Hacker News Reader

Comment by ransom1538 | Hacker News Reader

Imprisoning political prisoners is a great kick off to a bright future (historically speaking).

Sarkozy is not a political prisoner though. He's a politician that committed fraud by taking foreign money to finance his electoral campaign. Once elected he then proceeded to declare war to the dictator who gave him that money and eventually got him killed. That last point is sadly not in the scope of the judgement.

Are we crying tears over Muammar Gaddafi here? The man was a butcher and NATO was completely justified in imposing a no fly zone and supporting the National Transition Council in Libya. There was a UN Security Council resolution authorizing it.

Lots of things to criticize Sarkozy for but his support for the intervention is not one of them.

>Are we crying tears over Muammar Gaddafi here?

Yes, because removing Gaddafi from power after he yielded to international pressure to give up his nuclear-weapons ambitions makes it less likely that leaders will agree to give up nuclear ambitions in the future.

All leaders of countries know that no one would do to the leader of North Korea what France, Britain and the US did to Gaddafi -- because North Korea has nukes.

As a result the country entered dark ages with suffering unseen before. Of course Gaddafi was betrayed by the French. Just like France is betraying all of their former colonies.

Except that Libya never was a French colony I think.

Ottoman then Italian.

Failing to hold those in power accountable for their corruption has not been something that has produced positive outcomes, historically.

What is your definition of a "political prisoner"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com