Latest / Brian Thomas / Sen. Rand Paul on with Brian Thomas this morning

Transcript

Sen. Rand Paul on with Brian Thomas this morning · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: The talk station at seven thirty one, fifty five KRCD
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: Talk Station. Happy Tuesday, opening Day and always a great
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: day when Senator Ran Paul returns to the fifty five
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: krc Morning Show. Welcome back, Senator Paul's a distinct pleasure
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: to have you on the program.
• 0:15
  Speaker 2: Good morning, Brian, thanks for having me.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: More troops going to the region anyway, not necessarily going
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: to be deployed yet, but it's a threat to the
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Iranians to negotiate. They don't seem to want to negotiate,
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: and part of me, Senator Paul, thinks that maybe the
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: Iranians realize the political landscape you're here in the United
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: States and maybe trying to call Donald Trump's bluff and
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: get him to commit drowned groups or ground troops in
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: spite of the fact that might harm them. But I
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: don't know if I'm way out in left field on
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: that one, but certainly the war rages on and we
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: don't see any light at least I don't between both
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: sides in terms of negotiating a resolution. Where are we
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: on this, Senator Ran Paul.
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: You know one reason they might not want to negotiate
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: is last summer while they were negotiating if we bomb
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: their nuclear facilities. This time they were negotiating in omal
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: and we you know, unleashed this Operation Fury and all
• 1:04
  Speaker 2: the bombs. So I guess the last two times they've
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: negotiated with us, the negotiations didn't really seem to be
• 1:11
  Speaker 2: in earnest or honest negotiations, and I think they may
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: feel that they were tricked at the time to letting
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: down their guard. They also really are probably desperate. You know,
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: most of their command has been removed, their supreme leader
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: has been removed, so I don't know that they feel
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: like they'll get honest negotiation, and I think they're just
• 1:30
  Speaker 2: regrouping and thinking their best chance is hand to hand combat.
• 1:34
  Speaker 2: And this is sort of people have called this the
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: escalation trap, the idea that we have such great weapons,
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: which we do. They're smart bombs, precision, we can plant them,
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: you know, in a ten foot radius anywhere in the world,
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: and so we have superiority everywhere. But people think that
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: that means that people on the receiving end will ultimately
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: just surrender, and they might. That would be great if
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: that happened, but also sometimes what happens is nationalism arises
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: and the people actually come together, even the people who
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: hate their own regime come together and begin to hate
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: the collateral damage of all the bombing.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: Well, and I can certainly see them going down that
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: road center to Paul. The geographical realities are really perilous
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: for ground troop operations.
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: There.
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: The size of the country two point four times the
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: state of Texas, and they've had a long time to
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: you know, entrench themselves. You know, I think about, you know,
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: the invasion of the small little islands when the United
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: States Marines moved in towards Japan, and how you know,
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: in trench they were, and how long it took men
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: to you know, to overcome the forces. Hey, that's basically Iran,
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: is it not?
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: Well? And you know, Lindsey Graham has gleefully said, well,
• 2:44
  Speaker 2: there was Eva Gemo, we need another Eva Gema conveniently
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: sort of forgets that, like over twenty thousand Americans died
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: on the island of Eva Gema was. It was hell,
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: and they did it for their country. But anybody who
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: wishes that, or anybody who says, well, gosh, we're going
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: to make a lot of money off this war, I
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: think that's just reprehensible. And really those kind of people
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: shouldn't be listened to. Look, I know people who will
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: fight this war personally. I know good friends of mine's
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: kids who will go to fight this war, and may well,
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: as far as I know, have already been over there.
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: But I don't want I don't want the war to
• 3:18
  Speaker 2: go on. I want the war to end, and I
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: wanted to end as soon as possible. So we'll we'll
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: see what happens. I continue to be a voice to
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: say this isn't in our national interest and I don't
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: think it furthers. I think it makes our country poor,
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: not richer. I think it makes us as a country
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: more vulnerable as we increase our debt. So I hope
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: it's over sooner than later. The only thing I have
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: to say about the troops so far, as there's about
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: five thousand marines that the pub the press has reported
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: over there, I don't think that's enough to really invade
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: a country with. You know, when we went into Iraq,
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: you know when they went Iraq attack Kuwait. I think
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: we've probably one hundred thousand troops over there. So usually
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: when we go in, we go and it was overwhelming force.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: Now Venezuela was a one off, I think, and that
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: they went in with two or three hundred people in
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: a very precision raid to get one person and leave.
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: I don't know that that is really in the offing
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: for Iran. I think they'd want to do something like
• 4:14
  Speaker 2: you know, this is a guess. I haven't had any
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: briefings on this, but I guess that if you want
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: to go in and control the straits of Hermuse, I
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: don't think you do that with a lot of thousand soldiers.
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: I think the whole country would be up in arms.
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: I think it wouldn't be as easy as people think.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: And my understanding is some suggest that carg Island, that
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: massive export terminal for Iran, might be taken over by
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: the Marines. That represents some serious logistical challenges, and of
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: course it will be easier to just make a blockade
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: and blockade the Iranian oil tankers from getting out of
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: the area. That's it seems to be an easier solution.
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: Can I pivot over? Because I know what you were
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: one of the ones that actually looks at the Constitution
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: of believes there's some that need to get congressional approval.
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: There's been no declaration of war there's been no authorization
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: of use of military force, which seems to me suggests
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: we're in war powers resolution territory. But is the sixty
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: days last ninety day clock ticking on that? Some are
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: arguing that that hasn't even been implicated because there was
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: no imminent threat, which is the justification for launching the
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: action of the first place, Senator Paul exactly.
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: So the Constitution takes precedents, it's the first thing, and
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: it says that the power to declare or initiate war
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: lives with Congress. They haven't done that. The war powers
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: out come in and says, all right, there are three
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: different ways you can go to war legally, a declaration
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: by Congress, a use of authorization of force, which is
• 5:34
  Speaker 2: similar vote by Congress, or an eminent threat. So really,
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: the only way you can legally invade a country without
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: Congress voting on it is to say it's an imminent threat.
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: The problem with that argument is they say, well, yes,
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: a RAM started this war forty seven years ago, and
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: I guess once you say forty seven years, it doesn't
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: sound that imminent. You know, if they really have been
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: at war with us for forty seven years, I would
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: think another twelve hours to call Congress in and have
• 6:01
  Speaker 2: them vote would not be delaying the imminence of this.
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: Some have said, as Marco Rubio said, that Israel was
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: going to attack with or without our permission, and that
• 6:11
  Speaker 2: there would have been repercussions and those would have been imminent.
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: That sounds like sort of a stretch to the argument
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: of imminence. The other argument is that it was imminent
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: because they're imminently going to get a nuclear weapon. Well,
• 6:28
  Speaker 2: you know, when the Trump administration bombed their nuclear facilities
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: six months ago, they said they were obliterated, So that
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: wouldn't be consistent. If they were obliterated, how would they
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: be reconstituting them. We have intel assessments, I think from
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: eighteen different US intelligence agencies, none of which say that
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: they're reconstituting their nuclear program or that there were weeks
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: away from developing a weapon. And the people who have
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: won this war have been saying, really probably for twenty
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: years now. There are videos going back into the nineties
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: of them saying Iran is only one week away from
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: getting a nuclear weapon. True, we must stop them now,
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: And so it's somewhat of ain haard and it's hard
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: to argue with because even at my level, nobody shows
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: me evidence that they don't have a nuclear weapon which
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: is or are developing. It's hard to have evidence of
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: something that doesn't exist. But they also, you know, they
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: closely guard this information, so when the executive takes us
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: to war, they just tell us what they want us
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: to hear true, and there's no real way to challenge
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: them unless you have accessed to all the classified data,
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: and then they have it classified so you're not allowed
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: to reveal it. So there's a lot of reasons why
• 7:34
  Speaker 2: the argumentation is much more difficult from the outside looking
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: in well.
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: Utd of the concept of mutually assured destruction. I think
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: the North Koreans are benefiting from their nuclear weapons. We
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: know Russia and China are. We don't attack them in
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: spite of the fact that they represent greater existential threats
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: to our existence than even Iran. Iran of course once one,
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: so they can prevent being they can avoid being bombed.
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: Nobody bombs a country with a nuclear weapon, it seems,
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: and isn't that the point of having one.
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: I don't want to see this. I mean, yeah, they're
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: not dumb. They see this and it's something that we
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: have to understand from an adversary's position. Doesn't mean anybody
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: wants a rant of a neutral weapons but from their
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: point of view. But from their point of view, they
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: see it as a protection from attackers. Nobody attacks on Korea.
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: Senator Ran Paul pivoting over briefly, is the time finally
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: right for the penny Plan? I think it's a brilliant suggestion.
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: I think we can do with a little waste of
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: spending cuts with in the United States government is a
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: day finally come sir.
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: I think people when they hear about it say, well, gosh,
• 8:32
  Speaker 2: it just takes a small percentage cut of everything, Even
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: people who are enamored of their particular pet cause or
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: someone in their family has a terrible disease and they
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: want the government to find a cure. Even those people,
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: when I say to them, well, gosh, it'd be a
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: six percent cut. It used to be a penny cut,
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: but it's gotten worse to be a six penny cut.
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: And the six percent cut means, I mean, think about it.
• 8:54
  Speaker 2: Let's say your family member has Alzheimer's disease wants the
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: government to research that. I look at these people and
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: have great sympathy. I have family members with it. Also.
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: I say, you got one hundred million last year. What
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: this would mean is you get ninety four million next year.
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: And most of them look at me and say, well, gosh,
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: if the country's out of money, we all should do that.
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: We all get together. It doesn't mean there's no research
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: money into be ninety four million instead of one hundred million.
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: And most people think it's reasonable unless they're in Congress.
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: And those in Congress are what's a nice word, not idiots.
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: That's not a nice people in Congress. Let's just say
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: they're profligate spenders. That's a nicer word. But they don't
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: have a concern for the debt. But it's catching up.
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: Medicare So Security, you're running out of money within the
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: next few years. Nobody is lifting a finger to try
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: to fix them. Every time I try to propose something
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: for So Security Medicare, they're not popular because they do
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: involve reducing benefits in some ways or raising the age
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: in some ways. But every time I bring it up,
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: people say, oh, you're going to try to do this.
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: It isn't popular, but I don't do it for a
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: popularity contest. I know, because I want those security to
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: be there for my friends and relatives when they're turned
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: sixty five in the next ten years.
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the landscape has changed dramatically since the program is
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: an act that changes must take place to deal with
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: the reflections of that, and it is a failing program.
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: Just look at the numbers. The numbers don't lie, Senator Paul,
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: you know that you're just trying to bring to people's
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: attention third rail of politics. Okay, let's ignore the problem
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: as if it does not exist, so we all will
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: have nothing down the road.
• 10:27
  Speaker 2: There was an off edge of the day reporting how
• 10:29
  Speaker 2: many couples get over one hundred thousand dollars a year
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: now in retirement from ZOI security, But it also mentioned
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: what percentage of so security is our GDP? And I
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: think SO security is five percent of the GDP in
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: this country. And then we look at Sweden and we say, oh,
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: the Sweden's terrible. They're socialists and all this. Their SOB
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: security is less than one percent of their GDP. So
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: they actually have pension plans that if the economy goes
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: south and slows down, they slow down the pension payments,
• 10:57
  Speaker 2: and their average pension payments about thirty or four twenty
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: thousand dollars a year. And I guess maybe that's our top.
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: Our top is around one hundred thousand.
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you can't, it's it's not it's never apples the
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: apples comparisons. Senator Ran Paul, thank you so much for
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: your time today. Keep up the great work and keep
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: talking to us, keep speaking truth to the UH, the
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: profligate spenders. Somebody will finally get through to them. I
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: hope it's you, Senator ram Paul. You're always walking around
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: at fifty five carscree morning. Should have a great day, sir,
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: and happy Opening Day seven forty three. Right now at
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: thirty five krs, the talk stations Zimmer Heating