All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 8, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
27:57
Shock New Report US Spent $30+ BILLION On Israel Since 2023

Brown University's Cost of War Project has released a shocking report demonstrating that since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel the United States has spent up to $34 billion dollars to assist Israel on its multiple wars in the region. Millions have been displaced, with multi-hundreds of thousand casualties. Also today: Russia/US rapprochement is at a standstill after the successful Alaska summit earlier in the summer.

|

Time Text
Costly Foreign Policy Impacts 00:15:22
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning into the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, welcome to the program.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Doing well, doing well.
I want to inform you up front that I'm concerned.
The government's spending too much money and they're not listening to our program.
I know.
What are we going to do about this?
They should be forced to watch it.
We'll keep plugging along, trying to find the information that sometimes we don't think others are reading.
But I think more so than it used to be.
People are interested out of necessity.
I mean, there are big things going on in the financial markets and the foreign policy in our government, the whole works.
But before I get into a recent expenditure, a summary of an expensive $31 billion going to Israel, I want to mention something about the news today in the financial markets.
And that happens to be something that I've been looking at since before 1971, the price of gold tells us a lot.
It's an indicator of what the value of the dollar is.
So it was certainly announced in 1971 that that system that they devised, the Bretton Wooders Agreement, what didn't work and it collapsed in 1971, which was an admission that we were actually bankrupt.
We couldn't pay our bills.
We said, you take our note and we'll always give you $35.
Well, that failed.
But now today, there's the fact that gold this morning was essentially at $60, increased by $60.
But the other thing that impressed me was, you know, silver, everybody knows silver is going to go up.
It has gone up.
It was $1.29 when I started in 1971 when I got fascinated with this.
And it's up real close to $49, and psychologically, that's a big deal.
But we're in the midst of an argument between Trump and also those who, you know, at the Federal Reserve Board, Powell, of how fast should we print the money?
They don't say that.
They argue, what is the best thing for the economy to help the people?
Don't you think we, and Trump takes the position of a populist, always lower interest rates, which wouldn't be so bad.
Lower interest rates are pretty good because most of the time in a free market, interest rates are low if you have a sound currency.
Well, anyway, they argue about this, and they can't possibly know what the proper interest rate should be, but they're fighting and arguing over it.
And that causes uncertainty, a big deal of uncertainty.
And that's what we're in the midst of.
And people are now shifting where they can fib to the people about, oh, we have everything under control.
And even between 1971, when they admitted they didn't have enough, all the way up to 1980, you know, went along.
The markets accepted it.
People kept $10.
But that is all changing.
It's a big deal now.
But I think the idea that there is sort of like now, it looks like there's a concession, even with Powell, they're going to lower interest rate.
But they don't say, well, we're going to lower interest rates and everybody's going to be happy.
What really happens is when you lower interest rate, look, folks, we're ready to speed up the printing presses.
You don't have enough money.
So we're going to speed up the printing presses.
We're going to increase the money supply.
And, you know, of course, they wouldn't use those terms.
And that is inflation when you debase the currency by just producing it out of thin air and not backing it up by anything.
And this is something that is gearing it up and probably has a lot to do with why gold jumped up $60 in one day.
Even though if someone had asked me that 20 or 30 years ago, I'd say that's a possibility.
But even when it comes, I'm just dumbfounded.
They actually did it.
They never woke up.
So we're doing that.
So that is a big deal, and it's going to be around because they have not changed it.
Because I tell people who want to know, well, what do you expect?
Well, I don't know exactly what's going to happen to the price of gold.
But if you want the best test that I use, it's what the Congress is doing.
Are they spending more money?
Is there more debt?
And do we have a Federal Reserve that will manipulate the economy artificially with artificial interest rate?
And there's no signs that that's likely to happen.
So even though I think there's a big sign out there today of silver essentially $49 and gold over $4,000, it's sending a message.
And now what I'd like to do, Daniel, is get your expertise on how some of this comes about, you know, because we've talked about this instance, this problem before, and that has to do with how we finance wars.
And we always do it out of the goodness of our heart and out of charity.
But the article I want to talk about is Anselm article.
And Kyle starts off, the U.S. spent, hang on to your seat, over $31 billion aiding Israel in the past two years.
And that meant they had to print a lot of money because we don't have any money in the bank, but it just goes on and on.
And I keep thinking, when will the American people wake up?
Because it's not just two people in an office doing this.
The people have to support this because if the people woke up and said, you know, it might look good giving us another drink of inflation, but it's going to really wreck this economy and maybe whittle away at our liberties.
So they go along with this.
And not only did we have that spending, we have the persistence of a foreign policy designed for precisely that.
And though some of us were hopeful that we would have stopping all our warmongering, bring the troops home and have changes in the last six months.
Unfortunately, Daniel, I haven't seen too much evidence that we have moved in that direction.
Yeah, it's a lot of money that we're talking about.
And let's put this up on the screen.
This is on anti-war.com.
Kyle Ansloan brought up a study that was done by the Cost of War Project at Brown University.
Regular viewers of our program, Dr. Paul, will know that we cite this project very, very often, as often as we can, because we found it to be really an incredibly important source of information on the real costs of war.
And they go into, of course, the financial costs and monetary costs.
And they go into the other costs of war.
So they just came out with a couple of studies over the past couple of days, all of them very interesting.
This is one showing that the U.S. has spent over $31 billion aiding Israel in the past two years.
And as Kyle writes up, according to the study, the U.S. provided Israel with tens of thousands of bombs and other weaponry following the Hamas attack two years ago.
Israel has received over $21 billion in military aid, and Washington has bombed Iran and Yemen for Tel Aviv.
Now go to the next one here, and you will see that the mass killing in Gaza with U.S. weapons has pushed a growing number of Americans to oppose military aid and weapons sales to Israel.
However, the growing opposition to the special relationship Washington has with Tel Aviv did not leave Biden or Trump to curtail the flow of arms.
Additionally, Israel's aggression in the Middle East has drawn the U.S. into two into other wars.
Both Biden and Trump engaged in large-scale bombing operations in Yemen in an effort to force Ansar Allah to end the blockade of the Red Sea.
Ansar Allah enacted the policy in support of Gaza says the blockade and attack will end once Israel halts its genocide and onslaught.
While the bombing cost the U.S. billions of dollars, it failed to force Ansar Allah to end the blockade.
So these are the other things.
But when you put all these together, including direct military aid, and in fact, put that next one up because this is what we're talking about.
This is from the Cost of War Project.
Direct military aid, $21.7 billion.
And then you add in the military operations in Yemen, Iran, and the wider Middle East, you've got an additional $9.6 to $12 billion, leading you to close to $34 billion spent.
My guess, Dr. Paul, is that is a very low ball figure when you factor everything else in.
That's right.
You know, if we were ever serious, our country serious and our Congress serious about cutting back, they could pick.
They could be wise in their choosing on what to cut first.
I put on the top of my list is the ridiculous spending in the foreign affairs, the foreign policy that we have, and all the engagements we have.
But it's always, and the people have been very, very loyal to that.
There's probably more loyalty to those funds than there is to, you know, welfare, which so many people are willing to condemn, you know, just plain old welfare.
But the whole thing is, is they don't, they might say, yeah, I think too many people, we encourage them to take it, and they get too many food stamps.
But it's the food stamps for the military-industrial complex.
Those are the food stamps that have to be stopped.
And I think we do a lousy job, those of us who have that position, in selling that to the public, because if the public knew this, they would be after their congressmen.
But I do admit, and we've mentioned this, we do think there are more and more people waking up.
The Congress is a little bit behind the people right now, and the people aren't responding because they're doing nothing to stop.
And right now, they're arguing over how they're going to get through this budget by spending more money.
But they're not arguing on really cutting anything.
They're just arguing on whose axe is going to be used.
Who's going to lose something?
So this is going to continue.
But I think it's such a shame that they don't use this warmongering and pleasing the world, all this nonsense.
And, you know, a lot of presidents have used that as a method to get elected.
I remember, and we've mentioned this before, it's George Bush's foreign policy when he ran for president.
He ran on a fairly decent foreign policy if he had only followed through.
So this would be popular.
But right now, if you're in Congress and you really stick to your guns and vote for this, guess what they do to you?
They try to destroy you as quickly as possible in a political sense.
Absolutely.
Well, there are so many costs.
I mean, these are direct costs.
And we both think that they're probably a lot higher.
But there are other costs.
There's the human costs of our foreign policy of blind support for Israel.
Go to that same one that we left off on.
Go back one, actually.
And I hadn't read this.
The spending has come with an extensive human toll.
Over 10% of the population of Gaza has been killed or injured.
Now, if that were the U.S., we'd be talking about about 3.5 million people.
Imagine if we had a conflict where China started attacking us and they killed 3.5 million people.
It'd be absolutely devastating.
And then they also talk about, and you can go to this next clip because this is a post on exit cost of war project put out.
By the way, you should follow them.
It's a great, very important project.
The post-10.7 wars have killed or injured at least 236,505 people in Gaza alone.
Some people, including Colonel McGregor, put that number at about 600,000.
And when you look at the devastation in that picture, people buried.
Probably that might even be an understatement.
They also add the U.S. has spent over $31 billion in counting in the wider region since October 7th, where millions have been displaced according to new cost of war research.
Go to the next one, and here is an additional one to displaced people.
You're talking about 5.27 million people displaced in Gaza and the wider region, according to the study, including Iran, Israel, Lebanon, and the West Bank, writes David Vine at this report.
And you can see the picture of all of the people that have been displaced in Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, and Iran.
So the costs go beyond the hit to our national funds, right?
The printing press funds.
They're much more than that.
You also have the cost of our depleted weapons, which we've depleted in the service of this project.
Reputational cost of the U.S., we're the only one backstopping Israel's attack, and it's hurting the U.S. reputation.
And then also you have opportunity costs.
See, if not, if we didn't spend it on that, what could it have been spent on?
So a lot of hidden costs there.
It's so amazing to me that all this is being paid with is counterfeit.
Counterfeit money.
But it's legal.
The government's allowed to do this.
And the people can't counterfeit the money.
They are in serious trouble if they get caught.
But the government does it.
We put up with it.
And they see the symptoms, but they can't put the connection together that this insane appetite for the government taking care of us from Carol to grave, that the government's going to do a better job.
You know, it goes on and on.
And they expect this to work because it has worked.
It's because we were so wealthy and we're still wealthy, but it looks like they're determined to use up every bit of wealth or lose confidence.
It's just losing confidence in the dollar is a big deal and there's less confidence.
And I think this whole thing about gold, $4,000, it's confidence in the dollar.
And these explosions and the price, this could continue at the rate they're going.
What would it be like if somebody woke up and said, oh, gold is $20,000, which if you continue to do this, it is, but it has to end before that.
Dollar Confidence Crisis 00:03:47
And I always argue the case that you could do it without so many people suffering.
You know, we see how many people suffer from the foreign policy of the needless killing with that foreign policy.
What about the needless suffering that they already have?
Just think of the people now that, you know, the low-middle-income people, you know, they're not, you know, they're not in the business of trying to understand what the government's doing and what they have to do.
But it's a system that is going to be with us until people wake up.
And that won't happen without some leadership in the educational system.
And people should not be dependent on government-run schools because too often, at least 75% of what they're getting out of government schools is probably propaganda.
Yeah, no kidding.
Well, you know, Israel is in the headlines, and that's why we're talking about it, but it's certainly not just Israel.
Excuse me, I took a look at the GAO did a study not long ago.
They found that the U.S. had spent $174 billion on the Ukraine war.
So this is, I mean, $174 billion, $34 over here, a little bit over here, a couple trillion on the war on terror.
It starts to add up.
It really does, you know.
And so I think what Americans should be thinking about is, well, what could we have achieved if we had not wasted all this money on the global empire?
Now, we wouldn't necessarily be so enthusiastic about top-down achievements from the government down.
Nevertheless, it's hard to ignore the things that the Chinese have been able to achieve.
And I want to just put this up as an example of the contrast between two, this is the highest bridge in the world.
Put up that clip, actually.
Put up the, yeah, here we go.
No, no, go.
No, no, sorry.
It's the video clip.
The punchline is now messed up.
But that video clip, my fault.
Sorry.
Yeah, do you have the actual?
Well, it's all right.
Okay, let's watch this.
This is the highest bridge in the world.
We can get that going.
We can take it down now.
They did this in four years.
The 2,600 feet above the river, they did this.
And there's a restaurant.
You saw the restaurant up there and a permanent waterfall that comes down.
It's pretty amazing if you see that.
Now, the punchline here is putting up this on.
This is 18 months after a ship hit a bridge in Baltimore.
Here's where we are a year and a half.
This is halfway through what it took the Chinese to build that massive bridge.
It just goes to show the fact that we are wasting so much money on the empire while our entire country is crumbling and can't be fixed.
I would ask you, Dr. Paul, when you saw that restaurant up there, would you eat in that restaurant on the very tip top of that bridge?
A few people, members of my family, would not.
I looked at it.
My breath was taken.
He developed some type of park assistant.
Maybe you could leave on a slide.
Yeah, they probably would.
Crazy stuff.
Anyway.
You know, this to me makes me think about why is there so much animosity toward China?
Why Is There Animosity Toward China? 00:02:57
Well, they call themselves communists and they don't have freedom.
But then again, I think there's a bit of jealousy on our part because the American people are taught and they accept it's China's fault.
It's China's fault.
We put terrorists.
I think they're jealous over the thing because they have state-run capitalism.
You know, capital is capital and their state runs it.
And it's a communist-oriented state.
But in a way, It's not Marxism and the type of the Soviet system was or the China system in the past.
But I think that their state capitalism is better than our state-run corporatism.
Because people say, look at what they did.
Why haven't we done this?
Because we have a free market.
No, we have a sinister type of system, which is totally designed to make the middle class pay all the bills.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah.
And it's the other thing is that they don't spend a trillion and a half dollars a year on their military.
They spend a tiny fraction of that.
They don't have bases overseas.
I think they might have one small naval site somewhere, but they don't have 800 bases in 200 countries like we do.
Did you ever wonder why we have all those warships surrounding China Sea and the China Sea?
Yeah, they don't have them surrounding us.
They don't spend money.
And of course, obviously their economic system isn't one that you and I would ascribe to, but nevertheless, it seems to produce some pretty neat bridges.
So anyway, the second one we want to talk a little bit about here is if you put that up.
Now, I first saw this on RT when I got up this morning, but we're starting to see that the Russian government is getting a little bit frustrated.
Momentum from the Trump-Putin talks in Alaska has run out, said the Kremlin.
They've expressed their view Wednesday today that the positive momentum created in the wake of the August 15th meeting in Alaska between the presidents has waned and come to an end.
This is the Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov.
He said bluntly, the momentum has run out.
His fresh words indicate Moscow's point of view that positive advancement toward peace was largely exhausted.
Now, the thing that they've done here is Ryabkov is a very astute person, a little hawkish, but very astute person.
What they're doing, and they're trying to keep the dialogue open, is they're putting a lot of blame on the Europeans.
The Europeans will not let go of this war.
They're trying their best to drag America in.
So I think, in effect, the Russians are bending over backwards to not point fingers at the U.S., but it's getting close.
They're getting frustrated about things.
Yeah, we hear so many promises that we're on the verge of great victory in these various places.
Ryabkov's Diplomatic Dilemma 00:03:05
But my personality was such that I did this.
I still do.
I do the opposite.
If I'm supposed to do something and produce something, I want to lead them to believe, you know, don't expect too much.
And then hopefully it works out better than I expected.
But when you promises these successes on peace and prosperity and all this, and then it doesn't work, I don't think that's good psychology.
It turns the people.
He's fibbing to us.
How can we believe this stuff if they always have something?
It's magic.
We'll take care of it.
But that's why I like the system we like, and that is individualism to let people do what they want as long as they don't use force and intimidate people.
And then if it goes wrong, you're responsible.
That's all your fault.
But when these clowns get in office, and there's a lot there, I don't know.
There was quite a few that were always promising and grabbing it.
They were grabbing power.
And the people who argue, well, our system would allow too many people to suffer.
They wouldn't have enough to eat.
And there'd be too many wars fought if we didn't do it our way.
So they do this, but it doesn't work.
If you put these people in con, well, if you put them in charge, why do you think it would be any different than individuals when all individuals have a right to take care of their lives?
There will be some who will mess up and they suffer the consequences.
But if you put them in the government, they ruin it for everybody when they make these bad mistakes.
You know, I think part of the problem here, Dr. Paul, is the, and we've talked about it so many times, even in yet, even yesterday when we talked about Venezuela, that the Trump administration's notion of diplomacy is that we tell you what to do and we pressure you to do it.
And if you refuse to do it, well, then the talks have failed.
That's not really how talks work.
You know, maybe unless you've got little kids and the issue is cleaning up your room, you know, but not when you're dealing with countries.
You know, the U.S. diplomacy with Venezuela, as we've discussed yesterday, was Rick Grinnell going over to Maduro and saying, you need to quit.
You need to resign your presidency.
We want to have a regime change.
He says no.
And they say, okay, then we're going to attack you.
And it's the same thing with Ukraine.
The president is sending over knuckleheads like Kellogg going over to Russia as they're winning the war saying you need a ceasefire.
You need to stop shooting.
That would be like, you know, we're getting ready to start D-Day.
And they say, no, hold on a minute.
Let's put a break on that and let the Germans regroup.
Nobody's going to do that.
It's never going to happen.
So when Russia says no, we actually have some goals that we want to meet after three years of warfare.
We're tired of the situation.
We don't want NATO on our doorstep.
We're going to fulfill the tasks.
Then the U.S. has a blow-up and Trump starts arming Ukraine more and more and talking about tomahawks even.
That's not the way you conduct diplomacy.
Regime Change Demands Moral Standard 00:02:42
You have to understand your adversary.
That's Sun Tzu.
I mean, basic, basic stuff.
What they don't realize is when these policies inevitably fail, then it backfires on them.
It backfires on them as a real damage thing because that's what happens when you're broke.
Yeah.
And that's what's working its way through.
And soon people will realize that.
They will.
Well, I'm going to close out, Dr. Paul, thanking the audience again for watching the program.
Please hit that thumbs up, subscribe wherever you're watching the show.
We're going to have a good show tomorrow.
I'm looking forward to it.
We don't often have guests, but we have one tomorrow.
And it's going to be Pastor Chuck Baldwin, who's done some really, really good work.
I think your friendship with Pastor Baldwin has gone back many years.
In fact, something you did with him, we'll talk about it tomorrow, was the inspiration for the creation of the Ron Paul Institute.
So we're really looking forward to it.
You're going to want to tune in.
Again, it's live noon Eastern Time.
Check us out on Rumble, Ron Paul Liberty Report.
Pastor Chuck Baldwin will be with us to discuss the Middle East, presidential politics, and many, many other things.
Over to you, Dr. Paul.
Very good.
I talk a lot about bankruptcy and talk about gold and how that reflects this bankruptcy.
But even one step higher in importance is the moral bankruptcy.
Because, yes, it's counterfeit money that is a danger and it's wicked and it does all these evil things.
And that's why we put people in jail that do it, except the government gets a hold of it.
And they claim that they can control us with the political power.
But this is something that we have to realize that we have to put up with.
And this will happen until we say, well, there's a moral standard that has to be followed.
And it's something that the founders recognized and talked about it.
And that is the system that they endorse is natural law.
That most, for the most part, most people throughout all history have become aware of the natural law.
And it should be superior to the watered down laws that the politicians write.
And this is what is so easy to understand, but people aren't too interested in moral restraints.
But under natural law, nobody, including the government, are permitted to lie, cheat, steal, or kill.
There's where the problem is.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection