January 6, 2026 • 10 mins
Each of the historically successful U.S. campaigns to oust foreign leaders were either the result of U.S. and allied actions during World War II, or were the result of brief targeted campaigns to remove a rouge leader with no sustained military commitment. Each of the four failed regime changes were sustained wars the U.S. either chose to enter – in the case of civil wars in Vietnam and Libya, or the sustained “War on Terror” in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Have a question or topic you want to have addressed,
just ask.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
This is the Brian mud Show.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Today's QNA.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Why the Douros Alster will prove to be successful? What
history shows about us prompted regime changes.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
This is brought to you by me Melissa Ashes.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Check Mark collections each day feature a listener question that's
sent by one of these methods. You may email me
Brian Mudd at iHeartMedia dot com, heavy up on social
at Brian Mud Radio. May also use the iHeartRadio talk
back feature. We'd love it if you go into the
iHeartRadio app, you locate w j and O or viro Patreon,
(00:44):
and you also see a little microphone button there.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
You see it, you tap it. You may lay down
the message right there.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
Maybe something even for a future Q and A like this.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Can you go ahead and list all of the countries
that it's actually worked. I mean, I think you said Panama,
anything else. I detect some skepticism and maybe not, but
Joel laughing too kind of. I thought you. I thought
you did list a bunch yesterday. I did. I did.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
I'm not impugning. People are busy, might not catch everything.
I get it. It's it's all right, appreciate you being there,
Appreciate you listening, even if you're a little frustrated times.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Is that right?
Speaker 2 (01:30):
So today's note is in response yesterday's Q and A
Maduro's removal and Venezuela's future, in which I said this, well,
there are still more operations in questions than answers about
what exactly is going to happen in terms of the
transitional leadership from here.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
It's important to note that the United.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
States has a far better history at removing dictators than not.
The perception to the contrary is a case of recency.
Bio and I then went on to explain that the
removal of Maduro was most similar to nineteen eighty nine's
removal of Manuel Noriega and Panama, because, like Maduro, Noriega
(02:12):
had outstanding arrest warrants in the US, was arrested, brought
to the US, tried, and convicted. Meanwhile, Panama's future became
far brighter following Noriega's Oulster. So, following the multi decade
commitments and outcomes with the War on Terror in Afghanistan
and Rock, many are understandably skeptical of the United States
(02:36):
getting involved in the Oulster of a foreign head of
state and transition of power.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
I do get that.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
However, as mentioned, whether you agree with the Trump administration's
decision to travel down this path with Venezuela, Our country's
history with this sort of thing is actually really good.
It's exceedingly positive. An answer to today's question here is
a breakout of the countries and territories the US has
directly had a hand enforcing regime change in and whether
(03:05):
the effort was successful? And the first one, uh real
trivia question. I bet not only would most Samaricans have
no clue, I bet you most Hawaiians at this point
wouldn't either.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Did you know.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
That our first related effort was Hawaii? Was Hawaii? Yeah,
in eighteen ninety three we ousted the dictator of Hawaii.
He called that an eventual win. I think, right, Joel's
(03:46):
looking in Maybe not.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
I just I just can't imagine a dictator of Hawaii. Right,
you will wear grass skirts?
Speaker 2 (03:56):
I mean, what's a little different than that?
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Okay, you will.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Next up Italy nineteen forty three, So getting rid.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Of Mussolini probably a good thing.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Then you take a look at nineteen forty five, where
do you stand on the whole Hitler thing.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
I don't think he was a good guy, was he.
I think that was probably a good move to probably.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
To take out Hitler. Yeah, all right, so that's a win.
Related Japan nineteen forty five. Also win there. So then
you get into some others. Iran nineteen fifty three. Now
you take a look at Iran today, you might look
at that as a problem. But Iran in nineteen fifty
three was actually a huge win. That is what I
(04:46):
ended up paving the path towards actual stability in that
country for some time before you had the Ayatola that
it ended up stepping in by the late seventies. Again,
guatemalanineteen fifty four, that was a win. Dominican Republic in
nineteen sixty one, that worked out. Now you get into
(05:08):
South Vietnam in nineteen sixty three, that did not go
as planned. Brazil in nineteen sixty four, Yep, that worked out,
Chile nineteen seventy three, yes, Grenada Grenada in a nineteen
eighty three that worked out.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Pandamon nineteen eighty nine.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
Yes, and then the three most recent And some of
this is subjective, but I'm saying that, no, it did
not work out in all three of these Afghanistan two
thousand and one, Iraq two thousand and three, Libya twenty eleven,
and in the case of all of these.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
The leader or the body.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
In the case of like the Taliban in Afghanistan, they
were eliminated, were taken out, but things did not go
as planned, right, And so that's why I say those
will not be successful, and also why I think the
person by many is colored in a negative fashion because
those are the most recent. But if you're keeping score,
(06:07):
that's eleven successful endeavors compared to four relative failures, with
three of those four happening to be the most recent
interventions preceding the current now storre of Maduro, which again
I think is why so many are leery of this
type of thing.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
Now.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
In the interest of brevity not breaking down each of
the circumstances surrounding the successful efforts the unsuccessful ones, I'll
highlight the similarities between successful US provoked regime changes and
those that have not worked as planned. Each of the
historically successful US campaigns to alice foreign leaders were either
(06:42):
the result of US and Allied actions during World War
Two or or the results of brief targeted campaigns to
remove a rogue leader with no sustained military commitment. That's
always been the key for US. Each of the four
failed regime changes or sustained wars that the US either
(07:03):
chose to enter, as was the case in the civil
wars that had been taking place in Vietnam and Libya,
or the sustained war on terror in Afghanistan in Iraq,
but the Trump administration is carried out Ballow is a
roadmap that has been successful eight out of eight times. Previously,
there isn't a declared US war in Venezuela. US boots
(07:25):
aren't on the ground serving as de facto law enforcement,
and importantly, the people of Venezuela are overwhelmingly supportive, which
is the key to long term stability with any effort
at regime change. So about that point and ultimately will
be what will be the most pivolic cogue in all this.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
To give you an.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Idea, I'm not even going to walk you back to
where Venezuela was prior to Hugo Chavez and communistic dictatorships
coming into place.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
Where you had.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Venezuela is actually the fourth most prosperous country in the world,
according to GDP, even just taking a look at Maduro
since he's the figure in question. In twenty twelve, the
final year of Hugo Chavez's reign prior to his death
that led to the AMPHIG successor Maduro, Venezuela's per capita
(08:17):
GDP stood at twelve thousand, six hundred ninety dollars. That
is the equivalent of just under eighteen thousand dollars today. Okay,
that was twenty twelve. By twenty twenty four, per capita
GDP had fallen to forty five hundred dollars. And how
bad is it now? The current estimated per capita GDP
(08:40):
in Venezuela is estimated to be two thousand, nine hundred
and seventy bucks. Can you begin to imagine trying to
live an under three thousand dollars per year? The collapse
of the country's economy is why so many have fled
the country over the past couple of decades. By the way,
the most recent cautionary tale about socialism, communism doesn't work out.
(09:02):
You always run out of other people's money at some point.
So to simply recover from the damage of Maduro's communistic policies,
just Maduro would result in a standard of living that
is six times greater than the current economic reality in
that country, and with Venezuela having the world's largest or
(09:24):
oil reserves, it's extremely doable. Most importantly, for US interest,
it is critical long term for Venezuela to have a
leader that's aligned with US interests over the interests of
China and Russia, which was the case under Maduro. As
I mentioned yesterday, there are many reasons as to why
President Trump made the decision to move forward with this operation.
DUA was a wanted fella in the Venezuela responsible for
(09:46):
about thirty percent of the illicit drug trade into the
United States. US companies had assets seized and stolen from
them through nationalization, and Venezuela has the capacity produced multiple
times the amount of oil that it currently produces, which
would create energy price stability and permanently lower energy costs
(10:07):
in the United States and around the world. The most
important of all is that for China and Russia not
to have a permanent foothold in Venezuela and Cuba, controlling
the energy and being able to base military operations in
this hemisphere. Presidentum's highly successful history in using brief and
convincing force to exact desired outcomes. With the successful history
(10:29):
of similar regime changes, provides ample reason to be optimistic
about the outcome of this operation.
Have a question or topic you want to have addressed,
just ask.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
This is the Brian mud Show.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Today's QNA.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Why the Douros Alster will prove to be successful? What
history shows about us prompted regime changes.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
This is brought to you by me Melissa Ashes.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Check Mark collections each day feature a listener question that's
sent by one of these methods. You may email me
Brian Mudd at iHeartMedia dot com, heavy up on social
at Brian Mud Radio. May also use the iHeartRadio talk
back feature. We'd love it if you go into the
iHeartRadio app, you locate w j and O or viro Patreon,
(00:44):
and you also see a little microphone button there.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
You see it, you tap it. You may lay down
the message right there.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
Maybe something even for a future Q and A like this.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Can you go ahead and list all of the countries
that it's actually worked. I mean, I think you said Panama,
anything else. I detect some skepticism and maybe not, but
Joel laughing too kind of. I thought you. I thought
you did list a bunch yesterday. I did. I did.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
I'm not impugning. People are busy, might not catch everything.
I get it. It's it's all right, appreciate you being there,
Appreciate you listening, even if you're a little frustrated times.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Is that right?
Speaker 2 (01:30):
So today's note is in response yesterday's Q and A
Maduro's removal and Venezuela's future, in which I said this, well,
there are still more operations in questions than answers about
what exactly is going to happen in terms of the
transitional leadership from here.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
It's important to note that the United.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
States has a far better history at removing dictators than not.
The perception to the contrary is a case of recency.
Bio and I then went on to explain that the
removal of Maduro was most similar to nineteen eighty nine's
removal of Manuel Noriega and Panama, because, like Maduro, Noriega
(02:12):
had outstanding arrest warrants in the US, was arrested, brought
to the US, tried, and convicted. Meanwhile, Panama's future became
far brighter following Noriega's Oulster. So, following the multi decade
commitments and outcomes with the War on Terror in Afghanistan
and Rock, many are understandably skeptical of the United States
(02:36):
getting involved in the Oulster of a foreign head of
state and transition of power.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
I do get that.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
However, as mentioned, whether you agree with the Trump administration's
decision to travel down this path with Venezuela, Our country's
history with this sort of thing is actually really good.
It's exceedingly positive. An answer to today's question here is
a breakout of the countries and territories the US has
directly had a hand enforcing regime change in and whether
(03:05):
the effort was successful? And the first one, uh real
trivia question. I bet not only would most Samaricans have
no clue, I bet you most Hawaiians at this point
wouldn't either.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Did you know.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
That our first related effort was Hawaii? Was Hawaii? Yeah,
in eighteen ninety three we ousted the dictator of Hawaii.
He called that an eventual win. I think, right, Joel's
(03:46):
looking in Maybe not.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
I just I just can't imagine a dictator of Hawaii. Right,
you will wear grass skirts?
Speaker 2 (03:56):
I mean, what's a little different than that?
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Okay, you will.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Next up Italy nineteen forty three, So getting rid.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Of Mussolini probably a good thing.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Then you take a look at nineteen forty five, where
do you stand on the whole Hitler thing.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
I don't think he was a good guy, was he.
I think that was probably a good move to probably.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
To take out Hitler. Yeah, all right, so that's a win.
Related Japan nineteen forty five. Also win there. So then
you get into some others. Iran nineteen fifty three. Now
you take a look at Iran today, you might look
at that as a problem. But Iran in nineteen fifty
three was actually a huge win. That is what I
(04:46):
ended up paving the path towards actual stability in that
country for some time before you had the Ayatola that
it ended up stepping in by the late seventies. Again,
guatemalanineteen fifty four, that was a win. Dominican Republic in
nineteen sixty one, that worked out. Now you get into
(05:08):
South Vietnam in nineteen sixty three, that did not go
as planned. Brazil in nineteen sixty four, Yep, that worked out,
Chile nineteen seventy three, yes, Grenada Grenada in a nineteen
eighty three that worked out.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Pandamon nineteen eighty nine.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
Yes, and then the three most recent And some of
this is subjective, but I'm saying that, no, it did
not work out in all three of these Afghanistan two
thousand and one, Iraq two thousand and three, Libya twenty eleven,
and in the case of all of these.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
The leader or the body.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
In the case of like the Taliban in Afghanistan, they
were eliminated, were taken out, but things did not go
as planned, right, And so that's why I say those
will not be successful, and also why I think the
person by many is colored in a negative fashion because
those are the most recent. But if you're keeping score,
(06:07):
that's eleven successful endeavors compared to four relative failures, with
three of those four happening to be the most recent
interventions preceding the current now storre of Maduro, which again
I think is why so many are leery of this
type of thing.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
Now.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
In the interest of brevity not breaking down each of
the circumstances surrounding the successful efforts the unsuccessful ones, I'll
highlight the similarities between successful US provoked regime changes and
those that have not worked as planned. Each of the
historically successful US campaigns to alice foreign leaders were either
(06:42):
the result of US and Allied actions during World War
Two or or the results of brief targeted campaigns to
remove a rogue leader with no sustained military commitment. That's
always been the key for US. Each of the four
failed regime changes or sustained wars that the US either
(07:03):
chose to enter, as was the case in the civil
wars that had been taking place in Vietnam and Libya,
or the sustained war on terror in Afghanistan in Iraq,
but the Trump administration is carried out Ballow is a
roadmap that has been successful eight out of eight times. Previously,
there isn't a declared US war in Venezuela. US boots
(07:25):
aren't on the ground serving as de facto law enforcement,
and importantly, the people of Venezuela are overwhelmingly supportive, which
is the key to long term stability with any effort
at regime change. So about that point and ultimately will
be what will be the most pivolic cogue in all this.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
To give you an.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Idea, I'm not even going to walk you back to
where Venezuela was prior to Hugo Chavez and communistic dictatorships
coming into place.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
Where you had.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Venezuela is actually the fourth most prosperous country in the world,
according to GDP, even just taking a look at Maduro
since he's the figure in question. In twenty twelve, the
final year of Hugo Chavez's reign prior to his death
that led to the AMPHIG successor Maduro, Venezuela's per capita
(08:17):
GDP stood at twelve thousand, six hundred ninety dollars. That
is the equivalent of just under eighteen thousand dollars today. Okay,
that was twenty twelve. By twenty twenty four, per capita
GDP had fallen to forty five hundred dollars. And how
bad is it now? The current estimated per capita GDP
(08:40):
in Venezuela is estimated to be two thousand, nine hundred
and seventy bucks. Can you begin to imagine trying to
live an under three thousand dollars per year? The collapse
of the country's economy is why so many have fled
the country over the past couple of decades. By the way,
the most recent cautionary tale about socialism, communism doesn't work out.
(09:02):
You always run out of other people's money at some point.
So to simply recover from the damage of Maduro's communistic policies,
just Maduro would result in a standard of living that
is six times greater than the current economic reality in
that country, and with Venezuela having the world's largest or
(09:24):
oil reserves, it's extremely doable. Most importantly, for US interest,
it is critical long term for Venezuela to have a
leader that's aligned with US interests over the interests of
China and Russia, which was the case under Maduro. As
I mentioned yesterday, there are many reasons as to why
President Trump made the decision to move forward with this operation.
DUA was a wanted fella in the Venezuela responsible for
(09:46):
about thirty percent of the illicit drug trade into the
United States. US companies had assets seized and stolen from
them through nationalization, and Venezuela has the capacity produced multiple
times the amount of oil that it currently produces, which
would create energy price stability and permanently lower energy costs
(10:07):
in the United States and around the world. The most
important of all is that for China and Russia not
to have a permanent foothold in Venezuela and Cuba, controlling
the energy and being able to base military operations in
this hemisphere. Presidentum's highly successful history in using brief and
convincing force to exact desired outcomes. With the successful history
(10:29):
of similar regime changes, provides ample reason to be optimistic
about the outcome of this operation.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics
Two Guys (Bowen Yang and Matt Rogers). Five Rings (you know, from the Olympics logo). One essential podcast for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics. Bowen Yang (SNL, Wicked) and Matt Rogers (Palm Royale, No Good Deed) of Las Culturistas are back for a second season of Two Guys, Five Rings, a collaboration with NBC Sports and iHeartRadio. In this 15-episode event, Bowen and Matt discuss the top storylines, obsess over Italian culture, and find out what really goes on in the Olympic Village.