Robert Mugabe appointed goodwill ambassador for the WHO

Status
Not open for further replies.
rubberduck said:
I suspect quite a few people are a bit to emotionally involved in this to realise that 'good' and 'bad' are subjective terms and thus a blog article is a perfectly valid thing to link... Also Diddums, no personal insults please bra.
Click to expand...

Sorry, clarify for me; What's subjective about the murder of tens of thousands of people?

What's subjective about the decimation of a nation's currency?

What's subjective about the complete degradation of a nations health system?

I know you're most likely just trolling for the lols, but whether serious or silly, you're awful.
 
You’re not being serious are you Rubberducks? Mugabe is a vile individual who has almost single handedly ruined what was one of Africa’s most thriving economies, and in the process ruined the lives of millions.
 
Righto gonna leave it there, with the OP also out it is probably best if the mods close this one. At no point did I say that I approve of everything that Mugabe has done but he does have some support for certain things he has done (not the killing bit) so its probably not as balck and white as the western media make out... Its a bit like the western media try to make Chairman Mao out as one of the biggest killers in history of the world yet he is loved in China etc.

Anyway please carry on with Tony Blair being peace ambasador to the Middle East etc. because I'm sure western policy to that region over the last 20 years hasn't resulted in thousands upon thousands of deaths has it?
 
Mao Tse Tung was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of his own countrymen. That’s fact and has nothing to do with the views of western media. If he is beloved in China it’s due to the suppression of the truth by the Chinese authorities.

Tony Blair is just another money grabbing ********. His appointment as peace ambassador is only relevant by comparing that decision to that of Mugabe becoming a goodwill ambassador. Both are ridiculous.
 
rubberduck said:
Righto gonna leave it there, with the OP also out it is probably best if the mods close this one. At no point did I say that I approve of everything that Mugabe has done but he does have some support for certain things he has done (not the killing bit) so its probably not as balck and white as the western media make out... Its a bit like the western media try to make Chairman Mao out as one of the biggest killers in history of the world yet he is loved in China etc.

Anyway please carry on with Tony Blair being peace ambasador to the Middle East etc. because I'm sure western policy to that region over the last 20 years hasn't resulted in thousands upon thousands of deaths has it?
Click to expand...


"Not the killing bit" = nvm 20k+ deaths on his instructions lol.

I'd rather the mods keep this open tbh. Just because you can't bring anything of any worth to this discussion doesn't mean it has to go ;)
 
rubberduck said:
I suspect quite a few people are a bit to emotionally involved in this to realise that 'good' and 'bad' are subjective terms and thus a blog article is a perfectly valid thing to link... Also Diddums, no personal insults please bra.
Click to expand...

You have yet to state anything good Mugabe has done.
The first article you post doesn’t even state anything good he has done.
 
Communists are so blinded by their ideology that they cannot see the atrocities committed in it's name.

You will see this amongst University Campuses with students proudly displaying USSR flags whilst brushing under the carpet the genocide committed against the Ukrainians or the butchery of Mao in China.

They don't listen, they don't care and that, unfortunately, is why communist agitators must be smashed by force.

There is no point being shocked or upset about what a commie says about Mugabe. Commies don't care about the killings, they only care that he was "against the capitalist pigs" in his country. That he turned it into a basket case failed state is irrelevant to them.
 
Kronos said:
The WHO is rethinking it's decision after listening to views, whatever that means.
Click to expand...

One might think it would have been better to consider the man's record before appointing him and the likely public response but better late than never I suppose? I saw this news yesterday and wondered how this could have been deemed appropriate, even allowing for the occasionally questionable appointments by public bodies this seems a particular high (low?) watermark of inappropriate.
 
rubberduck said:
Listen! I'm not saying Mugabe is a saint, but the Western media certainly has an agenda against him and he has been the victim of many smear campigns over the years. Seems a reasonable appointment to given his political background and high profile gravitas. Just did some Wiki research and see Craig David has been goodwill ambasador for the WHO.... I rest my case.
Click to expand...

Oh wow you are serious. So you are happy that a man responsible for the deaths of so many and the ruination of an entire country has been given this roll. Stupidity and ignorance are not something to be proud of.

Oh good you also used Mao as a means to support your stand. Kills 10’s of millions, nothing to see here just western propagana. That is hilarious please try and read something beyond the tin foil hat YouTube brigade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom