Egomaniac or not, female or not, the facts on the ground point to deliberate demonization of a man the Saudi cabal wanted removed, his liason with Mubarak of Egypt was a threat to Sunni-wahabbi dominance in the region. I knew something serious was up many months before this fiasco started...
There was an long article in an Australian newspaper entitled ‘Getting to know the Colonel’ written some thirty years ago, outlining his plans for Libyan infrastructure. I searched for the article source on the web, and found the title, the article had been replaced by a lengthy diatribe against Ghaddafi.
He also made a speech just a few years ago, in which he said ‘what have the arabs ever done for us’ and that article has also disappeared from the web.
One does need to look a little deeper than the self-serving mush being served up by the media, he certainly was no saint, but he was more of a threat to fanatical islam, than he was to the West.
Watch the video. Assad appears to be cheering him on, and if looks could kill, the Saudi perfumed ‘princes’ would have annihilated him right then and there.
“but he was more of a threat to fanatical islam, than he was to the West.”
He was a threat to anyone that he viewed as a threat to him. The man murdered Americans. Al Qaida was a force and a threat to him, not because of their religious fanaticism, but because they threatened to take over Libya and thereby destroy him. Gaddafi sent death squads overseas to assassinate anyone he saw as a threat to Libya, which of course was a personal threat to him.
I understand that you dislike the Saudis. But Please stop trying to find the good in this terrorist madman. It’s like people who try to say that Hitler wasn’t so bad because he was nice to his dogs and liked to paint.
“Perfumed Saudi princes” stinking of rosewater (or is it Brut Cologne..) & more than a few glasses of whiskey, spreading and funding Wahhabism and (fund-a-mental Islam) around the world, incl. the West.
No doubt Ghaddafi was involved in terrorism, and even sided w/ quite a few ‘undesirables’ like Idi Amin & Slobodan Milosevic. But, in the last decade he wasn’t a threat to the West.
nuconvert: Sure, Ghaddafi viewed AQ as a threat to Libya & himself, and sent death squads overseas to assassinate threats to Libya. Obviously, Libya wasn’t a representative democracy, so, he feared AQ for personal reasons as well. On this point, for example, the Shah employed the wrong strategy w/ Khomeini et al. On this note, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq because we saw persons there being threats to us, you know, the “pre-emptive” stance ...
If the issue is international terrorism, past & present, S. Arabia, IRI & Pakistan should be dealt with as a matter of priority - they are the top 3 worst offenders in the moslem world, and around the world.
Unfortunately, there continues to be a lot of bowing & never ending ‘diplomatic solutions’ going on with the mentioned 3 horrors. On the one hand Hillary wants Afghanistan to ‘reconcile’ w/ the (democratic /s) Taliban, which has always been a product of Pakistan, funded by Saudi petro$$$$$. And, on the other hand, Hillary’s boss has been going after ‘soft targets’, and ‘dictators’ in Libya & Egypt.
Quite a few contradictions ...