How The US Stole Iraq

Summary

This video explores the complex reasons behind the US invasion of Iraq, challenging the simplistic narrative of securing oil resources. It delves into the influence of key decision-makers like Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld, who, in the aftermath of 9/11, saw an opportunity to project American power and topple Saddam Hussein, despite Iraq's lack of connection to al-Qaeda. The video outlines the strategic errors, such as dissolving the Iraqi military, which led to the rise of insurgent groups like ISIS. It critiques the decision-making process that was driven more by a desire for a decisive victory than by concrete intelligence, resulting in a costly and destabilizing war.

Takeaways

• 😣 The US went to war in Iraq not primarily for oil, but due to a complex mix of motivations including projecting American power and the desire to topple a dictator.
• 🔍 The initial narrative post-9/11 focused on al-Qaeda and Afghanistan, but certain US officials, including Paul Wolfowitz, redirected attention towards Iraq and Saddam Hussein.
• 🤔 The decision to invade Iraq was influenced by a small group of powerful men who saw an opportunity to assert US dominance and respond decisively to 9/11.
• 🚫 The US strategy in Iraq, including dissolving the Iraqi military, led to the empowerment of rebel groups and the rise of ISIS, which contributed to regional instability.
• 💸 The Iraq War resulted in significant financial costs, with over a trillion dollars spent, and a substantial loss of life, including nearly 10,000 American and over 200,000 Iraqi deaths.
• 🔑 The presence of US forces in the Middle East was justified by the claim of Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction, a narrative that was later debunked.
• 🗣️ Key figures like Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz played pivotal roles in shaping the narrative for war, despite initial skepticism from intelligence experts.
• 🏆 The 'Mission Accomplished' speech by President George Bush signified a premature declaration of victory, overlooking the complexities and challenges that lay ahead.
• 🌐 The war in Iraq had far-reaching implications for international relations and the perception of US foreign policy, contributing to a less stable Middle East.
• 🔄 The narrative of the Iraq War evolved from a response to 9/11 to a broader geopolitical strategy, with the US attempting to reshape the Middle East in its image.

Q & A

What was the initial narrative for the US going to war in Iraq?

The initial narrative was that the US went to Iraq to secure oil resources, as suggested by the phrase 'We went to Iraq to get oil, like America always does.'

Why is the oil narrative considered a 'lazy explanation' for the Iraq war?

The oil narrative is considered a 'lazy explanation' because, while oil was a factor, it was not the main reason for the war. The war was more about powerful American men wanting to project American power and the belief that it was vital to do so.

What was the immediate US response to the 9/11 attacks?

The immediate US response to the 9/11 attacks was to focus on Afghanistan, as it was understood that al-Qaeda, based there, was responsible for the attacks.

Why did Paul Wolfowitz direct the Defense Intelligence Agency to look into Iraq's involvement in terrorism after 9/11?

Paul Wolfowitz directed the Defense Intelligence Agency to look into Iraq's involvement in terrorism to establish a connection between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks, despite the known involvement of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

What was the significance of the meeting at Camp David following 9/11?

The meeting at Camp David was significant because it was where key advisors, including Paul Wolfowitz, began to push the idea of invading Iraq, even though Iraq had no direct connection to the 9/11 attacks.

What was Paul Wolfowitz's plan regarding Iraq's population and oil fields?

Paul Wolfowitz's plan was to take control of the major oil fields in Iraq by targeting the northern and southern population centers, effectively cutting off Saddam Hussein from his main revenue source and reducing his power.

How did the US attempt to justify the invasion of Iraq to the American public?

The US attempted to justify the invasion of Iraq by claiming that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and might give them to terrorists, which was a narrative that was heavily pushed despite little to no concrete evidence.

What was the outcome of the US Congress vote on the use of force against Iraq?

The US Congress voted to authorize the use of force against Iraq, with a majority of both Republicans and a significant number of Democrats supporting the authorization.

What was the 'Mission Accomplished' speech, and why was it premature?

The 'Mission Accomplished' speech was given by President George Bush on an aircraft carrier and signified a premature declaration of victory in Iraq. It was premature because significant fighting and instability continued long after this event.

How did the dissolution of the Iraqi military contribute to the rise of insurgent groups like ISIS?

The dissolution of the Iraqi military left many experienced soldiers unemployed and angry, leading them to join insurgent groups such as al-Qaeda in Iraq, which later evolved into ISIS. This contributed to the rise of these groups and the ongoing conflict in the region.

Outlines

00:00

😣 The Complex Motives Behind the US Invasion of Iraq

The paragraph delves into the reasons behind the US invasion of Iraq, challenging the simplistic narrative that it was solely for oil. It discusses how powerful American figures, including Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld, played a role in pushing for war. The paragraph also highlights the immediate aftermath of 9/11, where the focus was redirected from al-Qaeda in Afghanistan to Iraq, despite the lack of a direct link. The costs of the war in terms of lives lost and financial expenditure are starkly presented, along with the unintended consequence of destabilizing the Middle East.

05:00

😯 The Strategic Maneuvering for War and Its Aftermath

This section narrates the strategic discussions and personal influences that led to the decision to invade Iraq. It details how Paul Wolfowitz's plan to exploit Iraq's ethnic divisions and seize its oil fields piqued President Bush's interest. The narrative describes the psychological and political processes that led to the construction of a case for war, despite the absence of a direct link between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks. The paragraph also touches on the broader implications of the decision, including the search for a 'clear target' and the eventual fabrication of evidence to justify the invasion.

10:01

🔍 The Illusion of Victory and the Emergence of ISIS

The paragraph discusses the early failures and missteps in the US occupation of Iraq, particularly the decision to disband the Iraqi military, which led to a surge in insurgency. It outlines how this decision, along with others, contributed to the rise of al-Qaeda in Iraq and eventually ISIS. The paragraph emphasizes the financial cost of the war, the loss of life, and questions the rationale behind the invasion, suggesting that it was based on a fantasy of heroism and messianic complex rather than solid intelligence.

15:02

📣 A Call for Accountability and Further Exploration of Middle Eastern Politics

In the final paragraph, the speaker challenges the decision-makers of the Iraq War and reflects on the personal and political implications of their actions. There's a call for accountability and a recognition of the human cost of the war. The speaker also expresses a commitment to exploring further the complexities of Middle Eastern politics, hinting at a series of potential videos to come. Additionally, the paragraph includes a sponsorship message for ExpressVPN, highlighting its use for secure internet connections and accessing region-specific content on streaming platforms.

Keywords

💡Iraq War

The Iraq War, also known as the Second Gulf War, was a conflict that started in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq by a United States-led coalition. The war is a central theme of the video, as it explores the reasons behind the U.S. involvement and its consequences. The script mentions the war's initiation post-9/11 and the subsequent impact on the Middle East, highlighting the human and financial costs involved.

💡Oil

Oil is mentioned as a potential motivation for the U.S. involvement in Iraq, reflecting a common narrative that resource control, particularly of oil, often drives military actions. The video challenges this notion by suggesting that while oil was a factor, it was not the primary reason for the war, as other geopolitical interests and the desire to project American power played more significant roles.

💡Saddam Hussein

Saddam Hussein was the President of Iraq from 1979 to 2003. The video discusses him as a tyrant and a figure who was central to the U.S. rationale for war, with claims of his involvement in terrorism and possession of weapons of mass destruction. The script challenges the credibility of these claims and reflects on the consequences of his regime's overthrow.

💡Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs)

WMDs were the alleged weapons that Iraq was claimed to possess, which were used as a justification for the war by the U.S. government. The video critically examines this claim, suggesting that the evidence for these weapons was weak or non-existent, and that the insistence on their existence was part of a broader narrative to justify military action.

💡Paul Wolfowitz

Paul Wolfowitz was the U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense at the time of the Iraq War. The script identifies him as a key figure who pushed for investigating Iraq's ties to terrorism post-9/11 and later advocated for military action against Iraq. His role illustrates how certain individuals can influence foreign policy decisions significantly.

💡Mission Accomplished

The term 'Mission Accomplished' refers to the infamous banner displayed during President George W. Bush's speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003, which prematurely suggested that major combat operations in Iraq were over. The video uses this moment to highlight the overconfidence and misjudgment of the war's outcome, which later led to a prolonged and costly conflict.

💡George Bush

George Bush, the 43rd President of the United States, was a key decision-maker in the Iraq War. The video discusses his role in the decision to go to war, suggesting that he was influenced by advisors like Paul Wolfowitz and was seeking a clear target for retaliation post-9/11. His actions and decisions are central to understanding the video's narrative of the war's origins.

💡9/11

The September 11 attacks were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda. The video uses 9/11 as a pivotal event that set the stage for the U.S. to consider military action, although it clarifies that the attacks were carried out by al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, not Iraq, challenging the rationale for the Iraq War.

💡Coalition

The term 'coalition' in the video refers to the group of nations that joined the United States in the invasion of Iraq. The coalition's involvement is discussed as part of the broader context of international support for the war, which was sought to legitimize the military action.

💡ISIS

ISIS, or the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, is a militant group that emerged in the power vacuum following the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The video connects the rise of ISIS to the destabilization caused by the war, suggesting that the conflict inadvertently led to the growth of this extremist organization.

💡Human Rights Watch

Human Rights Watch is an international non-governmental organization that conducts research and advocacy on human rights worldwide. The video cites Human Rights Watch to provide a statistic on the number of deaths attributed to Saddam Hussein's regime, using this information to contrast the scale of violence before and after the U.S. intervention.

Highlights

The US went to war in Iraq for reasons beyond securing oil, including the desire to project American power.

Despite initial intelligence pointing to al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz directed attention towards Iraq's involvement in terrorism.

Paul Wolfowitz's memo to the Defense Intelligence Agency marked the beginning of a narrative shift towards implicating Iraq in terrorism.

At a post-9/11 meeting, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld suggested that Iraq, not Afghanistan, was the key player in global terrorism.

The idea of invading Iraq to cut off Saddam from oil revenue was intriguing to President Bush, given his background as a former Texas oilman.

The decision to go to war with Iraq was made shortly after 9/11, with the subsequent narrative built around this decision.

The narrative of Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) was used to justify the war, despite little evidence.

The US Congress, with bipartisan support, authorized the use of force against Iraq based on the WMD narrative.

The 'Mission Accomplished' speech by President Bush signified the beginning of a more complex and prolonged conflict.

The dissolution of the Iraqi military by the US led to many skilled soldiers joining rebel groups, including the precursor to ISIS.

The war in Iraq resulted in a power vacuum that allowed extremist groups like ISIS to rise and thrive.

The human and financial cost of the Iraq War was immense, with over a trillion dollars spent and significant loss of life.

The narrative of the Iraq War was constructed on a fantasy of heroism and messianic complex among powerful decision-makers.

The video challenges the viewer to consider the true motivations and consequences of the US involvement in Iraq.

The aftermath of 9/11 saw a group of powerful men construct a self-serving narrative that led to the unnecessary war in Iraq.

The video concludes by questioning the value and rationale behind the Iraq War, given its catastrophic outcomes.

Transcripts

- Why did the US go to war in Iraq?

- [Man] In the early stages of evacuations.

- Growing up, the narrative was always oil.

We went to Iraq to get oil, like America always does.

- We might find ourselves

without adequate supplies of energy in the future.

- [Reporter] All major oil fields in the south

are now under coaliltion control.

- But that's kind of the lazy explanation,

it's not quite it.

Oil is a part of it but it's not the main reason.

We went to war in Iraq

because several powerful American men wanted to.

Some of them thought it was vital, we had to.

Others just wanted to project American power.

But either way, here we are 18 years later,

nearly 10,000 Americans dead,

over 200,000 Iraqis dead,

over a trillion tax dollars spent.

And the result?

A Middle East that is less stable than ever

in part because of the US presence

and really because of it.

How did this happen?

I mean, I grew up and lived through this.

I studied it as an undergrad,

I studied it in grad school,

and yet it's taken me until now to really take a hard look

and to really understand exactly what happened.

So this is how the US stole Iraq.

- [Man] Saddam Hussein is a tyrant, a murderer,

and a man who has started two wars.

He's clearly someone who cannot be trusted or believed.

- All right, so it's the night of 9/11,

the country is reeling.

Who did this terrible thing and why?

How should the US respond?

And it became clear very soon

amongst intelligence and counter-terrorism people

that al-Qaeda was behind it,

this terrorist group that was mainly based in Afghanistan.

Later that night, the night of 9/11,

over at the Pentagon,

which earlier that day had been hit by an airplane,

a memo comes in from the Deputy Secretary of State.

The memo is urgent.

It's for the Defense Intelligence Agency,

the people who've spent their time

doing all the intelligence

for war and other defense purposes.

And this memo tells the intelligence agents

not to look into al-Qaeda,

the people they know did it,

but instead to look into ways

Iraq has been involved in terrorism for the previous decade.

The intelligence agents who got this memo

sort of scratched their head and were like,

"Wait what? What's going on here?"

These people were very familiar with the intel

and they knew that this attack

had come from al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is more than 1,000 kilometers away from Iraq.

It is a completely different place,

they speak a different language,

has nothing to do with Iraq.

Afghanistan and Iraq are totally different.

We had just been attacked by al-Qaeda,

and yet the Deputy Secretary of Defense

is asking for information about Iraq

and its ties to terrorism.

The person who sent this memo

was the Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz,

and he was just getting started.

(gentle music)

A few days after 9/11,

the president gathers all of his top advisors

out at his forest retreat right outside of Washington, DC.

They were there to discuss how to respond to these attacks.

The focus of this discussion was, of course, Afghanistan.

How do we retaliate against al-Qaeda,

this terrorist group that has been given

sort of a safe haven by the government of Afghanistan?

So they're sitting in some conference room in some lodge

in this forest retreat

debating how they're gonna retaliate against al-Qaeda,

and who pipes up again but this guy, Paul Wolfowitz?

This time with the support of his boss,

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

So Wolfowitz pipes up and he's like,

"You know, 9/11 was a pretty sophisticated attack.

"There's no way that this ragtag terror group of al-Qaeda

"could have pulled it off all alone.

"They probably had help from Saddam in Iraq."

And then Wolfowitz says

that "when it comes to global terrorism,

"Saddam is actually the head of the snake."

He actually said that,

basically saying that Saddam is behind all of this.

And everyone in the room is sort of like,

"Um, what the hell is this guy talking about?

"Saddam Hussein is a really bad guy,

"but he's not the head of the snake

"of international terrorism."

All these people,

these very informed international advisors. (chuckles)

Oh man, after some astonished glances,

the head of the Counterterrorism Center

raises his hands and says,

"Mr. President," quote,

"we were attacked on 9/11 by Osama Bin Laden

"and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

"Saddam Hussein and Iraq has nothing to do with this."

It's just like, I'm sorry,

I feel like as an eighth grader at this time

I was asking these questions.

I was like, "Is Iraq the same as Afghanistan?"

And here are the leaders of our country having to explain

that Saddam Hussein has nothing to do

with Afghanistan and al-Qaeda.

So this meeting at Camp David,

they move on and they keep talking about these plans

to bomb al-Qaeda.

But Paul Wolfowitz is stubborn and he does not give up.

Later that day there's a break in all of the meetings,

it's like the afternoon.

Attorney General John Ashcroft is playing the piano

in this sort of lobby

and a few others are singing along

these piano spirituals that he's playing.

Condoleezza Rice is one of these people singing along.

President Bush is sitting over by the fire.

It's this rustic cabin, it's all cozy.

He's drinking a cup of coffee.

And who cozies up to him at the fire but Paul Wolfowitz?

And Bush is like, "Uh, here we go again."

So he's like, "Listen, check out my plan.

"Half of Iraq's people live either way up here

"where they don't like Saddam.

"They're Kurds, they've been brutalized by Saddam,

"they do not like him.

"Or they live way down here in the south

"which is right near the border of our good friend Kuwait.

"We could easily come into Iraq

"and take both of these big population centers.

"Oh, and in doing so," says Paul Wolfowitz,

"we could naturally take the major oil fields in Iraq,

"thus cutting off Saddam from his main revenue source."

Or, in other words,

he said making Saddam, quote, "the Mayor of Baghdad."

He would only have power in Baghdad,

he would be cut off from the north and south of his country.

In this moment I can almost see George Bush's ears

literally perking up when he hears this last part

about cutting off the oil supply.

After all, Bush was a former Texas oilman

and he knew the importance of having access to oil.

So this plan sort of intrigued Bush

and he literally said to Paul Wolfowitz, quote,

"Why didn't you bring this up in the meeting?"

And Wolfowitz is like,

"Well, I didn't wanna step on the toes of my superiors."

Wolfowitz, we know you just wanted

to cozy up against the president

and plant this seed of how it would be to take over Iraq.

(gentle music)

So put yourself in George Bush's shoes for a second.

Your country was just brutally attacked on your watch,

and you are completely at a loss of what to do.

There's no clear easy target to retaliate against.

After a day of meetings,

of sitting around trying to figure out how to retaliate,

George Bush is realizing

that retaliating against a tiny group of terrorists

living in caves in Afghanistan

is like trying to hit smoke with a baseball bat.

Kind of impossible.

What George Bush wanted and felt like he needed,

and it turns out

what a lot of American lawmakers also wanted,

was a clear decisive target.

Not to try to hit smoke with a baseball bat,

but a nice solid hit.

A home run.

So I believe this day at Camp David,

four days after 9/11,

is when President Bush decided

that he would find a way to invade Iraq,

to make Americans and himself feel like

he was actually doing something definitive,

like toppling dictators,

as a rebuttal to the terrible attacks of 9/11.

Even though Iraq had nothing to do with al-Qaeda,

he and his people around him would find a way

to make a connection.

(gentle music)

- If they're harboring terrorists,

why not go in and get them?

- Well, the evidence is pretty conclusive

that the Iraqis have indeed harbored terrorists.

- So, over the next year,

this seed that Paul Wolfowitz really planted and nourished

in George Bush's mind

starts to spread to everyone around him,

and they start to find a way to sell the American public

on this idea of war with Iraq.

They get the British on board

and soon there's a full-blown debate

which revolves around this story

that Saddam has really big terrible weapons

and that he will likely give those weapons to terrorists

who will strike the United States

in another 9/11-type attack but way worse.

- The debate about the war against Iraq has divided many

along the political spectrum.

- Hundreds of millions of dollars

and I think that that is unnecessary.

- Real concern about this Russian war.

- And Bush kept saying weapons of mass destruction

over and over again.

He learned that short phrase.

- Very dangerous weapons of mass destruction

into this country.

- But wait, hold on a second, don't be fooled.

The lead-up to the Iraq War is often remembered

as this robust debate about WMDs,

weapons of mass destruction.

- Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity

to wage biological and chemical warfare

and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.

- But I'm here to tell you

that you need to think differently about it.

The decision to go to war in Iraq was already made.

It was made moments after 9/11

when a small group of powerful men

imagined a glorious military campaign

to liberate oppressed Iraqis and topple a dictator

to make themselves and their country

feel like we got a home run after we were attacked.

From there, everything molded to fit that decision.

Did Saddam Hussein have weapons of mass destruction?

Did he wanna give those to terrorists?

No, there was no evidence.

The little evidence there was

was threadbare and super speculative.

But these guys turned into sort of like tea-leaf readers

where you can look at the tea leaves

and see whatever you need to

to support the decision that they made many months earlier.

And it wasn't just these guys.

Soon, this vision of toppling Saddam

and having this American victory

spread to the American Congress,

Republicans and Democrats who were also getting on board

with this idea of America, a force for good,

toppling the bad guy.

It's a really wild study in human psychology.

When you're a true believer in something,

you really really believe that you need to do something.

Everything you see confirms what you want to believe

or what you need to believe.

We all do it,

but it's just scary when our leaders are doing this,

and they're doing it on beliefs and decisions

that have deep ramifications for human suffering.

So yeah, you can go over the debates and the intelligence

and the back and forth on whether or not

Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

It was all a show to help these people confirm

what they'd already decided they wanted to do.

So by the end,

after weapons inspectors had done 700 inspections

and found no weapons,

this group of guys eventually just start resorting

to full-on lying.

Dick Cheney gets up in his speech and says.

- Simply stated, there is no doubt

that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.

- Well, there was plenty of doubt.

In fact, he simply stated,

there can be no evidence that Saddam has WMDs

was the reality at the time.

Even the Secretary of State, Colin Powell,

who was totally against this fantasy-filled vision

of going and invading Iraq,

even him eventually got on board,

painstakingly getting in front of the UN

and going over a bunch of thin or non-existent evidence

and claiming that it was watertight.

- My colleagues, every statement that I make today

is backed up by sources, solid sources.

These are not assertions.

What we're giving you are facts and conclusions

based on solid intelligence.

- Solid intelligence, no no no no.

These are words that Colin Powell has lived to regret

for the rest of his life.

A lot of people saw Colin Powell

as the one sane guy in the room.

And so here at the UN

when he's drinking the Kool-Aid

and backing this intelligence,

a lot of people got on board.

By October 10th, 2002,

the US Congress was fully on board.

Almost all the Republicans in the chamber

as well as a sizeable group of Democrats

voted to authorize the US to use force against Iraq.

- [Man] Senate Joint Resolution 45

to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces

against Iraq.

- He has said he wants the power to be able to go to war.

This seems completely consistent with that request

that we say, "Yes, Mr. President,

"you have that power to go to war."

- This resolution gives the president the authority he needs

to confront the threat posed by Iraq.

- Saddam Hussein and his sons

must leave Iraq within 48 hours.

- And then it happened.

- [Reporter] Sirens went off in Baghdad

just a few minutes ago.

An air raid is in progress over Baghdad.

- Explosions in Baghdad.

- [Bush] Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly.

- [Reporter] You could have a report

that an estimated 30 Iraqis surrendered at the border.

(dramatic music)

(jet whooshes)

(triumphal music)

- Two months after the invasion,

George Bush gives a speech on an aircraft carrier

with this giant sign that says,

quote, "Mission accomplished."

This is the type of thing Bush surely was dreaming about

while he was sitting by the fire at Camp David,

drinking coffee,

listening to Paul Wolfowitz explain the plan

to take over Iraq.

Big triumphant America just toppled the dictator.

Mission accomplished.

But this is the part of the story

when all of the dreams, the fantasies,

the visions of glory start to topple.

Mission accomplished was really mission just beginning.

(gentle music)

One of the first things that the US did

when they took over Baghdad

was they dissolved the huge Iraqi military.

They just said, "No, we don't want you anymore.

"All of you commanders and leaders, soldiers, you're out.

"We're gonna start fresh."

In typical simplistic thinking of these visionary leaders,

the idea was that doing so would allow them

to start totally fresh with a new army,

completely rid of any sort of influence of Saddam Hussein.

So now you have a bunch of ex-Iraqi army members

who are angry at the United States and unemployed.

Oh, and all of them have extensive military experience.

- There is a large number of former Iraqi soldiers

that are unemployed now.

That is a huge concern.

- It is just painful.

What a terrible decision.

So these guys run off and they start to join

the growing number of rebel groups that are there

cropping up to oppose the United States presence.

One of those groups is called al-Qaeda in Iraq,

which later turns into the Islamic State of Iraq,

which eventually becomes

the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS.

A well-oiled governmental and military organization

run by many of the military leaders

who were ousted by the Americans from the Iraqi military

when they took over Baghdad.

So Iraq turns into the US trying to fight

this growing rebellion.

Billions of dollars turns into tens of billions of dollars,

and then hundreds of billions of dollars,

and eventually crossing over into over a trillion dollars

of tax payer money

to fight this unnecessary war.

Saddam Hussein was a really bad guy.

He committed mass genocide

against his own people, the Kurds.

He executed many others, imprisoned many others.

(man speaking in foreign language)

- All in all,

the number of dead on Saddam Hussein's hands

numbers around 250,000

according to Human Rights Watch.

That was over 25 years of his brutal regime.

And yet in just eight years

of this war that the US started in Iraq,

way more people were killed.

A power vacuum was opened up that allowed ISIS to thrive,

and for what?

Why did we do this?

How was this worth it?

I really believe that in the aftermath

of those towers falling,

this group of guys

began constructing a story for themselves.

A fantasy, one not grounded in real facts from intelligence,

but one grounded in fear and in desire to be the hero,

in the messianic complex that always infects the powerful.

That fantasy trickled down

and spread to other people in power,

leading us into one of the most catastrophic

and unnecessary wars in modern history.

(gentle music)

- I challenge the president

or whoever has us here for 15 months

to ride alongside me.

I'll do another 15 months if he comes out here

and rides along with me every day for 15 months.

- Oof, Saddam Hussein, George Bush, Paul Wolfowitz.

What a story, what a story.

Yeah, anyway.

I wanna thank the sponsor of the video today, ExpressVPN,

which is a service I've used for years.

When I traveled, I would use it all the time

to basically route my connection through the United States

so I could not be kicked out of my Gmail.

I don't travel very much anymore

so I use ExpressVPN these days to watch Netflix,

specifically Canadian Netflix.

So basically with ExpressVPN

it's not only a security measure

that helps you secure your connection with encryption

and all of this great technology.

The reason I like it so much

is because I can route my connection

through other countries,

and then Netflix thinks I'm in the UK or in Canada

and I can watch UK and Canadian stuff

that isn't available on Netflix in the United States.

This is actually the case

with a lot of different steaming services.

I love ExpressVPN.

It's super easy.

It's in the menu bar of my computer

and all I have to do is click it and decide the country

and boom I'm there within a few seconds.

Oh, and the best part is you can get three months of this

literally for free if you use the link in my description.

It's expressvpn.com/johnnyharris.

When you click that link,

it helps support this channel

but it also gives you three months

literally free, zero money to use this.

Thank you ExpressVPN for supporting this channel

and thank you all for watching.

If you want more Middle East content, there is endless.

It's what I studied in my undergrad,

it was Middle Eastern politics,

and there's just a lot.

So I'm gonna get there,

I'm gonna get to the rest of them if you all want it

'cause there is endless videos I could make

for the Middle East.

Anyway, have a good day, see you.