RamaY wrote:UBanerjee wrote:
One way to avoid getting putting your magnificent family in danger of martyrdom is to avoid turning heavy weaponry and aircraft on people who are tired of living under the jackboot of a cuckoo (these were all imagined also, CIA hallucinations) (gunfire and use of mortars/rockets all hallucinations only)
Sure, retribution may not come and you and yours may live long and happy lives. Maybe it will come.
Before judging Q one has to see his rule from multiple angles.
1. Is it any different from an average Islamic nation?
First of all, yes. Gaddafi is over-the-top even by the standards of Mid-East tinpots. Second of all, what exactly is the point here? That there is more than one foolish tinpot?
RamaY wrote:
2. Did his rule do more common good/bad to his people? Libya is rank 58 in HDI

well ahead of BRIC nations. Its percapita GDP is $13K
Do you know how many people live in Libya (6.4 million, far less than that in the early days) and how much oil wealth is in there? You have a nation smaller than Bangalore with the 10th largest proven reserves in the world! Also your per capita GDP measure is not useful because it only reflects average, not the distribution. Gaddafi uses Libya's oil wealth to patronize his favorite tribal groups while leaving out tribes he doesn't like or with whom he has problems. Drastically so in fact. As a result his cronies grow fat while the rest are not so fat. And the not so fat are not very happy about that. 42 years is a long time to wither.
RamaY wrote:
3. Did Q resort to mass violence against his own people before?
Easily, yes. Regular public executions of political dissidents and assassinations.
RamaY wrote:
4. How did west play him for/against Islamic nations?
Gaddafi was a joker in the pack until the Second Gulf War. He has a long history that goes much further than just 5-6 years back. He is neither a pawn of the West nor a rival; he had his own aims of African supremacy. For example he was a great friend of Idi Amin, and kept Amin propped up.
CRamS wrote:UBanerjee wrote:
Please.
One way to avoid getting putting your magnificent family in danger of martyrdom is to avoid turning heavy weaponry and aircraft on people who are tired of living under the jackboot of a cuckoo (these were all imagined also, CIA hallucinations) (gunfire and use of mortars/rockets all hallucinations only)
Sure, retribution may not come and you and yours may live long and happy lives. Maybe it will come.
Oh yeah, its none of your f%^&ing business nor mine nor the NATO gangsters' business as to how Libyans live their lives.
And its none of your business what NATO chooses to do, is it now. Since Gaddafi's might makes right over Libya, NATO's might makes greater right. And you can huff and puff all you want, good luck changing that. Try not to be so morally preachy towards me, since "helping civilians" and "NATO gangsters" are both emotionally bullshit slogans I don't give a fig about.
The idea that those who give their lives trying to get something for their country from under a petty tyrant's rule, are turncoats and traitors, is what started this. I find that idea repulsive to truth and sense. The whites are doing it, so the guy on the receiving end is a saint and those whom the whites are helping are turncoats and traitors. Real deep philosophy here. The sort of thinking that has led to Mugabe and Amin and Mao, because they opposed white people the rest didn't matter. However dhimmified India's elite may have been, it's a testament to our civilization that we didn't spawn that.