Libya: Advice to Gaddafi Loyalists

"Yeah, what he said!"
I can't totally disagree with the author of this opinion. One has to wonder why these Arab dictators, and they are dictators, (now we see Assad in the same position albeit a stronger one to make the conflict last longer)hang on so long and allow the country to be destroyed. When they know they are being targeted for regime change by the west...when does it not succeed? Why don't they arrange for the people to vote in who they want early on and then take a hike? Gaddafi, for example...why should his sons rule after him, what qualifies them? It seems to me that when the leaders wait till they are toppled by the west, they are replaced by the west. It seems to me they could work it differently early on and at least spare the country's sovereignty if they really cared about the country at all. 42 years he sat on the throne...what was so repugnant about retiring in comfort and what was unreasonable about the people asking him to bow out and give someone else a turn? Shouldn't it be everyone's option that they can strive to one day become a great leader without killing the currant one?

tripolipost  by S.R.H. Hasmi, top of the hill,  speaking down to the Gaddafi loyalists:

It is shocking to learn that that Gaddafi loyalists are still engaged in terrorist activities as a result of which two innocent persons died in the capital recently.

Apart from being cruel, the act is also senseless because through their terrorist activities, they can't bring the Gaddafi regime back to power and definitely not Col. Muammar al Gaddafi, who is dead and gone. Do they not realize that Gaddafi came to power after ousting King Idris and then instead of establishing a democratic rule, himself became a king, an absolute monarch rather, irrespective of whatever name he chose to give to his system of government?

Gaddaafi ruled the country for 42 years, being the fourth in the list of non-royalty heads of state who ruled for over thirty years since 1870. Obviously, Gaddafi’s output is not all that remarkable: a sincere, capable and devoted person in his place could have transformed the country in that long spell. His worst failing was not developing a democratic system of government.

Some one could say that Gaddafi tried a lot but then his efforts had more been like running on a jogging machine (treadmill) on which you may cover long distances according to the meter but in fact remain at the point you started at. His foreign policy was the worst and most wasteful. I remember Gaddafi's announcement made during his first official tour of Europe when he said "We trust you (Christians) because you believe in God. We don't trust Communists because they don't believe in God".

However, he did not maintain that stance for long and became opposed to the Europeans, and was reported to by supplying financial and other aid to Irish Republican Army who was stirring things up in Ireland. He also started courting Soviet Union and other East European countries.

He formed a union with Egypt and Syria but that did not last long and over time, he got so angry with Egyptians that according to some reports, his officials took Egyptians in buses to the border and left them there and many Egyptians died of thirst and hunger. His merger with Tunisia in times of Habib Borguiba lasted just a couple of days, such was his mercurial mood.

He even courted Idi Amin Dada of Uganda called the 'Butcher of Uganda' and whose rule was characterized by gross human rights abuse, political repression, ethnic persecution, extrajudicial killings, nepotism, corruption, and gross economic mismanagement. The number of people killed during Idi Amin's brutal reign of terror is estimated by international observers and human rights groups to range from 100,000 to 500,000.

Idi Amin's mental state can be guessed by the title he gave himself which read 'His Excellency President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea, and Conqueror of the British Empire.'

Needless to say, the highest military rank of Field Marshal was of his own choosing and the British civilian and military honours were similarly acquired and not bestowed on him by the British government. He even declared himself to be the uncrowned king of Scotland. To feel great, he made the visitors' entrance door to his office much shorter than the normal height so that every visitor had to bow down before him while entering his office.

He organised an air force with Israeli help but later threw Israelis out. Idi Amin even had a navy, ruling not the waves of oceans but the ripples of Lake Victoria, hence the name 'lake navy' given to his naval 'might'. Despite all this plus his big mouth and tall claims, he could not face the weak Tanzanian forces, that he used to make fun of, who came in support of Ugandan public.

However, he kept making bold statements right up to the last minute, asking his forces, to keep fighting until it was discovered that he had fled much earlier, leaving behind recorded speeches which his people kept broadcasting on the radio.

To help Idi Amin, Col. Muammar Gaddafi had even sent Libyan troops to Uganda where they suffered heavy casualties. Just shows what sort of characters Col. Gaddafi used to have close association with, perhaps because he was not much different from Idi Amin either.

However, the oil wealth of the country did not let things deteriorate in Libya as much as in Idi Amin's Uganda, though things could have been a lot better had Col. Gaddafi used oil wealth to develop his country first instead of squandering it over useless foreign missions, in a failed attempt to assume an international role for which he neither had the ability nor the temperament.

Seeing defeat, at least, Idi Amin had the good sense to flee and to spend the rest of his life in comfort in Libya and finally in Saudi Arabia.

As compared to that, Col. Muammar Gaddafi won't admit defeat even when it was staring at him right in the face, and subjected his people to prolonged period of needless suffering, not sparing even himself and a son, who met a tragic death for which they were themselves to blame.

His wife, other sons and daughter were forced to live in exile and his other son, ‘Seif al-Islam’ who is instead in custody awaiting trial for crimes against humanity, just because of sheer madness of his father whom he did not perhaps have the courage to stand up to.

I think the biggest problem of Col. Muammar Gaddafi was that he held himself in very high regard, elevating himself to the status of an international leader, and doing so before developing his country fully, to enable him to play that role effectively.

He was often running in opposite directions, sometimes even going round in circles, because of which despite his strenuous efforts, he did not get anywhere. After authoring his 'Green Book,' he perhaps started holding himself at par with Chairman Mao Tse Tung.

I think it is time for Gaddafi loyalists to give up because they are in no position to reverse the progress that has been made in the meantime and their struggle is not for a just cause anyway.

I have described Gaddafi's words and deeds in fair detail which makes it quite clear that he needlessly wasted lot of country's resources on useless and indeed harmful pursuits which, if spent on the development of the Libya, with a small population, would have transformed it into a model state.

By persisting in their terrorist acts, Gaddafi loyalists are only doing great harm to themselves as well as to their near and dear ones, some of whom might be viewed with suspicion because of their senseless activities.

For the good of the country, as well as for their own sake, it is best for them to forget the bitter past and join hands with the masses for making the country a modern, welfare state, for which Libya has abundant financial resources in the form of oil wealth.

Also, when Gaddafi loyalists have the choice to make life heaven or hell for themselves, why go for the latter: doesn't make sense to me. I speak from personal experience, having observed what in-fighting has done to my country which suffers from added problems of exploding population and inadequate resources.

Luckily, things are not all that bad in Libya and I hope few trouble-makers there will see sense and get on the right lines as much for their own sake, as for other people of Libya who deserve peace in order to grow and develop and enjoy the fruits of their sacrifices.

Comments back to the 'New Libyan' author:
The Irish Republican Army were stirring up things in Ireland? What a load of rubbish. The IRA were defending Ireland against the British. You're a traitor to Libya for inviting the British. Shame on you. Learn your history.
Instead of talking about only ur land author talks about others, author has audacity to ignore crimes committed by so called freedom fighters during recent Libyan crisis, anyways a nation which is built on false promises & lies, blood of innocents can never prosper, u may have money but never enjoy it with peace, sooner or later the crimes committed by you against innocent Libyans & foreign works will hound you and that day no one will rescue you...
This is pure propaganda, and you should be ashamed of yourself for writing it. All you are doing is helping along the string pullers of the world. If you become a journalist, you should at least have integrity to find truth.

1 comment:

  1. Very good. It is useful to separate the 'propaganda' from the 'truth'.

    - Aangirfan


If you sit by a river long enough, you'll see the body of your enemy float by.
Old Japanese proverb