How can one man be so based?

How can one man be so based?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chadian–Libyan_conflict#French_intervention
twitter.com/AnonBabble

In before someone posts that moronic copypasta propaganda about how great everything was

>How can one man be so based?
lel gaddhafi was stupid as hell

He was a despot of extravagant style, but the best despot these people had since a long time.

>the best despot these people had since a long time.
His "Jamahiriyya" is literally the most stupid state of the 20th century. Absolute clown college.

He was still a fucking muslim bedouin goatfucker that funded terrorist attacks until the mid 90s. He's better than Al Qaida and ISIS but that really isn't saying much

He's like one of those Banana Republic "Presidents-for-Life" who ape with their uncultured understandings of what a leader should be like and end up looking like a buffoon.

He was no Lee Kuan Yew, that's for sure, but at least he kept boatniggers at bay (or at desert, since that's where he landed them) and mudslimes in check.
Now that he's gone, Lybia went Somalia, so he must have been doing *something* right.

>Jamahiriyya

Didnt matter that much, he could afford his retardation along a social system with oil and trying to make his country less dependent on the west, while trying to strenghten african relations seems like a good thing.

I mean, what did they have before?
Deattached colonizers, before that some bumfuck hillybilly sharialand that lost its relevance the day europe found America.

>Now that he's gone, Lybia went Somalia, so he must have been doing *something* right.
No dude, this meme-apologism for dictators is totally backwards. If he had been doing something right, there wouldn't have been a violent revolution that dragged him out of a pipe in the desert and killed him. If he had been doing something right, there WOULDN'T be a power vacuum after his demise. And the reason why political scientists don't take dictatorship seriously is not because muh morality but because succession of power in a dictatorship literally always leads to internal conflict.

This retard Ghaddafi literally lost a war with Chad and I mean the country called Chad. The "greatest country in Africa" literally lost a conflict with a bunch of niggers from the desert.

>If he had been doing something right, there wouldn't have been a violent revolution that dragged him out of a pipe in the desert and killed him.

Ahh yes surely the 8 month long NATO bombing campaign had no effect.

In March 2011 Gaddafi was about to crush the rebels. They were pushed all the way back to just Benghazi, but NATO warplanes changed everything.

>No dude, this meme-apologism for dictators is totally backwards.
No, it really isn't. Dictators aren't there for the good of their people, they're there for their own good. This allows them to do stuff normal governments would never, ever manage to do, like ship boatloads of citizens trying to escape to die in a desert, or keep the country artificially stable through military control. Internal conflict is certainly a common consequence of power succession in dictatorships, but it's silly and reductiive to deny the worth of the system just on that basis, especially when said instability comes after decades of peace. Proper republics are certainly a better government form, but they too have a pretty damn big issue: they're about as hard to set up as peaceful passages of power in dictatorships.
>If he had been doing something right, there wouldn't have been a violent revolution that dragged him out of a pipe in the desert and killed him.
Yeah right, like the revolution didn't have any external causes at all.
It's not like there were a shitton of radical terrorists sent and financed by foreign powers trying to destroy him right? It's not like he had NATO bombing him right? Oh wait.

I don't get why he and saddam and assad and the other pan-arab union/baathist types didn't just go ahead with their plan to move off the petrodollar instead of just making loud noises about it.

If the threat was enough to get them shelled, imagine what the actual delivering would have caused.

Petrodollar wasn't the reason they got invaded, Saudi Arabia and Israel having the US politicians on their payroll was. Baathist socialists and Shias were an eternal enemy of the Saudis and Israelis.

In the leaked emails Hillary even outright admits that Syria was to be bombed because of their ties to Iran and thus being a threat to Israel.

>pulled out of a pipe
Pretty sure this was a meme created to make the rebels look good and he was actually pulled out of a twisted wreck after NATO blew up his motorcade.

At least that's what a Libyan on /int/ told me. Seems about as legit a news source as any other.

yes it was u retard fuck petrodollar > african union gold backed currency welcome to carpet bomb city

fuck i hate stupid fucking leftists

There's actually no legitimate source of him being pulled out of a pipe.

The only video is of him laying on the airstriked destroyed truck with stab wounds all over him, and then him put into an "ambulance" where he supposedly "naturally died".

Some french guy claimed that French special forces killed Gadaffi in the ambulance. That is why his body has never been found.

I don't think there's any way to be sure about what happened to Gadaffi's regime at the end since there are so many people pulling the story in different directions, but it's definitely not as clear as what was thrown up in the news as it was happening and then promptly forgotten.

Isn't there literal video of his death where he gets stabbed in the ass?

And pretty sure his death was over the petrodollar and going against the wishes of the USA.

Much like how Syria is about creating a pipeline from Qatar-Turkey to undercut Russian oil interests.

>"if you get rid of me the tide of Sub-Saharans l held back will reach you"
>West helps depose him
>migrant crisis begins

>West helps depose him
>migrant crisis begins
It's not as if that wasn't part of the plan.

Whose plan? That's the question. But the fact that it would create a huge immigration crisis was self evident.

Eye crie erry tiem

That's nice and all but only a small portion of the migrants sre coming fro SS africa

>whose plan
The merchant

Is this the infamous terrorist known as Sam al-Hayid?

Holy shit, kill yourself.

He lost to Chad.
Google the Toyota Wars.

So here's a robot?

>Whose plan?
Western governments.

An enraged European populace will fall for the "muh mudslimes" boogeyman and be more supportive of destabilizing other countries which happen to have muslims residing within. These bombings knock out governments which don't heed the commands of the West. However, this will only create more refugees and an angrier European populace. Yet, the Europeans will never think "what if we just stop bombing other countries?".

Fucking Chads

>He lost to Chad.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chadian–Libyan_conflict#French_intervention

>Isn't there literal video of his death where he gets stabbed in the ass?

Yes. But he did not die in the video. He is clearly alive but bloodied.

>petrodollar
Meme conspiracy. Neocons hated him since the 70's and wanted him dead.

>Oil pipeline
Retarded conspiracy theory. This is idiotic. The difference between oil through the Suez and oil through a pipeline is maybe $1-2 a barrel. Meaningless when you consider that you would have to pay tax to each transiting country.
Shipping oil is far cheaper in the long run.

[citation needed]

The amount of migrants coming from Libya is vastly larger than in 2010. Furthermore, the same can be true of the amount of Black African refugees coming from Libya.

Your "point" is completely meaningless.