GenBuhari: ^ That does not automatically mean you views about and understanding of the situation are correct.

Do not make allegations of Mugabe's motives or sincerity without hard evidence.

yes that true but i am an eye witness to mugabe brutality but i am a better witness that you i dont need to be told about zim becoz i was born and raised there i understand zimbabwe history & politics than you

and mugabe sweettalk and nothing happens on the ground just ask yourself right now he says he hasnt found a person to groom to takeover zanu leadership or just one person capable to takeover leadership

its not that he cant find but he is scared to let go becoz once he leaves that position he has not longer have power to protect himself he has done too many evil things that many people want him dead

@ZIM DRIll,
Are you black?

In any case, every leader regardless of how good they may be, would always have opposition in their country.

Because you oppose Mugabe, does not mean he is doing anything wrong - it is just a matter of opinion.

I have to re-iterate that you cannot make allegations about Mugabe's motives or sincerity with out providing hard evidence and it is nit sufficient to say that you grew up in Zimbabwe, because that does not constitute evidence to support your view.

Are you against the Mugabe because he took land from whites?

GenBuhari: @ZIM DRIll,
Are you black?

In any case, every leader regardless of how good they may be, would always have opposition in their country.

Because you oppose Mugabe, does not mean he is doing anything wrong - it is just a matter of opinion.

I have to re-iterate that you cannot make allegations about Mugabe's motives or sincerity with out providing hard evidence and it is nit sufficient to say that you grew up in Zimbabwe, because that does not constitute evidence to support your view.

Are you against the Mugabe because he took land from whites?

I am pretty sure he is. He has the same view most zimbawens have that I have spoken to. (Witch is probably more than you)


Yes but a good leader would not fear it. A good leader would let the people decide. It seems zim has the one man one vote system. Mugabe is the one man with the one vote.

It is the matter of a lot of people opinions even SADC. Trus me if you lived in southern africa you would know what I am talking about.

Well how about SADC with there report of corruption in the election. Numerous reports of poor governing skills, violence and massive corruption. There is enough official evidence out there.

Me I am against him for the way he ruined his country. This created a knock on effect in the region.

GenBuhari: @ZIM DRIll,
Are you black?

In any case, every leader regardless of how good they may be, would always have opposition in their country.

Because you oppose Mugabe, does not mean he is doing anything wrong - it is just a matter of opinion.

I have to re-iterate that you cannot make allegations about Mugabe's motives or sincerity with out providing hard evidence and it is nit sufficient to say that you grew up in Zimbabwe, because that does not constitute evidence to support your view.

Are you against the Mugabe because he took land from whites?

I am pretty sure he is. He has the same view most zimbawens have that I have spoken to. (Witch is probably more than you)


Yes but a good leader would not fear it. A good leader would let the people decide. It seems zim has the one man one vote system. Mugabe is the one man with the one vote.

It is the matter of a lot of people opinions even SADC. Trus me if you lived in southern africa you would know what I am talking about.

Well how about SADC with there report of corruption in the election. Numerous reports of poor governing skills, violence and massive corruption. There is enough official evidence out there.

Me I am against him for the way he ruined his country. This created a knock on effect in the region.

^ So you are not aginst him because he took back land from whites?

Why does it ocncern you if he ruins his country or not?

Who tells you his country is ruined anyway?

GenBuhari: @ZIM DRIll,
Are you black?

In any case, every leader regardless of how good they may be, would always have opposition in their country.

Because you oppose Mugabe, does not mean he is doing anything wrong - it is just a matter of opinion.

I have to re-iterate that you cannot make allegations about Mugabe's motives or sincerity with out providing hard evidence and it is nit sufficient to say that you grew up in Zimbabwe, because that does not constitute evidence to support your view.

Are you against the Mugabe because he took land from whites?

am black

lets seperate two things am not against land redistribution

am against the way mugabe handled it

the way he handles opposition parties

the way he handles people from his own party

i support idea of black empowerment but i disagree on the way it implemented

GenBuhari: @ZIM DRIll,
Are you black?

In any case, every leader regardless of how good they may be, would always have opposition in their country.

Because you oppose Mugabe, does not mean he is doing anything wrong - it is just a matter of opinion.

I have to re-iterate that you cannot make allegations about Mugabe's motives or sincerity with out providing hard evidence and it is nit sufficient to say that you grew up in Zimbabwe, because that does not constitute evidence to support your view.

Are you against the Mugabe because he took land from whites?

watch this clip


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZf_GcCjMIc&feature=relmfu

hear mugabe declaring zimbabwe to be a one party state

get a some views on the land issue

get some views on how he treats opposition

most clips there are between 1980 1985

then this its 1985 nkomo run away from zim becoz of mugabe brutality


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Y0MSlDd5p4&feature=relmfu

GenBuhari: ^ So you are not aginst him because he took back land from whites?

Why does it ocncern you if he ruins his country or not?

Who tells you his country is ruined anyway?

The ANC is doing it. They buy the land from the white guy and giving it to the black guy.

It creates a knock on effect in the region. Zim is dragging SADC down. Then there are all the illegals in SA. The cross border crime is all so on a increase.

The 2 million refuges in my country tell me, the empty shop in zim extra extra tells me they collapsed.

THE Azanian People's Organisation's youth league has called on former president Nelson Mandela to apologise to the nation "before he dies" for selling out black people's struggle.

The league's president, Amukelani Ngobeni, said in a statement that Mandela would not have peace should he die without apologising for "selling out black people's struggle through the secret talks with the apartheid government".

FULL STORY
http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2012/06/12/azapo-calls-on-sell-out-mandela-to-apologise-before-he-dies

@ ZIM DRILL,

It is obvious to me nothing Mugabe would do would ever please somebody like you. You have a dislike for him that goes beyond his policies. I suspect that some tribal sentiments may be involved.

To says you disagreed with how Mugabe handled redistribution of land is just like you are splitting hairs or pandering to the views of the whites.

You only mention that you do not agree with how Mugabe implemented his policy but you have not suggested how he could have implemented them better.



My response to the videos is " so what?"
What do you expect from a country going through insurgency and turmoil and which was going through a power struggle between Mugabe amd Nkomo.

I would have prefered Nkomo to lead Zimbabwe as he was more radical and pro-African he would have rightly dealt more harshly with whites than Mugabe ever did. As it turns out Mugabe won the power struggle and was considered a good enough leader by the West until he dared to stand up to them on the issue of Land Reform.

ZIM DRILL:

watch this clip


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZf_GcCjMIc&feature=relmfu

hear mugabe declaring zimbabwe to be a one party state

get a some views on the land issue

get some views on how he treats opposition

most clips there are between 1980 1985

then this its 1985 nkomo run away from zim becoz of mugabe brutality


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Y0MSlDd5p4&feature=relmfu

ZIM DRILL:

am black

lets seperate two things am not against land redistribution

am against the way mugabe handled it

the way he handles opposition parties

the way he handles people from his own party

i support idea of black empowerment but i disagree on the way it implemented

ZIM DRILL

mugabe is a sweet talker but he doesnt emplement things very well no wonder the british supported him to win the elections,for your own infor the freedom fighter in the bush never liked mugabe and mugabe was pushed to be on top in doing so he killed a commader who was liked by the fighters

the british liked mugabe charisma they thought it was easy to deal with that the commander of the fighters hence all these eyes 1980 - 1994 mugabe and the brits were in good books remember they knighted him in 1994

mugabe killed the ndebele people while the british were watching becoz they trusted mugabe than nkomo

@^^ You may be Zimbabwean but I can detect your prejudice against anything "Mugabe" . Was Mugabe really the initiator/responsible for the commander's death? Did Nkomo's well armed and uniformed soldiers(ZAPU) resident in Zambia hoping to unleash their terror, after ZANU must have done the hard work(fighting/dying) do any serious fighting to dislodge the "settlers" UDI? Why would the British prefer Mugabe instead of Nkomo who was already pliable and amenable to "corrupting" bribes by the British? I hope you read/remembered the exasperation/statement made by the American UN representative(Andy Young) who publicly declared that Mugabe was "incorruptible" and difficult to negotiate with and he added that perhaps it is because Mugabe was "trained" by the Jesuits. Everything is not black and white my friend.
How do you know that the fighters never liked Mugabe? Perhaps you think they liked their "commander" or even Edgar Tekere who was far more militant/hot headed than the rest of the ZANU members including Mugabe. I can understand that things did not turn out as some people including your good self wished but we cannot deny the good intent of the project. I wonder what you'll make of the recent declaration(june 28) by the President of RSA(Zuma)- " Land Redistribution" project in South Africa have[b] failed [/b]and have not served its purpose/stalled. I also wonder what some persons on this forum make of such honest statement by the President of RSA? He is actually admitting that RSA may appear "peaceful" for now, but the embers of the fire is still burning and something urgently has to be done or else it will be fire next time. Mandela to some extent have managed to negotiate/keep the lid on things but it'll definitely not be forever. There are too many living aggrieved South Africans(memories) to forget let alone forgive. Land is a very important resource everywhere especially in Africa where there are no structured/organised social security etc. It's very difficult to give up a land/property perceived stolen by many. Sometimes "strong arm" methods are effective in pushing forward policies/actions that are in the long run good for everybody(peace) hence Mugabe's method may not appeal to some of us, nevertheless it did solve long drawn out problems albeit not perfectly for some. Land issues are pervasive all over East-Southern Africa. None have managed to solve the problem except Mugabe(not perfect) . Namibia is also waiting/simmering too. In Nigeria there are several land disputes and the Nigerian "constitution" have not helped matters either. The land Use Act cedes monopoly powers to governors on land acquisition/ownership. As usual the demi-gods(Governors) of the various states, use/abuse the powers vested in them(office) in relation to allocation of Land/certificates. It's sad that we have unfinished business in Africa but most of us are not helping matters at all by not acknowledging some little positive actions in our domain. You obviously do not share Mugabe's methods/sympathies perhaps because you are too young to understand the enormity of the oppression your parents/ adults around you must have witnessed/lived under. Perception of oppression by a different generation actually dictates the kind of responses/the intensity meted out in return for actual/perceived injustice. You cannot wholly blame Mugabe nor Malema for being strident in their actions/oratory.Experience, Worldview and Age matters too.

There where a few ANC members who tried to push for aggressive land redistribution, they did not make it far. It would only lead to civil war and no smart South African wants to see that war.

andrewza

There where a few ANC members who tried to push for aggressive land redistribution, they did not make it far. It would only lead to civil war [/b]and [b]no smart South African wants to see that war.

@^^ Well, obviously the ANC members were sabotaged because of "softies" and so called "smart" members who have turned out to be very greedy and "turncoats" who never meant well for their own people. Besides, why do you think there'll be civil war? Is it such a bad thing to have it(war) as ugly as it may seem/sound. Nobody ever voluntarily gives up "stolen" property except with some coercion/serious threat to their own existence. The settlers in Zimbabwe learnt that lesson the hard way because they thought they can hold on/out longer with some tacit support from the British. The rest of Europe and the Americans did not exactly sympathise/share in the British "quasi-colonial" interest. Nevertheless, because of the "commitments" of bilateral agreements( not wanting to be seen to break ranks) most of them(EU) and the Americans reluctantly towed the British line. War in whatever guise is never desirable but we cannot rule out its therapeutic and cleansing efficacy of the old system everywhere. The tragedy of South Africans is their inability to act purposefully because of some innate fear of the unknown and the unfortunate presence of Mandela who was promoted, celebrated and foisted on the people because of his inherent "softness" and amenable disposition. He is not a Sobukwe, Biko nor Lithuli either. The Europeans and settlers understand and know what there interests are and know who to use to achieve their ends. They could not do that successfully in Zimbabwe hence the "aggressive" rhetorics/propaganda against the "imperfect" Mugabe. Besides, the Zimbabweans[b] actually[/b] fought a war of liberation which in itself helped to demystify the "power"/status quo holding the majority Africans in abject penury and subservience in their own land. The South Africans want it easy but that is a tall order given the inherent incompetence of the ruling ANC. There is no easy walk to freedom and total liberation without paying a price. It is impossible as long as the intransigence by the settlers about the land issue is allowed to continue. The settlers seem to be unable to understand the good logic of "sharing" or Ubuntu for their own good for the long run. I guess most Europeans/settlers cannot eschew their inherent selfishness and greed. Those settlers in Zimbabwe who had the good sense of "sharing" or giving up some of their lands are thriving and happy too. It is ironic that many runaways(settlers) are heading back to Zimbabwe just like the former Portuguese and so called East African Asians are heading back to Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Angola and Mocabique. Why did they have to wait for some drastic actions by the Africans to happen, for them to learn a lesson in the art of respect/sharing or doing things differently?. Only cowards are afraid of "war" or the hard decisions that have to be taken sooner or later. There is nothing smart about intransigence nor postponing effective decisions/policies that ultimately will happen someday whether we like it or not.

cheikh: andrewza


@^^ Well, obviously the ANC members were sabotaged because of "softies" and so called "smart" members who have turned out to be very greedy and "turncoats" who never meant well for their own people. Besides, why do you think there'll be civil war? Is it such a bad thing to have it(war) as ugly as it may seem/sound. Nobody ever voluntarily gives up "stolen" property except with some coercion/serious threat to their own existence. The settlers in Zimbabwe learnt that lesson the hard way because they thought they can hold on/out longer with some tacit support from the British. The rest of Europe and the Americans did not exactly sympathise/share in the British "quasi-colonial" interest. Nevertheless, because of the "commitments" of bilateral agreements( not wanting to be seen to break ranks) most of them(EU) and the Americans reluctantly towed the British line. War in whatever guise is never desirable but we cannot rule out its therapeutic and cleansing efficacy of the old system everywhere. The tragedy of South Africans is their inability to act purposefully because of some innate fear of the unknown and the unfortunate presence of Mandela who was promoted, celebrated and foisted on the people because of his inherent "softness" and amenable disposition. He is not a Sobukwe, Biko nor Lithuli either. The Europeans and settlers understand and know what there interests are and know who to use to achieve their ends. They could not do that successfully in Zimbabwe hence the "aggressive" rhetorics/propaganda against the "imperfect" Mugabe. Besides, the Zimbabweans[b] actually[/b] fought a war of liberation which in itself helped to demystify the "power"/status quo holding the majority Africans in abject penury and subservience in their own land. The South Africans want it easy but that is a tall order given the inherent incompetence of the ruling ANC. There is no easy walk to freedom and total liberation without paying a price. It is impossible as long as the intransigence by the settlers about the land issue is allowed to continue. The settlers seem to be unable to understand the good logic of "sharing" or Ubuntu for their own good for the long run. I guess most Europeans/settlers cannot eschew their inherent selfishness and greed. Those settlers in Zimbabwe who had the good sense of "sharing" or giving up some of their lands are thriving and happy too. It is ironic that many runaways(settlers) are heading back to Zimbabwe just like the former Portuguese and so called East African Asians are heading back to Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Angola and Mocabique. Why did they have to wait for some drastic actions by the Africans to happen, for them to learn a lesson in the art of respect/sharing or doing things differently?. Only cowards are afraid of "war" or the hard decisions that have to taken sooner or later. There is nothing smart about intransigence nor postponing effective decisions/policies that ultimately will happen someday whether we like it or not.

I take it you where never in a war. Only those who have never seen the horror of war wish for war.
Those who want to take the farms by force want it for themselves so who is corrupt now.
Have you ever been in zim or spoken to those who came from there. While run companies where taken over by government cronies and ran them down now the local workers there loose there jobs.

And how about this you can not own foreign currency or trade for it but if you want to leave the country you must pay a air port tax in US dollar. If your property is left alone for 3 months it gets confiscated by the state, Illegal miners where driven of a mine with a Hind Assault Helicopter. Should i go on how Zim is ruined thanks to stupid leadership.

cheikh: andrewza


@^^ Well, obviously the ANC members were sabotaged because of "softies" and so called "smart" members who have turned out to be very greedy and "turncoats" who never meant well for their own people. Besides, why do you think there'll be civil war? Is it such a bad thing to have it(war) as ugly as it may seem/sound. Nobody ever voluntarily gives up "stolen" property except with some coercion/serious threat to their own existence. The settlers in Zimbabwe learnt that lesson the hard way because they thought they can hold on/out longer with some tacit support from the British. The rest of Europe and the Americans did not exactly sympathise/share in the British "quasi-colonial" interest. Nevertheless, because of the "commitments" of bilateral agreements( not wanting to be seen to break ranks) most of them(EU) and the Americans reluctantly towed the British line. War in whatever guise is never desirable but we cannot rule out its therapeutic and cleansing efficacy of the old system everywhere. The tragedy of South Africans is their inability to act purposefully because of some innate fear of the unknown and the unfortunate presence of Mandela who was promoted, celebrated and foisted on the people because of his inherent "softness" and amenable disposition. He is not a Sobukwe, Biko nor Lithuli either. The Europeans and settlers understand and know what there interests are and know who to use to achieve their ends. They could not do that successfully in Zimbabwe hence the "aggressive" rhetorics/propaganda against the "imperfect" Mugabe. Besides, the Zimbabweans[b] actually[/b] fought a war of liberation which in itself helped to demystify the "power"/status quo holding the majority Africans in abject penury and subservience in their own land. The South Africans want it easy but that is a tall order given the inherent incompetence of the ruling ANC. There is no easy walk to freedom and total liberation without paying a price. It is impossible as long as the intransigence by the settlers about the land issue is allowed to continue. The settlers seem to be unable to understand the good logic of "sharing" or Ubuntu for their own good for the long run. I guess most Europeans/settlers cannot eschew their inherent selfishness and greed. Those settlers in Zimbabwe who had the good sense of "sharing" or giving up some of their lands are thriving and happy too. It is ironic that many runaways(settlers) are heading back to Zimbabwe just like the former Portuguese and so called East African Asians are heading back to Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Angola and Mocabique. Why did they have to wait for some drastic actions by the Africans to happen, for them to learn a lesson in the art of respect/sharing or doing things differently?. Only cowards are afraid of "war" or the hard decisions that have to taken sooner or later. There is nothing smart about intransigence nor postponing effective decisions/policies that ultimately will happen someday whether we like it or not.

I take it you where never in a war. Only those who have never seen the horror of war wish for war.
Those who want to take the farms by force want it for themselves so who is corrupt now.
Have you ever been in zim or spoken to those who came from there. While run companies where taken over by government cronies and ran them down now the local workers there loose there jobs.

And how about this you can not own foreign currency or trade for it but if you want to leave the country you must pay a air port tax in US dollar. If your property is left alone for 3 months it gets confiscated by the state, Illegal miners where driven of a mine with a Hind Assault Helicopter. Should i go on how Zim is ruined thanks to stupid leadership.

andrewza

I take it you where never in a war. Only those who have never seen the horror of war wish for war.
Those who want to take the farms by force want it for themselves so who is corrupt now.
Have you ever been in zim or spoken to those who came from there. While run companies where taken over by government cronies and ran them down now the local workers there loose there jobs.

And how about this you can not own foreign currency or trade for it but if you want to leave the country you must pay a air port tax in US dollar. If your property is left alone for 3 months it gets confiscated by the state, Illegal miners where driven of a mine with a Hind Assault Helicopter. Should i go on how Zim is ruined thanks to silly leadership.

@^^ Why do you presume that I've never been in war? Besides, do we now assume that because war is horrible etc that we should not fight for justice whatever it may cost? My friend you are trying to sell "fear" and "cowardice" amongst the oppressed so as to maintain the status quo. There is nothing special/unique about dying in war honourably and burying one's head in the sand cowardly like a slave. Have you actually been in a war? I do not consider the so called war/raids by apartheid South Africa into neighbouring vulnerable/hapless Zambia and other countries as serious war involving the citizens of South Africa. South Africans were a "captive" lot hence there was not much of a war(internal) and contrition/fear by the settlers in South Africa. Believe me actual war as ugly as it is have a way of clearing away "rubbish" and innate inferiority complex pervasive amongst the South Africans no matter whatever they may think. It is akin to being an ex slave. It takes many generations for such hang-ups to die away whereas the so called oppressor is forever emboldened and energised. War wipes away such hang-ups whether you won or lost the war. It is therapeutic and cleansing indeed . We cannot run away from it hence the Zimbabweans will forever be proud and[b] emboldened [/b]as full fledged human beings anywhere unlike half baked "hand me down" freedom chanters. You have never been at the receiving end of "white" supremacist terror hence it is impossible for you to empathise. It is not your fault and I do not hold it against you. You are also a "victim" like everyone else around you black or white. Oppression affects everyone- master/slave obliquely.

Both of them are jokes. Even though i liked some of mugabes policies regarding white ownership of property in the country, Zimbabwe is messed up because of [i]him [/i]not because of the sanctions you guys love to scapegoat.

And Nelson Mandela is just a typical black sheep, turn the other cheek and all that jazz. These were brave people, but what we need to realize is true freedom can never be given to you. Marching, protesting and all that crap will only give the illusion of freedom because the oppressors will never completely abandon a system that benefits them.

If you want real freedom you must fight for it, with the same tactics as your enemy.

cheikh: andrewza


@^^ Why do you presume that I've never been in war? Besides, do we now assume that because war is horrible etc that we should not fight for justice whatever it may cost? My friend you are trying to sell "fear" and "cowardice" amongst the oppressed so as to maintain the status quo. There is nothing special/unique about dying in war honourably and burying one's head in the sand cowardly like a slave. Have you actually been in a war? I do not consider the so called war/raids by apartheid South Africa into neighbouring vulnerable/hapless Zambia and other countries as serious war involving the citizens of South Africa. South Africans were a "captive" lot hence there was not much of a war(internal) and contrition/fear by the settlers in South Africa. Believe me actual war as ugly as it is have a way of clearing away "rubbish" and innate inferiority complex pervasive amongst the South Africans no matter whatever they may think. It is akin to being an ex slave. It takes many generations for such hang-ups to die away whereas the so called oppressor is forever emboldened and energised. War wipes away such hang-ups whether you won or lost the war. It is therapeutic and cleansing indeed . We cannot run away from it hence the Zimbabweans will forever be proud and[b] emboldened [/b]as full fledged human beings anywhere unlike half baked "hand me down" freedom chanters. You have never been at the receiving end of "white" supremacist terror hence it is impossible for you to empathise. It is not your fault and I do not hold it against you. You are also a "victim" like everyone else around you black or white. Oppression affects everyone- master/slave obliquely.

You do know what took place in Angola against the cubans backed by the USSR. There was a war for you. And I was not serving during the border war. But the SANDF deploys to lots of war zones. And I would prefer we did not end up like them.

You do know that the majority of big business is in the black elite (or ANC members) hands. The fact that the poor are still poor is more to do with greed. There is a big chance of a revolution against the rich than a war against white farmers who are a big source of employment.

andewza

You do know that the majority of big business is in the black elite (or ANC members) hands. The fact that the poor are still poor is more to do with greed. There is a big chance of a revolution against the rich than a war against white farmers who are a big source of employment.

@^^ You are correct that some big business is in the black elite(ANC) hands . Yes, the revolt ought to be against the rich but somehow ignorance by the black majority will derail it.

The war in Angola was a proxy war, nevertheless the outcome would have been different if not for the restraint of the Cubans by the then OAU against Mugabe's and Castro's wish .

Thank Afro Blue,
This was culled from the news story link which you posted:

"Before Zimbabwe’s government began the violent and chaotic seizure of white-owned farms in 2000, fewer than 2,000 farmers were growing tobacco, the country’s most lucrative crop, and most were white. Today, 60,000 farmers grow tobacco here, the vast majority of them black and many of them working small plots that were allotted to them in the land upheavals. Most had no tobacco farming experience yet managed to produce a hefty crop, rebounding from a low of 105 million pounds in 2008 to more than 330 million pounds this year.

The success of these small-scale farmers has led some experts to reassess the legacy of Zimbabwe’s forced land redistribution, even as they condemn its violence and destruction. "

GenBuhari

he success of these small-scale farmers has led some experts to reassess the legacy of Zimbabwe’s forced land redistribution, even as they condemn its violence and destruction. "

@^^ Out of chaos comes ORDER .
Out of War comes Peace .
Out of destruction of the old order comes[b] New Dawn[/b] .
Only cowards/propagandists are afraid of the unknown and promote dubious "peace", "economic" growth or so called "experience" of the settlers as indispensable as if they were born with the knowledge of farming alone and not another acquired skill like most other things in life. The Africans only asked for a small holding of land/share in the land of their forebears after all. It appears "violence" seem to be the language Europeans/settlers seem to understand very well. It must be a cultural trait . They know how to dish it out to others but cannot handle it when the tables turn. Suddenly, all manner of holier than thou propagandists come out of the wood works. South Africa will surely face the music someday whether they postpone the hard decisions that have to be made now or later. What is so difficult in sharing/giving up a few acres of land vountariily if you have hundreds/thousands of hectares of land, most, ill gotten/forcibly acquired from the natives? It is shocking/greedy indeed! Do they think that human memory of injustice is irrelevant/forgettable?

pleep

Both of them are jokes. Even though i liked some of mugabes policies regarding white ownership of property in the country, Zimbabwe is messed up because of him not because of the sanctions you guys love to scapegoat.

And Nelson Mandela is just a typical black sheep, turn the other cheek and all that jazz. These were brave people, but what we need to realize is true freedom can never be given to you. Marching, protesting and all that crap will only give the illusion of freedom because the oppressors will never completely abandon a system that benefits them.

If you want real freedom you must fight for it, with the same tactics as your enemy.

@^^ You are correct that so called sanctions did not do much damage to Zimbabwe especially to the "elites". Zimbabwe had to put in the hard work/struggle in order to survive in the long run. That is the price societies have to pay to achieve their ultimate goal of freedom from foreign dick-tats/interference. Sanctions are effective in import addicted places/classes etc .
I agree that freedom is not a cheap sweet that can be dispensed/handed out to "children" but must be "Fought" for sometimes using same tactics as the enemy .

lol dick-tates Yea, i've always advocated Africa moving away from the import dependent situations we are in now. that is the worst kind of slavery.

See we do agree.


Yes the war in Angola was a proxy war but south africa was a American and there where lots of little unwritten rules in that war. One was cuba stand out of (then) south west africa because all though the world hated apartheid the west hated the communists even more. And we control the second best rout to the far east and the best could be blocked by one ship sicking at the right spot. All so we had 7 nukesplus a few more on the way.


That a lot of small farmers. But who they selling it to I mean it is illegal to own foreign currency. Unless there is a lot of corruption. But still good work with the farmers and with the EU dropping sanctions and resuming AID they can actual turn it in to a good profit.

andrewza

That a lot of small farmers. But who they selling it to I mean it is illegal to own foreign currency. Unless there is a lot of corruption. But still good work with the farmers and with the EU dropping sanctions and resuming AID they can actual turn it in to a good profit.

@^^ You'll agree that the EU/other Europeans did not really sympathise with the British stance on Zimbabwe but had to "tow the line" so as not to be seen as "breaking the ranks" . The EU knew exactly what the "agreements" were in relation to the land issues but the Blair government chose to be intransigent and spread false propaganda against Mugabe which culminated in driving him even more recalcitrant and confrontational than he would be if the British kept to their side of the agreement- adequate funding for the "willing seller/willing buyer" for farm lands. The British only provided £20ml aligned to "democracy", a far cry from the agreed sum of about a billion promised. Most Zimbabweans were very much aware of the contents of the agreement hence the impatience/militancy. Besides, most were veterans so have lost any sense of fear/subservience which is still pervasive in South Africa even after "freedom"/apartheid. It will take generations before South Africans will be weaned from such mental slavery/hang-ups. It is expected anyway, since their experience was unlike Zimbabwe( gun toting freedom fighters). There is no substitute for the efficacy of actual "war" - win or lose in liberating a people from innate psychological fear/subservience.
Yes, we must agree on something. We are trying to have a conversation about our mutual survival and the way forward . We are about life not death I hope .

cheikh: andrewza


@^^ You'll agree that the EU/other Europeans did not really sympathise with the British stance on Zimbabwe but had to "tow the line" so as not to be seen as "breaking the ranks" . The EU knew exactly what the "agreements" were in relation to the land issues but the Blair government chose to be intransigent and spread false propaganda against Mugabe which culminated in driving him even more recalcitrant and confrontational than he would be if the British kept to their side of the agreement- adequate funding for the "willing seller/willing buyer" for farm lands. The British only provided £20ml aligned to "democracy", a far cry from the agreed sum of about a billion promised. Most Zimbabweans were very much aware of the contents of the agreement hence the impatience/militancy. Besides, most were veterans so have lost any sense of fear/subservience which is still pervasive in South Africa even after "freedom"/apartheid. It will take generations before South Africans will be weaned from such mental slavery/hang-ups. It is expected anyway, since their experience was unlike Zimbabwe( gun toting freedom fighters). There is no substitute for the efficacy of actual "war" - win or lose in liberating a people from innate psychological fear/subservience.
Yes, we must agree on something. We are trying to have a conversation about our mutual survival and the way forward . We are about life not death I hope .

I don't agree that the rest of the EU followed tony bush sorry I mean blare. The UK dose not lead the EU in any real way. If there is a power in the EU it is germany. But I do agree the entire zim problem from unilateral independence to the end of the revolution till now has been one big mess the english caused.

And has for no guns in SA revolution. That is foolish. Thanks to my job I have met former MK solders and Former SADF solders (some are friends with each other). There was lots of blood on the streets. And a number of state of emergences due to them.

Yes there where never shoot outs in south africa between massive rebel groups and SA security forces. That had more to do with SA have more solders. They kept. Across the border. But to say that the SA blacks did not fight for there freedom is a insult against all who died in those battles.

Mugabe is an African HERO.

ROSSIKE: Mugabe is an African HERO.

Even though he killed Africans.

Mugabe is an african hero
A true black liberator of Zim
from the shackles of colonialism and unjust occupation

Yeah, if I was in his shoes, I will also kill the traitors, spies and anti-liberation "uncle toms"

An enemy is an enemy, be it an homegrown traitor or a foreign aggressor.
Afterall no nation condones treason.
How about Obama assasinated a suspected traitor Awlaki (an american)

All hail the freedom fighter and black hero Mugabe.

Jon.Bee:
Mugabe is an african hero
A true black liberator of Zim
from the shackles of colonialism and unjust occupation

Yeah, if I was in his shoes, I will also kill the traitors, spies and anti-liberation "uncle toms"

An enemy is an enemy, be it an homegrown traitor or a foreign aggressor.
Afterall no nation condones treason.
How about Obama assasinated a suspected traitor Awlaki (an american)

All hail the freedom fighter and black hero Mugabe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxptHYBrHdQ&feature=player_detailpage

andrewza

I don't agree that the rest of the EU followed tony bush sorry I mean blare. The UK dose not lead the EU in any real way. If there is a power in the EU it is germany. But I do agree the entire zim problem from unilateral independence to the end of the revolution till now has been one big mess the english caused.

And has for no guns in SA revolution. That is foolish. Thanks to my job I have met former MK solders and Former SADF solders (some are friends with each other). There was lots of blood on the streets. And a number of state of emergences due to them.

Yes there where never shoot outs in south africa between massive rebel groups and SA security forces. That had more to do with SA have more solders. They kept. Across the border. But to say that the SA blacks did not fight for there freedom is a insult against all who died in those battles.

@^^(1) I never said/implied that UK leads the EU let alone have the kind of influence Germany and France wields amongst the EU members.

(2) Of course there were guns in SA but in whose hands were the serious guns/ammo? whites/settlers of course!. The so called armed MK guys cannot be taken seriously . How many settlers did they harm let alone kill? I don't want to denigrate their struggle/valour etc but sincerely I don't take the so called freedom fighters of South Africa that seriouly compared to the Mocambiqans, Angolans, Namibians and of course the Zimbabweans where some 13yearl olds were actually fighting/dying.Your MK guys were into "grandiose" targets which they never managed to disable. SA was better policed(borders) and ruthless in every sense of the word hence the lower incidences of damage/fights if any. SA may have many soldiers but that does not explain away the general incompetence/ineptitude of the so called freedom fighters of SA. SA freedom protesters/fighters had a lot of goodwill/attention from the rest of the world hence the inevitable favourable "headlines". Sincerely many were indisciplined/drunk lacking any sense of purpose hence the school kids revolted against the "adults"/parents and took certain unsavoury actions against what they saw as decadence, cowardice and blatant indiscipline amongst the "adults" which still pervades the place.
As you put it there was "lots of blood on the streets and a number of state of emergencies due to them". My friend, as a former SADF veteran, did you sincerely feel threatened [/b]or was your [b]safety ever in doubt? You can't equate street disorders and occasional brou ha ha as serious armed struggle. Do you? May I ask a personal question? Why did you not take the option of "a conscientious objector" if you cared about the "injustice" meted out to the "owners" of the land(Africans). You "gladly" enlisted or got conscripted without any qualms . Well, I do not blame you but somehow I cannot prevent myself from thinking that it would have been better for everyone in SA to feel the pain equally in order to appreciate/respect each other. As it is now, nothing really have "changed" as to make the Afrikaaners to be a little contrite, less pompous, aggressive and inherently contemptuous of other people to the extent that some of them wanting a separate nation of their own . I do not know how I'll feel if I was a South African(African) given the experience. I know of a blue eyed Aussie who confessed to me that your settlers(Afrikaaner) are despicable and horrible indeed. That's coming from an "Aussie" after his visit to SA. The settlers in Zimbabwe are far more "sensible" and less "confrontational" nowadays, perhaps they have learnt a lesson or two or maybe they are a better "breed" of human beings than their SA cousins .
andrewza, let's say goodbye and thanks for sharing your views/conversation. I appreciate your insight/views no matter how disagreeable it may sound. Have a good day.