Zimbabwe.

meghatronic said:
WHERE IS THE ****** MONEY!??!?! And why is it costing us so much? Why aren't we all wearing Armani suits??!?!?!
Click to expand...

Ask me again in 10 years. The country's a mess, its not going to provide any benefit at the minute, indeed might never will. But at the beginning, no-one thought it would be this bloody hard, and I'll bet they the Americans certainly didnt expect to be so heavily involved for this long.

Regardless, theres no desire to go to Zimbabwe. It would be financially crippling.
 
meghatronic said:
No, I don't think we went to IRAQ to find Osama.

I have my personal opinions and beliefs, and they'll stay that way... but if it was about the 'oil' as so many retards utter, then WHERE IS THE ****** MONEY!??!?! And why is it costing us so much? Why aren't we all wearing Armani suits??!?!?!
Click to expand...

:confused:

We've secured oil contracts for the future, search around on the web, it's a well known thing...
 
meghatronic said:
"future". And I doubt anything will happen of them, the country will be in tribal hands way before then.
Click to expand...

Iraq? No it wont. Could well be pretty dangerous (well, as dangerous as it is at present) with the terrorists, but it certainly wont be tribal. As I've already said, I don't think anyone thought it would be so hard to sort out. It is reasonably modernised, unlike the complete ****hole that Mugabe has made of Zimbabwe.
 
meghatronic said:
Show me the oil. Show me how Britain has profitted (with oil) directly from the conflict in Iraq.
Click to expand...

Does that include the fact that the Kurds used the war to form their own State to the North, and we jumped straight in there to secure oil deals with their leadership, even though it isn't formerly recognised? I believe it was David Mililband who the government sent to do the deals, look it up.
 
If we're going to get involved at all, it should be a quick in-and-out job - go in, remove Mugabe, and leave.

Zimbabwe's troublemakers are mostly over-paid thugs. Remove the paymaster and most of the rest should fall apart unless we give them an excuse like fear of a return to 'colonial rule'.

PS - The trouble with making Apaerheid-era comparisons is that besides the high-profile ANC terror tactics, very little 'news' got out of the country that wasn't state controlled. Nowadays, we're giving every man and probably their dogs the means to make themselves heard. Same thing happened with Tibet - while we knew about the last uprising, very little got out about it, but this time you had dozens of bloggers trying to make themselves heard.
 
You look through history Europeans come together to fight the greater threat but Africans don't. They almost never come together and would rather fight each other tribe vs tribe etc.

The whole situation is an African problem and it's time the nations came together to help their future.
 
Azagoth said:
I've already outlined why I think Africa should sort itself out in numerous other threads. As long as they're happy to sit back with all the corruption, genocide, disease and crime that goes on in that Continent without doing anything about it themselves then they can go for the proverbial long walk off a short pier. After all, it's not like the money isn't there, is it?
Click to expand...

You are a naive idiot. Welcome to my ignore list.
 
Spie said:
Rhodesia and South Africa only prospered because of white rule. Both countries have declined under black majority rule, especially Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).

Can anyone show me a country in Africa that has prospered under black majority rule?
Click to expand...

Angola? Botswana? Both some of the fastest growing economies on earth. Admittedly they are not 'there' yet, but both countries show enormous potential for being the leading lights in Africa.

South Africa (where I have lived) is in a sorry state, and I really hope they don't go the way of Zim, as it is a great country with fantastic people, and actually has a decent infrastructure (in many ways). Of course it also has a fascinating history.
 
Last edited:
Von Smallhausen said:
I watch footage of the cholera epidemic there. I watch rubbish and raw sewerage in the streets. I watch people pulling dirty water out of the ground to stay alive. I watch the death toll rise for what is an entirely preventable disease and I watch Robert Mugabe say that it is under control.

I tend to switch off to bad things in the world where I can but I don't half get wound up on this one. Iraq is invaded to promote freedom and democracy ( not oil then ) while democratic leanings are stamped on by one of the most corrupt and morally bankrupt regimes in modern times.

If there was ever a case for military intervention then surely this is it ?

Thoughts ?
Click to expand...

The UN has expressed a desire to intervene, but intervention has been resisted by Zimbabwe and her African neighbours.

Since nobody is willing to repeat the mistakes of Iraq, the mess drags on.

There is no simple solution.
 
We certainly can't intervene for historical reasons, it would make things worse not better. It really needs to be the African Union but the chances of that seem slim.
 
There's definitely a case for intervention, the main problem as I see it is that we can't be sure it will be any better afterwards. However I think it is a risk worth taking overall, Mugabe is a brutal fantasist who will happily blame others for the many failures his regime has caused.
 
Is Nigeria not doing better than average due to its large oil reserves currently supporting the economy? The internal attacks on the pipelines causing the government troubles... not sure if I would advertise that as what the other nations should be striving for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom