Haftar to Take Over Libya

[Duhon]

Can we just say Gadhafi is a sun-addled piece of shit who's getting the bishie sparkle treatment now due to what succeeded his dead trussed ass?

No. There was no migrant crisis when Ghaddafi was still kicking. Libya was better in 2009 than it is right now.

It was an authoritarian hellhole in 2009. Say what you will of what came after Gadhafi, and I certainly won't claim it's now better -- just a differently flavored turd, something I wouldn't wish on Libyans of this or any other generation, let alone the rest of the world.

[Auvis]

Tell that to WW2 Europe.

What evil did Fascism commit in WWII?

Let's see; genocide, destroying entire communities, more genocide, gas chambers, secret police..Need I continue?

[Duhon]

Tell that to WW2 Europe.

What evil did Fascism commit in WWII?

... are you serious?

[Washington Resistance Army]

No. There was no migrant crisis when Ghaddafi was still kicking. Libya was better in 2009 than it is right now.

It was an authoritarian hellhole in 2009.

It was also one of the wealthiest and safest countries on the entire continent and was just generally a pretty modern nation.

What the EU did to Libya is right up there with how we handled Iraq.

[Aureumterra]

Tell that to WW2 Europe.

What evil did Fascism commit in WWII?

https://www.history.com/topics/world-wa ... -holocaust

[Vetalia]

Let's see; genocide, destroying entire communities, more genocide, gas chambers, secret police..Need I continue?

That was National Socialism, not fascism if we really want to get down to the details.

[Badb Catha]

What evil did Fascism commit in WWII?

Let's see; genocide, destroying entire communities, more genocide, gas chambers, secret police..Need I continue?

Genocide is terrible, but Italy never committed genocide, nor did they use gas chambers against anyone, nor did they destroy entire communities (at least not that I'm aware of, correct me if I am wrong).

There was nothing wrong with the OVRA, either.

[Duhon]

It was an authoritarian hellhole in 2009.

It was also one of the wealthiest and safest countries on the entire continent and was just generally a pretty modern nation.

What the EU did to Libya is right up there with how we handled Iraq.

Same shit, different flavor, still won't inflict either on anyone living or dead.

[Aureumterra]

It was an authoritarian hellhole in 2009.

It was also one of the wealthiest and safest countries on the entire continent and was just generally a pretty modern nation.

What the EU did to Libya is right up there with how we handled Iraq.

Libya was on its way to becoming a “rich dictatorship”, and Qaddafi was far more libertarian than other dictators. In fact, I think if his regime had gone on, he would’ve either declared democracy like Pinochet or his death would’ve brought democracy, like Post-Franco Spain

[Badb Catha]

What evil did Fascism commit in WWII?

... are you serious?

I am.

What evil did Fascism commit in WWII?

https://www.history.com/topics/world-wa ... -holocaust

Fascism had no hand in that; that was a crime of National Socialism.

No. There was no migrant crisis when Ghaddafi was still kicking. Libya was better in 2009 than it is right now.

It was an authoritarian hellhole in 2009. Say what you will of what came after Gadhafi, and I certainly won't claim it's now better -- just a differently flavored turd, something I wouldn't wish on Libyans of this or any other generation, let alone the rest of the world.

What is wrong with authoritarianism?

[Auvis]

Let's see; genocide, destroying entire communities, more genocide, gas chambers, secret police..Need I continue?

That was National Socialism, not fascism if we really want to get down to the details.

Yeah, but it wasn't really socialism, since for that to happen the Nazis would have had to take actual care of their people.

[Auvis]

It was an authoritarian hellhole in 2009. Say what you will of what came after Gadhafi, and I certainly won't claim it's now better -- just a differently flavored turd, something I wouldn't wish on Libyans of this or any other generation, let alone the rest of the world.

What is wrong with authoritarianism?

Well, I happen to like personal freedoms.

[Vetalia]

Yeah, but it wasn't really socialism, since for that to happen the Nazis would have had to take actual care of their people.

The Nazis took care of their people, it's just their definition of "people" was skewed in a truly horrific way.

[The Man Who Shot Jiminy Cricket]

1) May Allah SWT bring Al-Islam back into Libya, aameen
2) May Allah SWT bring peace back into Libya, aameen
3) May Allah SWT make whoever wins over Libya a great Muslim leader, aameen
4) Qadhaafi was cool.

Inshallah

[Duhon]

What is wrong with authoritarianism?

Well, I happen to like personal freedoms.

And I happen to like calling leaders who overstep their bounds "dicks", but that's me and maybe most people.

[Dushan]

Has taken long enough. Hopefully he manages to take Tripolis sooner than later.

No bets though how sucessfull he will be though.

[Badb Catha]

That was National Socialism, not fascism if we really want to get down to the details.

Yeah, but it wasn't really socialism, since for that to happen the Nazis would have had to take actual care of their people.

They did, to an extent. It was not an ideal extent if you would ask me but to suggest they did not care for the German people is outlandish and incorrect.

What is wrong with authoritarianism?

Well, I happen to like personal freedoms.

"Personal freedoms" is a vague term. You are not necessarily without personal freedoms in an authoritarian state; authoritarianism merely removes the dangerous and unnecessary personal freedoms from the equation to avoid their abuse.

[Badb Catha]

Well, I happen to like personal freedoms.

And I happen to like calling leaders who overstep their bounds "dicks", but that's me and maybe most people.

And who is deciding what their "bounds" are?

[Auvis]

Yeah, but it wasn't really socialism, since for that to happen the Nazis would have had to take actual care of their people.

They did, to an extent. It was not an ideal extent if you would ask me but to suggest they did not care for the German people is outlandish and incorrect.

Well, I happen to like personal freedoms.

"Personal freedoms" is a vague term. You are not necessarily without personal freedoms in an authoritarian state; authoritarianism merely removes the dangerous and unnecessary personal freedoms from the equation to avoid their abuse.

Vague term? I like voting for my leaders and protesting them if they do something bad. I also like my privacy, right to free speech, freedom of worship, and free media.

[Badb Catha]

They did, to an extent. It was not an ideal extent if you would ask me but to suggest they did not care for the German people is outlandish and incorrect.



"Personal freedoms" is a vague term. You are not necessarily without personal freedoms in an authoritarian state; authoritarianism merely removes the dangerous and unnecessary personal freedoms from the equation to avoid their abuse.

Vague term? I like voting for my leaders and protesting them if they do something bad. I also like my privacy, right to free speech, freedom of worship, and free media.

Those are examples of personal freedoms, yes. Dangerous ones that can easily be abused.

There are others, however.

[Duhon]

Yeah, but it wasn't really socialism, since for that to happen the Nazis would have had to take actual care of their people.

They did, to an extent. It was not an ideal extent if you would ask me but to suggest they did not care for the German people is outlandish and incorrect.

Well, I happen to like personal freedoms.

"Personal freedoms" is a vague term. You are not necessarily without personal freedoms in an authoritarian state; authoritarianism merely removes the dangerous and unnecessary personal freedoms from the equation to avoid their abuse.

But who decides what to remove and what to retain? The leadership, of course, who is then at liberty to do whatever if wishes without mediation, oversight, or opposition, for what it does is by definition right, for it has removed all but the most obscure ways to oppose or air out grievances.

[Auvis]

Vague term? I like voting for my leaders and protesting them if they do something bad. I also like my privacy, right to free speech, freedom of worship, and free media.

Those are examples of personal freedoms, yes. Dangerous ones that can easily be abused.

There are others, however.

Well, if America ever decided to take these freedoms from the people, me and some pals would probably rebel. Along with most of the population.

[Badb Catha]

They did, to an extent. It was not an ideal extent if you would ask me but to suggest they did not care for the German people is outlandish and incorrect.



"Personal freedoms" is a vague term. You are not necessarily without personal freedoms in an authoritarian state; authoritarianism merely removes the dangerous and unnecessary personal freedoms from the equation to avoid their abuse.

But who decides what to remove and what to retain? The leadership, of course, who is then at liberty to do whatever they wish without mediation, oversight, or opposition, for what it does is by definition right, for it has removed all but the most obscure ways to oppose or air out grievances.

Not in the Fascist State. In the Fascist State even the government is held accountable; the party must remain true to the doctrine and nature of the Fascist belief system, or they will be purged by the paramilitary wing composed solely of enlightened ideologues loyal not to the party but to the ideology by which the party is sworn to. To abuse power is to risk annihilation at the hands of the Vanguards of the Fascist Revolution. This safeguard is why Fascism is superior to other authoritarian ideologies.

[Farnhamia]

Those are examples of personal freedoms, yes. Dangerous ones that can easily be abused.

There are others, however.

Well, if America ever decided to take these freedoms from the people, me and some pals would probably rebel. Along with most of the population.

Yes, well, but you digress. The discussion of rights, which are dangerous and which are not, is off-topic.

[Badb Catha]

Well, if America ever decided to take these freedoms from the people, me and some pals would probably rebel. Along with most of the population.

Yes, well, but you digress. The discussion of rights, which are dangerous and which are not, is off-topic.

A fair point.

Haftar, so far, seems good for Libya. Perhaps he will prove to be better than Gaddafi even, though given his age this is unlikely.