and both took a bullet to the back of the head
That’s about as visceral a question as one could think of. Spend a little time at it, and I’m sure you’ll discover your answer.
You apparently have too time on your hands as well as some pretty weird obsessions.
Both wanted power over a unified national body. Moral concerns about humans did not register as deep concerns.
The word specious comes to mind.
Former ABC correspondent John Miller (May 28, 1998, interview) said to Osama bin Laden “You are like the Middle East version of Teddy Roosevelt.”
I do not know if that part of the interview made it on the air.
Nicely done.
It is not a fair comparison since your argument really depends on a straw man fallacy. YOu have, in essence, misrepresented Abraham Lincoln by making him akin to an Arab tyrant, which he of course was not. You then make your statement that the two were so much alike in their defense of the country, that you rest your case on it. Bad logical reasoning and silly allusion. I thought the Civil War was over.
Abe is dead. Daffy is not.....yet...
Another question is how would the USA have reacted if the Muslim nations attacked Abe Lincoln because he was killing other Americans?
I think it would have brought us together as a country and we and our militias would have counter attacked our invaders using any means possible.
When other countries and other cultures invade, the residents will usually repel it. That’s human nature. The Christians are outsiders in Libya and it will probably unite their country against us, just the same as would an invasion of the USA in 1861.
I think a more salient question would be: Why will France fight with us against Libya and didn’t with us against Iraq.
But seriously, do you really think there was no other differences than the ones you cited? How long was Lincoln in power? How long has Gaddafi been in power? How did he get in power? And that's just a start.
What a dumbass question. That’s like saying Ronald Reagan and Adolf Hitler are alike because they both armed Germany. Different circumstances, different causes, obviously.
Dumpy psycho wife versus hot Ukrainian nurse?
Lincoln went to war on BEHALF OF THE UNION, for the good of the law abiding people. Lincoln went to war against immoral people who were out to protect their own interests in sacrifice of the good of others.
Khaddafi kills to protect his domination of the people. The “union” in Libya is artificial, cobbled together to make the people easier to exploit, not for the benefit of the people (as is the case in the US).
Actually the better analogy is a comparison of Khaddafi to the goals of the “confederacy”. Both went to war to maintain their domination of an enslaved people.
Not a dumb question, in spite of the snarky responses. The surface response is that Quadaffi is a two bit tyrant who has richly earned whatever happens to him. However, the same could be said for almost every Arab ruler who has existed.
What most here don’t want to dig into is the fact that Lincoln’s motives were not as pure as the driven snow. He cared nothing for freeing slaves. I suspect that northern interests were interested in holding the south as a sort of colony which could provide cheap labor and resources for their industrial system as well as a market for its products. The government likely saw secession as a loss of an enormous tax base.
I don’t know that the civil war accomplished anything that wasn’t going to happen soon enough. Slavery would have ended due to a combination of humanitarian and economic factors. Costs to the southern aristocracy would have been lower if they had freed the slaves and then used them as temporary workers who could be fired when the job was done rather than keeping them year round. That’s what happened after the war anyway, but the northerners got the advantages of cheap labor. As always with war, a bunch of northern businessmen made a bunch of money while a bunch of people died.
I’n not anti-war, sometimes it beats the alternative. Often there are better ways. I like assasination of opposing leaders as an alternative. If they get a few of ours in return, we have plenty where those came from.
What is the Difference Between Muamar Qaddafi and Josef Stalin?
Both had people summarily deported and executed.