CNBC’s Joe Kernen Battles Rand Paul Over Whether He’ll Ever Admit Trump’s Iran Strike Was ‘Brilliant’
CNBC’s Joe Kernen pressed Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on whether he would flip his criticism of President Donald Trump and praise his strikes on Iran as “brilliant” and “courageous” if a ceasefire manages to hold and a larger war does not break out.
Paul joined Squawk Box on Tuesday, where he warned Trump that the “track record” of United States military “interventions” in the Middle East is “not a good one,” pointing to the decades-long Iraq war and more.
“I hope this is an exception,” Paul said of Trump’s recently announced ceasefire between Iran and Israel, following US strikes on Iran over the weekend.
The president lashed out at both Iran and Israel on Tuesday morning for violating the ceasefire.
“There’s a real fissure, obviously, in the Republican Party, neocon, warmongers on one side, and then isolationists on the other side,” Kernen told Paul on Tuesday.
Kernen argued these “isolationist” lawmakers arguing for diplomacy over starting a new Middle East war would likely never “go outside of our borders in this country for any reason,” earning an immediate objection from Paul, though the senator let Kernen finish.
The CNBC host asked Paul if he would celebrate Trump’s actions on Iran if the military action remained “limited” to airstrikes targeting Iran’s nuclear sites.
“Is it possible that someday, if it doesn’t get out of hand now, you would say I was wrong and that this was a brilliant and courageous move by the president? Would you ever say that?” he asked.
Paul pushed back at the “isolationist” description, calling those who don’t want to “trade” with the world the true isolationists, referring to the president’s tariffs.
“I think that you mischaracterize the positions. There are no isolationists that would never go outside of our borders. When we were attacked on 9/11, even the most libertarian members of Congress, my father included, voted to go after those who attacked us. When World War II happened, there were many people who hesitated to get involved in a European war. But when we were attacked, the vote was nearly unanimous,” Paul said.
The senator argued Iran could have moved uranium to keep their nuclear ambitions alive. He argued that diplomacy will ultimately be needed to atually end any potential conflict.
“So you’re arguing that now we need to take out the [uranium], so I don’t know, that’s inconsistent,” Kernen objected, saying Paul was arguing the US “didn’t do enough.”
“No, I think you’re mischaracterizing this again,” the senator said. “What I would say is that I’m arguing that the intervention, the military intervention, may not have been successful, as people are saying, and also that there may not be a military answer to this, that ultimately the answer to the end of the nuclear program is going to involve diplomacy.”
Watch above via CNBC.
