Every time so-called Western nations want to invade and take over the economy, culture and the resources of another country, they claim their actions are necessary to ensure “democracy” by causing a regime change. Well, it wasn’t so long ago that invasions were legitimized by saying the invaded countries needed civilization.
History indicates that countries have been invaded and more “friendly” leaders have been put into place to keep dollars flowing to Western businesses and individuals.
These invaded countries have had gold, diamonds, ivory, rubber, coffee, copper, coal, aluminum and platinum. The biggest resource desired these days is oil.
I don’t have to name every country but let’s take a look at a few.
Regime change was desired in Iraq, which had a leader, Saddam Hussein, who was labeled a dictator. Despite what the imperialist press told you to justify the invasion of Iraq, there were no weapons of mass destruction and there was no alliance with Al Qaeda.
The problem with Iraq was that they didn’t bow down to the West.
After invading Iraq, the fighting didn’t stop. Al Qaeda came into Iraq after the invasion – perhaps because of the invasion. Saddam was no friend of Al Qaeda; he hated the terrorist organization.
Again, the West tried to bring “democracy” to Iraq by supporting and helping insurgents they felt would be more loyal to and accommodating of the West.
In Libya, Muammar Gaddafi was labeled a Despot and a dictator. However, the majority — the mostly black majority — of other African nations described Gaddafi as “The King of Kings” because he helped African countries fight apartheid and modern-day colonialism. Gaddafi even paved roads in many impoverished African nations.
But Libya has oil and Gaddafi planned to stop selling Libyan oil for dollars and said he wanted to be paid in gold.
That didn’t sit well with Western powers and subsequently Gaddafi was labeled a dictator who hated and hurt his own people. So the West armed the so-called Libyan rebels some of whom turned out to be Al Qaeda members, better known as terrorists who hate America and others in the West.
Al Qaeda members, probably using arms originating from the U.S. and others, were the ones who killed America’s ambassador to Libya and three other Americans in an attack on the Libyan city of Benghazi.
Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad has always said people fighting against the Syrian government were terrorists and not upset countrymen.
The “terrorists” can’t beat the Syrian army so some Western nations want to jump into the fray. Some people want young American soldiers to be put in harm’s way just because the Syrian government and its leaders won’t bow down like the West wants them to.
My question is: If the imperialist press can identify freedom fighting rebels, why can’t those rebels be interviewed? Why can’t the media ask so-called rebels who taught them to fight or where they get their weapons? Why is it that all Western news agencies seem to be able to do is rubber-stamp what they have been told about dictators, despots and weapons of mass destruction, like chemical weapons that were never found in Iraq?
To me, the only difference in what used to happen in the past and what is happening now is semantics. Countries were once invaded to bring about civilization and now countries are bombed so there can be democracy.
The problem is American-style or Western-style democracy is not always best in other parts of the world.
America, and others in the West, are not the world’s police forces. If the masses of people were supporting so-called rebels, the “rebels” would not need foreign military assistance.
*Lucius Gantt, a political consultant based in Tallahassee, is author of the book Beast Too: Dead Man Writing which is available at Amazon.com. You can like The Gantt Report page on Facebook and contact Gantt at allworldconsultants.net