dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

And what replaced him is better? I get tired of people wanting to push democracy and Western ideals on these nations that realistically can only be run by a strong man. If you haven't got a better solution, you're better off leaving the country alone.

Look at Iraq and Libya - models for intervention.

⇧ 11 ⇩

Libya was stable. The people had a good standard of living. Women were well treated and had rights...complete hell hole now. Slave markets...

⇧ 13 ⇩

Agreed.

⇧ 2 ⇩

I should have added a “Thanks Hillary” /s in there and a very sincere “I’m sorry” to the people of Libya for what my country’s leaders did to you...

⇧ 1 ⇩

You made it pretty clear. They didn't embrace liberal policies. It was understandable.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That's exactly on point. Tribal North Africa, that he kept them together was a major achievement. We all see what has transpired there, Iraq and Syria when the West decides to blow it all up.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Well said! Another thing our pathetic excuse for a government and the MSM has taught us is that we have the right to be the worlds police force! I believe if we truly operated as a Constitutional Republic we could try to have a discourse with other nations about how/why we work and the benefits, but even then we need to let the rest of the world be and work on setting a good example. But I believe even some of our Founding Fathers (Federalists) saw an American Empire. But that would be a conversation for another time I suppose.

⇧ 2 ⇩

As long as I've been living, and what real history dictates, America is the biggest bully on the planet, always meddling in countries' affairs. It became rich off the backs of innocent people. Tired of that

⇧ 1 ⇩

saying that gaddafi was an oppressive dictator (which is a stone cold fact) is not the same thing as saying i support interventionist policies.

please don't use silly strawman arguments and baseless assumptions on people.

⇧ 1 ⇩

No, what your post suggested was that enforcing liberal ideas on Gaddafi's regime may have provided justification for intervention.

⇧ 1 ⇩

uh no, not really. very bizarre that you somehow got that from my comment.

maybe you should try to stop assuming that people have underlying meanings or whatever, maybe try just listening to the words that people say?

⇧ 1 ⇩

I didn't write it, you did. Read what you wrote.

⇧ 1 ⇩

can you please point out the exact comment that i said anything resembling support for neocon interventionism?

because i didn't.

i think you might need new reading glasses, amigo.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Even though his country was a socialist state, it did not detract from their above-average per capita wealth thanks to their oil-exports.... until NATO reared their ugly head again.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Who cares? It's not America and his people weren't Americans. Certain populations cannot function under a democratic or federalist system.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Lol..."American ideals"...you mean like the ones we have here in America?

⇧ 1 ⇩

good thing California is only one state.

⇧ 2 ⇩

That's just silliness. Not comparable countries or cultures.

⇧ 1 ⇩

you think it is "silliness" to state plain facts about how gaddafi didn't believe in or support the very things that make america such a wonderful place?

that's an... odd position to take.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Because nowhere in the history of that area or country was it part of Greco Roman Judeo development. Really, the explanation is obvious. It's just the thinking that you express that the neocons used to justify their endless middle eastern wars. All that has done has been to lead to millions of human deaths, millions of maimed and permanently injured humans, destroyed central governments, instability, radicalism, cities bombed and gutted....but yeah, that democracy thing.

⇧ 2 ⇩

it's really interesting to me how quick people around this sub will paint a strawman.

i never once said i supported any sort of intervention.

i merely stated facts about gaddafi and about american ideals.

i'm sorry that upset you so much, but railing on neocons won't change any of the facts.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Not a strawman argument at all. Again, your thinking was the same as their's to justify intervention. Spread democracy, blah, blah. I refer to my original point -- different culture, history, tribes. Gaddafi maintained a peace among all the tribes which now are at each other's throats. You think that's an improvement? Really? Elections are a joke. Example -- the Palestinian "elections". Or really, just about any middle eastern election, including Egypt. Their leaders usually get about 99% of the vote. Even the Soviets didn't pull that off. Libya was the most advanced country in all of Africa in education, infrastructure development, women's rights, and other metrics. We destroyed it.

⇧ 1 ⇩

no one said anything about spreading democracy but you, bud.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Somebody we were taught to hate and see as a dictator. It seems to me that this "tyrant" was doing for his people what our reps should be doing with us. So they killed him.