Top 1200 Regime Change Quotes & Sayings

Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned and this regime is on its way to annihilation.

That is what I want: I want a better Saudi Arabia. I don't see myself as an opposition. I'm not calling for the overthrow of the regime, because I know it's not possible and is too risky, and there is no one to overthrow the regime. I'm just calling for reform of the regime.

Change of regime with respect to Iraq had nothing to do with this; it had everything to do with the fact that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And at the time change in regime as a policy came into effect in 1998, it was seen as the only way to compel Iraq to get rid of its weapons of mass destruction.

I'm not an extremist. And I disagree with Saudis who are calling for regime change and stuff like that.

I'm fighting for real change, not just partisan change where everybody else gets rich but you. I'm fighting all of us across the country are fighting for peaceful regime change in our own country. The media donor political complex that's bled this country dry has to be replaced with a new government of, by, and for the people.

What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States.

We invaded Iraq to change a totalitarian, despotic regime, and we have been successful there.

Before the change of regime in 1989, you couldn't talk about anti-Semitism, and after the regime change, people started to talk about taboo subjects. I was 8 years old in those days, and later, in politics and society, these extreme wright ideologies got stronger - the skinhead movement was started, a lot of ex-Nazis emigrated and financially supported these extreme right movements in Hungary.

We need a regime change in this country.... If we launch a pre-emptive strike on Iraq we lose all moral authority.

It's a brutal regime, in the Assad regime, that is willing to take any measure, no matter how immoral or war criminal acts, to persecute its goals.

When you have a regime that would be happier in the afterlife than in this life, this is not a regime that is subject to classic theories of deterrence.

A neoliberal disaster is one who generates a mass incarceration regime, who deregulates banks and markets, who promotes chaos of regime change in Libya, supports military coups in Honduras, undermines some of the magnificent efforts in Haiti of working people, and so forth.

America does not need to continue to have regime change throughout the world, nation-building.

I worry a little bit about - quote - "regime change." We haven't had a great deal of success with that in years. That's just really difficult.

I can’t on my own change the regime in South Africa or teach the Palestinians to learn to live with the Israelies, but I can start with me.

There is no suggestion of regime change; quite the contrary, this is an initiative to help people and to help governments who are inclined toward change.

How will the bombing of Baghdad, a city of five million, accomplish a regime change?

The only thing that will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons is regime change in Tehran.

The Assad regime has lost the consent of the governed, and it is difficult to see how a replacement Alawite regime would be able to regain this consent.

I don't know about [Rex] Tillerson, but I do know that John Bolton doesn't get it. He still believes in regime change. He's still a big cheerleader for the Iraq war. He's promoted a nuclear attack by Israel on Iran. He wants to do regime change in Iran. So, I think John Bolton is so far out of it and has such a naive understanding of the world. If he were to be the assistant or the undersecretary for Tillerson, I'm an out automatic no on Bolton.

The only way to resolve the North Korean problem is to change the regime.

In Russia, tweeting or sharing real news that's embarrassing to the regime can land you in prison. Imagine, then, the response of the regime to 'fake news' that's damaging to the Kremlin.

The burden is on Saddam Hussein. And our policy, our national policy - not the UN policy but our national policy - is that the regime should be changed until such time as he demonstrates that it is not necessary to change the regime because the regime has changed itself.

Would Americans accept if we decided to come here and decide who your rulers should be? So why do you expect us Iranians to accept the idea that the United States shall come in there and decide who shall govern us?Of course, everyone knows that I'm also opposed to the Iranian regime and I have said that we must change the regime. But it is us, the Iranians, that must change the regime.

To move any regime you need to have co-operation and co-ordination between Kurds, Shia Arabs, Sunni Arabs, the people and the army. Until we have this we cannot change the regime.

Regime change has been an American policy under the Clinton administration, and it is the current policy. I support the policy. But regime change in and of itself is not sufficient justification for going to war--particularly unilaterally--unless regime change is the only way to disarm Iraq of the weapons of mass destruction pursuant to the United Nations resolution.

You know that we are not in the regime-change game. We are against interference in domestic conflicts.

The Zionist regime is an injustice and by its very nature a permanent threat. Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm.

Those who think they can revive the stinking corpse of the usurping and fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation.

One of the ways the North Korea regime has kept power is by keeping its people ignorant of the living standards in the outside world. That's the underlying lie that supports the regime - not that their country is 'normal' but that they are better off.

In addition to declaring and destroying all of its weapons of mass destruction, Iraq must end its support for terrorism. It must cease the persecution of its civilian population. It must stop all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. And it must release or account for all Gulf War personnel, including an American pilot, whose fate is still unknown. By taking these steps, and only by taking these steps, the Iraqi regime has an opportunity to avoid conflict. These steps would also change the nature of the Iraqi regime itself. America hopes the regime will make that choice.

I don't believe in regime change, certainly not in the Middle East.

It remains our policy to change the regime until such time as the regime changes itself. So far, we cannot be sure that he is cooperating or he [Saddam Hussein] is acting in a way that could give us comfort, or should give the international community comfort, that he is giving up his weapons of mass destruction. He continues to give us statements that suggest he is not in possession of weapons of mass destruction when we know he is.

I've always said that the Cuban regime will not change politically.

You can't change a regime on the basis of compassion. There's got to be something harder.

You don't help a country by supporting a military regime that denies any sign of democracy, and what defeated Pakistan was its military regime.

If your regime is not strong enough to handle a joke, then you don't have a regime.

I think those who have wanted regime [of Bashar Assad] change have made a mistake.

I can't on my own change the regime in South Africa or teach the Palestinians to learn to live with the Israelies, but I can start with me.

We have, during his regime, during President Obama's regime, we've doubled our national debt. We're up to $20 trillion.

The Régime did not want Communists; it wanted robots. It will take at least a generation to change them back into humans again.

Most of the European leaders look at themselves as having to follow the United States, because if the US opposes them, there will be a regime change.

The Putin regime's income comes from oil and gas exports. If we could crash the price of these commodities, we could bankrupt the regime.

I also think regime change in Syria is a bad idea. And that's an ongoing question. It's one of the things I like about Donald Trump, one of the reasons I endorsed him is he thinks regime change is a mistake. But John Bolton thinks completely the opposite. They are diametric opposites.

I am no apologist for Fidel's [Castro] regime. It is, after all, a totalitarian regime. So I would like to see that change.

[John] Bolton was an advocate for regime change in Libya, so was Hillary Clinton actually. And Donald Trump said it was a mistake. I agree it was a mistake to do regime change in Libya. We became more endangered and actually worse people took over afterwards.

The American people are sick of our failed regime change wars.

It's important to understand the policy of the U.S. towards North Korea is to deny North Korea possession of a nuclear weapon and the ability to deliver that weapon. Our strategy has been to undertake this peaceful pressure campaign we call it enabled by the four no's.The four no's being that we do not seek regime change, a regime collapse, an accelerated reunification of the peninsula, and we do not seek a reason to send our forces north of the demilitarized zone.

We must acknowledge that for scores of years the Iraqis have offered martyrs and victims but have not been able to change the regime.

We have been talking with leaders: Change is coming; you can no longer have a closed regime with an open society - satellites, social media, the Internet - you have this kind, this kind of society moving forward, and you are running this closed regime; this is not sustainable. This cannot continue.

American politicians have openly said that the sanctions are aimed at bringing about regime change in Russia. That's aggressive enough.

When a nation has allowed itself to fall under a tyrannical regime, it cannot be absolved from the faults due to the guilt of that regime.

Look at the results of regime change in Iraq. You can't possibly claim that it was successful.

Regime change is not within that purview. And that has been an all-out disaster.

I think the Bush Administration was bound and determined on regime change, and we will be paying the price of that for some time to come.

The Shah's regime was an incorrigible regime and after a while, when the revolution happened, the situation began to change, revolutionary conditions was created...we simply wanted to change the regime.

Whether or not regime change is a good idea or a bad idea. I don't think because I think the regime change was a bad idea it means that Hussein was necessarily a good idea.

When I published my first work, I thought I would never be able to go back to Lebanon. I thought they'd arrest me at the airport. I thought I would change literature as we know it. I thought I'd have men lining up at my door wanting to be my boyfriend. But later I discovered that no one read the book. Or no one cared. Right now, I have only one book translated into Arabic. Someday, maybe if the Syrian regime falls, there will be others, but probably another regime will come into power and it will employ just as much censorship.

We now believe it is appropriate for Saddam Hussein to be forced to change, either by the threat of war, and therefore that compels him to cooperate. If he cooperates, then the basis of changed regime policy has shifted because his regime has, in fact, changed its policy to one of cooperation. So if he cooperates, then that is different than if he does not cooperate.

Don't start any diet or regime if you can't make that an everlasting lifestyle change because it simply will not work.