All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 30, 2025 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
47:21
Tales of Regime Change: Iraq — The War That Rewired The World

FOR ALL THE NEWS, ZERO STATIC, SUBSCRIBE TO HUMAN EVENTS WITH JACK POSOBIEC HERE: • Twitter ► https://twitter.com/humaneventslive • Rumble ► https://rumble.com/user/JackPosobiec • Tiktok► https://tiktok.com/humaneventslive • Instagram ► https://www.instagram.com/humaneventslive Support the show

|

Time Text
I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Pozo Daily Brief.
It is completely free.
It'll be one email that's sent to you every day.
You can stop the endless scrolling trying to find out what's going on in your world.
We will have this delivered directly to you, totally for free.
Go to humanevents.com/slash pozo.
Sign up today.
It's called the Pozo Daily Brief.
Read what I read for show prep.
You will not regret it.
Humanevents.com slash pozo.
Totally free.
The posto daily brief.
This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posovic.
Christ is King.
My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grave danger.
On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war.
I take the threat very seriously.
I take the fact that he develops weapons of mass destruction very seriously.
20% of the total amount added to the U.S. national debt between 2001 and 2012 were just the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obviously, the war in Iraq is a big, fat mistake.
The main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction.
It turns out he didn't.
Central Baghdad.
This crowd, the small crowd that's swelled to this now, taking off their shoes, throwing them at this statue, which is a deeply insulting Arab gesture.
It looks like it might be coming down.
A few seconds, Saddam will be executed.
Before he manages to complete his last prayer, the Shiite security guard opens the scaffold.
Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.
In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.
The individuals strapped with explosives, but me and my fellow three Marines that was injured had no idea he was there.
Five years after the war began, the American death toll has reached at least 4,000.
The military says the latest deaths occurred Sunday.
A roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers in southern Baghdad.
President Bush said that he will leave Washington next week with a great sense of accomplishment.
Do you feel the same way?
I do.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard to Tales of the Regime Change.
Iraq, the war that rewired the world.
In March of 2003, the United States launched one of the most consequential gambles in modern history.
Remove Saddam Hussein, remake Iraq, and reshape the entire Middle East in our image.
Washington believed that it was striking a blow against tyranny.
Instead, it struck a match in a room full of gasoline.
Because the Iraq war wasn't just another intervention.
It was a blueprint for how intelligence, ideology, and hubris fused into a foreign policy revolution that detonated across the world.
And then first came the certainty.
Sodom had weapons of mass destruction.
Not maybe, not probably, definitely.
That confidence came from the same intelligence pipeline that had spent a decade overestimating Soviet strength, underestimating al-Qaeda, and misreading Afghanistan, as we learned in that episode.
But now, in the shadow of 9-11, no one wanted to question anything.
And then came Bush's great theory, the grand idea.
Remove a dictator and democracy will bloom.
Baghdad today, Damascus tomorrow, Tehran the day after, a wave of liberation radiating across the region.
A new Middle East built not only by its people, but by the design sheets of Washington policymakers.
But as we know, Iraq was not a blank canvas.
It was a nation of rival sects, tribes, militias, clans, and loyalties that went deeper than any constitution written in the green zone.
And the moment Saddam's regime fell, the moment the Baath State dissolved, all of those forces that Saddam Hussein had held in check erupted at once.
Every neocon assumption collapsed.
Every projection failed.
The war for Iraq wasn't fought in neat phrases.
It was fought in the streets, the mosques, the marketplaces, and the neighborhoods where neocon planners never bothered to look.
And out of that chaos came insurgency, sectarian war, al-Qaeda in Iraq, and eventually the rise of something the world had never seen, the Islamic state, at least not seen in hundreds of years.
The Iraq war didn't just topple a dictator.
It remapped alliances, rewired global politics, destabilized entire regions, birthed movements that would shape the century.
And at every step, the same pattern emerged.
An intervention sold by intelligence, powered by neocon ideology, and undone by unintended consequences.
And folks, let's be serious.
America lost trillions in the Middle East.
Trillions of dollars, which devastated our own economy, which led Washington to turn to massive financial printing, which devastated the average American, devastated the middle class.
And not to mention the amount of blood that we spent, that American boys who went over to die in the sand for a lie.
That's what we're talking about today.
And you need to be dead serious because this is dead serious.
And there are people right now who want to do another one of these.
They say, let's go try it in Iran.
It works so well in Iraq.
Let's go try it somewhere else because it works so well.
No, the same ideology that led to that war still exists today.
And we need to fight it with every breath that we have.
And I know that I certainly will.
Neocons haven't left.
You need to be America first.
And these are the reasons why we are America first.
This is Iraq, the war that rewired the world.
I'm Jack Posobiec, and today we are stepping into the war that defined a generation and revealed just how far a superpower can fall when it believes that reality itself will bend to it.
Operation Iraqi Freedom, our effort to disarm Iraq and dismantle the Iraqi regime is fully underway.
But here's the twist.
Saddam Hussein wasn't always America's enemy.
In fact, at one point, the United States quietly supported him with money, intelligence, and political cover.
All right, folks, Jack Posobiec, we're back.
Tales of regime change, the war that rewired the world, Iraq.
Now, many people ask, why was it that the United States chose to invade Iraq after 9-11?
Two years later, we see this invasion.
At the time, the Bush administration lied and said that Saddam Hussein was involved with 9-11, which wasn't true.
We also found that they said he was involved with weapons of mass destruction.
Also was not true.
And in fact, the United States had backed Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran.
in the 1980s.
We had been his ally.
But then along came something called the Kuwait War.
Saddam goes in for the oil fields and the U.S. launches the Gulf War against him.
He says, whoa, thought we were friends.
Guess not.
But then something interesting happens in the region, in the United States, and new leaders begin to emerge, specifically after America's victory in Desert Storm.
And people realized, wait, perhaps the U.S. government can do more in the Middle East, not just establish a permanent military blueprint or footprint in the Persian Gulf, but a new doctrine.
Some call it the project for the new American century.
But there was something that even came before that.
In 1996, a policy memo was prepared for incoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
And we've spoken about this on the show previously.
And this was written, interestingly, by a group of American neoconservative policy advisors, several of which would later become central figures in the Bush administration and associated with PNAC.
That's that project for the new American century.
And this was called a clean break, a new strategy for securing the region.
And here's what's interesting.
The clean break specifically called for the destabilization of what were labeled hostile regimes and called for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
It called for the rollback of the government of Syria, the rollback of Hezbollah, and then eventually the rollback of Iran, then to strengthen ties with Turkey and Jordan to encircle Syria.
They laid this out as a policy, a strong policy for Israel in the Middle East.
But then interestingly, many of those same advisors began to apply this policy to the United States.
And in the wake of 9-11, you see these policies being enacted by the Bush administration.
And we're told that this was to, we're told that this was to defend America in the wake of 9-11.
We must restabilize and reshape the entire Middle East.
But what's interesting is that they were saying it even before 9-11, because in 1998, they sent President Clinton a demand that said, remove Saddam Hussein from power, not someday, now.
It's not fringe.
These were people who were later at the top of the Pentagon, the top of the vice president's office, and the National Security Council.
So by the time Bush took office in 2001, the blueprint for the Iraq war was all ready drawn.
And of course, the first domino whose fall was supposed to unleash a democratic wave from the Tigris to Tehran.
And of course, that was the theory.
Joshua Lysick, I want to get you in on this.
You've studied this stuff.
You've looked into it.
This isn't conspiracy talk.
This is actually how our government functioned in those years, isn't it?
That's correct.
Yes.
And there's a strange bit of sleight of hand amongst the Bush administration and its allies and advisors from 2001 to 2002, 2003, leading up to the invasion of Iraq.
And when we go and look at President George W. Bush's speeches, the policy, the think tanks that were surrounding him, the context of Afghanistan was this is a once-off.
It is, in the context, it's going to be retribution for 9-11.
There's not going to be long-term regime change.
And this was explicit policy.
This was explicit speech material.
We go back and we look at 2001, 2002.
And then suddenly we see a strange turn of events where his advisors and then President George W. Bush himself begin talking almost out of nowhere about this axis of evil.
It's almost like marketing or advertising where, but wait, there's more.
And the military-industrial complex then needed to be reapplied.
It was too successful, too quick.
Oh, but behind Al-Qaeda, behind the Taliban is a threat that's far worse than anything we've seen before.
Now, CleanBreak advises Israel, Bibi Netanyahu specifically, prime minister at the time, advises them to engage in preemptive policy.
That's where we hit them so they can't hit us.
And that is the argument that was used by the Bush administration with this, actually, we're going to have way more 9-11s if we don't stop Saddam Hussein, because that was still part and parcel with the American patriotic experience, right?
We all got to come together and be patriotic citizens and oppose those who oppose us.
And that language began to emerge where we have to fight them over there so we don't fight them over here again and have more of these terrorist interventions.
And imagine just how awful it would be.
Go ahead, Jack.
Oh, no, no, just again on that.
Iraq did not attack the United States.
And in fact, the people who were on those planes on 9-11 and were not, okay.
And so people understand for the scope of this project, Joshua and I are not discussing 9-11 itself because we are focused on regime changes the same way in unhumans.
We were focused on, people say, when we wrote on humans, people were asking us, why didn't you, you know, mention certain things?
And I said, well, they were outside the scope of our project.
And we were focused on Marxist revolutions specifically at that time.
There were other places where Marxists came to power and Marxist regimes that just didn't follow the model that we were looking at.
But what's interesting is, of course, 9-11, most of the hijackers were, of course, from Saudi Arabia.
They were not from any of the countries that are labeled in this document.
And that Egypt is an Egyptian, right?
And Khalid Sheikh Muhammad was Kuwaiti.
So he was the planner and who was down at Gitmo.
I did not get the chance to meet him, by the way.
But for the record, I could have if I wanted to go to his trials, but I never did.
And I had work to do.
So the key here, right, the key here that's very interesting, I think, for everyone is to understand that it's very clear, Iraq did not attack the United States.
And for people who, and the fact that I need to say that, that I even need to pause and take this second to say it over and over, just shows you how propagandized this time was, because these lies still exist, even to this very day, where people will try to think, well, they were our enemy.
They were our enemy.
They didn't attack the United States.
We beat them in the Gulf War after we intervened on the side of Kuwait.
Again, they also did not attack the United States.
They attacked Kuwait, which, again, a separate country.
And prior to that, we were the ones who had propped up Saddam Hussein, working with him in the Reagan administration when Bush was vice president, propping him up as a bulwark against Iran.
And then suddenly you just have this total shift in policy on Saddam Hussein, where someone who thought he was an ally of the U.S., someone who we had sold weapons to, then turns around and becomes the enemy of all that is good.
We are told that he was gassing his people, that they were killing babies and incubators in Kuwait.
And there's just all this war propaganda that gets spread.
And then even up to 2003, where we're told, oh, he's a threat to the United States.
He's threatening the United States.
They went to the United Nations.
And Joshua, if you could just take two minutes, because we have two minutes left in this, talk about the power of propaganda and persuasion that was used to gin up support for this war.
And I can remember, you can remember for folks who were too young to know this, and it's true, there was a lot of support for this war early on.
There was a lot.
America has been traumatized.
And they abused it.
Yes.
This is where the George Soros versus George Bush alignment on Afghanistan begins to diverge on Iraq because George Soros did believe in turning Iraq as a closed society into an open society, right?
Where you have these neoliberal values, you have feminism, you have secular government, you have separation between church and state or mosque and state in this case.
And Soros seemed to resent the fact that George W. Bush's, let's say, coalition of regime change for Iraq was using neoconservatism rather than neoliberalism.
Whereas there was almost like this Christian American patriotic flag-waving propaganda that Soros opposed to be used in Iraq.
And what's interesting is the commentary on the Clean Break report that later appeared in the New York Times in 2003 at around the time of the invasion.
And it was a description of the ideologues that were behind that report for BB Netanyahu that the best way to prevent conflict for Israel is to preemptively intervene in these other countries.
Those men behind that report, as you were saying, show up inside of the Bush administration.
And in this commentary, I'm reading from the New York Times 2003.
A peculiar alliance of evangelical Christians, foreign policy hardliners, lobbyists for the Israeli government, and neoconservatives.
That's the supranationalist alliance where we began to see for the first time, and I remember this in 2003, we saw evangelical Christians across America put in their front yard, what?
The Israeli flag, flying the Israeli flag and the American flag.
So there becomes this moral, ethical, dare we say, even religious connotation to the war.
This is very interesting.
This is very deep.
But people need to understand this is where the Iraq war came.
We'll be right back, Dr. Sobey, Joshua Lais.
My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grave danger.
All right, Jack Prasebik, we are back live.
Joshua Lysak, you were talking about, and we're here in this episode of Tales of Regime Change, Iraq, the war that rewired the world.
We're talking, and really from personal experience, about why there were certain populations of the United States who fervently agreed with regime change in Iraq, the war in Iraq, the same people who fervently believe, many of whom are Christian, fervently believe in regime change in Iran today.
They backed these wars to the hilt.
And it's really a question, right?
Why was the Bush administration, the second Bush administration, particularly run by George W. Bush, so fervently in a belief, and you mentioned there was a religious aspect to this, that we should have a war in Iraq.
A lot of people will say that, oh, it was just blood for oil, and that was Cheney and Halliburton.
And other people would say, oh, it's because they went after George H.W. Bush.
Saddam went after his father.
So we wanted to get rid of him.
But perhaps you have another opinion, or at least another angle.
Yes, we said moments ago how this coalition of support had a cast of characters that included a number of high-profile, prominent, and powerful evangelical Christians, including those who worked within the Bush administration and set and advocated for the specific interventionist policy,
this preemptive interventionist policy, which goes back to 1996 and the Clean Break Report, which says that, again, in order to have peace in the Middle East, we need to advocate for regime change in these countries that are opposed to Israel.
And there was an expression, three down, two go with reference to Syria and to Iran right following the Lebanon war in 2006.
That said, remember Act 1 of regime change, as we saw in Afghanistan and we'll see in Syria.
Act one of regime change, the first stage is this demonization and preparation and ideological propaganda, persuasion, preparation, where you build the case for going in there and getting him out of there.
And of course, there are a number of lies about chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapon, this enriched uranium from Africa, a hypothesis that was, of course, debunked prior to the invasion of Iraq, we should add.
But I happen to recall at this time that my network, limited as it was as a youngster, it was representative of the national evangelical support for the Bush administration invasion of Iraq, which by the way is what George Soros opposed, was the religiosity mixed with American patriotism, where we need to use the full force of the United States military to engage in this righteous Christian war was how it was positioned, which Soros opposed.
He preferred the secular, neoliberal freedom, democracy, feminism, women's rights, et cetera, version of regime change.
But it ultimately leads to the same thing, the toppling of Saddam, which Soros advocated for.
But in the Bush movie, an evangelical world, you had prominent Christian preachers, pastor, televangelists like John Hagee, like Hal Lindsay, who were saying, Iraq today is literally in Bible prophecy.
You know where it talks about Babylon in the Old Testament?
That's literally Iraq today.
So where it says that there's going to be this end times conflict, this end of the world, Armageddon, we are right on the eve of Armageddon.
Let's go.
When that happens, the rapture, which is an evangelical Christian doctrine that's about 150 or so years old, when that happens, Jesus Christ is going to return to earth and there's going to be this third temple built and there's this tribulation, this whole world, this sort of religious theocratic sci-fi situation from the left behind novels, which also were very popular at that time.
And the film and the number of films inspired by that also came out right around this time.
Like there was one called, I think it was called the Omega Code.
And of course, there's Left Behind with Kirk Cameron.
And I remember at the megachurch I attended with my family, the preacher on the eve of invasion gave a sermon entitled, What Would Jesus Say to Saddam Hussein?
But the idea was that for the first time.
Christians.
So this, I gotta say, wait, can I pop in?
Because like, this is me in Catholic world, right?
We didn't have any of that.
And in fact, the Pope was against the war.
John Paul II was still Pope.
And I remember him speaking out against this.
And he said, do not do this.
I remember Vladimir Putin coming out and saying, do not do this.
I don't know.
You do not know what you will unleash.
And so you're saying that in this world, on your side of the house, where you were at the time, that there was this fervent support for it.
Yes, that's right.
The evangelical Christians as a voting bloc has been historically one of, if not the most powerful special interest groups, I think you could refer it within the electorate, kind of a religious community.
And that's why, of course, Donald J. Trump has done his best to persuade that community to support him from the very beginning.
And now he has the faith council and Paula White, who's an evangelical Christian mega church televangelist.
And at that time, it was believed widely, and many of your viewers will back me up on this and we'll see their comments and the replies, that the sense was, we can make the rapture happen.
We can make Jesus come back.
That was the subtext of this, it's called eschatology, where there's this idea that the United States can sort of engage in this Armageddon-like crusade and Russia is going to get involved on behalf of Iraq.
That's what the Bible prophecy of the cities of Gog and Magog are about.
And this is what demagogues have done over the years within evangelical Christianity who come in to do a little grifting is they'll say, look, the time we are living in is literally written here in the Bible.
Here's what happens next.
Hal Lindsay, of course, claimed that the rapture is going to happen prior to the year 1989.
Did not happen.
I remember Y2K was seen as the time at which the rapture was going to occur.
We were all ready for that.
We ready for Jesus to come back.
Everyone was getting their wills written up so that all of their possessions would be given to their non-Christian family members.
This was an entire movement in a mood.
And because evangelical Christianity was adhered to, this rapture version of it at all levels of society, including in the government, there was this sort of alignment of pro-regime change individuals.
Again, evangelical Christians, those who are lobbyists for the Israeli government, who are aligned with Clean Break.
And of course, you had the neoliberal and neoconservative regime changists.
And it's something that I will never quite personally understand because Catholics, we don't have that theology.
But this belief that invading Iraq would somehow hasten the return of Jesus Christ to the world is something that I just don't think it should be running our farm.
Right back to the church.
Another grim milestone has been reached in Iraq.
Five years after the war began, the American death toll has reached at least 4,000.
The military says the latest deaths occurred Sunday.
A roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers in southern Baghdad, and rockets and mortars pounded the heavily fortified green zone.
All right, Jack Subker back with Joshua Lysak.
And Joshua, one of the things that I wanted to get into in this is that we don't see the return of Jesus coming from these wars in the Middle East.
But what do we actually see that's happening?
We lose tons of money.
We lose tons of Americans.
And ultimately, a very strange thing seems to happen, at least strange from perhaps our perspective.
Christian communities throughout these regions, whether it be Iraq, whether it be Afghanistan, whether it be Syria or anywhere else, they get decimated.
They get wiped out.
And we sit there and we say, oh, gosh, what about the Christians who are being persecuted?
Oh, gosh.
And we never turn around and point the finger at ourselves and say, wait a minute, what if the forces that are conducting the persecution of Christians in these regions are the same forces that we've unleashed or that we've enabled to be able to do so because of our own insane actions?
Because that's what I think has been going on in the Middle East since 2001, et cetera, when it comes to these Christian communities.
And I sit there and I talk about it and I go on this show and I go on others and nobody wants to talk about it.
Nobody wants to talk about how these wars always seem to lead to more dead Christians.
100%.
Yes.
What I would like to say to the evangelical Christian community is that the Israel of the Bible is not the modern state of Israel secular liberal organization founded in the year 1948.
Different people, different place, different times, different world.
And what is in Israel's economic interest or their foreign policy interest is not necessarily in the best interest of Christians in Iraq and in Syria.
Let us recall the three stages of a regime change.
Stage one is this demonization, this hardcore persuasion campaign to build this coalition of moral support against your target.
That's Act 1.
Act 2 or stage 2 is the unleashing of your intervention operation where you overthrow, you execute, you get rid of the guy.
We got to go in there and take him out.
That was what was believed by myriad households, both Republican and Democrat, in 2003 regarding Saddam Hussein.
There was bipartisan support.
Usually bipartisan is code for, oh, this is bad.
As there was bipartisan support for Obamacare, right, a few years later.
But it's in Act III that regime changes are completely and totally botched.
I was reading a report by George Soros in which 2003, he suggested that it would take the United Nations one or two years to stabilize Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein.
So this is not a neoconservative evangelical issue.
This is we can go into these countries who do not share our culture, our stories, our values, and we can make them like us in one or two years.
We just have to give them hospitals.
We have to give them roads and some schools.
Act three is the aftermath and the idea where you can simply consolidate power, install your person, and everything will be stable.
Well, what happened?
We saw the rise of the, first of all, the insurgency that resulted following the mission accomplished banner, right, of George W. Bush there.
We had the insurgency.
We had the vying for power.
There were odd scenarios where the Iraqi soldiers trained by Americans were siding with their own people against the Americans.
There was friendly fire.
There was leaking of classified information and battle plans to the insurgents.
There was, of course, ISIS, right, in both Syria and Iraq.
And what did those radicals do in mass?
They rounded up and they executed Christians wherever they go.
And there was a direct consequence in the line of dominoes from this idea that we need to go into the Middle East for religious reasons to religious brothers and sisters of that religion being murdered in mass.
Men, women, children, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands.
So if you are a Christian, war in the Middle East is the very last thing that you should want to happen to the church.
And this, this is key, folks, because what do we see?
The sectarian violence.
We saw Iran, by the way, became emboldened, right?
So, you know, even if you're someone who's worried about Iran and worried about stabilization of the region, well, remember, we talked about earlier in the episode that Saddam was the U.S. bulwark against Iran originally.
And so guess what?
In fact, all those years, he had still been operating as that bulwark against Iran.
It turns out that actually that policy was quite useful, that you prop up one of these guys and no, they are not a Jeffersonian Democrat.
But guess what?
They're a strongman or, you know, as I like to call it, a zookeeper, you know, because when an area is a zoo, you need a zookeeper.
And when the zookeeper gets removed, guess what happens?
All the animals get loose.
And that's exactly what we will see happens across the Middle East in every single one of these instances, whether it be, whether it be Afghanistan, whether it be Iraq, whether it be Libya, whether it be Syria, et cetera.
It continues and it always plays out the same way.
This is what they do.
And so, no, you can't just impose your beliefs on these areas.
They don't operate based on your schedule.
And Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, of all people, when he came out against this war, Iraq war originally, he said, what you unleash will be 100 times worse than what is already there.
And what was unleashed?
Ultimately, al-Qaeda in Iraq, which later became ISIS, which later became the Islamic State.
And when, Joshua, when you and I talked about Afghanistan, we talked about how the U.S. backed the Mujahideen and that the Mujahideen led to the rise of the Taliban and al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda, which then later attacked the United States.
And so again, we have these situations, right?
We have these situations where we need to understand that the law of unintended consequences will always win.
You don't just get what you want out of life.
That's not the way that it works.
You need to be very careful.
And for any of those people who think that I'm just going to say it, all right?
I'm just going to say it.
I am talking about the people who are calling for more war in Iran.
I am talking about the people who are calling for regime change in Iran.
Say, oh, those mullahs, they're so bad and we got to get rid of them and just look at the bad things they do.
We don't like them and they don't believe the same things we do.
Okay, got it, right?
Got it.
Understood, totally.
But what happens next?
And that is a question that they never seem to answer.
Is it, Joshua?
No.
And there's this idea that is both a secular utopian and also religious utopian.
In this case, it's the kingdom of heaven coming to earth, right?
It's the sort of the George Soros evangelical alternative, right?
Where the kingdom of God is on earth.
I mean, just take the secular version of that.
Both of those advocate for regime change.
And if I'm going to give a quick tip to evangelicals, Christians who do believe in an interventionist foreign policy, who I was speaking at a Republican event recently and I fielded a question in which someone was claiming that, you know, JD Vance, our vice president, is signaling isolationist foreign policy.
And I was thinking to myself, what?
And how we need to oppose that in a strong America is an America that's involved.
It's a sort of Team America World Police shenanigan situation.
With a quick tip I would give you, go to Instagram, follow the account, Eastern Christians.
These are the Lebanese Christians, the Syrian Christians, the Iraqi Christians, the Jordanian Christians, the Palestinian Christians who are caught in the crossfire between and among American Israeli and the insurgencies and the militias and the armies that they're battling.
And you don't need to see but one or two videos of churches wiped out by Western munitions before you think to yourself, maybe we shouldn't be the police.
Maybe we shouldn't be following Operation Clean break here.
Maybe my allies are my brothers and sisters in Christ.
It may not be the secular government of Israel here.
And that's a difficult situation to be in.
But I believe that if you spend some time on the Eastern Christian account on Instagram, you will see the people who are being threatened by Western interventionist, American interventionist, and Israeli interventionist foreign policy.
These are the people who are at risk of death.
Eastern Christians on Instagram.
You know, it's funny because I was actually on Twitter.
I believe they have a couple of Twitter accounts that are involved in this as well that I was tracking.
And you can see it.
And by the way, we're not just seeing that Christian persecution in the Middle East, boys and girls.
Oh, no.
We see it across Europe at the hands of who?
Muslim migrants, which are also unleashed by these wars coming soon to a European capital.
Right back, Jack Posobic, Joshua Watson.
Moments ago, the ceremony to mark the end of the Iraq war wrapped up.
All U.S. troops are to be out of Iraq by December 31st.
Though President Barack Obama has pledged the U.S. will continue civilian assistance for Iraq as it faces an uncertain future.
All right, Jack Posobic, we are back here.
Human Events Daily.
Tales of regime change.
Iraq, the war that rewired the world.
And to be clear, this is the reason that the world is the way it is.
America poured trillions into Iraq.
America shattered their own myth of liberal hegemony.
And in fact, ironically, it was the Iraq war and the broader war on terror that destroyed America's position, its pole position as the only superpower in the world.
This is what caused America to overstretch.
It caused the American empire, as it were, to be poured out into the sands of places thousands of miles away from America's shores.
And it is what ended this system, which had existed since the end of World War II, really, since 1945.
This system of one sort of order in the world has now led to multi-polarity.
It was Iraq.
It all goes back to that.
And it also has to be said because we haven't, and particularly more so with Syria, but Iraq is what began the migrant crisis.
That's when we started originally to see these migrants flooding out from Middle East and into our lands, into European lands, into Christendom.
Where now the attacks on Christians, the rapes of our daughters, the burning of our churches is all done in this clash of civilizations, which continues to this day.
And so for me, my sense of this, my conclusion on this is when you look at the Iraq war, it's not enough to just say, we're not going to do it again.
It's not enough because we said that about Vietnam.
You have to understand the motivations that drove it and extended it to understand and unpack that which you will face in another scenario, perhaps involving Iran or any number of these countries.
You can insert whichever one you want, Venezuela, et cetera.
These do not work.
And the lies that you are told early on about how great things will be once we topple the dictator or topple the MOLA are always just that.
They are lies.
They are wrong.
And the people saying them seldom actually have that as their true motivation.
Joshua Lisa.
Yes.
And as long as we can take away the religious undertones and overtones of regime change, we can see these for what they really are.
They are supranationalist interventionist shenanigans, frankly, that never go the way that they're promised.
We've talked before about the three acts of regime change.
And that third one, the aftermath and consolidation, where you install your friendly regime, a new one, and you build up this wonderful infrastructure and you stabilize the situation.
Both the neoliberal supranationalists like George Soros and the neoconservative supranationalists like those who ran policy for the Bush administration, both of those expectations fall flat.
This mission accomplished 2003 is as absurd as Soros' idea that the United Nations can stabilize and create a prosperous, free, democratic, and dare I say feminist society in an Islamic country, 99.99% in one or two years.
They're just not based on reality.
And so in the future, as we look at any other regime change, we need to be careful, as George Washington, our first president in his farewell address, advised us to beware certain foreign entanglements.
Something that is in the best interest of, let's say, even a friendly ally like Israel may not be in the best interest of the United States or of those who are Christian brothers and sisters in these countries, Iran or elsewhere.
Something else that Data Republican and I began to uncover in the research on our upcoming book is the idea that George Bush, President George W. Bush, advocated for, that we fight them over there so we don't fight them over here, how that simply fell flat because the fighting over there never actually ended.
And we have this open loop from 2001, 2003, 7, 9, 15, 21, and beyond, where the aftermath and consolidation stage of regime change has remained open because you can't open up a society that is not capable of being opened up to use George Soros language.
So what's been done instead, what we've seen the data Republican calls it the administrative NGO complex that use both Republican and Democratic aligned institutions, religious charities, whether it's Catholic charities or the Lutheran or Jewish alternative charities that they have set up.
Instead of fighting them over there, we don't fight them over here, the idea now becomes, beginning in about 2015, realizing the war on terror globally did not go as planned, stage three failed of regime change.
Let's bring them from there to over here.
We can democratize them and indoctrinate them with neoliberal and neoconservative values.
We can make them good little citizens of the world who believe in democracy, freedom, and George Washington.
And then because of the money they're sending back, the remittances, because of the H-1B labor that's coming from those countries, because of this cross-cultural exchange, we can influence those governments and those families and those groups back home by bringing them over here.
Yet another neoliberal and neoconservative disaster, which again, both Republicans and Democrats have historically supported over the last decade.
And into that, I guess you could say, weak glass frame ideology comes the wrecking ball of nationalist populism under President Donald J. Trump and through powerful influencers and superconnectors like Charlie Kirk.
And so those individuals from both sides establishment become enemies of this supranationalist utopian idea where everyone can get along, all people are basically the same.
On the right, we jokingly call it magic dirt theory, where you can bring a Haitian, plant them in my sister town next door to me, Springfield, Ohio, and they immediately become just like everyone else, if not better, as some have said in the past, that immigrants are superior to citizens because we're lazy, as certain mistakes of Christmas break have been known to report.
That said, as it looked towards regime change, we have to understand that it doesn't work that way.
Not all peoples and cultures are literally the same.
That's a both neoliberal and neoconservative overextension of Thomas Jefferson's words that all men are created equal.
That does not mean that all men are created literally equally the same and are therefore interchangeable.
That's what neoconservative, neoliberal ideology is founded on.
What that means is having equal dignity in the eyes of God.
There's a verse in Galatians, I believe, in which the Apostle Paul, St. Paul says that there is neither Jew nor Greek nor slave nor free nor male nor female, but all are one in Christ.
That is to say, from that perspective, all human beings have an inherent dignity as creations of God.
To overextend that idea ironically, ironically, violates separation of church and state.
It is a Christian doctrine that has legs through neoliberal secular enlightenmentism.
This is why we understand that the sort of secular liberal perspective is like a riff on Christianity and Christian values, where equality in terms of dignity becomes equality of everything else.
And getting into another subject there, but that's similar to that term I introduced recently on the show, ex-evangelicals, where they're taking the Christian superstructure and then applying that to progressivism.
Folks, this has been tales of regime change.
Iraq.
The war that rewired the world.
Understand why this happened and understand why it can happen again.
Ladies and gentlemen, as always, you have my permission to lay ashore.
▲
Export Selection