Did those countries jointly attack Libya because the NATO charter demanded it or because those countries agreed it was a good idea? Did all NATO countries join in attacking Libyan forces or just some of them? Joining NATO doesn’t give the NATO alliance sole control over who you’re country goes to war with.
The destruction of the Libyan airforce so Gaddafi couldn’t drop bombs on his civilian population like Assad did in Syria was a good thing that saved lives.
Unless you’re a tankie who jerks it the images of schools and hospitals ripped to shred by barrel bombs.
The destruction of the Libyan airforce so Gaddafi couldn’t drop bombs on his civilian population like Assad did in Syria
Brown leader inevitably bombs civilians if not for glorious white interference
good thing that saved lives.
Yeah, surely Libya wasnt catapulted into horrifying civil war that lasted decades after and killed hundreds of thousands of people in formerly the most developed country in Africa…
You’re accusing me of racism but I could just as easily accuse you of thinking the only way for Africans to be properous is if they are ruled over by a strongman dictator.
The people of Libya rose up against Gaddafi in thr arab spring. The civil war had already begun.
I’ve seen what a barrel full of explosives and metal shrapnel does to the inside of a school classroom when dropped from a helicopter. NATO prevented that from happening in Lybia and you’ll never forgive them for it.
the only way for Africans to be properous is if they are ruled over by a strongman dictator
That’s only if you believe the western propaganda. [Libya had a functioning representative democracy and the role of Gaddafi is overblown. Morocco today is a monarchy and so is Saudi Arabia and I dont see you calling for the bombing of either country.
One of the cornerstones of democracy is education for everyone, and Libya had an extremely successful education system that turned Libya into one of the countries with highest education level in Africa, hardly pointing to the decisions of a dictator wanting to keep the masses oppressed.
I understand you believe Gaddafi was a bloody, ruthless, corrupt dictator, but Libya was arguably more Democratic than any country in its surroundings and the source of most claims of horrible dictatorship come from western media apparatus of “eagle burger freedom institute”.
The General People’s Congress existed as a formal legislative body, but it did not make Libya a democracy because any opposition to Gaddafi got disappeared. The system was an authoritarian regime with a centralized power structure under Gaddafi himself, utilizing the GPC to maintain the appearance of popular involvement without true democratic governance.
Morocco today is a monarchy and so is Saudi Arabia and I dont see you calling for the bombing of either country.
If the people of Morocco or Saudi Arabia rose up like the Libyan people did in the arab spring, I would absolutely support using NATO to stop those dictators from bombing their own civilian populations.
Gaddafi doesn’t seem as bad only because you have never seen published photographs of his atrocities. Extrajudicial killings, torture, public executions, political repression, and elimination of dissent. Lots of horrors that I guess are okay as long as the trains run on time.
We also don’t know what a Libya where NATO didn’t intervene looks like. It’s not unbelievable that the civil war would’ve resulted in the same result but with a much higher body count.
By creating the country in Africa with highest Human Development Index instead of becoming your run off the mill slavery-sustained petrostate like Saudi Arabia?
Ask Libya how defensive NATO is.
Did those countries jointly attack Libya because the NATO charter demanded it or because those countries agreed it was a good idea? Did all NATO countries join in attacking Libyan forces or just some of them? Joining NATO doesn’t give the NATO alliance sole control over who you’re country goes to war with.
You mean the action taken under a UN mandate to implement a no fly zone and protect civilians?
The destruction of the Libyan airforce so Gaddafi couldn’t drop bombs on his civilian population like Assad did in Syria was a good thing that saved lives.
Unless you’re a tankie who jerks it the images of schools and hospitals ripped to shred by barrel bombs.
Brown leader inevitably bombs civilians if not for glorious white interference
Yeah, surely Libya wasnt catapulted into horrifying civil war that lasted decades after and killed hundreds of thousands of people in formerly the most developed country in Africa…
You’re accusing me of racism but I could just as easily accuse you of thinking the only way for Africans to be properous is if they are ruled over by a strongman dictator.
The people of Libya rose up against Gaddafi in thr arab spring. The civil war had already begun.
I’ve seen what a barrel full of explosives and metal shrapnel does to the inside of a school classroom when dropped from a helicopter. NATO prevented that from happening in Lybia and you’ll never forgive them for it.
That’s only if you believe the western propaganda. [Libya had a functioning representative democracy and the role of Gaddafi is overblown. Morocco today is a monarchy and so is Saudi Arabia and I dont see you calling for the bombing of either country.
One of the cornerstones of democracy is education for everyone, and Libya had an extremely successful education system that turned Libya into one of the countries with highest education level in Africa, hardly pointing to the decisions of a dictator wanting to keep the masses oppressed.
I understand you believe Gaddafi was a bloody, ruthless, corrupt dictator, but Libya was arguably more Democratic than any country in its surroundings and the source of most claims of horrible dictatorship come from western media apparatus of “eagle burger freedom institute”.
The General People’s Congress existed as a formal legislative body, but it did not make Libya a democracy because any opposition to Gaddafi got disappeared. The system was an authoritarian regime with a centralized power structure under Gaddafi himself, utilizing the GPC to maintain the appearance of popular involvement without true democratic governance.
If the people of Morocco or Saudi Arabia rose up like the Libyan people did in the arab spring, I would absolutely support using NATO to stop those dictators from bombing their own civilian populations.
Libia has been at war almost since Gaddafi’s death at war. Is that a better situation than with Gaddafi?
Edit: missing words.
The people rose up against Gaddafi in the arab spring. He would’ve used his airforce to drop bombs on his civilian population the same was Assad did.
It was a civil war, not a revolt.
deleted by creator
Almost what?
“At war”, sorry.
Gaddafi was bad, sure, but NATO reduced libya to a state where there’s now open air slave markets.
Gaddafi doesn’t seem as bad only because you have never seen published photographs of his atrocities. Extrajudicial killings, torture, public executions, political repression, and elimination of dissent. Lots of horrors that I guess are okay as long as the trains run on time.
We also don’t know what a Libya where NATO didn’t intervene looks like. It’s not unbelievable that the civil war would’ve resulted in the same result but with a much higher body count.
By creating the country in Africa with highest Human Development Index instead of becoming your run off the mill slavery-sustained petrostate like Saudi Arabia?
You can rape and murder innocents. Kill anyone who questions your regime. Blow up airliners. All good as long as thr HDI number is high enough.
I bet you’re a huge fan of Israel. They have such a high HDI number compared to their neighbors. It excuses all atrocities.
Oh, which country did Libya invade? What was the civilian murder rate compared to neighboring countries? Give me numbers instead of vibes, please
How about a Wikipedia page?
Give me number of murdered civilians in Libya at the time in comparison with Egypt or Chad, both neighboring countries.
And you’re not answering: which country did Libya invade?