Message from @MrSally
Discord ID: 337121002859266051
Than he wasn't useful
That's not a very good argument.
You're both imperialists
Eh?
Can you not tell the difference between useful now and not useful tomorrow?
That's not the point
Imperialists have their own games.
You know who made a new place after Gadaffi? Islamic militants. They have the new use to imperialist policy.
@Deleted User What's your point? that doesn't make Gaddafi an Imperialist puppet
No, no, his craziness and ease of provocation did that.
Imperialist
Don't project stuff.
I'm not, I'm calling out liberals for what they are
You are projecting.
>There will never be another dictator who suggests we split Switzerland
>muh projectuion
You don't know me at all, man. I've said like, six things to you.
I can still tell you're an imperialist
THAT IS PROJECTING
>I'm a psychiatrist xD
Okay
Sorry I don't support the liberal west
Yeah, neiter do I, fuck face.
You clearly do
Sorry, just had to add some inflection there.
Fair enough
I'm sorry
No, it's okay.
I will end it here. I am saying that Gaddafi was allowed to exist, because the moment he wasn't useful he died. When you review the recent history of Libya it is clear that is did not have strong effect to turn others to Communism. To imperialist powers, Gaddafi was a lesser evil, because he was a basic dictator, with no effect on others, and only interested in his own land. On every level he was a very poor theoretician, because he did nothing to help the international working class. Yes, expectation is high, but because it has to be. History is a tough judge.
Isn't it less Orwellian to just say he was stupid and really easy to troll?
Yes but Dusseldorf would never understand that.
Do you support Gaddafi, Dusseldorf?
*did
@Deleted User But you're essentially calling him an imperialist based on the fact that he wasn't "assassinated sooner"
Did you say that, Chopin?
It's a silly argument to make @Deleted User
You also have to factor in the fact that the U.S. wasn't always able to Justify a war with Gaddafi
If he did not actually name Gaddafi as an imperialist, I would advise you to check your argument a little bit to make sure you aren't projecting again.