Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevmo | Hacker News Reader

The USA convinced every nation it's at odds with that they should pursue nukes when it toppled Gaddafi after he voluntarily quit pursuing them.

View on HN

The US did not topple Gaddafi. He was in the midst of civil war when NATO did some intervention, mostly led by UK and France.

Gulf Arab states on the ground hunted him down, it was Qatari forces that likely killed him.

The US did some drones, AWACS and coordination, but to suggest it was the US is not quit fair.

In this case, perception is reality. If the rest of the world thinks Gaddafi was toppled because he gave up his nukes, then it’s true. At least as far as the decision to pursue a nuclear program. It’s certainly what North Korea thinks.

"If the rest of the world thinks Gaddafi was toppled because he gave up his nukes, then it’s true"

This is not what the world thinks.

Gaddafi was not about to obtain nuclear status - not even close.

There's no way he would have been allowed to anyhow.

Libya is a fairly small country, smaller than Chicago, fragmented, spread apart, with no industry other than some oil.

North Korea is not remotely comparable to Libya - I don't think the North Koreans see a true analogy.

I think the north Koreans see that any state opposing a major force in recent history got pushed over and trampled upon for oil and various reasons. Well except for Pakistan. Pakistan is a ally. Does not even have to export oil to be one. Okay, it has al quaida hide outs - but it is a really good friend. Loyal, as long as the bri- the budget doesn't run out. Totally different from afghanistan.

Another great country, that totally does not get pushed around comes to mind. Israel. Surrounded by enemys, with some really nasty wars in its recent history- that suddenly stopped.

Or India, dear god, that country was fractured and ripe for the taking- and yet, suddenly its independence is well respected- just like it is by all those companies and foreign powers in africa.

I wonder why.(not)

Delusional Intentions do not equal good outcomes, just because they timewise correlated.

"a major force in recent history got pushed over and trampled upon for oil "

This is ridiculous.

The US didn't take a drop of Iraqi, Kuwaiti or Libyan Oil.

The US could take all the Oil in the Middle East in a heartbeat if it wanted to.

This whole 'war for Oil' bit is mostly rubbish.

'War for continued access to energy' yes - but the us is not grabbing resources with military power, moreover, North Korea has nothing anyone wants.

Gaddafi was one of the longest-serving leaders in the history of the entire Middle East. It is a pretty widely held opinion that he would still be in power had he kept pursuing nuclear arms.

Current US Intel chief on this subject: https://theintercept.com/2017/07/29/dan-coats-north-korea-nu...

iirc Libya had the highest per-capita GDP / quality of living/(?) in Africa before, now there are people being sold as slaves

Yes, https://www.globalresearch.ca/libya-from-africas-richest-sta... , and yes http://time.com/5042560/libya-slave-trade/

Isn't lybia a dictatorship in both cases anyway ?

Yes. The USA should quit meddling in places it doesn't understand at all.

"Don’t invade a country if you are too lazy to learn the language." is a good rule of thumb here.

http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/why_the_worlds_biggest_mili...

" Libya had the highest per-capita GDP / quality of living/(?) in Africa"

Except for the part where Gaddaffi was using his military against half his nation in revolt.

Did you mean Saddam Hussein?

Nope.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com