The US definition of terrorism has been widely criticized by other first-world countries because it opens the door for a bad prez (like Nixon or Dick Cheney) to create a totalitarian state
It could be both. That MG improved education, quality of life and infrastructure in Libya is true. That GM also committed atrocities is true. The two are not mutually exclusive.
My guess is GM was taken down because the bigger powers could no longer control him. He had been doing the things cited as reason to help the people overthrow his government for decades so I'm not buying this as the true reason.
View attachment 67117570 The rebels who abused MG were angry young men bent on revenge. Had they been older/seasoned men, I believe MG's end would have been more humane and more in accordance with international law.
I am thinking we agree more than not.
The misuse of "terrorism" is out of control, and the overwhelming amount of propaganda of what we are shown relating to foreign affairs and happenings in the ME in the news makes it truly difficult to form a proper opinion.
One moment we are led to believe that all of Islam is planning to over throw the entire west "by the sword" and the next were told that there are only a small amount of "radicals" that are being dealt with militarily, and then that this leader or that leader is part of the "axis of evil" and so on and so forth as the BS piles up so high no one can believe any of it.
From reading various news sources outside of the US, and reading various authors who have either first hand experience or have lived most of their lives in the ME I have become of the opinion that the garbage we are fed by our legislators and our media is inaccurate, misleading and changes direction as the needs of public opinion and various political and monetary agendas dictate.
I completely agree with the issues some "bigger power" had with MG, and that this was a big part of why he was allowed to fall, but also realize that more importantly than his own selling him out is that there is a much larger force driving all the change in the ME and being that force is money and power it is no surprise that the exact country or leader is only of importance when rallying public support.
I figure this all is why so many outside the US despise it, though not everyone would be an ally even if such tactics were not used it would seem obvious that the normal everyday working class family in the ME would have much more anger towards the US than MG etc.
We have to remember that those inside the ME are most likely receiving the exact opposite propaganda that is used in the US, and just like in the US when things are tough or worse finding a common enemy to blame and point hatred towards etc is a very strong and effective tool.
Now add to all this the large amount of anti terror units, dollars, and manpower being used to "keep an eye" on the OWS protests and it makes one really wonder just WTF is the intent of the whole war on terror, and where is this all leading to?