It may have crashed because it was written in C/C++, perhaps. But on the exact same grounds, why not say "It crashed because it was not written in Haskell"? (Or any of several other languages.) Why Pascal in particular?
But no, the people back then weren't fools wandering in darkness. C won not just because it appeared better, but because it was better. Pascal appeared better - it had better theory, and a better story. But for actually writing software, C was better. Even with all the "shoot yourself in the foot" potential, C was still better. Programming in Pascal was like picking your nose with boxing gloves on compared to programming in C. (I exaggerate, but Pascal was noticeably - and frustratingly - clumsier to use.)
And Go still doesn't have anything comparable to Lazarus, which isn't as feature rich as Delphi/RemObjects.
A) The person you're replying to is simply quite wrong about the amount of Pascal libraries available. There is no "domain of interest" I can think of that does not have at least one "defacto" library for it.
More commonly though there's four, five, six or more libraries for any given thing to choose from, which often turn out to each have specific strengths such that you may very well end up using more than one of them in your project.
B) They would almost certainly probably not like Go. Object Pascal as implemented by Free Pascal is a language that effectively embraces with open arms almost all of the things that Go actively avoids: for example, traditional (single) inheritance, operator overloading, both function overloading and generics, and so on and so forth.
As far as inheritance specifically, the general indifferent attitudes towards it of "there are definitely times and places where it makes more sense than anything else to use" amongst Pascal programmers are in my opinion basically a direct result of the fact that "bad experiences the compiler developers personally had with inheritance as specifically implemented by C++" are NOT something that actively factors into their decision making process or something that they really think about or care about at all (or more broadly, something that users of the compiler generally think about or care about at all).
This sets it quite far apart from other languages such as Rust, where "things C and C++ arguably did wrong" are in fact heavily influential and both thought about and discussed regularly.
Almost all buffer overflows and security bugs could be solved by rewriting all software in Pascal.
Everytime a software crashes, you should say, it crashed, because it was not written in Pascal
I just spend two hours modifying my xml parser to load files that have a doctype with inline declarations. Never needed to load an xml file with a doctype before, and I only wrote the parser for the files I have. I also have plans for a json parser. There is a surprising lack of Pascal libraries.