If you are under 30 it is not surprising you have not heard of this as much of the news media will cover up this type of story.
Just about everyone on MSM ( except FOX) has worked for Carter, Clinton or Obama. Is there any wonder there is so much bias
Tulsi Gabbard is supposed to be the anti-war candidate, But in this interview she takes a very hawkish stance with North Korea, Donāt be fooled she is not what you think she is
Sheās certainly wrong about Gaddafi and Libya. Of course, the question is whether Kim is also as wrong as she is about this.
The Iran nuclear deal seems very loose and dependent on Iranās transparency and goodwill - not seen much in past experience. A new deal will be needed but the US withdrawal from the current pact should help this along. The tragedy would be if the US stay away from the table.
If Gaddafi had a nuclear bomb he would still be in power and Libya would be a productive modern state, not the dysfunctional hell hole that we created.
Iran would be wise not the make the same mistake Libya did
1 Like
Gaddafi led Libya for 40 years. This was after a military coup. What evidence is there that he was moving the country along to become in any meaningful way a productive modern state?
I understand Gaddafi is a very troubled individual and he definitely had numerous faults, but as far as his vision of a united Africa I always truly respected that. I had a professor who grew up in Libya and touted that medical care and education was free under Gaddafi ruling. Also remember before Gaddafi got there Libya literacy rate was I think around 25% and after him it shot up a whopping 87%. Libya also provided its citizens with loans at 0% interest rate. Again there are a bunch of things he did wrong but heās done a lot for Libya as well and looking at the state of Libya now itās definitely much worst now.
Well, Iāve heard that Hitler led the construction of autobahns and the VW beetle.
Spot on momoisnyc, their banking system is the one thing the US could not allow to continue, look at all the counties the US is at War with or trying to go to War with, everyone of them operates outside the US banking system, that is very telling
1 Like
Just think if Hitler had taken on the world economically instead of militarily he might had created some kind of a European Union with a common currency administrated by Germany. Something to think about
Note: the VW beetle never made into production before the start of WWII, It was brought back to life by the American Military as a means to create economic activity in post war Germany
2 Likes
The period of economic advancement in Libya starts after the re-commencement of western relations with the country after Gaddafi agreed under huge international pressure to end his development of weapons of mass destruction and to renounce his support of terrorism. You surely cannot be saying that Gaddafi advanced his peopleās lot out of human kindness and economic goodwill. Donāt forget this was after he had backed the Lockerbie bombing in which a US airliner was blown apart over Scotland killing 259 people on board plus 11 on the ground.
Actually, I didnāt believe at the time that the west should have got involved in the Libyan civil war nor any of the Arab Spring uprisings. But in Gaddafiās case, weād have probably had to come to deal with him at some stage. Same as Saddam. Same as Assad. In the end, for me, a dictator is a slave-master and their people deserve freedom, whatever the cost.
The question put forth, is the country better off in 2019 than it was in 2011 under Gaddafi. The chart I posted above should answer that but if you need more proof here is this
Gaddafi took power illegally in 1969. He ran an authoritarian police state which subdued and victimised his own people, he sponsored international terrorism, he ran a corrupt and criminal government. For the first decade of his reign it seems the country actually got better off materially base don oil export revenue, though its hard to think that this was a benevolent regime which redistributed wealth equally.
After he effectively put his own country into isolation by developing nuclear weapons and sponsoring terrorism, the country declined and only recovered after he renounced these positions. And this was only due to the hard line taken by the west.
Then came the Arab uprisings and a civil war in Libya. Better the west had never got involved but its wrong to say this was a good and caring leader of a free people who was cheated out of a benevolent position by a treacherous US. He was a terrorist, a gangster, guilty of illegal usurpation of his countryās government, an acquirer of nuclear weapons intended for aggressive use and an authoritarian dictator guilty of terrible repressions and crimes against his own people. Good riddance.
Iām sorry for the Libyan people. I think the west could have done more and could still be doing more in reconstitution. But we donāt have the political determination to run armies of occupation any more. At least the Libyan state is powerless to act aggressively in the region.
It would seem, in retrospect, our two bad choices in Libya and Iraq were dictator or Islamic fundamentalism? And then back to Iran with the Shah or Islamic fundamentalism.
It made sense, at the time, to get rid of the dictators and allow the people free elections. They, in my mind, made bad decisions. Iām in the Rand Paul camp now; letās not force our will on people as the people in the Middle East, save for my beloved Israel, made choices that we, and Israel, have to worry about everyday.
And donāt get me started on Afghanistanā¦
1 Like
Donāt forget the US Navy On July 3rd, 1988 shot down Iran Air Flight 655, this was an Airbus A300 caring 290 people 66 of them were children. Just who are the terrorists
1 Like
1 Like
Iām against all dictators, for me theyāre each living on a death sentence which we can enact at any time if we need to, if justified. That said, the west cannot go round knocking them off alphabetically or randomly and as we are where we are we need to fond ways to deal with the ones we cannot either ignore or depose - Saudi etc.
On the USS Stark incident, yes, Iām fully aware that the US has committed some fatal errors over the years. That doesnāt give blanket legitimacy for Gaddafiās regime in Libya, nor any other evil despotās anywhere else. The US is not the villain in world foreign affairs.
You mention the 1988 incident, but you ignore the context. 37 US naval personnel were killed on the USS Stark by an Iraqi jet attack in 1987. The US was neutral at the time, the ship was in international waters. The US gave clear warnings that defensive measures would be taken if any aircraft appeared to endanger US vessels in the future. In the 1988 incident, the US reported the aircraft had been mistaken for an F-14, this was not terrorism, this was an accident.
You know Dennis, we can trade news stories all day about how the US did something bad and how some other country did something bad, but these tallies are not what drive foreign policies.
What do you see as the USās role in the world? How could this best be accomplished?
That was part of the āMaster-planā - developed by Walther Funk - āto suck the wealth out of Europeā - Certainly that seems to be happening as the Mediterranean Countries are pushed out of self governance and their economies are devastated by āEU-Economic-Polliciesā.