T Nation

Mugabe's Winning the Election!

WOW!

What a “nail biter” of an election!

MUGABE WON!!!

(Cynical button OFF…)

Mufasa

He won fair and square!!!*

*Not

Headhunter’s real picture:

[quote]vroom wrote:
Guys, if you are looking for countries to liberate… here’s one with a voting population that is just itching for democracy.

How about throwing them a bone?

On a related note, I saw that Bush is asking for sanctions and so forth, which is a good step.[/quote]

Actually, the british have their panties in a bunch over Zimbabwe…Ethiopia is much more valuable to us. If we are going to assist anyone, it should be them. They are to one preventing al queada from rooting in Somalia. They need weapons, food and money. We should be sending that shit there by the ship load.

What needs to happen in Zimbabwe is to arm the citizens…They are desperate…Desperate people shoot back.

[quote]pat wrote:
vroom wrote:
Guys, if you are looking for countries to liberate… here’s one with a voting population that is just itching for democracy.

How about throwing them a bone?

On a related note, I saw that Bush is asking for sanctions and so forth, which is a good step.

Actually, the british have their panties in a bunch over Zimbabwe…Ethiopia is much more valuable to us. If we are going to assist anyone, it should be them. They are to one preventing al queada from rooting in Somalia. They need weapons, food and money. We should be sending that shit there by the ship load.

What needs to happen in Zimbabwe is to arm the citizens…They are desperate…Desperate people shoot back.[/quote]

Or you could get Mugabe taken care of.

China was colonized as well. Why isn’t it so screwed up?

[quote]rsg wrote:
pat wrote:
vroom wrote:
Guys, if you are looking for countries to liberate… here’s one with a voting population that is just itching for democracy.

How about throwing them a bone?

On a related note, I saw that Bush is asking for sanctions and so forth, which is a good step.

Actually, the british have their panties in a bunch over Zimbabwe…Ethiopia is much more valuable to us. If we are going to assist anyone, it should be them. They are to one preventing al queada from rooting in Somalia. They need weapons, food and money. We should be sending that shit there by the ship load.

What needs to happen in Zimbabwe is to arm the citizens…They are desperate…Desperate people shoot back.

Or you could get Mugabe taken care of. [/quote]

Me? I’d have no issue popping a cap in his ass. But I say let the red coats do it.

[quote]pat wrote:
Me? I’d have no issue popping a cap in his ass. But I say let the red coats do it.[/quote]

It would be preferable if the tyrannicide came from the people.

[quote]nephorm wrote:
pat wrote:
Me? I’d have no issue popping a cap in his ass. But I say let the red coats do it.

It would be preferable if the tyrannicide came from the people.[/quote]

The people are too terrified.

Let’s send Obama on a peace msssion. He can talk about change, and Mugabe will resign at once.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The British once encountered one of those glorious native peoples, living in their purified state, in which the local king drank a yearly potion made from 6000 human hearts. They promptly killed him, as was just.

I bet the people in Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) wish the British were back.

It’s a bet you would lose.While Mugabe is a tinpot dictator and criminal of the highest order and the majority of Zimbabweans want him gone,that does not mean that they would accept British rule in his stead.

The British were not the ‘benevolent rulers’ you seem to have envisioned in your fantasy world.

Zimbabwe has the highest inflation rate in the world, and an unemployment rate of 85%. The ruler is about as close to Satan as a guy can get; only Saddam or Kim Jung-il ranks with him.

I think they’d love for the British to at least temporarily come back. Hell, call it by its real name, while they’re there (Rhodesia).

And,pray tell,makes you think that they don’t just want him gone to be replaced by a democratically elected leader of their own choosing?

Your rampant Anglophilia is showing.Get it seen to…

It took centuries for the British to develop the concepts of equal justice and fair dealings. A government administered by people such as that would tend to be very fair and impartial.

The British were not in Africa long enough to instill these values in the people. Native leaders tend to think of what would be good FOR THEIR TRIBE and not for their country. They think first of plunder and how to get money from the World Bank, to deposit in their Swiss accounts.

If the British had stayed, I’d probably grant that African countries would be ready for independence sometime near the end of this century. Too bad for those poor folks that megapolitical events turned against them — they now revert back to their warring tribes, rape, and plunder (as in Darfur).

[/quote]

Speaking generally of patterns of European colonization and imperialism, efforts were made specifically to create societies which were incapable of functioning without outside (European) oversight. Borders were drawn and rivalries stoked-- at times fabricated outright-- in order to create political balances so precarious that an outside presence measuring in the hundreds in many cases could tip the balance of power. While the British had a better record of developing institutions in the territories they governed than others, a look at just about any of their border engineering jobs, or their rule through dependent minority tactics shows where their priorities really were.

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

[quote]etaco wrote:
Speaking generally of patterns of European colonization and imperialism, efforts were made specifically to create societies which were incapable of functioning without outside (European) oversight. Borders were drawn and rivalries stoked-- at times fabricated outright-- in order to create political balances so precarious that an outside presence measuring in the hundreds in many cases could tip the balance of power. While the British had a better record of developing institutions in the territories they governed than others, a look at just about any of their border engineering jobs, or their rule through dependent minority tactics shows where their priorities really were.

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.[/quote]

The British weren’t there to civilise the places, but to make money. However, as Gandhi demonstrated, moral people make poor colonists. The basic decency comes out. Look at the USA, South Africa, and India — all functioning democracies. Even Obama’s home country, Kenya, is more civilised than its neighbors.

Zimbabwe never had enough exposure to western civilisation. Then Mugabe kicked out the few remaining white farmers, who actually knew how to farm. Now the people starve.

[quote]etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.[/quote]

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.[/quote]

Are you saying that any country is beyond criticism and reproach?

That the previous experiences of other peoples are invalid?

That any sector of the human race has their shit so well worked out that they know what is best for all and sundry?

I certainly hope that’s not what you’re implying…

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.

Are you saying that any country is beyond criticism and reproach?

That the previous experiences of other peoples are invalid?

That any sector of the human race has their shit so well worked out that they know what is best for all and sundry?

I certainly hope that’s not what you’re implying…[/quote]

Europe ignores its part in the making the mess. They are not drawing upon experience, they blame America for all the ills in the world. Only a fool would listen to much of the talk that comes from them.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.

Are you saying that any country is beyond criticism and reproach?

That the previous experiences of other peoples are invalid?

That any sector of the human race has their shit so well worked out that they know what is best for all and sundry?

I certainly hope that’s not what you’re implying…

Europe ignores its part in the making the mess. They are not drawing upon experience, they blame America for all the ills in the world. Only a fool would listen to much of the talk that comes from them.[/quote]

Every world war was started by Continental Europeans. Then Britain and its decendents have to stop the insanity. From Napoleon on up, they have some record to answer for. I think its because the philosophy of Britain and the USA are a philosophy of life, while the rest of the world worships death. They sure spend enough time creating a lot of that.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.

Are you saying that any country is beyond criticism and reproach?

That the previous experiences of other peoples are invalid?

That any sector of the human race has their shit so well worked out that they know what is best for all and sundry?

I certainly hope that’s not what you’re implying…

Europe ignores its part in the making the mess. They are not drawing upon experience, they blame America for all the ills in the world. Only a fool would listen to much of the talk that comes from them.[/quote]

I think you are wrong.Europe most certainly acknowledges its part in the current state of world affairs.Where Europe differs from the U.S. is in its vision of how interactions between countries and cultures should be attempted going forward.

Europeans are far more acutely aware of history,in general,than Americans.(That is my opinion,nothing more.)

Just because the U.S. may feel harshly criticized,does not make the critique invalid.

But it definetely not the role of Europe to STFU.It is also my opinion, whether one likes it or not,Europe is on the cutting edge of human socio-political development,has been so since the beginning of Western civilization,and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.

And believe it or not ,most Europeans are more interested in how to make a positive (within their own capabilities)contribution,than in blaming America.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.

Are you saying that any country is beyond criticism and reproach?

That the previous experiences of other peoples are invalid?

That any sector of the human race has their shit so well worked out that they know what is best for all and sundry?

I certainly hope that’s not what you’re implying…

Europe ignores its part in the making the mess. They are not drawing upon experience, they blame America for all the ills in the world. Only a fool would listen to much of the talk that comes from them.

I think you are wrong.Europe most certainly acknowledges its part in the current state of world affairs.Where Europe differs from the U.S. is in its vision of how interactions between countries and cultures should be attempted going forward.

Europeans are far more acutely aware of history,in general,than Americans.(That is my opinion,nothing more.)

[/quote]

Certainly not reflected here or in any media.

[quote]

Just because the U.S. may feel harshly criticized,does not make the critique invalid.

But it definetely not the role of Europe to STFU.It is also my opinion, whether one likes it or not,Europe is on the cutting edge of human socio-political development,has been so since the beginning of Western civilization,and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.

And believe it or not ,most Europeans are more interested in how to make a positive (within their own capabilities)contribution,than in blaming America.[/quote]

I see them more worried about ways to enrich themselves and gain power while the masses just go along with what they are told.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
etaco wrote:

The pre-European history of the continent shouldn’t be glorified as some utopia-- it was complex, varied, and generally fucked up like everywhere else in the world-- but that doesn’t change the fact that the countries the Europeans defined and built were defined and built to fail from day one.

Very true. This is why it is infuriating when Europeans try to tell us how we should interact with the world. They fucked up the Middle East, Africa etc. and then they dare criticize the US for trying to set things right.

Frankly they should sit down and STFU. If they feel the need to speak they should apologize not criticize.

Are you saying that any country is beyond criticism and reproach?

That the previous experiences of other peoples are invalid?

That any sector of the human race has their shit so well worked out that they know what is best for all and sundry?

I certainly hope that’s not what you’re implying…

Europe ignores its part in the making the mess. They are not drawing upon experience, they blame America for all the ills in the world. Only a fool would listen to much of the talk that comes from them.

I think you are wrong.Europe most certainly acknowledges its part in the current state of world affairs.Where Europe differs from the U.S. is in its vision of how interactions between countries and cultures should be attempted going forward.

Europeans are far more acutely aware of history,in general,than Americans.(That is my opinion,nothing more.)

Certainly not reflected here or in any media.

Just because the U.S. may feel harshly criticized,does not make the critique invalid.

But it definetely not the role of Europe to STFU.It is also my opinion, whether one likes it or not,Europe is on the cutting edge of human socio-political development,has been so since the beginning of Western civilization,and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.

And believe it or not ,most Europeans are more interested in how to make a positive (within their own capabilities)contribution,than in blaming America.

I see them more worried about ways to enrich themselves and gain power while the masses just go along with what they are told.
[/quote]

I think you may be mistaking Europe for the US in that statement…the masses seem far more docile in the US.

Maybe former European colonies are screwed up because the people living there are. China was colonized and it’s creating lots of wealth. Same thing for India. Same thing for Taiwan. Europe went through 2 huge wars and it’s doing better than Africa. Maybe parts of Africa are so screwed up because the Africans living there are, not because they were colonized.

A few things:

Africa would be a lot better off had NOBODY colonized there. Wanna know why? Western nations carved up Africa in the best way to benefit them, leaving the natives out to dry. Off the top of my head I’d say over 50% of civil wars in Africa are a direct result of a colonizing power lumping tribal enemies together under one flag. Because we all know putting hated enemies under one roof is a great idea.

Second of all, Zimbabwe only really went to shit once they start trying to take back the white farmer’s land. I have friends there, I have been told this. Once that happened it all went to shit.

And lastly, someone needs to put a bullet in Mugabe’s head.