Dede1:


Pal, take it easy on me. What fountain of knowledge if I may ask? I write to pure cold facts on hot irrelevant conjectures.

We have been through this lane before now and I guess we must have picked up one or two indelible facts about the situation then. Gowon may have been silly not foolish. He sat comfortable in western region of Nigeria while prosecuting what was initially termed “Police Action” against eastern region of Nigeria latter called Biafra. Gowon had dissolved Lagos Garrison Organization into 3rd Division under the command of western region born commander and moved them to Escavros in mid-western region for amphibious attack on Port Harcourt and other eastern regional territories. Gowon, still at home in western region of Nigeria, had total control of the 2nd and 4th area commands which he created into 2nd Division.

The Nigerian Naval headquarter and command were situated in Lagos, western region and Gowon and his naval chief of staff, who was a Yoruba, had given orders to chase down an Igbo naval officer who left port on training mission with one of the Nigerian frigates simple because the officer was from eastern region. It was not a coincident that the naval officers who gave chase were a Briton, Yoruba, Hausa and Ijo. Talk about neutrality.

You have always written numerously about military strategy but still could not recognize one when you see it. Gowon’s sitting in western region and issuing attack on Biafra from the boundary points between northern region and eastern region was a smoke screen to protect southern part of northern region while making sure the western and mid-western regions remains as part of northern region as he would want. Any attack on Biafra from soldiers that took orders from Gowon while in Lagos was open invitation to Biafra to launch any preemptive attack on Nigeria period.

It is ridiculously pathetic and a display of cowardly disingenuous act to claim neutrality when Gowon was issuing orders to the combatants drawn from the regions claiming to be neutral in the saga.

What else do you know than Posting garbage here, you sometimes amazw me with your s*t*u*p*i*d*i*t*y

Talk of so-called non-neutrality of Midwestern region just because Gowon in far away Lagos moved soldiers not from the Midwestern region, commanded by a soldier also not from the Midwestern region, to be stationed in Midwestern region in disregard of Ejoor's declaration of neutrality is laughable. After the beginning of hostilities between the federal government and Biafra, Lt. Colonel David Ejoor walked right into Biafra and attended Ironsi's funeral, with multiple Biafrans watching. He waltzed right out unscathed evading a weak attempt by Ojuwku to kidnap him. I wonder why Ejoor and the Biafrans at Ironsi's funeral were oblivious to the fact that a supposed enemy officer was right in front of them performing reconnaissance or some other supposed enemy activity until Ojukwu orchestrated Biafran aggression against him?


When federal soldiers led by Igbinosa were ordered out of the Midwest by a Midwestern officer, did they protest that the Midwest was subordinate to Gowon and that Midwest soldiers' salaries were paid by Gowon's government and therefore the decision for them to be moved into the Midwestern region should have been complied with? Did Ejoor protest that reinforcements from the federal government should be sent and overrule Nwawo's order (as someone with higher authority that Nwawo)? No. He was quite content with no federal takeover of the Midwest yet some people would have us believe the Midwest would just sit there with only a few soldiers and refuse reinforcement if it were intent on joining the move to "crush Ojukwu and his rebel gang." The so-called conquest of the Midwest which simpletons claim could have allowed Biafra to take out Gowon in Lagos had Banjo and others not betrayed Ojukwu was a direct consequence of Midwestern overtures towards neutrality toward Biafra and efforts not to fight Biafra.

Did Ejoor suddenly just forget that he was some sort of supposed enemy of Biafra when he waltzed right into Biafra to attend Ironsi's funeral? Did Ejoor suddenly suffer an attack of selective amnesia?

Did Samuel Umweni and Joseph Imokhuede suddenly forget that they were enemies of Biafra and supposed to be supporting the "crushing of Ojukwu and his rebel gang" (in the words of Gowon), when they heartily accepted and waltzed right into Biafra itself after being arrested (for what?) by Biafran soliders after the Biafran takeover of the Midwest? Why would they allow themselves to be forced straight into the lion's den itself when, as deliberate and incontrovertible enemies of Biafra, they would assume that they would be subjected to imprisonment, interrogation under torture, or death? I wonder why they didn't refuse arrest and die on the spot or be detained in the Midweset, being such known sworn and long established enemies of Biafra as some people would have us believe.

These fanciful rationalizations of unnecessary aggressive actions are no different from those offered by the other side.

What some Biafrans didn't get or admit then and now, is that they deliberately made enemies where they had none in a gambit to use neutrals as a launch pad for attacks on possible actual enemies.

seanet02:

What else do you know than Posting garbage here, you sometimes amazw me with your s*t*u*p*i*d*i*t*y

Withe due respect, it is not enough to call any forumite's post garbage, without at least giving us your reason for making such a statement. If you are capable, you could offer counter points that would enrich the rest of us. You are the one who appears st.upid, buddy!

Take a cue from my posts, olodo.

@ndu chicken
Next time you speak a Yoruba Word without My Permission
I will clamp you in Jail

seanet02:

@ndu chucks
Next time you speak a Yoruba Word without My Permission
I will clamp you in Jail

where is the igwe of all igwes [ALJ HAREM] to come and explain things in a better light.

Ileke-IdI:

where is the igwe of all igwes [ALJ HAREM] to come and explain things in a better light.

You don't seem to empathize with Ndigbo on any of their causes at all? kini awon omo ibo se fun e. Abi okan ninu wan ti ba e sun ri ni?

ndu_chucks:

You don't seem to empathize with Nbigbo on any of their causes at all? kini awon omo ibo se fun e. Abi okan ninu wan ti ba e sun ri ni?

Mhms . . . wdssj . . , <stuttering>

I love the Igbos, Olorun!!! That's why I pity them. HBP because of the Yorubas is not worth it.

PhysicsMHD:


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<--------[size=16pt]SPAM[/size]--------------------------------------------------------------------------->

What some Biafrans didn't get or admit then and now, is that they deliberately made enemies where they had none in a gambit to use neutrals as a launch pad for attacks on possible actual enemies.

Well, at least you admit that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. That has always been the truth.
If Biafra considered Midwest an enemy territory, the expeditionary force won't go through it. If anything, Biafra would have attacked strategic MILITARY positions in the Midwest, which wasn't the case. Secondly, Biafra could have planned an occupation force for Midwest, which again didn't happen. In fact the term "incursion" itself says it all. Why don't historians use INVASION instead?

Onlytruth:


Well, at least you admit that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. That has always been the truth.
If Biafra considered Midwest an enemy territory, the expeditionary force won't go through it. If anything, Biafra would have attacked strategic MILITARY positions in the Midwest, which wasn't the case. Secondly, Biafra could have planned an occupation force for Midwest, which again didn't happen. In fact the term "incursion" itself says it all. Why don't historians use INVASION instead?

onlytruth my brother, how u dey

how is mumsi na

and our siblings ,

greet them for me

Onlytruth:


Well, at least you admit that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. That has always been the truth.

What is this rubbish? When did I ever say Biafra considered the Midwest an enemy territory? Dede1 and other revisionists hold that Biafra considered the Midwest an enemy territory and that that is why they invaded and that the Midwest considered Biafra an enemy territory and that that is why they sat there like schmucks and allowed Delta Igbos in Asaba to give supplies and interact with Igbos in Biafra and that that is why the military governor of the Midwest just waltzed in and out of Biafra-an idea that clearly makes no sense.

If Biafra considered Midwest an enemy territory, the expeditionary force won't go through it.

Does this make even the slightest bit of sense? Think before you type. This "going through" the Midwest is at odds with what immediately commenced upon the successful takeover.

If anything, Biafra would have attacked strategic MILITARY positions in the Midwest, which wasn't the case.

What are you talking about? There were no attacks because there was virtually no fight and furthermore, no significant military presence to engage in any fight. The place was taken over, and quite strategically, none of this "going through." The key military positions were in fact taken over.

Secondly, Biafra could have planned an occupation force for Midwest, which again didn't happen.

Biafrans soldiers immediately moved to occupy Warri, Benin, Sapele, Auchi, Agenebode, Ughelli, and other cities. I'm starting to think you just like to make stuff up.

In fact the term "incursion" itself says it all. Why don't historians use INVASION instead?

Actually they do use invasion. I don't know where you're hearing that they don't use invasion. Let's not delve into semantics based on unfounded conjectures (the supposed absence of "invasion" as a term).

[img]http://www1.american.edu/ted/images3/nigeria.jpg[/img]

this was just to aid the argument

PhysicsMHD:


Actually they do use invasion. I don't know where you're hearing that they don't use invasion. Let's not delve into semantics based on unfounded conjectures (the supposed absence of "invasion" as a term).

I still maintain that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. The facts are there.

I have also come to a decision to stop discussing the Biafra war or arguing over it with groups whose participation was not instrumental to Biafra's defeat. It is a waste of time.
We know who fought the war.
For folks like myself, I am more interested in WHY and HOW of Biafra's loss in order to seriously advocate for a change of strategy should we face similar war in the future.

Personally I have come to the conclusion that if Biafra raised and maintained a VERY STRONG NAVY, our infantry could have defeated any enemy no matter the size. Biafra's loss was from lack of sustained supply of heavy weapons through from the sea, and Biafra's inability to move troops by sea to the western parts of Nigeria. That NAVY could also have allowed Biafra to impose the weapons blockade on Nigeria, like Israel did on Lebanon.

Midwest was really insignificant and irrelevant. It was just an accessway. A very strategically poor accessway to the west.

Onlytruth:

I still maintain that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. The facts are there.

I have also come to a decision to stop discussing the Biafra war or arguing over it with groups whose participation was not instrumental to Biafra's defeat. It is a waste of time.
We know who fought the war.
For folks like myself, I am more interested in WHY and HOW of Biafra's loss in order to seriously advocate for a change of strategy should we face similar war in the future.

Personally I have come to the conclusion that if Biafra raised and maintained a VERY STRONG NAVY, our infantry could have defeated any enemy no matter the size. Biafra's loss was from lack of sustained supply of heavy weapons through from the sea, and Biafra's inability to move troops by sea to the western parts of Nigeria. That NAVY could also have allowed Biafra to impose the weapons blockade on Nigeria, like Israel did on Lebanon.

Midwest was really insignificant and irrelevant. It was just an accessway. A very strategically poor accessway to the west.

onlytruth, how u day na

alj harem:

onlytruth, how u day na

I dey fyne. What is your latest plot against Igbo?

Onlytruth:

I still maintain that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. The facts are there.

I have also come to a decision to stop discussing the Biafra war or arguing over it with groups whose participation was not instrumental to Biafra's defeat. It is a waste of time.
We know who fought the war.
For folks like myself, I am more interested in WHY and HOW of Biafra's loss in order to seriously advocate for a change of strategy should we face similar war in the future.

Personally I have come to the conclusion that if Biafra raised and maintained a VERY STRONG NAVY, our infantry could have defeated any enemy no matter the size. Biafra's loss was from lack of sustained supply of heavy weapons through from the sea, and Biafra's inability to move troops by sea to the western parts of Nigeria. That NAVY could also have allowed Biafra to impose the weapons blockade on Nigeria, like Israel did on Lebanon.

Midwest was really insignificant and irrelevant. It was just an accessway. A very strategically poor accessway to the west.

So PhysicsMHD's contribution is insignificant because he is not Igbo/Yoruba/Hausa-Fulani? The way you rationalise your arguments is always amusing. You are Igbo but he has a better grasp of our history than you and most posters on these forums. Its like suggesting that only British, German, American, and Russian citizens that can discuss the great war. But then again, I am not surprised since you always find a way to attack posters who have a superior argument to yours.

Onlytruth:

I dey fyne. What is your latest plot against Igbo?

onlytruth, u have to trust me, i do not hate my igbo brothers

all i am just doing is to try to reason with them, some of them just like insulting

Katsumoto:

So PhysicsMHD's contribution is insignificant because he is not Igbo/Yoruba/Hausa-Fulani? The way you rationalise your arguments is always amusing. You are Igbo but he has a better grasp of our history than you and most posters on these forums. Its like suggesting that only British, German, American, and Russian citizens that can discuss the great war. But then again, I am not surprised since you always find a way to attack posters who have a superior argument to yours.

It is like the French and the Pols (Poland) boasting and mocking the Germans more than the Americans [/b]and [b]Soviets who actually fought and won the war.

Simple fact.  

In fact I would debate and argue with a Northerner -Tiv, Anga, Idoma, Jukun, Hausa, Fulani about the war and would actually learn something that matters. Something that enables me to understand how to free myself next time. Not wasting my time with oafs seeking cheap attention and boasting over others' sweat.

mschweeeeeeew! 

alj harem:

onlytruth, u have to trust me, i do not hate my igbo brothers

all i am just doing is to try to reason with them, some of them just like insulting

I will post your latest anti-igbo comment soon.

Onlytruth:

I still maintain that Biafra never considered Midwest an enemy territory. The facts are there.

I have also come to a decision to stop discussing the Biafra war or arguing over it with groups whose participation was not instrumental to Biafra's defeat. It is a waste of time.
We know who fought the war.
For folks like myself, I am more interested in WHY and HOW of Biafra's loss in order to seriously advocate for a change of strategy should we face similar war in the future.

Personally I have come to the conclusion that if Biafra raised and maintained a VERY STRONG NAVY, our infantry could have defeated any enemy no matter the size. Biafra's loss was from lack of sustained supply of heavy weapons through from the sea, and Biafra's inability to move troops by sea to the western parts of Nigeria. That NAVY could also have allowed Biafra to impose the weapons blockade on Nigeria, like Israel did on Lebanon.

Midwest was really insignificant and irrelevant. It was just an accessway. A very strategically poor accessway to the west.

Actually the decision to invade and take over an insignificant and irrelevant region for pure expansion was a enormous strategic blunder and instrumental in swinging momentum of the whole country against Biafra. That alone makes it significant.

Now if the argument is whether or not Ojukwu meant to expand or merely to push through immediately to Lagos, I should remind those who would argue the latter that even after Banjo was recalled to Enugu after making the mistake of not pushing through immediately to Lagos, Ojukwu still kept him as head of the expeditionary force and still kept a hold on the Midwest with another governor.


As for a navy, that requires quite a bit more monetary investment to do anything significant with than an army for defensive purposes with the same amount of money, that's just self-evident.

And Biafra really focused on aerial operations over naval operations, a choice which may not at all have been a mistake, if a few things had gone differently.

If you can find a post where I boasted about or mocked the participants of a war in which many people died, or mocked the ethnic groups participating in such a war I would readily apologize. However, you would not find such a post.


What I do mock are  the theories revisionists of history who would tell me my forefathers were seeking conflict with their forbears based on Gowon supposedly moving non-Midwestern troops into the Midwest or based on one Anthony Enahoro opting for an internationally strong federalist country over an internationally weak confederation of nations or any other similar theories when there is clear cut evidence that the leadership of the Midwest region was seeking no conflict with the breakaway Eastern region.

Please my Igbo brothers, listen to the song being sang by the Biafran volunteers in this video and notice that they counted Ifeanjuna as one of the reasons why we lost. But more importantly, notice they identified the enemy in that war clearly -HAUSA (read Northerners). So why waste time debating all these southern chest beaters?

The Biafran recruits sang "ka anyi merie Awusa, ndi n'amaro chukwu. . ."

[flash=480,385]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An7IZBBATTM?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"[/flash]

Onlytruth:

Please my Igbo brothers, listen to the song being sang by the Biafran volunteers in this video and notice that they counted Ifeanjuna as one of the reasons why we lost. But more importantly, notice they identified the enemy in that war clearly -HAUSA (read Northerners). So why waste time debating all these southern chest beaters?

The Biafran recruits sang "ka anyi merie Awusa, ndi n'amaro chukwu. . ."

[flash=480,385]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An7IZBBATTM?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"[/flash]

i have seen this video before,,,,,,and i also noticed it

then why do we always blame the yorubas, calling them coward and all sort of names

why onlytruth,,,,, i want to know ur answer

"Southern chest beaters"? Man, what's the point of debating with someone whose main tactic is ad hominem attacks? There was no "chest beating" in my posts. There was correction. Some people are out to distort history and say that people who weren't out to be enemies with anyone were deliberate enemies and provocateurs against this or that group and such claims need to be countered. I think I'm done here.

alj harem:

i have seen this video before,,,,,,and i also noticed it

then why do we always blame the yorubas, calling them coward and all sort of names

why onlytruth,,,,, i want to know your answer

I said they are irrelevant to the military equation. Notice I said "are" instead of "were".

I stand on that. If you are really a northerner, you know that is the truth.

So why waste my time.

PhysicsMHD:

"Southern chest beaters"? Man, what's the point of debating with someone who's main tactic is ad hominem attacks? There was no "chest beating" in my posts. There was correction. Some people are out to distort history and say that people who weren't out to be enemies with anyone were deliberate enemies and provocateurs against this or that group and such claims need to countered. I think I'm done here.

Thank you!!! I am glad you noticed it!

alj harem:

i have seen this video before,,,,,,and i also noticed it

then why do we always blame the yorubas, calling them coward and all sort of names

why onlytruth,,,,, i want to know your answer

I AM ALSO WAITING FOR THE ANSWER!

The Yoruba and other southern braggers here were irrelevant to the outcome of the civil war. They are still irrelevant today.

I can only debate aboki.

Checks out of thread!

Onlytruth:

The Yoruba and other southern braggers here were irrelevant to the outcome of the civil war. They are still irrelevant today.

I can only debate aboki. 

Checks out of thread!

Yes, and that's why Awolowo's threads pop up each day.

That's why Igbos on NL register with Yoruba IDs to vent. . .Yoruba this and that.

We're very important to y'all social life, gba be! You start your conversation with Yoruba and ends it with the Southwest. You start your day thinking of the Yorubas and "odigbose" your lives with the Yorubas.

Mu hehe.

I guess once again, even online, Biafra just took a beating!!!

Onlytruth:

It is like the French and the Pols (Poland) boasting and mocking the Germans more than the Americans [/b]and [b]Soviets who actually fought and won the war.

Simple fact.

Poor comparison! Both France and Poland were occupied by Germany during the second world war. The biafran army failed at the attempt to occupy the south-west.

Onlytruth:

The Yoruba and other southern braggers here were irrelevant to the outcome of the civil war. They are still irrelevant today.

I can only debate aboki.

Checks out of thread!

I hope you'll leave Yorubas and Awolowo alone now. And I hope your comments such as the ones in the following thread will now cease;

Yes we do that because Joseph Goebbels was also similarly notorious among the Jews. I'm sure conversation among Jews will always put him on top of things.

Awo was the Goebbels of the Nigerian civil war.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-546678.64.html

@caP28 All those who have tried to work for better Nigeria have been disillusioned, disgraced, humiliated or killed by the genocidists. Not even one of the Nigerianists has been spared; from D. Nnamdi Azikiwe, Alex Ekwueme, Eni Njoku, Kenneth Dike, N.U. Akpan, Eyo Bassey Ndem, Adaka Boro, Ignatius Kogbara, Ifegwu Eke, to Chuba Okadigbo, Ken Saro Wiwa, Melford Okilo, and others. They have all been creamed and destroyed. In 49 years of Hausa-fulani fundamentalist, Islamist pogromists; jihadist genocidists and their slavish Yoruba Oligarchs have ruled Nigeria. In 49 yeras all elections and census were rigged, Sovereign National Conference deliberately refused in 20 years of almost daily clamour, $500 Billion dollars squandered 63-year genocide maintained against Nigerians as the trashy constitution is substituted with Sharia in more than 19 states and counting. Nigeria is evil.Our people are normally a peacefull people until we are provoked. Nigeria has been tormenting us for decades. The situation is so bad such that now we are harming ourselves,