The New York Times‘ Helene Cooper on President Obama’s speech last night (3/29/11):
To the democracy protesters across the Middle East, he vowed that the United States would stand by them, even as he said that “progress will be uneven, and change will come differently in different countries,” a partial acknowledgment that complex relations between the United States and different Arab countries may make for different American responses in different countries.
“Complex relations” make for “different American responses”?That’s a nicer way of saying that we are on the side ofthe dictators you are protesting,which makes it rather unlikelythe U.S.will intervene on your behalf.
The U.S. is for the U.S., isn’t it? Every time, no exceptions, from what I can see. Though the rationale for our actions is often put forward as altruistic and humanitarian, there is only one reason we ever do anything. Money. Follow the money and you will find the true impetus behind any action or inaction. If it serves the purposes of our corporate masters, if it furthers their “interests,” our country will send troops, if not, we won’t. It’s never had anything to do with “progress” of any sort, and it’s never been any more “complex” than figuring out if there is more money to be made under a dictator or under some other government. Democracy, of course, is usually not favored by people in power, either here or anywhere else, but sometimes the demands of the populace need to be considered for the sake of “stability.” If a dictator fails to control his people we sometimes need to replace him. It’s hard to make money when there is “unrest.”
The media, naturally, being extraordinarily large businesses themselves, are unlikely to ever expose such obviously mercenary impulses, but will continue to obfuscate, prevaricate, dissemble and distract in their own self interests. Why would they do anything else?