General

If you look up, Libya actually had plans to begin developing nuclear weapons under Gaddafi. It was actually the Iraq war that made Gaddafi come out and admit he planned to develop nuclear weapons, and he subsiquently cancelled such plans. That led to somewhat reduced tension between the Western world and Libya, however, the revolution in Libya was largely initiated by Libyan citizens who wanted Gaddafi gone, NATO only supported the citizens of that country. As far as I'm concerned, there was no mistake made. And yes, the media swings a lot of things (look at President Obama, he would NEVER have gotten elected if the media didn't prop him up to superstar status and actually reported on his credentials).

just keep shootin out those babies and soon you'll be a millionaire

[quote=AmyTheDino]That things I don't find smart :
"-Every time a woman gave birth, she'd receive $5000
-Every time a coupe got married, they'd receive $50 000 for a home"

Women won't care about protection anymore because not they get something out of giving birth, they could also murder their baby and blame it on someone else, you would still have the money, and the other one is even worse, 1 out of 2 marriages lead to a divorce, people would just get married for the money, like for example, getting married to a stranger just for the money, Bam! You get $25,000 for whatever you want, then separate and never talk/see each other again, and again, murdering your 'partner' and blaming it on someone else.[/quote]

$5000 isn't a lot of money for giving birth to a kid...it only helps for a little bit. You're going to spends 10's of thousands of dollars raising this kid...food, clothes etc.
Yeah, cuz women are just gonna get away with killing babies for money? :s #1 it takes a special person to kill someone. Usually when a murder is committed, it's due to a sudden surge of emotion (i.e. anger, stress etc.), let alone to kill a baby. People have morals and a conscience you know...

Yeah, cuz the government isn't going to catch on you're just marrying and re-marrying for the money they give you...
You really need to think these things through.... Talk about paranoia

That things I don't find smart :
"-Every time a woman gave birth, she'd receive $5000
-Every time a coupe got married, they'd receive $50 000 for a home"

Women won't care about protection anymore because not they get something out of giving birth, they could also murder their baby and blame it on someone else, you would still have the money, and the other one is even worse, 1 out of 2 marriages lead to a divorce, people would just get married for the money, like for example, getting married to a stranger just for the money, Bam! You get $25,000 for whatever you want, then separate and never talk/see each other again, and again, murdering your 'partner' and blaming it on someone else.

[quote=Uiluj]you didnt even read the facts did you? or the sources i used.

oh my god, drop your conspiracy theories
if you're not even going to face facts, then dont even pretend to know anything. go hide in a dark corner of your room and never come out until you die.

btw, you're using the internet(a form of media) in AMERICA! how can you trust anything you read on your computer?
lol that ought to but your conspiracy theorist mind into overload.[/quote]

Yeah taxes are high, and the rich get taxed even more. These taxes allow for homes, free health care and education. Still forgetting the fact that money from oil revenue goes to the people.
Let me Clarify one thing quickly tho. I'm not trying to say he was completely a good person or that he never did anything wrong. Who hasn't? If you were to draw up a table of countries who've done bad things, he wouldn't be anywhere near the top. My point is NATO was too quick to act and made the wrong choice. Libya had the best standard of living in Africa because of Gaddafi. I'm trying to debunk this "Incredible, terrifying, ruthless monster that the media made out of him.".
On a scale of 1 - Hitler, he wouldn't score that high.

Blow me off as a crazy conspiracy theorist all you want, but you still remain naive.
Gaddafi was going to help pave way for the African Dinar, a new currency dependent on gold and Africa would ONLY accept gold as payment. No more diamonds, no more oil etc., it would be too expensive for the west to afford. You really think a government who is in power will simply hand over that power? You're more naive than i thought then.

[quote=Dendrology]It doesn't matter what he did in his presidency, all that matters is that he killed his own people without a second thought and that's the only thing the U.S. looks at.[/quote]

He killed the rebels who tried to overthrow him. If you try to overthrow your government, you'd be met with the same response.

[quote=Hera]if it involves the middle east

i
dont
care[/quote]

If the middle east drops bombs/hijacks your planes, then all of a sudden you care. But you don't care why they did it...great.

[quote=Uiluj]you didnt research hard enough
[url]http://www.basilmarket.com/forum/2249244/0/Gadaffi_is_the_Greatest_Dictator.html[/url]
a dictator is a dictator. gadaffi was an extreme communist dictator, but a dictator none-the-less[/quote]

#1 reason why i don't trust American media/news, or British meda/news. They've lied to the public time and time again about wars. Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, WWI, WWII. They've lied about casualties, how sure they were of the other countries intentions, plans, strategies etc. All of them were complete failures except WWI and WWII. WWI was a legitimate battle, WWII was more about doing the right thing, which i side with the allies on.

As for Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam, They've lied and changed their stories numerous times about reported incidents they've tried to hide but were brought to light by independent journalists. Some say "oh well, those are isolated incidents", they keep occurring, and each time they try and hide it/flat out lie. If they lie about things like that, then who knows what else they're lieing about. Plain and simple, can't trust Western news. It's ridiculous the amount of BS they put in there.
British journalists spend over a month in Libya. Not once did they report about the Rebels looting and killing the dark skinned/black Libyans. They only corroborated 1 civilian death by NATO air strikes; while other more independent journalists, in the span of 3 hours corroborated 7 civilian deaths. Once again, in only 3 hours.

Rebels claimed Gaddafi would massacre their people, no evidence was shown of that, Human Rights Watch proved it. 3% of casualties were women/children in Tripoli. Rebels are notorious for picking fights against forces too great for them, then relying on UN help on the basis of "They'll slaughter us all if you don't".
NATO was too quick to jump in to help. Yet another foolish mistake to go along with Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yet people fail to realize this remarkably obvious trend of one failure after another. On the basis of Western forces making constant mistakes and hiding the truth on multiple occasion, i make the reasonable claim that 3rd party involvement in the Libyan civil war was inappropriate given the lack of evidence of Gaddafi's "terrifying rain over Libya" and the allegations made by the rebels and others seem to be rather suspicious.

Same with Hitler. Only known for killing Jews.

You make it sound like he was a great guy. Eventhough he did do some decent things for his country, he mostly did them for himself. He also accumulated billions of dollars through selling libyan oil and keeping the money for himself. He continously had civilians tortured and kept a group of female bodyguards (i believe they were known as the amazonian guard) that he sexually assaulted many times. Theres also a video (i think youtube but you can get it off of google) of his nanny being interviewed, discussing how ghadaffi and his wife tortured her. He was nowhere near being a nice guy.

[quote=Segumisama]I know I should care, but I really don't. I'm sure there's much more to this and you would have to get facts from legitimate sources, or look at a bunch of facts from different sources and compare them to try and get a gist of what kind of person he was but I'm not really sure.[/quote]

That's sad. What's even more sad is the majority of the citizens of the US and Canada are like this. They fight for their rights and couldn't care less about others. Yet they let their government do as they wish. Then comes along a direct attack to the US (9/11) and other Western Nations, and people are surprised.

I know one thing for a fact. The government always lies about affairs abroad seas. They would lie about events in WWI and WWII, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. They're not going to stop anytime soon. Which is why wikileaks was such a big deal, because they were bringing to surface truths that the government didn't want to be known.
It just boggles my mind people can just let their governments do as they wish, when they tend to violate human rights themselves.

If children are the future, then there's a sad future ahead of us people.

I know I should care, but I really don't. I'm sure there's much more to this and you would have to get facts from legitimate sources, or look at a bunch of facts from different sources and compare them to try and get a gist of what kind of person he was but I'm not really sure.

[quote=JekutoNightra]Isn't $5000 each second a lot?[/quote]

each second? I said every time she gives birth to a child.

[quote=kizz123]You make it sound like he was a good person. A lot of that information at the bottom sounds wrong.[/quote]
The guy was friends with and helped out Nelson Mandela during the apartheid. He apposed the Iraq war from the beginning. He criticized other Arab leaders for their hypocritical behavior. I don't get how this guy could be a tyrant dictator the media pointed him out to be.

Also, the civil war would have been over ages ago if NATO didn't start dropping bombs. Instead of preventing a bloodbath, they just prolonged it for more bloodshed

Isn't $5000 each second a lot?