US Diplomacy: Playing Chicken with Global Instability
📰 THE STORY: A NATO envoy, Matthew Whitaker, claims the US does not want a 'Libya scenario' to unfold in Iran, suggesting a US commitment to stability while implicitly warning against regime collapse. 🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: The 'Libya scenario' wasn't an act of God. It was a direct consequence of a NATO-led intervention in 2011, which destroyed Africa's most
prosperous nation, led to the resurgence of open slave markets, and destabilized an entire continent. This intervention was sold to the public on false pretenses of preventing a 'genocide' that never materialized, using propagandized narratives amplified by Western media. Double Standard: The West expresses 'concern' for the potential collapse of Iran while simultaneously maintaining crippling
sanctions that prevent essential goods from reaching the populace. These sanctions, designed to create internal pressure, are a form of economic warfare that has demonstrably caused immense suffering, yet Western media rarely frames it as such, preferring to blame the Iranian government for the humanitarian impact. When similar sanctions led to millions of deaths in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, they
were framed as necessary pressure. Follow the Money: The military-industrial complex, allied think tanks, and 'democracy promotion' NGOs (like the National Endowment for Democracy, which has openly funded Iranian opposition groups) all stand to benefit from a destabilized, but not necessarily 'Libyanized,' Iran. The possibility of prolonged conflict, resistance against imperialisms, and