All Episodes
Previous Next
June 25, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
21:10
After Trump's Bombs, Is Peace With Iran Possible?

According to press reports, President Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff is back in touch with Iran after the ceasefire with Israel. Will a deal still be possible? Is Iran still interested?

|

Time Text
Less Wars, More Rhetoric 00:09:05
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 again today.
Welcome back, Dr. Paul.
Oh, yeah, yeah.
I was taking a vacation, sort of, unscheduled vacation.
No, it's good to be back in the studio, and good to see everybody and visit with our viewers.
What we want to talk about today, and Daniel is the expert, I'll tell you, he knows all that you need to know about foreign policy.
We need less wars.
Well, that's what we want.
But anyway, we do want to talk about the Middle East and what's going on, especially what's going to come of all this bombing and saying how wonderful it is.
And it's sort of a bombing philosophy.
Bomb people, threaten people, and you have world peace forever.
So it's a wonderful thing.
And we've been, the United States has been at this, working with this belief for a long time.
They have, we have, that has practiced this so often.
And, you know, I was looking and thinking about that, wondering when it started.
Well, it's been going on a long time.
But even at the turn of the last century, we had gunboat diplomacy.
And, you know, we decided we were going to remate South America, make them friends, make them like the United States.
And then we got into a little battle with Spain and we ended up having regime change there.
And they said, well, that's pretty good.
How'd that work out?
Well, for a while, it was a big benefit financially to us.
But then, lo and behold, the end result was, you know, Cuba went communist.
So long-term benefits aren't always there when we decide that we're going to have regime change and change things around.
But we've been, you know, supporting, you know, there's a certain small little country over there called Israel.
They have their opinions and there's a lot of support in this country for that.
And I don't think you necessarily are being against our policy if you support American policy.
Matter of fact, I think our responsibilities are we can have opinions about other places around the world.
But when I was in Congress, I always assumed the responsibility was to obey the law, obey the oath of office, and everything else should be done through persuasion.
Matter of fact, politically, I think things should be done through persuasion rather than threats and innuendos.
But I think the current administration has a use of intimidation as strong and powerful as we've ever had.
Even though the bombs have been flying and we think about all the problems that we have, and certainly in recent history, just think of these episodes where we have been involved.
None of them have worked out so well.
I mean, Korea sorted wasn't a total calamity, but it ended up taking a country that did not unify.
When we lost in Vietnam, it unified and became friendlier with us without our troops being there.
So on and on.
So we give up there.
So, well, why don't we just go to the Middle East and straighten out that mess?
Yeah, Iraq needs a little lesson here and there.
And Afghanistan, we'll work on Afghanistan.
So on and on, this intervention is an authoritarianism, use of force, intimidation, I think is very, very bad for us.
And yet it's all done in the name of good things, peace and prosperity.
So, I guess the question now is being discussed in the media is: are we on the road to peace and prosperity?
How's this all going to work out?
Are we going to have an official peace treaty?
And how can we figure out exactly what the administration's policies are?
Because I have trouble keeping up one day.
One day I hear something, well, that sounds pretty good.
And then the next day, it changes a little bit.
And even this recent bombing, it's interesting.
We knew it was going to come.
It came.
And now we're still trying to figure out what the results are.
Oh, it's bringing about peace and we're working it out.
We probably won't have an official peace treaty, but we're going to stop and it's going to be okay.
Daniel, I see this so much as just a problem with understanding about a non-interventionist foreign policy and people dealing with political pragmatism and military-industrial complexes, money and profits.
And if we want to promote our ideas of peace and prosperity, we have to contend with that.
And yet, you know, that is part of human nature, and that's what we have to challenge because it certainly was the goal of the founders to have a different foreign policy than interventionism, authoritarianism, and authoritarianism, and pleasing the world.
Even though we've heard the rhetoric, but even when the presidents give pretty good rhetoric in their campaigns, it doesn't seem to work out.
Even the current presidency had some pretty good rhetoric.
George Bush Jr., his rhetoric was pretty good, but we didn't have peace.
So what is your opinion about what's going to happen over there?
Are we going to have a quiet spell or could we possibly have an explosion someplace that motivates other people to get more aggressive and trying to remake the world's boundaries?
Yeah, Dr. Paul, one of the principal tools of diplomacy, in fact, diplomacy depends on it, is the use of precise language.
When you're making a treaty, when you're making a deal with another country, it's absolutely critical if you're going to be successful to have precise language that is agreed upon by both parties.
And you mentioned President Trump, what are his intentions?
I think his approach is the opposite of precise language.
And I think that he feels that gives him an advantage, and perhaps it does in the business world that he's used to.
But I think in the world of diplomacy, it makes things complicated.
And I had read an article earlier today about the process before the Israeli attack on Iran.
And apparently, President Trump was rather vague and it was interpreted by Netanyahu as a green light.
And he went in after that.
What we're seeing this morning, Dr. Paul, we both read an article on Zero Hedge by way of, or Epoch Times by way of Zero Hedge, saying that immediately after the ceasefire was announced by President Trump, negotiations began with Steve Witkoff in Iran.
And there is some optimism.
It's almost like deja vu.
They're starting to discuss things and apparently agree on some things.
However, just as that is happening, President Trump, you know, he was in NATO yesterday and he was been making some strong statements.
And he said if they basically, if they try to, they're not allowed to have nuclear is what he said.
They're not allowed to have nuclear.
He didn't say specifically what that was.
He didn't say weapons.
We now know that he probably, possibly means enrichment.
If that's the case, then we're back to square one because Iran is not going to give up nuclear enrichment.
That's a right that they have.
So, and in the meantime, as the papers are reporting that diplomacy is now coming to the fore, President Trump went on his social media account this morning and he posted a video of B2 bombers and they were taking off to the sound of a song called Bomb Iran, which was a takeoff on an old Beach Boys song.
And the lyrics of that song that he played this morning on his social media include, went to a mosque, gonna throw some rocks, time to turn Iran into a parking lot.
Unfortunately, this is the level of leadership we have, Dr. Paul.
And I don't know that any country out there feels like they can do any kind of business whatsoever when this is the person who's pushing the buttons.
You know, policies are made, and sometimes they have immediate reactions, but sometimes they might do something wrong, and it might last for a long, long time.
But eventually, if it's a bad deal, it'll work its way through the system and do more harm.
Coup and Its Consequences 00:07:26
And I'm thinking mostly right now of Iran, because in 1953, there was a coup in the United States, and the British got together and had a coup and threw out the people they didn't like.
Mosettec, who had been elected a leader, but he wasn't sending enough profits from the oils to these various countries.
So they had a coup and got rid of somebody and they installed the Shah.
And the Shah was friendlier to us.
And things seemed to be better.
But on the long run, it stimulated and created the radical movement in Iran.
And that lasted a while.
And it was a strong motivation for what happened in 1978.
And even in current events, was our intrusion in that activity.
I remember in one debate with a commentator during an interview I had, and I brought up the subject.
Well, you know, because of the history of what's here, you have to try to understand, you know, what we have done and how these people see this.
He said, I don't want to hear anything about history.
Well, I think a lot of stuff that happens in our country, you should know about history.
I've always argued that Americans so often don't remember too much about the history and how it affects them.
And those who are the victims around the world that we have victimized, they never forget.
And therefore, Americans wake up and say, oh, I didn't know that.
I didn't know that.
Why did we do those things?
But now we've been putting up with this radicalism and the mess and the fighting going on and the isolation.
It seems like the isolation of Iran is out of proportion to the threat to the country.
I mean, I can't remember.
You know, it's been maybe hundreds of years, if not more, where Iran has pretty much stayed within their borders.
They don't go out looking for wars and getting involved.
But anyway, it's something that is ongoing and we're very much involved.
And the motivation I think comes a whole lot from us, you know, appealing to the desires of the Israelis because they want us to go in there and we respond to that.
Now, you can be pro-Israel and whatever without being anti-American policy.
But to decide that we're going to do things because we are pressured by somebody else.
It's not working in our self-interest, I think is a dangerous thing to do.
But I believe that the people that really want to have peace, it should be offered up.
There are things that can be done right now.
I think free trade is great.
That was one of the reasons we talked out when we heard some good things that Trump was saying about free trade.
But his free trade is ambivalent.
I can't figure it out.
It's good one day and confusing on the next day.
And that is, I think, think of that.
The other thing that they could do is to reject the pragmatism, you know, saying they don't have basic principles of the Constitution, personal liberty, free markets, free trade.
It's pragmatism.
And then that invites, especially when you have this bowing down to pure democracy.
The majority always rules.
The dictatorship of the majority is what people have accepted.
So you have to go along with that.
And that forms formulates, you know, the special interests and why this goes on and on.
But I do not understand why the American people put up with it because they have to pay for it.
Especially the poor and the middle class.
They pay for this.
And who makes the profits?
The military-industrial complex.
And this helps, you know, motivates these people to support it.
But it is something that people should pay attention to.
And one thing they are starting to pay attention to, and that is that it costs a lot of money.
The deficit is going up.
Deficits lead to more inflation.
And once again, that's a tax on the middle class and the poor.
So we need to get people to understand the foreign policy.
And the foreign policy we've been involved here over here, especially with Iran, doesn't make very much sense.
I have never sat around, you know, thinking pretty soon the Iranians are going to come.
Even when we were attacked on 9-11, it was Saudi Arabia's people.
They were born and raised in Saudi Arabia, and yet what do we do?
We became closer friends with Saudi Arabia.
We went over and said, oh, I guess Iraq and Afghanistan are our next step.
They didn't have anything really to do with 9-11.
But anyway, it's so confusing because I think it is lack of understanding, lack of understanding of history, and the idea that our educational system isn't designed to promote our Constitution and personal liberty and be motivated to endorse those principles to bring people around to believing and understand if you want peace and prosperity, well, you have to first start with an understanding of personal liberty.
All right, Dr. Bill, I'll just have one other statement I was going to make, and then I'll close out.
I was just going to point out something somewhat alarming.
Now, we had talked about polls before the war started, where a very large percentage of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, were opposed to the United States getting involved with Israel's war on Iran.
That was a big majority.
Now, there was a poll that came out right after President Trump decided to start bombing Iran.
And unfortunately, that poll result was quite different.
You had a majority opposing military action against Iran.
But when they were told, do you support military action against Iran's nuclear program?
The yeses accounted for 85%.
So 85% of Americans, of Republicans, 85% of Republicans supported the bombing when told it was about Iran's nuclear facilities.
So what does that tell you?
That tells you that the propaganda machine that will try to get President Trump to continue bombing Iran, we know that because all the neocons are flipping their lids in favor of it.
All they have to do is ramp up the idea that, well, Iran's nuclear facilities weren't destroyed.
And now Trump has been pushing back against that.
But if they're successful in putting out that argument, you're going to have, just as we had with Iraq, Dr. Paul, when WMDs became the excuse, we're going to have the same kind of excuse that we have to go back in because the nuclear facilities were not destroyed.
That's what's coming on the horizon.
That's what to keep an eye out for.
The propaganda is exactly the same.
Keep an Eye Out 00:04:38
It's again based on lies, but it's a huge danger right now.
We're in a very strange time.
So I'm going to close out by thanking our viewers and reminding you to go to ronpaulinstitute.org, pick up those tickets for the August 16th conference.
And if you are an upper division undergrad or grad student, you will see in red on the front page of the Ron Paul Institute website a link to apply to be a Ron Paul scholar this year.
The program is in its, I think, seventh or eighth year.
It's a great program.
Scholarships available.
Apply today.
Over to you, Dr. Paul.
Very good.
And if one were to ask me about what kind of simplified principles would one follow if you wanted to work toward a foreign policy of peace and prosperity, well, I would say the one that is just general and people understand this when it's dealing with maybe a neighborhood, mind our own business.
You know, if you mind the business of your neighbors and all and button in, it doesn't go well.
Sometimes the neighbors end up fighting, you know, about that.
So mind our own business would go a long way with this.
The other thing is, is you can't use force if you decide some other country is doing something wrong and you can't concoct some idea of justifying, well, we have to go in there and straighten that out, even it has nothing to do with the disruption here in this country or diminishing our liberties.
And you can't use force to do it.
And you can't be the aggressor to advance and tell people what to do.
And even just threats and innuendos can be very dangerous.
And there's a lot of that.
And right now, it's all over the place.
You know, it used to be one person is saying one thing and the other one is saying something else and they're saying administration.
But when you have somebody at the top of the ladder, you know, maybe changing the definition, well, I said that, yeah, but we fixed that up about 30 minutes later.
I mean, it's very confusing.
We ought to be precise, and we can be.
Founders understood that.
That's why they wrote a document and they worked hard on it.
And they had perceptions that have been failed, we've failed to follow.
And that is, it's based on the principles of personal liberty.
And of course, the sound money issue was a big thing too.
And the other thing that we'd have to deal with is to have an administration and a government and all the politicians because you have to say, well, yes, you know, strong national fence, peace through strength.
We have to do this.
We never can vote against a military budget.
And they always passed when I was there easily.
And they still pass very easily because it's concocted that if you know it, you're unpatriotic and therefore you're hurting the country.
But they should look at it and be more honest about the reason why we spend so much money on it.
It's profiteering.
It's a motive for it.
And that's been around for a long, long time.
So, there is, you know, there is an availability of understanding what a non-interventionist foreign policy is, and we should follow it if you, if we didn't, if we were still confused about what it is, just read the Constitution.
For instance, you can't go to war without declaring it, without even telling Congress.
You know, keep it secret, keep it secret from the enemy.
No, keep it secret from the American people because they might want to try and stop it.
So, and as Daniel mentioned, the polling, and many times back with Iraq, and now the people saying, No, we don't need another war, and yet it marches right on.
Then, then, after it's oh, oh, yeah, we just came, we just saved the world, we dropped all these bombs, and yeah, we saved the profit, the profiteering of the military-industrial complex.
So, I think it's still, you know, something that all American people should encourage, and that is a peaceful foreign policy where you do not do anything more than try and be friends with people and trade with people and use diplomacy.
And why not use a little bit of common sense?
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection