Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
It took over that role (if we take the Worldview of what its spokesmen said, wrote and presumably believed) for the most noble of reasons (e.g., GEN Westmoreland was only one of many Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson era spokesmen who sang the same song):

Portion of quoted piece: "It remains a fact that few countries have ever engaged in such idealistic magnanimity; and no gain or attempted gain for human freedom can be discounted."
In many situations it has been seen that the "heart" behind the US action has been in the right place. That has to be respected. However, it is the implementation that has been almost universally poor. Libya is the latest best example of this.

The Worldview of, say, the British, French and Dutch was quite different. Quite rationally in their perception they saw the US "takeover" as a coup - and the new US role as neo-colonialism and neo-imperialism (or other names, such as Pax Americana, American Hegemony, American Exceptionalism, etc.).

Regards

Mike
OK, so can we agree then that the US used the situation at the time to "takeover"? Then whether it was a "coup" or a natural assertion of authority that comes with power becomes academic.