Samuel T. Francis Samuel T. Francis

Championing
Western Civilization
and the great legacies of
Sam Francis and Joe Sobran
and their allies

Joseph Sobran Joseph Sobran

FGF Op-Ed
THE CONFEDERATE LAWYER
September 19, 2019

Wars of Regime Change

by Charles G. Mills
Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation

Front Royal, Virginia — Tulsi Gabbard, a war veteran and Democrat candidate for President, has described American policy for the last eighteen years as a succession of wars of regime change. This is a succinct and accurate description of our policy -- and it is at the heart of what is wrong with neo-conservatism.

It is hard to imagine a just war of regime change. Certainly, regime change can never be just as the primary reason for war.

It is hard to imagine a just war of regime change. Certainly, regime change can never be just as the primary reason for war.

The modern idea of a war of regime change is part of the wicked legacy of Woodrow Wilson. It is the modern hypocritical substitute for dynastic wars. World War I started as a Masonic War against Germany, Austria, and Hungary. The Ottoman Empire entered the War against the three main Masonic powers, Great Britain, France, and Italy.

“Making the world safe for democracy” really meant making democracy universal. This is not a just cause for war, any more than a government has to be a democracy to be just.

When the United States entered the war on behalf of the Masonic powers, Woodrow Wilson invented a new reason for war, “Making the world safe for democracy.” This implied that the Germans and Austrians wanted to get rid of all democracies.

Every war is unique in some way. World War I was strange in that Austria and Hungary were fighting a defensive war, and Germany was exploiting them under the guise of defending them.

Wilson’s idea of universal democracy has dominated us for eighteen years. Its most pernicious form is called “Neo-Conservatism.” The neo-conservatives have led us into about a half dozen wars of regime change grouped together as the “War Against Islamic Terrorism.”

“Making the world safe for democracy” really meant making democracy universal. This is not a just cause for war, any more than a government has to be a democracy to be just.

What Wilson really wanted was for the political science faculties of the great American universities to invent a narrow definition of democracy and make it standard for all white nations in the world. (Wilson did not believe that all races were capable of governing themselves.) After World War I, Wilson’s disciples turned the world into a terrible mess and gave us Hitler, Stalin, and Japanese imperialism.

After World War I, Wilson’s disciples turned the world into a terrible mess and gave us Hitler, Stalin, and Japanese imperialism.

Wilson’s idea of universal democracy has dominated us for eighteen years. Its most pernicious form is called “Neo-Conservatism.” The neo-conservatives have led us into about a half dozen wars of regime change grouped together as the “War Against Islamic Terrorism.”

The oldest of these wars is the War in Afghanistan. It is now eighteen years old. Like the war in the novel 1984, the enemy changes. Right now, the only thing close to a logical excuse for continuing it is the fear that Moslems will launch a September 11-type attack on America from Afghanistan if we do not continue operations there. Our so-called allies in Afghanistan are opium dealers and war lords who shoot us in the back. Much of our operation in Afghanistan is civil affairs nonsense that has nothing to do with making us safe. If the Moslems do attack us it is more likely to be from Pakistan or Iran, than from Afghanistan.

Much of our operation in Afghanistan is civil affairs nonsense that has nothing to do with making us safe. If the Moslems do attack us it is more likely to be from Pakistan or Iran, than from Afghanistan.

The most stupid thing we did was probably our wrap up of the Libyan War. Libya was a terrible problem for the world and for the United States. We did, however, succeed in defeating Libyan tyrant Khadafi to such an extent that he actually realized he had to behave. We then promptly overthrew him and plunged Libya into chaos.

The Syrian War was the most tragic of the U.S.’s regime change wars. We were repeatedly warned that if the Syrian dictator was overthrown, a terrible persecution of Christians would follow.

Remains of church in Syria

A Christian church in Syria is destroyed during the war.

The Syrian War was the most tragic of the U.S.’s regime change wars. We were repeatedly warned that if the Syrian dictator was overthrown, a terrible persecution of Christians would follow. We got involved anyway and the persecution of Christians is underway.

We got involved anyway and the persecution of Christians is underway. We are no longer really treating the old regime as an actual enemy in any sense except the formal one, but we are fighting other enemies that would never had survived if we had not decided (unsuccessfully) to eliminate another dictator who was doing us no harm.

The Second Iraq War is complicated. It was probably unjust from the beginning. It was certainly started by untrue statements, almost certainly deliberately false. Militarily, however, it was a great success. There were few casualties. We were welcomed by the Iraqi people. We lost all this good will when we delayed the election of a new government longer than the Iraqis wanted and removed most of Iraq’s ruling class from power. Now we are fighting a chaotic war there.

The strange thing is that we seem to fight everybody but our worst enemies, especially Iran.

The strange thing is that we seem to fight everybody but our worst enemies, especially Iran.

There are some lessons to be learned. The liberals, and many others, like to say that we are not the world’s policeman, but nobody really means it.

The liberals, and many others, like to say that we are not the world’s policeman, but nobody really means it.

We should, of course, protect ourselves when we are attacked. We should provide some help to our allies when they are invaded. We do not, however, need to defend every Saudi citizen regarded as a traitor by the Saudis, even if he does write newspaper articles from America. We do not need to beat our chests in outrage every time an adversary spies on us; we should instead just adopt some ruthless defenses against the spies. Above all, however, we should get over the idea that a government is an enemy just because it is nasty, or even just because it is undemocratic.

Making other countries conform to USA standards is not a function of the U.S. government.

###

Copyright @ 2019 by the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation. All rights reserved. This article may be reprinted if credit is given to Charles G. Mills and fgfBooks.com.

Charles G. Mills, author of The Confederate Lawyer, is the Judge Advocate Emeritus (general counsel) for the New York State American Legion. As a New York lawyer, he has been arguing cases for fifty years in federal courts and in all levels of the New York courts.

Help the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation in its mission to publish the writings of Charles G. Mills and other great writers. Give a tax-deductible donation to FGF online.

Or send a check to: Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation
344 Maple Avenue West, #281
Vienna, VA 22180

Or call toll-free at 1-877-726-0058 to donate by phone. For more information, write to Fran Griffin at fgf@fgfBooks.com