Votto
Diamond Member
- Oct 31, 2012
- 63,067
- 68,557
- 3,605
I was watching a Netflix documentary on how to be a despot.
In the documentary, they looked at techniques from previous despots and examined them.
One of the more interesting techniques was to divide the people. Essentially, government wants to sow discord and a lack of trust everywhere it can, that way people will wind up not even being able to trust members of their own family, and as a result, there is no real way to build a movement to oppose them.
Naturally, you will still have a core number of groupies that trusts the government 100% in every despotic regime despite opposing views in the media. like we see some posters here. I think this is done by controlling the core of the media that gets watched the most while allowing alternative viewpoints along the side to control the propaganda most people never see.
Ironically, as I watched them cover the Qaddafi regime the documentary seemed to be providing propaganda for the DNC. It mentioned why Qaddafi was overthrown. They said it was because he became too soft on his opposition. For you see, Qaddafi was bombed by Reagan and then saw what the West did to Saddam, so he gave up his weapons program to appease the West to save himself, and he lightened laws against his own people, presumably to appease the West as well. But at the end of the day, Obama and the UN hunted him down anyway, bombing every area they thought he might be at, which weakened him considerably and led to his overthrow. This the documentary left out completely. The funny part is, I remember the media saying the UN was just there to set up a no fly zone to protect the opposition to Qaddafi in Libya. They swore up and down it had nothing to do with regime change LOL.
But had it not been for Obama and the UN, he would never have been overthrown.
So why was Qaddafi targeted? After all, there are far worse despots out there, as the people in Libya had a higher standard of living than any in Africa.
Why was Qaddafi singled out like that?
I will admit, him giving up his WMD program made the option plausible as they would not done it had he had WMD's
The cherry on the top was the Nobel Peace Prize given to the warring Obama.
In the documentary, they looked at techniques from previous despots and examined them.
One of the more interesting techniques was to divide the people. Essentially, government wants to sow discord and a lack of trust everywhere it can, that way people will wind up not even being able to trust members of their own family, and as a result, there is no real way to build a movement to oppose them.
Naturally, you will still have a core number of groupies that trusts the government 100% in every despotic regime despite opposing views in the media. like we see some posters here. I think this is done by controlling the core of the media that gets watched the most while allowing alternative viewpoints along the side to control the propaganda most people never see.
Ironically, as I watched them cover the Qaddafi regime the documentary seemed to be providing propaganda for the DNC. It mentioned why Qaddafi was overthrown. They said it was because he became too soft on his opposition. For you see, Qaddafi was bombed by Reagan and then saw what the West did to Saddam, so he gave up his weapons program to appease the West to save himself, and he lightened laws against his own people, presumably to appease the West as well. But at the end of the day, Obama and the UN hunted him down anyway, bombing every area they thought he might be at, which weakened him considerably and led to his overthrow. This the documentary left out completely. The funny part is, I remember the media saying the UN was just there to set up a no fly zone to protect the opposition to Qaddafi in Libya. They swore up and down it had nothing to do with regime change LOL.
But had it not been for Obama and the UN, he would never have been overthrown.
So why was Qaddafi targeted? After all, there are far worse despots out there, as the people in Libya had a higher standard of living than any in Africa.
Why was Qaddafi singled out like that?
I will admit, him giving up his WMD program made the option plausible as they would not done it had he had WMD's
The cherry on the top was the Nobel Peace Prize given to the warring Obama.
Last edited:
