Muammar Gaddafi - Dead

Northern Verve said:
Marwikedor said:
I agree with that. People ask me who I hate more, Obamabush, or Hitler. I don't know! Hitler never did anything to me! That's like asking who do I hate more, Obamabush or Lex Luthor more!
Click to expand...

Eh... Hitler didn't do anything to you because he existed long before you were born. He however is one of the worst men in History to everyone. Just because you think he didn't do anything to the effect to you (Which is silly because had he won WWII unless you're (And your parents, and other family members) of German heritage and/or have Blond Hair and Blue Eyes chances are you wouldn't have even been born). Nothing Bush or Obama ever did should make them even considered as bad as Hitler.

And for one thing, Lex Luthor is a fictional character. OF COURSE he never did anything to you.
Click to expand...

Neo-Nazis don't hate him, and I find it deplorable that human society casts judgment on others simply because its members disagree with one another.
 
The blonde hair blue eye crap: Everything is true about that except the facts. Stalin was worse than Hitler. Hitler just wanted to fight the Soviet Union which killed far more and threatened the world with nucleur devestation for DECADES. To make a long story super-short, the Nazis came to power on the promise of overthrowing the diabolical Soviet empire and bringing Germany out of the depression. Poland could have allied with the Axis powers because as history came to show it sure was better off than under the Bolsheviks. But England basically makes the promise to Poland hey if Hitler attacks you we will fight on your side. But England thought the USSR and Nazi Germany would just duke it out. However, then the USSR and Germany sign a non-agression treaty which stuns the world because everyone thought the fascists and communists would come to blows from the very begining. Because Poland is enboldened due to Enlgand's promise, they don't ally with Germany. Then, lo and behold, Germany invades Poland and Russia flanks Poland from behind. They team up together! England is flabbergasted and doesn't know what to do. Regardless, England and France are at war with Germany within the week. Later on, hitler breaks the non-agression treaty and attacks Russia. The whole mess would have been avoided if we just would have let the Third Reich and the satanic Soviet Empire just go to war with eachother and destory each other. For the millionth time, Stalin was worse than Hitler. He killed 30 million of his own people. Fellow Communist chairman Moa of China killed 70 MILLION of his own people. The United States did NOT win WWII. It was a disaster. All of Eastern Europe was sold out to the evil beyond words USSR and results in a cold war with our former Russian allies from 1945-1990 DURING THAT TIME WE MAY WELL ALL HAVE BEEN KILLED IN NUCLUER WAR! But we didn't, and luck and luck alone (well prayer too) we have to thank for our sorry lives. Would this have happend if we just would have let Nazi Germany and the Soviet Empire kill each other and not get involved? No sir it would not have. England should have played their cards better to prevent the unessesary war.
 
Mario4Ever said:
Marwikedor said:
Dr. Javelin said:
Marwikedor said:
BOO! They shouldn't have killed him he will just be replaced with Moslem terrorist regime waaaay more extreme. He was a moderate! The United States NEEDS TO STOP RECKLESSLY SUPPORTING THESE STUPID REBELS IN THE ARAB WORLD WHEN THEY WILL BE FAR WORSE THAN OUR ALLIES THEY TOPPLE!!! GADAFFI WAS NOT A BAD GUY NEITHER WAS MUBAREK (SP?) STUPID AMERICA SPENDING MILLIONS TO AID IN THIS OPERATION WITH MILLIONS UNEMPLOYED HERE!!! GRRRRR!!!
Click to expand...
He wasn't a bad guy?

He ordered the Lockheed bombings, for your information. And he killed thousands of Libyan civilians.

I'd rather have a Islamic regime that is relatively peaceful than a madman who orders terrorist attacks. And even so, the rebel movement was not Islamic. I think.
Click to expand...
But the rebel scum is NOT a peaceful Islamic regime they are fanatical Islamic fundamentalists. don't you remember the nightmare of the Muslim Brotherhood taking over in neighboring Egypt?! Saddam Hussein in Iraq also didn't let terrorists in his country, Christians were as well off in Iraq under his rule (and Saddam's righthandman, Teriq Aziz, was a Catholic) NOW CHRISTIANS IN IRAQ ARE GETTING KILLED BECAUSE OF RETARD GEORGE BUSH! Bush was just a retard but Barack Obama is an evil man and he knows full well what he's doing.
Click to expand...

Why do you care so much about Christians in Iraq?
Click to expand...
Because they lived in peace and were not persecuted in Iraq (and even held positions of power. Remember Saddam's right-hand man?) but after Retard Bush invades Iraq and causes chaos, they are being killed today. And the Japanese attacked us because we cut off their oil. SHIGERU MIYAMOTO'S FATHER COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED BY THOSE ATOMIC BOMBS!!!
 
Marwikedor said:
Mario4Ever said:
Marwikedor said:
Dr. Javelin said:
Marwikedor said:
BOO! They shouldn't have killed him he will just be replaced with Moslem terrorist regime waaaay more extreme. He was a moderate! The United States NEEDS TO STOP RECKLESSLY SUPPORTING THESE STUPID REBELS IN THE ARAB WORLD WHEN THEY WILL BE FAR WORSE THAN OUR ALLIES THEY TOPPLE!!! GADAFFI WAS NOT A BAD GUY NEITHER WAS MUBAREK (SP?) STUPID AMERICA SPENDING MILLIONS TO AID IN THIS OPERATION WITH MILLIONS UNEMPLOYED HERE!!! GRRRRR!!!
Click to expand...
He wasn't a bad guy?

He ordered the Lockheed bombings, for your information. And he killed thousands of Libyan civilians.

I'd rather have a Islamic regime that is relatively peaceful than a madman who orders terrorist attacks. And even so, the rebel movement was not Islamic. I think.
Click to expand...
But the rebel scum is NOT a peaceful Islamic regime they are fanatical Islamic fundamentalists. don't you remember the nightmare of the Muslim Brotherhood taking over in neighboring Egypt?! Saddam Hussein in Iraq also didn't let terrorists in his country, Christians were as well off in Iraq under his rule (and Saddam's righthandman, Teriq Aziz, was a Catholic) NOW CHRISTIANS IN IRAQ ARE GETTING KILLED BECAUSE OF RETARD GEORGE BUSH! Bush was just a retard but Barack Obama is an evil man and he knows full well what he's doing.
Click to expand...

Why do you care so much about Christians in Iraq?
Click to expand...
Because they lived in peace and were not persecuted in Iraq (and even held positions of power. Remember Saddam's right-hand man?) but after Retard Bush invades Iraq and causes chaos, they are being killed today. And the Japanese attacked us because we cut off their oil. SHIGERU MIYAMOTO'S FATHER COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED BY THOSE ATOMIC BOMBS!!!
Click to expand...

We are not here to talk about Miyamoto.
 
I think England made the right
choice, anyway why the hell are we talking about WWII when we should be talking about Muammar Gaddafi
 
SuperMario25 said:
I think England made the right
choice, anyway why the hell are we talking about WWII when we should be talking about Muammar Gaddafi
Click to expand...
Because he should not have been killed. While the lesser of two evils may still be evil (like how hitler was the lesser of two evils by far when compared with stalin and the Red Flag of Communism), we should still back the lesser of two evils especially when Christians aren't being killed.
 
Marwikedor said:
The blonde hair blue eye crap: Everything is true about that except the facts. Stalin was worse than Hitler. Hitler just wanted to fight the Soviet Union which killed far more and threatened the world with nucleur devestation for DECADES. To make a long story super-short, the Nazis came to power on the promise of overthrowing the diabolical Soviet empire and bringing Germany out of the depression. Poland could have allied with the Axis powers because as history came to show it sure was better off than under the Bolsheviks. But England basically makes the promise to Poland hey if Hitler attacks you we will fight on your side. But England thought the USSR and Nazi Germany would just duke it out. However, then the USSR and Germany sign a non-agression treaty which stuns the world because everyone thought the fascists and communists would come to blows from the very begining. Because Poland is enboldened due to Enlgand's promise, they don't ally with Germany. Then, lo and behold, Germany invades Poland and Russia flanks Poland from behind. They team up together! England is flabbergasted and doesn't know what to do. Regardless, England and France are at war with Germany within the week. Later on, hitler breaks the non-agression treaty and attacks Russia. The whole mess would have been avoided if we just would have let the Third Reich and the satanic Soviet Empire just go to war with eachother and destory each other. For the millionth time, Stalin was worse than Hitler. He killed 30 million of his own people. Fellow Communist chairman Moa of China killed 70 MILLION of his own people. The United States did NOT win WWII. It was a disaster. All of Eastern Europe was sold out to the evil beyond words USSR and results in a cold war with our former Russian allies from 1945-1990 DURING THAT TIME WE MAY WELL ALL HAVE BEEN KILLED IN NUCLUER WAR! But we didn't, and luck and luck alone (well prayer too) we have to thank for our sorry lives. Would this have happend if we just would have let Nazi Germany and the Soviet Empire kill each other and not get involved? No sir it would not have. England should have played their cards better to prevent the unessesary war.
Click to expand...

Damn it, more people need to realize that Satanism has nothing to do with this deplorable sort of shit. If you knew a thing about Satanism, you'd know that the USSR definitely was not Satanic. I just hate it when people bash something without understanding it (which you did indirectly) just because societal tradition has forced that into their brains, but fuck it, this is a thread about Gadhafi. I thought the U.S. was done with the whole "Saviors of the World" thing years ago. We wouldn't be hated so much if the population was smart enough to elect officials who would focus on managing our problems instead of trying to "democratize" everyone else.
 
Mario4Ever said:
Marwikedor said:
The blonde hair blue eye crap: Everything is true about that except the facts. Stalin was worse than Hitler. Hitler just wanted to fight the Soviet Union which killed far more and threatened the world with nucleur devestation for DECADES. To make a long story super-short, the Nazis came to power on the promise of overthrowing the diabolical Soviet empire and bringing Germany out of the depression. Poland could have allied with the Axis powers because as history came to show it sure was better off than under the Bolsheviks. But England basically makes the promise to Poland hey if Hitler attacks you we will fight on your side. But England thought the USSR and Nazi Germany would just duke it out. However, then the USSR and Germany sign a non-agression treaty which stuns the world because everyone thought the fascists and communists would come to blows from the very begining. Because Poland is enboldened due to Enlgand's promise, they don't ally with Germany. Then, lo and behold, Germany invades Poland and Russia flanks Poland from behind. They team up together! England is flabbergasted and doesn't know what to do. Regardless, England and France are at war with Germany within the week. Later on, hitler breaks the non-agression treaty and attacks Russia. The whole mess would have been avoided if we just would have let the Third Reich and the satanic Soviet Empire just go to war with eachother and destory each other. For the millionth time, Stalin was worse than Hitler. He killed 30 million of his own people. Fellow Communist chairman Moa of China killed 70 MILLION of his own people. The United States did NOT win WWII. It was a disaster. All of Eastern Europe was sold out to the evil beyond words USSR and results in a cold war with our former Russian allies from 1945-1990 DURING THAT TIME WE MAY WELL ALL HAVE BEEN KILLED IN NUCLUER WAR! But we didn't, and luck and luck alone (well prayer too) we have to thank for our sorry lives. Would this have happend if we just would have let Nazi Germany and the Soviet Empire kill each other and not get involved? No sir it would not have. England should have played their cards better to prevent the unessesary war.
Click to expand...

Damn it, more people need to realize that Satanism has nothing to do with this deplorable sort of *bleep*. If you knew a thing about Satanism, you'd know that the USSR definitely was not Satanic. I just hate it when people bash something without understanding it (which you did indirectly) just because societal tradition has forced that into their brains, but *bleep* it, this is a thread about Gadhafi. I thought the U.S. was done with the whole "Saviors of the World" thing years ago. We wouldn't be hated so much if the population was smart enough to elect officials who would focus on managing our problems instead of trying to "democratize" everyone else.
Click to expand...
Why are you disagreeing when we agree about Gadaffi. I agree the US needs to stop this policeing the world saviors of the world crap especially when they are always WRONG!
 
And with this recent crap with Gadaffi and Egypt and all these other African/Middle Eastern countries, the United States has become like the Soviet Union in that instead of supporting uprisings around the world to spread communism, the United States is supporting questionable rebellions around the world to advance democracy. Democracy always leads to tyrany. If the majority of people supports something that is evil, then it becomes the law of the land. But that evil is not somehow now good all of the sudden via popular vote! The US needs to stay OUT OF THIS CRAP!!!!! IF THE WESTERN POWERS HAD NOT GOTTEN INVOLVED GADDAFI WOULD STILL BE ALIVE HE WOULD HAVE SQUASHED THE REBELS!
 
Marwikedor said:
The blonde hair blue eye crap: Everything is true about that except the facts. Stalin was worse than Hitler. Hitler just wanted to fight the Soviet Union which killed far more and threatened the world with nucleur devestation for DECADES. To make a long story super-short, the Nazis came to power on the promise of overthrowing the diabolical Soviet empire and bringing Germany out of the depression. Poland could have allied with the Axis powers because as history came to show it sure was better off than under the Bolsheviks. But England basically makes the promise to Poland hey if Hitler attacks you we will fight on your side. But England thought the USSR and Nazi Germany would just duke it out. However, then the USSR and Germany sign a non-agression treaty which stuns the world because everyone thought the fascists and communists would come to blows from the very begining. Because Poland is enboldened due to Enlgand's promise, they don't ally with Germany. Then, lo and behold, Germany invades Poland and Russia flanks Poland from behind. They team up together! England is flabbergasted and doesn't know what to do. Regardless, England and France are at war with Germany within the week. Later on, hitler breaks the non-agression treaty and attacks Russia. The whole mess would have been avoided if we just would have let the Third Reich and the satanic Soviet Empire just go to war with eachother and destory each other. For the millionth time, Stalin was worse than Hitler. He killed 30 million of his own people. Fellow Communist chairman Moa of China killed 70 MILLION of his own people. The United States did NOT win WWII. It was a disaster. All of Eastern Europe was sold out to the evil beyond words USSR and results in a cold war with our former Russian allies from 1945-1990 DURING THAT TIME WE MAY WELL ALL HAVE BEEN KILLED IN NUCLUER WAR! But we didn't, and luck and luck alone (well prayer too) we have to thank for our sorry lives. Would this have happend if we just would have let Nazi Germany and the Soviet Empire kill each other and not get involved? No sir it would not have. England should have played their cards better to prevent the unessesary war.
Click to expand...

Yes in Statistics Stalin was worse then Hitler. And they were both bad guys. But by the time Germany attacked Russia the British were still fighting and France was under Nazi Control. I don't think it would of been wise for British to say "Oh you're attacking Russia? Fine Fine we pull out of this war" because of the torture the people under Nazi rule was going through. And for one, Russia did kinda need the Allies help for Distraction. Germany would of actually beat Russia if the British and other Allies did not help in North Africa for example (For invasions like D-Day we also needed Russia then) because Germany could actually put it's full strength against Russia which the Western Allies were splitting. Cutting off North Africa lessened gasoline supplies for Germany needed to use their tanks or airplanes. Had Germany had no opposition besides Russia, no matter what the determination of the Soviet Union or Winter did: Germany would have eventually triumphed. Yes we still got the cold war out of the whole thing but is Nazi World Domination really better then the Cold War? Germany probably could of also eventually found out how to make a Nuclear Bomb even if it ended up being slower then Russia did. The Nazis and Hitler in particular with Nuclear Weapons is far more scarier then any Russian leader with them. It just might of been Cold War only between the US and Germany. Nothing ever comes out 100% good out of War but I much would of preferred the timeline we ended up having instead of Nazis still running amuck. History sometimes has that Luck factor, Nuclear War was very scary during those times but it didn't happen so therefore the result we got was still better then had we let only Germany and Russia fight eachother.

As for the topic on Gaddafi. I don't know what to say. And while there will always be Terrorist regimes somewhere, capturing and/or killing the leaders that supported or even lead such terrible acts are still a blow to the enemies morale
 
Marwikedor said:
And with this recent crap with Gadaffi and Egypt and all these other African/Middle Eastern countries, the United States has become like the Soviet Union in that instead of supporting uprisings around the world to spread communism, the United States is supporting questionable rebellions around the world to advance democracy. Democracy always leads to tyrany. If the majority of people supports something that is evil, then it becomes the law of the land. But that evil is not somehow now good all of the sudden via popular vote! The US needs to stay OUT OF THIS CRAP!!!!! IF THE WESTERN POWERS HAD NOT GOTTEN INVOLVED GADDAFI WOULD STILL BE ALIVE HE WOULD HAVE SQUASHED THE REBELS!
Click to expand...
I thought democracy was generally set up so no single person could rise to power...

And if the majority of the people want something, then it's usually good. Stupid people don't make up the majority of the population.
 
Wait...you want Gaddafi alive?

I personally think it's a good thing that the lives of the Libyan people were saved.
 
Dr. Javelin said:
Wait...you want Gaddafi alive?

I personally think it's a good thing that the lives of the Libyan people were saved.
Click to expand...
Educate yourself a little more on these issues I've said a hundred times (well once actually) he will be replaced by someone FAR WORSE an Islmamic Fundy a la Bin Laden or the Moslem Brotherhood we've seen in neighboring Egypt. He was by NO MEANS an extremist! Yes that bombing in the 1980s was bad but since then far more heinous men could rule Lybia he wasn't that bad he was a moderate Muslim he wasn't a kill the west extremist. Well he kinda sometimes supported anti-west stuff but that is a grain of sand compared to what radical Islamists want to do.

And for that bitch Hilary Clinton cackling over his death!!! God I hate that bitch and I dont hate Gadaffi! If you laugh over the death of another human being you are a sick individual. They didn't need to torture and murder Gadaffi those INSANE REBELS who most people on this forum want to see TAKE POWER they are barbaric savages and it is RECKLESS of this Obama administration to support these insane barbaric savages around the world to topple governments.
 
And how did you gain your "education" on this? It sounds like mindless dribble. Do you believe everything you hear on TV?
 
Mason said:
And how did you gain your "education" on this? It sounds like mindless dribble. Do you believe everything you hear on TV?
Click to expand...
A lot of people belive it you're just not supposed to say it
 
You're telling me that I'm uneducated when you're calling the rebels who wanted their freedom barbaric savages?

I'll let the stupidity of that speak for itself.
 
Even if he was captured Muammar Gaddafi would have been executed and how does anybody know he was the lesser of two evils he killed millions of his own people because they opposed him
 
Educate yourself a little more on these issues I've said a hundred times (well once actually) he will be replaced by someone FAR WORSE an Islmamic Fundy a la Bin Laden or the Moslem Brotherhood we've seen in neighboring Egypt. He was by NO MEANS an extremist!
Click to expand...

You could argue that the fall of Gaddafi could result in a messy power vacuum or a more radical dictatorship if the CNT proves to be weak. That's an half-valid point and something not totally rooted in neocon raw sewage. But trivializing Gaddafi - a man who conciously ordered the army to shoot on pacific protests, and executed soldiers that did not carry out his insane order - as being somehow "not that bad" due to being a rampart against an hypothetical EVIL ISLAM GUVMIT!!! would be laughable if it wasn't indicative of an horrible, horrible thought process.

(please stop posting.)
 
Mario4Ever said:
Dr. Javelin said:
ghostyTrickster said:
You know, it's one thing to fight against someone who is opressing you.

It's another think to kill him/her in a bloody rage.

The latter is just sick. Even if he was terrible, nobody deserves death. Kinda why I don't believe in the Death Penalty over here, but I digress.
Click to expand...
Hitler deserved to die. Stalin deserved to die. Bin Laden deserved to die. People who have killed thousands of other people deserve death because it's the only surefire way to stop them from sontinuing their massacres. Gaddafi got what he deserved.
Click to expand...

"Why do people insist on creating things that will inevitably be destroyed? Why do people cling to life, knowing that they must someday die? ...Knowing that none of it will have meant anything once they do?"

That said, I support the death penalty if it is carried out efficiently (e.g. not in twenty years) and after there is no room for reasonable doubt. HOWEVER, I see no legitimate reason for Gadhafi's death (if I misspelled his name, *bleep* it, I can't find a consistent one). Same goes for Hitler, Stalin, and Bin Laden. Why? Because their worth was measured in relation to that of other human lives, and in my opinion, we are all equally insignificant. In other words, I don't see mass murder as a determinant of requiring death oneself. Generally, if the potential victims belong to causes or ideologies I support (e.g. scientists and video game designers) and/or are close to me (family, friends, acquaintances), their lives are worth defending. Otherwise, they mean nothing (that's true for most people; if two people, one being a stranger with whom you were ideologically opposed, let's say Gadhafi, and a close family member were at risk of death, and you could only save one, which would it be?). For the record, anything I do not condemn is not automatically considered justified, or vice-versa. I just tend not to take sides.
Click to expand...


Holy fuck, never talk again.

Can this guy be demoted simply for having the worst opinions known to man?
 
Marwikedor said:
The blonde hair blue eye crap: Everything is true about that except the facts. Stalin was worse than Hitler. Hitler just wanted to fight the Soviet Union which killed far more and threatened the world with nucleur devestation for DECADES. To make a long story super-short, the Nazis came to power on the promise of overthrowing the diabolical Soviet empire and bringing Germany out of the depression. Poland could have allied with the Axis powers because as history came to show it sure was better off than under the Bolsheviks. But England basically makes the promise to Poland hey if Hitler attacks you we will fight on your side. But England thought the USSR and Nazi Germany would just duke it out. However, then the USSR and Germany sign a non-agression treaty which stuns the world because everyone thought the fascists and communists would come to blows from the very begining. Because Poland is enboldened due to Enlgand's promise, they don't ally with Germany. Then, lo and behold, Germany invades Poland and Russia flanks Poland from behind. They team up together! England is flabbergasted and doesn't know what to do. Regardless, England and France are at war with Germany within the week. Later on, hitler breaks the non-agression treaty and attacks Russia. The whole mess would have been avoided if we just would have let the Third Reich and the satanic Soviet Empire just go to war with eachother and destory each other. For the millionth time, Stalin was worse than Hitler. He killed 30 million of his own people. Fellow Communist chairman Moa of China killed 70 MILLION of his own people. The United States did NOT win WWII. It was a disaster. All of Eastern Europe was sold out to the evil beyond words USSR and results in a cold war with our former Russian allies from 1945-1990 DURING THAT TIME WE MAY WELL ALL HAVE BEEN KILLED IN NUCLUER WAR! But we didn't, and luck and luck alone (well prayer too) we have to thank for our sorry lives. Would this have happend if we just would have let Nazi Germany and the Soviet Empire kill each other and not get involved? No sir it would not have. England should have played their cards better to prevent the unessesary war.
Click to expand...
Gentlemen, we have a new Rudnicki.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back