What did we get out of toppling Ghadaffi?

Hillary’s baby. We came, we saw, he died!

What did that do for us as Americans? What did our tax dollars buy?
330 tons of the gold that he was going to use to bypass the petro dollar, for one.

LOLOL.. That hysterical.. That was just an ignorant conspiracy theory. REALLY ignorant.. Libya imports 90% of their food. If they paid for it in gold the interest would eat the alive.

Two things.
First of all, someone got this confused, because it was Saddam who was hoarding gold and wanted to bypass the US petro dollar, not Qaddafi. Saddam had enough oil to do it, Qaddafi did not.
Second is that moving to a gold standard decreases interest payments, not increases them.
But I really don't see how it matters if any country has 330 tons of gold or not, because the US could not legally get its hands on any gold any country might have. In Iraq the gold had to go to the Shiite government we created, and in Libya never had any control on the ground at all.

Nobody transfers gold to pay bills.. It takes too much time and runs up the interest. They made up a bunch of crap about Saddam and then used the same lies against Gadaffi.

Transferring gold is as trivial as transferring credit.
You don't have to actually move it, just change who owns it in the vault manifest.
There is only interest if you negotiate it that way.
Qaddafi was not running up interest because he was paying in oil.
But I agree they used the same lies on Qaddafi that they made up about Saddam.
It really started with Desert Storm, because Saddam had asked for and been given permission to attack Kuwait first, and the US said we did not care.
We set up Saddam, and then turned on him.
We are evil liars.

You're right about setting up Saddam. The US and the Brits and the Israeli wanted Saddam gone.

Obama was part of that nor did he have that mindset. The US had NOTHING to do with the Arab Spring in Libya.

If the US had nothing to do with toppling Qaddafi, then why was it most people in Libya were relatively happy with Qaddafi, why was it the press said the west was worried about Qaddafi about to be massacring the civilians in Benghazi with an attack, and why was it the press said western coalition of military forces wiped out Qaddafi's forces in the desert, between Tripoli and Bengazi?

Just look at the number hundreds of missiles and thousands of bombs, enough to murder hundreds of thousands in the open desert.

{...

On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, in response to events during the First Libyan Civil War. The United Nations' intent and voting was to have "an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute crimes against humanity ... imposing a ban on all flights in the country's airspace – a no-fly zone – and tightened sanctions on the [Muammar] Gaddafi regime and its supporters."[20]


Coloured in blue are the states that were involved in implementing the no-fly zone over Libya (coloured in green)
American and British naval forces fired over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles,[21] while the French Air Force, British Royal Air Force, and Royal Canadian Air Force[22] undertook sorties across Libya and a naval blockade by Coalition forces.[23] French jets launched air strikes against Libyan Army tanks and vehicles.[24][25] The intervention did not employ foreign ground troops.[26]

The Libyan government response to the campaign was totally ineffectual, with Gaddafi's forces not managing to shoot down a single NATO plane despite the country possessing 30 heavy SAM batteries, 17 medium SAM batteries, 55 light SAM batteries (a total of 400–450 launchers, including 130–150 2K12 Kub launchers and some 9K33 Osa launchers), and 440–600 short-ranged air-defense guns.[9][27] The official names for the interventions by the coalition members are Opération Harmattan by France; Operation Ellamy by the United Kingdom; Operation Mobile for the Canadian participation and Operation Odyssey Dawn for the United States.[28] Italy initially opposed the intervention but then offered to take part in the operations on the condition that NATO took the leadership of the mission instead of individual countries (particularly France). As this condition was later met, Italy shared its bases and intelligence with the allies.[29]

From the beginning of the intervention, the initial coalition of Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Qatar, Spain, UK and US[30][31][32][33][34] expanded to nineteen states, with newer states mostly enforcing the no-fly zone and naval blockade or providing military logistical assistance. The effort was initially largely led by France and the United Kingdom, with command shared with the United States. NATO took control of the arms embargo on 23 March, named Operation Unified Protector. An attempt to unify the military command of the air campaign (whilst keeping political and strategic control with a small group), first failed over objections by the French, German, and Turkish governments.[35][36] On 24 March, NATO agreed to take control of the no-fly zone, while command of targeting ground units remains with coalition forces.[37][38][39] The handover occurred on 31 March 2011 at 06:00 UTC (08:00 local time). NATO flew 26,500 sorties since it took charge of the Libya mission on 31 March 2011.

Fighting in Libya ended in late October following the death of Muammar Gaddafi, and NATO stated it would end operations over Libya on 31 October 2011. Libya's new government requested that its mission be extended to the end of the year,[40] but on 27 October, the Security Council voted to end NATO's mandate for military action on 31 October.[41]
...}

Who told you that most people were happy with Gadaffi?
 

My advice to surada is to research his statements BEFORE he makes them. He is frequently mistaken on things that are easily researched.

I lived in Libya across the street from the US Embassy and a block from the Palace. I knew Abdullah Tariki his oil minister who hated Americans and insisted on prematurely nationalizing Libya's oil business. I knew the brass at Tobruk and Wheelus and how much they cared about Libya... and I'm not a he.

You saw the western show in Tripoli.
That is not really Libya, in my opinion
The Pharaohs of Egypt were not Arab like the rest of Egypt was and is.
From the triangular skull shape, they most likely were Berbers, like Qaddafi.
And the Berbers have been living in the hills of Southern Libya for thousands of year, likely an Egyptian colony, and ruled by tribal elders.
Qaddafi was just their chosen puppet.
He had no source of power on his own, could not have lasted a day if not for him being the one picked for public appearance.

Nor do I think Libya was premature in nationalizing its oil.
It does not have that much, and western nations are holding their own oil in reserve, waiting until the rest of the world runs out, and the price of oil starts to greatly accelerate. We only have about 40 years worth of oil left.

Did you know Tariki? He was out for vengeance. He hated the US. He damn near killed Libya's oil business.

Libya has hardly been explored for oil. You don't know what you're talking about. LOLOL.. The Western nations are NOT holding their own oil in reserve.. They weren't drilling because the ppb was too low. Jeez.

No, I do not know Tariki, unless you mean Sheik Abdullah al-Tariki, the Saudi who started OPEC?
But obviously selling oil when the price is low is foolish, since the market is constantly increasing, and the supply is limited, never to be replaceable, ever. Eventually the price has to skyrocket, and anyone selling low now is an idiot.
The US not only is deliberately holding its own oil in reserve, but passed laws to prevent export of US oil in the past.
Obviously the whole point of Desert Storm, the Iraqi WMD lies, and the Arab Spring actually were a cover for the US to gain control over Mideast oil.

Tariki didn't start OPEC. Trust me.. I was there. Tariki had an American wife and he hated Americans ..demanding that ARAMCO be nationalized immediately rather than following the timeline in the concession agreement. Tariki was fired from ARAMCO before 27 year old Gadaffi hired him.

Wars don't open the door for controlling ME oil.. Jesus.. The oil business HATES a war zone. You get nothing but sabotage and out of control prices.

I did not think the Saudi Tariki of OPEC was the Tariki you were referring to. Just asked to be sure.
But I hate Americans in the Mideast as well, so I don't think I have a complaint about this Tariki either.

Wars do gain control of oil.
Iraq invaded Kuwait over Kuwait's slant drilling and under pricing.
Desert Storm was over getting that oil revenue back from Saddam.
We invaded Iraq to gain control of Iraqi oil.
Oil business love war zones halting oil production temporarily because then the price spikes without having to deplete reserves.
Oil companies want "out of control prices" on oil.
That is their main goal.
 
...

Who told you that most people were happy with Gadaffi?

Everyone but the western fake media said Qaddafi was VERY popular.


{...
Some Facts About Libya
Libya and Libyan "dictator" Muammar Gaddafi:

1. Electricity is free for all Libyans.

2. Loans in Libya are free with 0% interest as banks are state owned.

3. Homes are considered a human right in Libya – Gaddafi vowed that his parents would not get a house until everyone in Libya had a home. Gaddafi’s father has died while him, his wife and his mother were still living in a tent.

4. All newly married people in Libya receive US$ 50,000 by the government to buy their first home to help the new family.

5. Medical treatment and education are free in Libya. Before Colonel Muammar Gaddafi ruled the country, only 25% of Libyans were literate. Today the figure is around 83%.

6. If Libyans wanted to take up farming as a career, the government funded people from equipment to seeds, all for free.

7. The government subsidised 50% of the price of a new car if a Libyan citizen wanted to buy their first car.

8. Petrol price in Libya is around $0.14 per litre.

9. Libya has no debt externally and its reserves amounts to $150 billion – now globally frozen.

10. The Libyan government would fund anyone who got a degree and if they could not get employment, and they would receive income as if they were employed until they got a job.

11. The sale of Libyan oil is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens in proportion.

12. A family would get US $5,000 if they had a new baby to support the childs upbringing.

13. 40 loaves of bread in Libya costs around $0.15.

14. 25% of Libyans have a university degree.
...}
 
Aid agencies face escalating crisis as foreign workers ...
...
Mar 01, 2011 · Libya relies for more than 90% of its food on imports that have been badly hit by the turmoil. She said she was particularly worried about the situation in Zawiya, which is held by rebels but ...

Focus on Libya | World-grain.com | January 26, 2018 21:15
“The country relies heavily on imports (up to 90%) for its cereal consumption requirements, mostly wheat and barley. By the end of 2017, the WFP aims to assist up to 175,000 beneficiaries (including both

Food is a very minor cost in Libya compared to the oil wealth they get from exports.
Insignificant.
 
Hillary’s baby. We came, we saw, he died!

What did that do for us as Americans? What did our tax dollars buy?
Hillary was not running the Country and was NOT Commander And Chief. The decision to pimp our military out to Al Qaeda to help them assassinate a sovereign nation's leader - who was helping the Coalition fight terrorists in Northern Africa - and take over the nation for their own was ALL BARRY'S!

All evidence proves Barry was running weapons to the very terrorists the Coalition was fighting out of Libya.

The whole gun running claim is a really dumb lie.

Gadaffi had funded separatist groups all over Africa for decades.

Not possible.
Qaddafi was under economic blockade by the US most of the time, and there is no way Libya could have been getting all those arms and Toyota trucks to al Qaeda or ISIS. I can't prove it was the US, but it really had to be someone like the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, or Israel. Qaddafi could not have pulled it off. If nothing else, all those Toyota trucks would have had to have gone through Benghazi if they came from Tripoli, and since the rebels held Benghazi, that would have been impossible.
 
All the Mideast leaders, like Saddam, Qaddafi, Assad, etc., existed for so many decades because their government subsidies food, housing, education, health care, etc., made those place great places to live.
The people had the highest prosperity under those dictators.
And cultures in the Mideast WANT dictators.
It makes them feel more secure to be protected by a strong leader.
No one wants the anarchy of a democracy.
All these leaders were attacked by external western powers, and not from domestic complaints or rebellion.
The claim there were civil wars is fake western media manipulation.
Like with Assad in Syria.
He is VERY popular, and would easily win if they had an election today.
The rebels are all fake, paid, western mercenaries, or religious extremist even more dangerous than the mercenaries.
 
Qadaffi was no saint, but it can be argued that taking him out was a very BAD idea.
The Libyan people took out Ghaddafi. The western forces only intervened militarily, once it became certain he was going to commit genocide against his own people in the coastal cities where he wanted to maintain control (because of the ports). By this time Ghaddafi had already lost control of 90% of Libya's territory.
 

Forum List

Back
Top