Opinion of Muammar Gaddafi

[The Last Northerner]

It was a mistake to remove him. A serious mistake.

I would argue that it was the best thing to do, considering he was going to basically burn the rebel-controlled towns to the ground and slaughter thousands of his own people (or so he threatened), far more than have died in a Gaddafi-less world.

The problem the US made was not following up and contributing support to the secular-ish types and forcing the Islamists to back down.

Like in Iraq?

Putting an end to that mass murderer is yet another wonderful accomplishment of Barack Obama.

Would you say the same if Bush did it? I somehow doubt it.

HP regardless.

The difference with Iraq is that we ignored the rebels the first time, and then when we finally got rid of Saddam in the second war, there wasn't really any rebel forces we could have supported. We just went in and attacked, essentially. At least in Libya there was a clear, non-Gaddafi opposition that at least appeared democratic.

I see where you are comming from. With hindsight bias of course, would you have supported an overthrow of Saddam back in 91 using the Shia/Kurds/anti-Saddam elements as auxiliary ground forces?

[Zioneer]

It was a mistake to remove him. A serious mistake.

I would argue that it was the best thing to do, considering he was going to basically burn the rebel-controlled towns to the ground and slaughter thousands of his own people (or so he threatened), far more than have died in a Gaddafi-less world.

The problem the US made was not following up and contributing support to the secular-ish types and forcing the Islamists to back down.

Like in Iraq?

Putting an end to that mass murderer is yet another wonderful accomplishment of Barack Obama.

Would you say the same if Bush did it? I somehow doubt it.

HP regardless.

The difference with Iraq is that we ignored the rebels the first time, and then when we finally got rid of Saddam in the second war, there wasn't really any rebel forces we could have supported. We just went in and attacked, essentially. At least in Libya there was a clear, non-Gaddafi opposition that at least appeared democratic.

I see where you are comming from. With hindsight bias of course, would you have supported an overthrow of Saddam back in 91 using the Shia/Kurds/anti-Saddam elements as auxiliary ground forces?

Probably. The religious sectarianism wasn't as bad then, and when there's a legitimate opposition that's literally asking for help (and doesn't appear to be as brutal as the current dictator), toppling the dictator should be at least considered. Perhaps it shouldn't be done, but considering the option is good. And in any case, if the dictator throws a punch at a neighboring country, definitely push him out.

That's one of the reasons why (for example) I wouldn't support an immediate overthrow of Saudi Arabia, as vicious as they are; there is no organized resistance. However, if North Korea (as another example) attacked South Korea, I think that there's a legitimate argument for toppling the Kim dynasty while in the course of throwing them out of South Korea.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

The support for Gaddafi is almost universal on Youtube. Go on every video and there's hardly a negative comment about him.

That is literally the worst demographic you could cite, dude.

Various demographics use Youtube. The site is overwhelmingly leftist/progressive, much more united in political opinion.

looks like it's time for this gif again:

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

The support for Gaddafi is almost universal on Youtube. Go on every video and there's hardly a negative comment about him.

That is literally the worst demographic you could cite, dude.

Various demographics use Youtube. The site is overwhelmingly leftist/progressive, much more united in political opinion.

looks like it's time for this gif again:

Basically every poll on this site confirms it's overwhelmingly progressive slant. That is undeniable.

[Simfan34]

I have gotten many days worth of enjoyment just by playing the Wikipedia pronunciation of his name. A+, would FF (Fight Freedom?) again.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The support for Gaddafi is almost universal on Youtube. Go on every video and there's hardly a negative comment about him.

That is literally the worst demographic you could cite, dude.

Various demographics use Youtube. The site is overwhelmingly leftist/progressive, much more united in political opinion.

looks like it's time for this gif again:

Basically ever poll on this site confirms it's overwhelmingly progressive slant. That is undeniable.

Other polls I have personally conducted on the matter suggest more than half of all youtubers have had sex with my mother.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The support for Gaddafi is almost universal on Youtube. Go on every video and there's hardly a negative comment about him.

That is literally the worst demographic you could cite, dude.

Various demographics use Youtube. The site is overwhelmingly leftist/progressive, much more united in political opinion.

looks like it's time for this gif again:

Basically ever poll on this site confirms it's overwhelmingly progressive slant. That is undeniable.

Other polls I have personally conducted on the matter suggest more than half of all youtubers have had sex with my mother.

My poll has shown that I am apparently so gay according to most male youtubers that they apparently want to rape my father. I had no idea.

[Zioneer]

How does this site (or this poll in particular) have a progressive slant when currently, 41 people think Gaddafi is an HP, and only 9 think he's a FF (and over half of those 9 are probably the reflexively anti-West type)?

[Blair]

Gaddafi is awful, besides his state funding of terror he basically ran Libya as his personal backyard.

In regards to comparisons with Iraq 1991 is more apt. 2003 was preemptive action, whilst attacking Gaddafi in 2011 was a result of him trying to roll down protesters with tanks and planes

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I wish he had faced trial at the iOc rather than get lynched.not that I blame the Libyans for doing it, but something felt very wrong about it.

[ingemann]

How does this site (or this poll in particular) have a progressive slant when currently, 41 people think Gaddafi is an HP, and only 9 think he's a FF (and over half of those 9 are probably the reflexively anti-West type)?

Well because non-moronic progressives recognise Gaddafi as the horrible excuse for a human being he was.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Evil.