Why was he so based?


Other urls found in this thread:


Almost forgot:

People should see the sections on Gadaffi from Adam Curtis's new documentary. He's a kinda sad figure really and not one who should be taken to seriously.

Also everyone should know the story of how Gadaffi hired Green Berets to train terrorists and assassinate his political enemies including in Colorado.


Why was the US all like "Gaddafi has to go"?
I have heard that Libya had Scandinavian style social democracy in North Africa under Gaddafi. I didn't know their Social democracy was actually that robust. So much for all that bullshit from people who say that Social Democracy can only exist under imperialism. Libya was a third world country and they made Social Democracy work

They were missing the democracy part and this could only be done because of all the oil.

Except Gaddafi was literally elected by a people's congress.

Two main reasons.
Firstly Gadaffi attempted to form a united African union.
A united Africa would be just about the most powerful nation on earth in terms of sheer resource abundance and associated wealth.
This would threaten western (and Chinese) industries such as the diamond trade.

Second, he attempted to create a gold backed currency.
The only reason the US dollar is so valuable is due to the petro-dollar arrangement (basically an agreement that oil will only be sold in US dollars on the international marketplace).
If Libya were to switch over to selling oil with a gold back currency, it would undermine the petro-dollar system and as such American economic influence.

Really the arms for Libya controversy in general is something that should be more well known, like other known deep state actions.

Imperialism will do that to a person. When everybody else in the world is after you, you have nothing else to rely on but solidarity with your people.

Only people i have ever seen praising Gaddafi are westerners. I know plenty of libyans and they hate him. Never even seen a arab who liked him kek. Why do so many leftists always praise these authoritarian dictators?
I guess tankies gonna tank

Libya's rising discontent with Gadaffi was also likely one of the reasons why the US started bombing and funding. Gotta have their group fill the power vacuum.

Except a lot of people supported him. People came out by the thousands waving the green flag and holding pictures of him after the U.S. started bombing Libya.

Wasn't Ghadaffi a dictator?

People look at how shit Libya is now and learn that under Gaddafi they had a higher standard of living and conclude he was the good guy. It helps if you're a communist knowing that he had a socialistic ideology and aided leftist terrorist organizations. However they don't really think about how totalitarian the country was and forgot all the stupid shit he did.

No, he was the permanent leader of the Libyan revolution.

What does that even mean?

Basically there were two sectors of government. The "Jamahiriya sector" (which was largely democratic) and the "Revolutionary sector" which oversaw revolutionary committees. Gaddafi along with his advisors lead the revolutionary sector of government.

What's the alternative? These countries don't exist in a vacuum, they exist under the foot of giant imperialist power after their blood.

But what about alleged human rights abuses?

I'm not reproaching Ghadaffi, I'm trying to get an accurate picture of his rule. My experience with him is only through propaganda, from either side.

Most of those were fabricated by the U.S. media to drum up support for the fact that we were bombing Libya. As a matter of fact the "rebels" who overthrow him were western backed mercenaries.


People who say he had some leftists policies hence he was good are very ignorant if not dishonest. They mention that the standard of living was higher but not his crackdown on dissent and brutal torture. Just because someone opposes the US doesn't make them good.

Oh shut up you retarded conspiracy theorist "most of those were fabricated". Go to the gulag.

Just an example>>1293525



These guys ran a propaganda article on Pol Pot, claiming that details of the Cambodian genocide were fabricated. Going to need something more reputable.

You tankies are cancer. If I oppose a brutal dictator I am an "Imperialist". This is why the a lot of rad left is cancer. To you either your an Imperialist or you must support brutal dictatorships like DPRK Syria and Libya. Gaddafi wasn't the worst but he shouldn't be praised as a good guy. Their are so many accounts and reliable information on the crimes of his regime.



Check the links.

Gold standard shit is a libertarian meme. Remember when ISIS bragged they were making gold dinar coins that were supposed bring down the western economy.

In the UN report if you look at the states praising Libya they are countries like Syria ,DPRK and the gulf monarchies.

It doesn't say they were going to give him an award. You are desperate to defend a dictator. Refute this tankie en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Salim_prison
Stop making the left cancer

You guys are imbecile. Everybody with a sane mind can see that without Gadaffi, Libya is Somalia tier, do you prefer that?

You can not run these countries like a Western liberal democracy, they neither have reached the material or cultural conditions for it yet, nor are they suddenly just being left alone from imperialism.

Yeah, sorry for actually caring for the people in Libya.

OP, that's not how you spell cancer.


arab here. gaddafi was pretty based.

the only people who opposed him are salafists ie pic related

I am on no side, I'm eager to find out about daffi's pros and cons, but the link you posted says

So its not exactly open and shit

No, I just don't see the point in venerating him.

Don't you think there's meaning in the fact he died fighting imperialism? I don't exactly believe Sankara and Lumumba were true socialists, but the fact they died fighting against imperialism makes them heroes to me.

The guards probably just took the watches to sell them. Similar thing happened to my friend in Indonesia when they kept him for four hours because they thought he'd have weed.

Chef got probably mistreated and then made a claim how they are all from dead people and the Western media loves stories like that. That's why they treat Russian oligarchs who dislike Putin based on their economic interests as "brave liberals" in the West as well.

Social democracy with dictator > anything else

Prove me wrong.

I think he lost his marbles towards the end but I do give him credit for lifting up the living standard in Libya so much. Every other dictator would just use the oil to enrich himself, granted, he build himself a nice palace, but in the end all the oil went into the welfare for his people.

He's not a Socialist but to build Socialism in Libya is impossible, they still haven't overcome tribal society. You gotta take him for what he did.

I think there's this tendency in the left to treat nationalism as anti-imperialism depending on where you geographically. I agree, there's some meaning there. But we must not delude ourselves.

I agree, the anti-Gadaffi uprising during the Arab Spring just had me curious. He's certainly superior to Pinochet.

You can achieve the same in countries that are big tourist destinations.

Lmoa desu senpaitachi


While I agree with you mostly, you're way of the mark here. His commitment to 'internationalism' is ultimately a huge factor in getting him killed. Had he just focused on Libya, he'd likely not have been buttfucked with a blade.

Internationalism is fucking cancer. You should know this.

An aristocratic oligarchy with plebescitarian elements including the option to appoint a dictator for a short time in times of crisis.

Not necessarily a textbook dictatorship but applying modern concepts onto something from 2000 years ago is anachronistic anyway.

Still, we should remember that it is the original definition for dictator.

You can be a nationalist and still support revolution in other countries. As a matter of fact if you're a social-nationalist nation, it's almost preferable to do so since capitalism tends to fuck over countries like that.

Aside supporting anyone anywhere that spoke or acted against Anglo-saxon imperialism, he was going to launch a new pan-African currency, backed by gold. The US and French would not allow this as their currencies were in major circulation in Africa, keeping demand for Dollar high.

Not true. Power in Libya was highly decentralized. Gaddafi didn't even really consider himself ruler. He left tribal leaders largely to do their thing. This is the kind of hands off leadership I'd have thought all you anti-statists approve of?

Interesting that the uprising against him never enjoyed more than 15% popular support and was largely centered around muslim brotherhood strongholds.

Surely a {{{coincidence}}}…

define "brutal"

Kinda depressing that so many leftists are happy to write off all the good that he did cause he wasn't a liberal.

I think he and others like him would have been better served defending themselves than attacking much stronger imperialist forces.

That's a fair enough point I suppose.

Most """"""leftists"""""" seem to be liberals these days. Even some of the people here who claim to oppose liberalism. Liberalism is a cancer that seems to infect everything.

He was a narcissist idiot, thats what got him killed

Should have bought icbms from russia and poited them at the us


This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French.franc (CFA). (Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy's decision to commit France to the attack on Libya. According to these individuals Sarkozy's plans are driven by the following issues:


British support for the rebels during the fighting, certain members of the NTC remain focused on the fact that the British government and oil industry had good relations with the Qaddafi regime, particularly the firm British Petroleum (BP). At the same time, this source indicates that the government of France is carrying out a concerted program of private and public diplomacy to press the new/transitional government of Libya to reserve as much as 35% of Libya's oil related industry for French firms, particularly the major French energy company TOTAL. Sources with access to the highest levels of Libya's ruling NTC, as well as senior advisors to Sarkozy, stated in strict confidence that while much of this pressure is being exerted at very senior diplomatic and political levels, the French external intelligence service (Direction Generale de la Securite Exterieure/General Directorate for External Security –DGSE) is using sources with influence over the NTC to press the French position.


Clinton Emails Reveal True Motive for Libya Intervention


Exposing the Libyan Agenda: A Closer Look at Hillary Clinton's Emails


US Treasury blocks record $30bn of Libya assets. Officials say action to seize funds belonging to bank and sovereign wealth fund is largest ever undertaken by US


In March 2011, the governor of CBL, Farhat Bengdara, resigned and defected to the rebelling side of the Libyan Civil War, having first arranged for the bulk of external Libyan assets to be frozen and unavailable to the Gaddafi regime.[1] As of September 2011, the bank's governor is Kassem Azzuz



It sucks because if he didn't do these two things, he'd likely still be alive today. He was too naive that those actions wouldn't come to bite him. Should have just focused on his country.