Yesterday Civilization, Today Democracy

The Gantt Report

Every time so-called Western nations want to invade and take over the economics, the culture and the resources of another country the Western nations claim their actions were necessary to insure “democracy” by causing a regime change.

Well, it wasn’t so long ago that invasions were legitimized by saying the invaded countries needed civilization.

I do have an appointment scheduled with my ophthalmologist, but my sometimes diluted eye sight sees invasions of sovereign countries as merely money grabs!

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 by the West 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. Iraq had a leader that was labeled a dictator. While Iraq did have conflicts and skirmishes with some of it’s neighbors, the neighbors, for the most part, didn’t get on the phone with Washington about Iraq randomly attacking people. Iraq had land and border disputes with Iran and Kuwait.

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 and perhaps because of the invasion. Saddam Hussein 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 to the West.

In Libya, Gaddafi was labeled as a despot and a dictator. However, the majority, mostly Black majority, of other African nations described Gaddafi as “The King of Kings” because he had helped African countries fight apartheid and modern-day colonialism. Gaddafi even paved roads in many impoverished African nations. But Libya had oil and Gaddafi planned to stop selling Libyan oil for dollars and said he now wanted to be paid in gold.

Well, obviously that didn’t sit well with western powers and subsequently Gaddafi was labeled as a dictator that hated and hurt his own people. So the West armed the so-called Libyan rebels that eventually turned out to be Al Qaeda members, better known as terrorists that hate America and others in the West.

Al Qaeda members armed by the US and others were the ones that killed America’s Libyan ambassador.

Now, we bring this ‘remove the dictator and bring democracy idea’ to another Eastern country – Syria. Syrian President Assad has always said people fighting against the Syrian government were terrorists and not upset countrymen.

Well, 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 from? Why is it that all western news agencies can do is rubber stamp what they were told about dictators, despots and weapons of mass destruction, like chemical weapons that have been discussed but never revealed?

To me the only difference in what used to happen then from what is happening now is the 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.