.
And it really isn't prosperity except for the leaders.
The leaders always seem to do pretty well, you know.
But eventually they're vulnerable too.
And I think that when the big problems hit, there will be, I think about the French Revolution, you know, there were a few people who suffered from that that thought they were going to be the kingmakers forever.
The thing that worries me about Waltz, and I think even Trump would be the first to admit he was ill-served by his advisors in his first administration.
He may use a stronger word.
We actually may use a stronger word.
He hired people who were not good at the job, who did bad things, who didn't listen to Trump, who didn't give him good advice.
And that's a problem.
And that makes me worried about Waltz, because there are a couple of things that Waltz should know, especially as an incoming national security advisor.
He should be briefed on these things and he should understand.
Two big whoppers, he's told.
Now, the first one is about the demographics.
He's just thinking, we need more cannon fodder, as you say.
18-year-olds, why are they laying around on the street?
Get him in there, put them in a uniform.
The thing is, he should know the demographics.
We've talked about it on the show.
Put on that graph if you can.
We've talked about it at least twice on the show.
There aren't any 18-year-olds to 24-year-olds in Ukraine.
There was a huge baby bust in that era, and there simply aren't enough of them.
You see, there are more of the 30s and 40s.
Those are all dead.
The future generation is hinging on these 18-year-olds, and Waltz wants them to go die in the trenches for a war that he knows, he must know, is being lost.
So if he doesn't know this demographic chart, then there's a real problem.
The other thing is in this ABC News interview, Dr. Paul, he talked about the North Koreans fighting in Ukraine.
Now, if there were tens of thousands of North Koreans fighting in Ukraine, we would have a photo of it.
We would have a dead North Korea.
Supposedly, they're getting slaughtered.
This is what Waltz and them are saying.
They're getting slaughtered.
Show us a photo of one.
We have not seen a single photo of a North Korean, so he should know better.
He should have the intelligence, and I mean intelligence in terms of being briefed by the intelligence community saying, We can't find any North Koreans, sir.
They aren't there.
This is a propaganda point that Biden used to justify shipping in high Mars.
That's why we're talking about North Korea, or allowing High Mars to be used, sorry, inside Russian territory.
So these two things are not true, and he's repeating them.
That's worrisome.
Well, that's what backs up the authoritarianism is lying, you know, lying and cheating.
And they actually believe in their nihilists.
They say the people like us who search for truth and want to move in a certain direction, a nihilist says, why waste your time?
People who do well understand that those issues don't work and the people are too dumb to take care of themselves.
We can always play the card and say, we're going to take care of you.
It's always a promise.
And just remember, all we have to do is scare the people.
Whether it's a domestic issue, scare them about a bad virus coming.
That'll give an opportunity to gain more power.
And then, of course, during the Cold War, it was Soviet missiles in Cuba and all that.
They were able to build it up.
But the gullibility, and that really remain, it boils down to an understanding of the issues and attitudes.
And I keep thinking about this.
Why do the attitudes do this?
Where do they come from?
These young people, you know, I try to mock a bit.
These young people don't stand up and say, oh, let's have a war where it sounds like fun.
And here they can speak out.
They like not to be there.
You have to have the thugs running and say, well, we're not going to let an 18-year-old get away with this.
He owes it to this country.
I never understood that about the draft.
You're an 18-year-old, and I was part of that system that was, you know, coerced.
And you do that for the service for your country.
I said, well, why don't you do the, guys, there's a lot of 45, 50-year-olds in pretty good health, and they've had a lot of fun.
So why don't you see them first and send the politicians first?
But that doesn't work that way.
Well, and Creighton said that the 45-year-olds are all dead too now.
They're reaching down in the cradle.
The other thing we wanted to talk about briefly, and this is a piece in Politico.
Actually, you can put it up if you don't mind.
It's about the use of troops.
Now, this is from Politico, with all of the biases cooked into the whole thing, but it's still an interesting topic.
Now, here's a quote: I think things are going to be bad, really bad.
End quote.
The U.S. military debates possible deployment on U.S. soil under Trump.
And I'll start, Dr. Paul, by saying I think this is kind of a scare piece.
And as you go through it, they are quoting people that are Trump's enemies throughout the piece, but it still bears some consideration, as the piece points out.
And it goes back to 92 with the Rodney King riots where U.S. troops were called in in a state of emergency.
You know, that's an interesting thing.
And I do remember those riots.
Everybody who was living would remember.
Oh, yeah.
But they were worse than I would have estimated.
I mean, a lot of people died, 2,300 injured, 63 people got killed.
And This is something that, you know, and to quote they put in this article from Trump on November 18th, two weeks after the election, Trump confirms he plans to declare a national emergency.
We've heard that many times, whether it's in Gaza or Ukraine, a national emergency and use the military for the mass deportation of illegal immigrants.
Oh, well, that's a holy thing to do.
You know, they're violating our property rights and they're invaders.
And there's a lot of reason to complain about it.
But there's a lot of reason to be determined and detailed about protecting our civil liberties and our Constitution and some of the attitudes that came out of the Civil War that they say the military should never be part.
And that was one of the reasons we had a revolution against the British.
They occupied all the colonies.
So that is one thing that they want to happen.
The military for mass deportation.
So that's that, people would justify that.
But you know what?
You might do a lot of help by comparing a well-run city, having a decent police force, and having private ownership of guns and all the things that could come out of a libertarian society and compare it to which city do you want to use from California?
Maybe L.A. right now.
Society's Moral Dilemmas 00:03:43
They haven't survived very well.
Oh, well, it's the weather.
It's global warming caused all L.A. problems.
Yeah, yeah, that's what they want to say.
Well, it'll be interesting to see if he does use the troops, what might happen.
The political piece, in typical fashion, quotes people who hate Trump.
They quote Mark Esper, who hates Trump, another bad Trump hire, honestly, where he says he claims that Trump said something which I suspect he didn't say.
They also quote Mark Milley, who also hated Trump, another bad Trump hire who said terrible things about Trump in this saying that Trump is going to use the military in a way to take over and to quash dissent.
So I think the article is overplayed, but it's still, you wonder what will happen.
There are very difficult questions to be answered if they're going to be used, the terms of engagement in those sorts of things.
Well, you know, in a way, they were probably pretty lucky in 1992.
And there it was a different attitude in 1992.
They had the military there and a lot of violence.
And the general that was in charge didn't have a lot of direction, so he set up the rules.
And he took the weapons.
He restrained the weapons.
They didn't have live ammunition and all these things.
And that helped keep down the violence from spreading.
But it was still pretty violent.
But it's really, to me, it's the principle.
If you have the military in there for doing a very good thing, because they say you have a thousand illegal immigrants and they all belong to the worst group in the world, and the states can't handle it, which I would have trouble believing.
But anyway, you bring in the military.
It sounds like a good idea.
But what if that becomes routine?
You end up with a military state.
The baby step is something that leads to more.
You let a few in, a few times have our military be the policeman.
But it was never meant.
And that's one of the reasons our justice system has deteriorated.
Think of how many federal laws there are.
There's so many federal laws and federal bureaucrats going on, and most of them could be canceled.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, we'll see what happens.
We'll see what Trump does.
I guess we'll close it out a little bit and thank our viewers for watching.
We have unfortunately had some little minor problems with our streaming today.
I've just been noticing, so hopefully, we'll get those worked out.
But thanks for viewing anyway.
Thanks for your patience as we work through our studio of remodeling and upgrade.
Over to you, Dr. Franklin.
Very good.
And I too want to thank our viewers for tuning in because this is what our message is designed to is to reach as many people as possible.
And I know so many have been so supportive of what we're doing.
And I believe this is the only thing I feel comfortable in doing something and feeling like it's very positive.
And that is changing people's attitudes.
Because when you have wars and fighting and killing and lying and cheating and stealing, it has to do with people's attitude of right and wrong.
And if the people lose that, if they don't have a moral compass, this continues.
So, yes, we have to do the technical things and defend our country and do our very best.
But ultimately, it's the moral fiber and the understanding of a society that will make or break a free society.
And the founders knew well and warned us about it.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection