FULL PRESSER: Marco Rubio Addresses Media At ASEAN Summit In Manila On Global Security Issues | AC14

[00:00:00]on certain individuals but not on others. It just depends on the light of it and you know the the justification and rationale behind that original executive order had sort of the circumstances had changed in the president's judgment. But there are issu individuals there's still significant number of individuals in Hong Kong that remain sanctioned um that were not covered by the executive order and that remains in place and obviously that was raised with us yesterday but we don't see a change anytime in the near future on that. Mr. Secretary, Russian readout of your meeting also once again mentions anchorage proposals. Can you please clarify what those proposals are and how relevant are they today?

[00:00:33]>> Yeah, I mean there was no I mean proposals we know they've been reported about they call it 3 plus two the trading of terror but those those failed the you can't have a peace deal unless both sides agree to it and the Ukrainians would not agree to it and so that's why that effort didn't work. So, we'll have to find new suggestions and new ideas because certainly that one it was not acceptable Ukraine at the time and I don't think it's acceptable to them now either. In fact, it's probably less acceptable to them. So um um you know if uh when peace comes it'll be because of some new idea and some new concepts and we're prepared to offer some of those in the right setting and form if the opportunity presents itself and the conditions are right we're prepared to play that role in a positive way strategy to in assisting Manila in uh in terms of uh uh putting more strategy in in terms of uh the sites in terms of uh freedom of navigation operations will you be conducting more of that soon.

[00:01:26]>> Yeah, I mean, look, we're a treaty ally.

[00:01:28]I mean, the the United States and the Philippines have a treaty and so we will we will we'll live by that treaty. We're committed to supporting our treaty partners and you know, obviously we we're we've already done quite a bit. In fact, there was a US Coast Guard vessel in the region at the time that this happened and actually helped stand between the two sides and allowed the individual who was injured to be rescued and brought back for medical treatment.

[00:01:49]So, uh we already here, we're already present. We have a role and we're not going to abandon our allies. We've made that abundantly clear. We're going to have to have a good a relationship with China.

[00:01:58]>> Okay, these are the two most powerful economies in the world. Two large militaries, two nuclear powers. We have to have a relationship with China. We want it to be as positive as it possibly can be. But that won't come at the expense of our allies and our partners in the region or our presence here either.

[00:02:12]>> Sir, it's been a day since we asked you about the Saudi nuclear agreement. Have you had >> Well, let me refer No, but let me refer you. I I know that was in the press the last few days, but let me refer you back. I think it was in November of last year when the energy department entered into this agreement. So the details are there obviously even when the official announcement is made. It will have to go through a congressional notification process and then we can talk more in depth about it. But suffice it to say that the US is always looking for cooperation agreements with allies. is I mean Saudi Arabia is a strategic partner of the United States and I think without speaking in specificity about that deal but in general we're not the only country in the world that offers uh nuclear technology and uh and when countries decide they want to pursue a peaceful civil nuclear program we'd prefer them do it with us than do it with some other country uh it allows us to have influence over the direction that it goes it allows us to make sure that there are safeguards in place things of this nature and in the case of Saudi Arabia they've been an important strategic partner for us so it would make sense for us to enter into such an agreement. But obviously the details of it once it's released, you'll see it, you'll be able to understand it, and more importantly, uh it'll go through its congressional review process, which is a key part of this, you know, and and um so there'll be a lot more questions answered at that time.

[00:03:22]>> Would you be comfortable with Saudi Arabia enriching and reprocessing?

[00:03:26]>> I'll let the agreement speak for itself.

[00:03:28]Suffice it to say that any agreement that we're going to make with any country in the world on civil nuclear energy is going to be one that will have safeguards in place to ensure that it can't be turned into a weapons program.

[00:03:38]And one of the best safeguards is to make sure that American technology and American companies are the ones that are involved in doing it. If on the other hand a country pursues nuclear technology with another country, well then we don't really control those safeguards. So um again I Saudi Arabia is seeks to have a peaceful civil nuclear program. Other countries do as well. We have a similar agreement in place now with the UAE and US companies are the world standard in providing that. And so we are always looking for opportunities by the way not just in you know conventional reactors but in small modular reactors which is an area that we are increasingly around signingus all over the world to help do as well to countries that are exploring civil peaceful nuclear energy. Um the United States wants to be their their partner of choice and we're always looking for opportunities to be able to make sure that our technology and our companies are the ones that are providing that.

[00:04:26]Does anybody over here have questions because this side is really lopsided. Go ahead. US put sanctions on China's moonshot AI for apparently distilling >> I don't have any announcement on that today Saudis agreed to the additional protocol it's sort of the gold standard and if the administration is trying to stand up to say that non-prololiferation is a problem in the Middle East shouldn't that be the >> any agreement that we would make on civil nuclear energy with Saudi Arabia or any other country is going to have safeguards in place to ensure that those cannot ever be turned into a weapons program I mean that's that's the gold standard and obviously we live in a new era there competitors that we face. So, we'll have to adjust individual deals to that reality. We're not the only show in town, but we're the best show in town, but we we want to be we want to make sure that it's our companies they're picking. So, again, we understand any deal we enter into with any country.

[00:05:13]We'll have to go through a congressional review process. And so, we will ensure that in order to get congressional approval, we're going to need to have those safeguards in place. Whether they're structured differently how they are from other deals in the past or not will depend on the individual deal. on Cuba policy. Um, you've said in recent >> I'm in Asia. You're asking me about Cuba. That's far.

[00:05:32]>> But you said you said yesterday you're the main guy on Cuba policy, so we should ask.

[00:05:35]>> No, I said I'm most of you guys were asked me a question about people that are involved in Cuba policy. So, no one's more involved in it than me. So, go ahead.

[00:05:41]>> This is a good question for you. Um, so you said in recent months that the economic system can't improve unless there's a change in the political system, but you have you've been very vague about what that change in the political system would entail. Can you give us some more details with the Communist Party stay in power, but a different leadership with the Castros still in power with.

[00:05:58]>> So, you want me to give you details on our plan?

[00:06:00]>> Yeah.

[00:06:01]>> Okay. Not today. No, I'm not going to do that. I'm going to tell you this. No.

[00:06:03]No. Here's what I told you, and this is the truth. The people who are in charge of the country don't know what they're doing. They don't know. They don't know how to fix their economy. They don't know how. They don't understand basic concepts. And I think the challenge that Cuba has faced for the last 15 years is they want to somewhat improve their economy, but they're afraid that if they improve it too much, they'll lose political control over people. That's the challenge that they face. So I think for us we are looking for an opportunity to influence the direction that that goes because it's 90 mi from our shores and we want Cuba to be prosperous. We want Cuba to be free. But uh but but in that sense um you know on the level of detail you're asking me suffice it to say that as long as the people that are in charge think the way these people think and act the way these people act it's going to be difficult for them to to make the changes that need to be made in order for Cuba to have a better future because they just really they they either they don't understand that some of them are incompetent and some of them just basically don't understand and others are just so recalcitrant that they they'd rather you know destroy the country than ever walk away from a failed ideology although I think the number of people in that category is less than it's ever been. But for the most part, it's just people that don't know what an economy is supposed to look like. They really don't. And and they've because they've always relied on foreign sponsors. That regime has survived on on um you know on subsidies from the Soviet Union and then from Chavez. This is the first time they don't have a sponsor that's giving them subsidies for free and they don't know what to do with themselves because all they've done is freeload off these countries for all these years. The people of Cuba deserve better than that.

[00:07:30]>> Did you have a question? Yeah. What are your thoughts on the appropriate defense spending for allies like Japan and the Philippine?

[00:07:37]>> What is my opinion on >> uh defense spending? Appropriate defense spending.

[00:07:41]>> Well, we've communicated that to them.

[00:07:43]But look at at the end of the day, I still think that, you know, these are partners and allies, but we want countries to assume more responsibility for their own security. And for the most part, I think the countries in this region agree. And um so um the US will continue to do its part, but by the same token, we're now in many cases dealing with advanced and wealthy economies who have the ability to spend more on their own defense, and they should. I think the primary responsibility of any government is the national security of their country. So um you know, but I I wouldn't I don't think it's a point of conflict um between us and the region.

[00:08:16]I ask question on South China. Are you looking to at least step up this uh support that you've mentioned especially near the show where uh US commission BRT share a matter is >> yeah look again we have a treaty agreement with the Philippines that we intend to keep. We have a treaty agreement with that we intend to live by and we have had a long-standing defense uh partnership. We don't view that as a hostile act towards anybody. We view it as keeping our commitments to long-term allies with whom we have many shared values, shared history, and we hope shared future.

[00:08:48]>> You said that next month, I think, they're going to start this transition first week of August. Yeah.

[00:08:52]>> Yeah. Between the interim government and >> the 2015 assembly.

[00:08:55]>> The 2015 assembly. Um, is there going to be a direct role for Maria Karina Machalo and her opposition movement at one?

[00:08:59]>> Well, that's up to the Venezuelans to decide. I'm sure she can play a role if they allow, you know, if they want her to and the but the 2015 National Assembly is the is the government that we recognized up, you know, that's the government we had recognized up until these changes when we have these interim authorities. But we think it's a really good development. In the end, I would say that in order for Venezuela to have the reconciliation that that country requires to move forward on all these other projects, every element of Venezuelan society needs to be represented. And and obviously, Maria Karina represents an important element of that. I mean she's got supporters there and people that are supportive of her and there are others as well but uh a reconciliation process we are there to facilitate it not to dictate it and we will certainly provide guidance and support in the direction that it moves forward. We think it's important for the country to do that and there's a lot to work on. I mean if you think about in a country like that that's been under a regime now for 20 to 25 years political parties have to transition from being street protest movements to electoral forces. You have to have a free and open press so you can communicate it. You have to have an electoral council that'll actually accurately count the votes. You have to have enough security in the streets to ensure that the ballot box is safe and people aren't being intimidated. There's a lot that goes into an election. Then creating the infrastructure for an election that really was not invested in for a very long time and in some cases they were hostile towards. So there's a lot of change to happen. But what would requires is patience, persistence. We have to stay on top of it because these transitions do take some time. They don't need to take a decade or even five or seven years, but they take more than a few weeks, especially when you're dealing with something that's been in place for 25 years. Unfortunately, for the people of Venezuela, >> there's some prominent Republicans who have said they want you to take over the Iran negotiations. They trust you. They think that you will prioritize Israel's interest and they're attacking Vice President Vance.

[00:10:44]>> Who are these prominent Republicans?

[00:10:45]>> Senator Shei, the Wall Street Journal opinion page. Uh there's people >> Well, that's not Republican. That's a newspaper. Well, the the >> you're a troublemaker of these questions. No, >> it leads right.

[00:10:54]>> No, no, look guys, listen. Here's the bottom. The here's you know who the lead negotiator is? His name is Donald J.

[00:11:00]Trump, the president of the United States. That's who dictates our policy.

[00:11:02]He has a team of people that work together on this. We all have a role to play depending on what the topic is. We have very good negotiators and Steve Woodoff and Jared Kushner. We have the vice president of the United States, which is the second highest ranking official, which tells you how the importance we've given this file.

[00:11:16]Obviously, I have a role to play. uh Department of War has had a role to play. That's how we approach it. This doesn't I mean it's a it's a combined effort and and it always should be.

[00:11:25]>> Do you wish people didn't endorse you to take over the talks yourself?

[00:11:28]>> I I mean you're telling me about that, but that's not how our system works.

[00:11:31]That's not how this administration works. It starts at the top. The president is in charge and he has a team of people that provide counsel and provide advice, but ultimately whose job it is to execute on the president's directive. We have a great team that works very well together on that topic.

[00:11:44]We've also worked well together on a number of topics. We worked together as a team on Lebanon. We've worked together as a team on Venezuela. We've worked together as a team on the uh Thailand Cambodia peace agreement that was put together. We've worked together as a team. We have a really good core team that works on foreign policy and national security. And oftentimes it's a it's a you know it's a multi- agency effort because there's a role for Treasury to play. Sometimes there's a role for energy to play. That's how these things work. It's not one person.

[00:12:10]And it's all these different elements of our government that have to work in conjunction and in concert to execute on the president's directive and on the direction that he's giving us. Mr. Secretary Secretary, you've argued that the ICC threatens the sovereignty of the United States and its allies. How do you reconcile that position with the need for an international mechanism for to hold perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity accountable?

[00:12:33]>> Well, here's how I reconcile it. We're not members of the ICC. We never signed that treaty. We never joined it. and they somehow claim that they have a right nonetheless to go after non-treaty members and put heads of state and others in jail. We've long had quarrels with them and we have lunatics and crazies involved in the ICC that are talking about charging members of the US military, maybe even the president or a future president uh with with crimes and it's not going to happen. It's just not going to happen. We are not members of that court. We never signed on to that treaty. They need to understand that if people want to sign on and be a part of that stupid organization, they can. but we're not going to be a part of it and they're not going to apply their jurisdiction to Americans. That's just not going to happen. We're not going to tolerate it now or in the future and we've warned them about it repeatedly and now they're going to see the consequences of ignoring us.

[00:13:16]>> Mr. Secretary, can I come back to Ukraine?

[00:13:19]>> You want to go back to Ukraine?

[00:13:20]>> Oh, as a question. Yes. Um and you're meeting with with Mr. Lav. The the Russian foreign ministry issued a statement saying that Mr. Lav told you or asked you or said said to you that the US needs to stop arming Ukraine.

[00:13:36]What was your reaction? And there's a statement. They said that.

[00:13:40]>> Yeah, I know. I mean, I I don't know what those statements. I know what happened in our meeting. At the end of the day, >> what did you say?

[00:13:44]>> Well, first of all, the US position on it is we don't we we sell arms. We sell arms via Pearl, which is an initiative we have through NATO. [snorts] >> And uh and that's what we're involved in. There's been no change to our policy in that regard. We want a peace deal. We want the war to end. We're prepared to play whatever positive role we can to end the war. And that in order to end this war will require something that both Russia and Ukraine can agree to.

[00:14:06]That's not going to happen at a press conference. That's not going to happen in one meeting here in the Philippines.

[00:14:11]That's going to require a lot of work.

[00:14:12]We invested in the past in it. It was unsuccessful or at least unfruitful at the time. If conditions and factors have changed to make that possible, we're ready to go. The president's committed to that. And every single day, if we identify an opportunity to make a difference in that, we will. Because in the end, what the president most cares about is not the stuff people are Well, here's what he most cares about. That people stop dying. That people stop being slaughtered. That Ukraine no long you can go on and live in peace and Ukrainians can move back to their country and rebuild it. That young Russians aren't being killed at the tune of 5,000 a week in the battlefield. He thinks it's a stupid war. He thinks it's a senseless war. And if we can play a role in bringing it to an end, we're going to use the power and influence of the United States to do so. And we're prepared to do that if the opportunity presents itself. And I hope it has. And I hope it does. and and that's what we've communicated consistently to both sides. By the way, >> on that line, Mr. Secretary, you said that you are open for new ideas. Now that you met, are you and the president prepared to sit down with your counters, Ukrainian counters, if they visit next week for the funeral?

[00:15:10]>> Well, I I don't know if they're coming next week or not. I think President Zalinsky had expressed an interest in coming. We've we've met I mean, we just saw we'll meet with them. We've met with them often. We talked to them often. In fact, we saw them two weeks ago in Turkey. Uh, I would argue we've probably met with the Ukrainians far more times than we've met with the Russian side and um and I'm sure we'll meet again in the future whenever that is. We're always open to meeting with them.

[00:15:31]>> Trump statement about the bridges and the power plants. Just want some clarification. Do you rule out striking civilian?

[00:15:38]>> I I think I saw you know guys I saw Arachi their foreign minister who who uh the other day say or something about their policy is an eye for an eye. The president's policy is a head for an eye.

[00:15:50]I mean honestly that's what it's going to be. I mean, they will pay a very heavy price for the things they're doing. They're already paying a very heavy price. You guys don't know it cuz you don't cover it. You're not in Iran.

[00:15:58]You're not in the street. They don't have a free media, but they're going to continue to pay a very heavy price.

[00:16:02]Their industrial base has been decimated. Their defense industrial base has been decimated. They're losing launchers. They're losing radars every single night. They are suffering billions of dollars in damage. And their economy is a disaster. But despite all that, okay, these people who are calling us every day begging, let's do a deal.

[00:16:18]They send us messages through other countries, third countries. I mean, they're running out of countries to send. Even I had countries here coming up to me. Oh, I just spoke to the Iranians. They want to do a deal. The problem is every time these people do a deal, they either break it or after they make it, they want to change the deal.

[00:16:32]So, they're probably not ready to do a deal yet, but they will be soon because the price they're paying is very high.

[00:16:37]Despite their tough talk and their flowery language and their stupid Lego videos they put out, I've never seen them, but they put these things out on social media. Despite all that bravado, they are suffering tremendously, and they're going to suffer more until they come to their senses. They're not there yet, unfortunately. Which countries came to you?

[00:16:51]>> I can't tell you who told me that. I mean, then I'd be betraying the confidence is there's some of them that are here. Yeah. And every day I get a text or a call or a signal message from a foreign minister. Oh, so and so call me. The Iranians want to talk. The Iranians want to talk. But the problem with these guys, and in addition to the fact that they're probably fighting with each other, is they make a deal, they agree to something, and then they decide, "Oh, let's change it after they made it." Or they agreed or they decide, "Oh, I know we made a deal, but we're going to violate it." I mean, these these people, unfortunately, just they aren't ready for a deal. I think they'll be ready soon, though.

[00:17:19]>> Do you think there's going to be a big escalation by the United States in the coming days?

[00:17:23]>> That's the president's decision to make.

[00:17:25]They're going to pay a price. They're already paying a price every single night. Um I mean, you can't do the stuff they're doing for free. They're going to pay a price.

[00:17:31]>> On Russia, Ukraine, did you talk with Wangi about any um influence that China might be able to exercise to help bring that war to >> We didn't discuss in our meeting. No, we didn't discuss Russia and Ukraine. We had a lot of other stuff to talk about.

[00:17:42]Secretary, did you discuss with Wangi uh the issue of technology and whether that will be on the agenda for the September?

[00:17:49]>> Well, that's a broad topic. Technology like what AI disc >> Oh, AI. Yeah. Look, I think that they you know, they've expressed uh they'd like to see some global governance about what AI is governed by. Obviously, you know, we're we're I'm not sure we're aligned on that point yet, but um you know, that topic has come up. I think they've expressed an interest in discussing what the rules are going to be for how AI is used in the future. And I think that's going to have to be an international conversation. So, you know, we have some ideas about what that should look like and what those standards should be and we um maybe they're different from theirs, but we didn't go into great depth on that topic, but it's it's an issue. It came up in Beijing as well.

[00:18:24]>> Secretary, >> just final point on Iran. Is Iran's off now? Is diplomacy running out >> with Iran? I just don't think they're serious about making a deal. These guys, I mean, the more the president's gotten to know them, the more he's come to that realization. I mean, he said it yesterday. I believe he gave a speech in Georgia. These guys, the problem with them is you can't make a deal with people unless they're going to keep it.

[00:18:43]And these people make deals and then they break it almost immediately or they decide, oh, let's change the deal.

[00:18:47]That's not how deals work. I mean, they violated theou within days of it being implemented. We kept our end of it, so now they're paying the price for it. And uh maybe they'll change their mind here over the next few days as they continue to suffer great losses.

[00:18:58]>> Mr. Secret, you know the Senate better than most anybody. Uh they're debating the new military policy bill right now after the House passed it. Uh, one of the more controversial topics is about fusing the US and Israeli military when it comes to co-production on things. Uh, do you have any sovereignty concerns about that? If there are situations where the United States wants to send weapons, um, Iron Dome came up with Ukraine when the Isra manages that legislative portfolio. So I'm aware of the provision you're discussing that involves cooperation on technology and uh look at the end of the day the truth is we do that with countries all over the world right I mean if somebody well I I haven't read the specific provision in terms to tell you in detail I I understand that I understand the topic though because it's not new you know on air defense for example we've long cooperated with the Israelis look if we have a breakthrough in our system or they have a breakthrough in theirs we could share that in a way to improve our own systems as well so if they've come up with some novel way of defeating drones, for example. Of course, we would want to have that and benefit from it. By the way, they're not the only country in the world that we would do that with. We do that with other countries as well. So, I think that's the provision you're referring to. And um and that's something we're already doing. I mean, that's something that already exists.

[00:20:11]But I don't think there's any that that's different from sovereignty. I mean, it's not like US forces are going to come under the command and control of a foreign general or anything of that nature. But when Ukraine was asking for Iron Dome, the United States and some lawmakers including Lindsey Graham wanted the US to send Iron Dome battery that was in the east coast, Netanyahu vetoed that. That was the production.

[00:20:32]>> Yeah. Yeah. But anytime you enter into co-production, we have those restrictions too. I mean, if we provide weaponry to a country um as as part of an agreement, they can't transfer that to a third country without our approval.

[00:20:44]That that's we do the same thing. And and you Israel is not the only country in the world that does it. other countries do it with their systems as well. That's just a normal way when you do arm sales. Part of the restrictions is you get to veto them passing it on to a third country. Um that's that that's not just us to do it or Israel. It's every country.

[00:21:00]>> Is President Trump coming to Mando for the Assyrian leader summit in in November?

[00:21:04]>> I think he'd like to. I don't know what the schedule looks like, you know, yet.

[00:21:07]I can't commit him to that trip because I don't control his schedule, but he was there last year and I think uh that's something that we're going to talk about. It's an important forum and I think APE is a few days after. So, um, but, uh, but I'm not I'm I can't make scheduling announcements for you today.

[00:21:20]>> Secretary, would you rule out running for president in 2028?

[00:21:23]>> Do what? I'm not answering president questions. Come on, guys.

[00:21:26]>> Do you think do you think this visit has e concerns about declining US engagement in Asia?

[00:21:32]>> Are there ease concerns about our engagement in Asia? I mean, we're engaged in Asia every single day. I mean, obviously, this is a conference.

[00:21:39]We're here. We're participating, but we're engaged in Asia every single day.

[00:21:43]The Department of War is present all over Asia. the Department of State and our embassies are involved every single day in in Asia. We have strong partnerships and economic ties to multiple countries in the region.

[00:21:53]Virtually every country represented here in Azion is someone that we we deal with every single day. So, um there's a lot of competing interests in the world. So, I think there's always going to be a concern that America is so focused on one place that it can't focus on another. But one of the great things about our country is that it is a large powerful country. has the ability to be present in the Western Hemisphere, in the Indoacific, in Europe, in Africa, in the Middle East, and anywhere else where our interests are vital, including the Arctic. By the way, >> do you think it would be easier to make a deal with Iran if the United States didn't wipe out so many layers of their leadership? Trump often mentions that they're on the third tier now. Do you think it would be easier >> to do what?

[00:22:27]>> To make a deal, you >> Well, I think the first two layers weren't necessarily the nicest people on Earth, so I don't think that, you know, um, you know, we'll just keep going down the layers, I guess. But I I I don't the first two layers were not like reformers. These were not like Renaissance men. You know what I mean?

[00:22:43]So um I'm not uh I don't think that the layers are the issue here. They're this look the system is a at the end of the day it's a country run by radical clerics. I think they have political people in their system. I wouldn't call them moderates, but they at least understand like that hyperinflation is bad, high food prices is bad, gas shortages are bad. But I think when you get to that clerical level, these guys are just oblivious to all of that and they're destroying their country. These are the people. Understand Iran is a rich country. Iran could be the richest country in the Middle East if they wanted to be. But instead, they take their money and they use it and they give it to Hezbollah. They give it to Hamas. They give it to the Houthis. They give it to Shia militias. They give it to sponsor terrorism all over the world.

[00:23:21]They give it to try to kill people all over the world. They build drones and missiles and pursue a nuclear weapons program. That's what they spent their money on. If they had spent their money on their people and on their economy, today Iran could be probably the richest country in the region. If you want to know the truth, >> give that a second. Is the US seeking a regime change in Iran or just change in its behavior?

[00:23:40]>> I think the US is seeking a denuclearized Iran that will never have a nuclear weapon. The future of Iran, you know, that's obviously, you know, it would be easier to have people in charge that don't want nuclear weapons, but in the end, that's our interest. Our number one interest and the threat they pose to the war the world is these lunatics in possession of a nuclear weapon. And that's not going to happen. Not as long as Donald Trump is president. I don't know if some future president or I know some past presidents have made some bad deals and others just haven't dealt with a problem. But our issue and our concern and our focus is denuclearizing Iran.

[00:24:10]They can never have a nuclear weapon. I don't know how many times the president has to say that.

[00:24:12]>> A group of people who you describe as lunatics. I mean if if they decide to make a deal um the >> Well, some of them are lunatics, some of them are evil. Some of them are evil lunatics. You can be both.

[00:24:20]>> So the United States is okay comfortable leaving these evil lunatics in place.

[00:24:24]>> They just can't have a nuclear weapon.

[00:24:25]They can't have a nuclear weapon. I mean, imagine what they would do to the world.

[00:24:28]>> What changed between now and the beginning of the war when the president made it sound like they were that was not going to be the case. That regime change was one of the goals of the war.

[00:24:34]>> Well, now he never said regime change is a goal though from the very beginning like from day one of the operation. It was very clear that we were going to degrade their missile launchers, their drones, and their factories and their navy. Their navy no longer exists. The the the the there is no such thing as an Iranian navy. What they have left is a handful of Boston whalers, but they don't really have a lot of they don't have a navy.

[00:24:55]They don't have an air force. Their air defenses are crushed from the very beginning. Now, what the president has pointed to is the fact that the people of Iran deserve better leadership and they slaughter their own people by the thousands. They shoot them in the head.

[00:25:06]They slaughter them in the streets.

[00:25:07]Yeah, we don't like that. I mean, we don't think that's good for Iran. But our goal and our national interest in Iran is they can never have a nuclear weapon. And that's what they were going to try to do if they had been able to hide behind double the number of missiles, double the number of drones that they that they that's where they would have been in about a year had they continued on the pace of construction.

[00:25:26]Even though their economy was suffering, even though their people were suffering, that's what they were spending their money on. Even though they had sanctions, the money that was coming in, they were spending it on those things.

[00:25:35]That tells you everything you need to know about them.

[00:25:37]>> All right, guys. Thank you.

[00:25:39]>> Secretary, >> thank you.

[00:25:40]>> That one.

[00:25:41]>> Thank you.

[00:25:49]That's a good >> All right, guys. We got to lose. No problem.

[00:25:54]>> Yeah.