this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

MeanwhileOnGrad

1268 readers
5 users here now

"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"

Welcome to MoG!


Meanwhile On Grad


Documenting hate-speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse


What is a Tankie?


Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.

(caution of bias)


Basic Rules:

Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.

Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.

Apologia(Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism or any variation of Tankie Ideology. There is no justifying Genocide.

Revisionism — Downplaying or denying atrocities past and present will result in an immediate ban.

If you're violating instance rules, you'll typically be warned. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last seven days, but repeat infractions will have longer sentences. You may ask to be unbanned.


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Incase anyone tells you that lemmy.ml is not a tankie instance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That also overlooks all the times western powers were friendly with Gaddafi. They didn't mind him following his ascent to power, nor in the post 9-11 period when the U.S. and European countries restored diplomatic ties with Libya, and Western oil companies re-entered the Libyan oil sector.

In 2007, the UK's Tony Blair visited Libya to strike up energy deals, and France's Sarkozy met with Gaddafi for military and economic agreements.

Was Gaddafi a supervillain then too, or did he only become one when his interests were no longer aligned with the Western powers?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That also overlooks all the times western powers were friendly with Gaddafi. They didn't mind him following his ascent to power, nor in the post 9-11 period when the U.S. and European countries restored diplomatic ties with Libya, and Western oil companies re-entered the Libyan oil sector.

That was my point about him swapping out friends sporadically. Gaddafi had massive swings in political alignment throughout his time as leader of Libya. The reason nato/un could actually make a move on his government without greater political ramifications is because he's burned every bridge across the political spectrum.

Was Gaddafi a supervillain then too, or did he only become one when his interests were no longer aligned with the Western powers?

Literally yes...... Is it that surprising the west would work with a crazy despot that has a bunch of oil?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It seems we're largely in agreement then - that 1) NATO did, in fact, make a move on Gaddafi and 2) the West supported him when it was beneficial but turned on a dime the minute he stopped cooperating.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

that 1) NATO did, in fact, make a move on Gaddafi

Not something I ever disputed? Would be kinda hard for a rebel force to get a cruise missile.

  1. the West supported him when it was beneficial but turned on a dime the minute he stopped cooperating.

This I don't really agree with as it's a bit of a reductionist mischaracterization. Gaddafi literally funded terrorist attacks on the US in the 80s, which led to about 15-20 years of political disruptions between the two countries. They normalized relations again in the early 00s, with the US eventually going as far as to delist them from the state sponsored terror list in 08.

It would be hard to describe that as "turned on a dime the minute he stopped cooperating". There's a reason why no one in the UN, including Russia and China UN vetoed the resolution.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Gaddafi literally funded terrorist attacks on the US in the 80s, which led to about 15-20 years of political disruptions between the two countries.

According to the Regan administration perhaps, but not according to intelligence agencies from several European countries. There was a concerted effort to link Gaddafi to individual terrorist attacks, like the Lockerbie bombing, although there was no hard evidence to support that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

According to the Regan administration perhaps, but not according to intelligence agencies from several European countries.

Again, a reductionist interpretation. There's been a lot of conspiracies over the years due to so many groups initially claiming responsibility. However the trial held in the UK and a recent one in 2020 both point to the same culprit.

I think you may be talking about the bombing in Germany.

Either way, the point is that Gaddafi has sponsored over 15 violent paramilitary groups in other people's countries. Not exactly going to be winning a lot of friends on the global stage by doing that.

This is not what stable leadership looks like ...