Why Biafra Lost (A Riposte to Revisionism)

By

Mazi K. Ani

crlng@catholic.org

There has been a proliferation of Biafra and Ojukwu-related articles lately in the Nigerian cyber media. This is both a reflection of the critical role of one man -His Excellency Gen. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu- in the historical turning point of Nigeria as well as the Igbo proverb that after brave men have done the real fighting, the effeminate would remain at home by the fire-side and tell the tales. The cyber space has become the ultimate fire-side, the destination for cowardly tale telling by effeminate revisionists of all hue about a war that ended over three decades ago.

One theme that recur with regularity in these fancy tales is the issue of Ojukwu's leadership and the outcome of the Biafran war. However, all the articles written so-far on the issue have missed the point by narrowly focusing on leadership. Therefore they suffered from one debilitating weakness: one-factor analysis. The theme Ojukwu da da da da da taken out of its historical context from predictable sources has become as boring as it is unproductive. In this essay, we unpack the real reasons for Biafra's loss of the war and the implications for the brand of total political posturing that fail to account for the changed context of that defeat.

Biafra lost mainly because the idea that it portrayed was too far advanced for its time. The Biafran war broke out just over 6 years after Nigeria's independence. At that time, anti-colonial struggles were still going on elsewhere in Africa, pitting African nationalists against colonial and neo-colonial forces in countries such as Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, South Africa etc. The issues thrown up by Biafra had not been properly understood at the time as they are now. These issues are:

(a) Self-Determination vs. Territorial Integrity.

The dominant debate in the war was the right of nations to self- determination versus the right of states to maintain their territorial integrity. At the time of Biafra, the principle of territorial integrity was upheld world-wide over self-determination. And because the Nigerian side represented the politically correct ideology at the time, it was able to mobilise a vast array of forces incorporating both NATO and Warsaw Pact countries and the Arab League (USSR, UK, OAU, USA, Egypt etc.) against Biafra which was seen as a threat to Nigeria's territorial integrity.

At the time Biafra was declared, very few people e.g. France's Charles De Gaulle, Tanzania's Julius Nyerere, Zambia's Kenneth Kaunda etc. upheld the right of nations to self determination over territorial integrity of states. Today, the picture is different. The scale has tipped in favour of national self-determination as seen in Eritrea, Yugoslavia, East Timor, USSR etc. Indeed during the Biafran period, the collapse of a state, any state was viewed with utmost horror. Yakubu Gowon scored cheap points by raising the spectre of tens of African republics invading the UN! No one imagined that the almighty USSR would disappear from the world map, each of its 15 constituent republics becoming full members of the UN and the high heavens did not fall. Today the reality of collapse is taken for granted after the disintegration of USSR, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and separatist pressures in Canada, Spain, Britain etc.

(b) The Viability of Colonial Boundaries in Africa.

What Biafra challenged at the time was the viability of the African boundaries as constructed by colonial powers. At the time, the received wisdom was that African boundaries were inviolable and non-negotiable. The idea was that if these boundaries were successfully challenged, it would open a floodgate for more agitation and therefore chaos in Africa and elsewhere. As a result, the OAU incorporated in its charter, the inviolability of African boundaries, a clause which it defend with great zeal.

It was precisely this principle that Biafra attempted to challenge in the 1960s. Again this idea was far ahead of its time. Today after millions of Africans have died in wars related to these same boundaries, millions are maimed and million more rendered homeless, serious people everywhere have come to see the futility of maintaining those artificial boundaries. In fact, many more Africans have died fighting about Africa's artificial boundaries that killed under direct European colonialism itself. When the British colonial police shot a dozen coal miners in Enugu, all hell broke lose, but the Biafran War alone claimed over 2 million lives. The same scenario is being played out in Rwanda, Burundi, Congo, etc. Therefore, a lot more people are today willing to accept that African boundaries are not and should not be inviolable. Ironically Ethiopia itself where the fate of Biafra was discussed several times became the first to accept this compelling reality by not only letting Eritrea to go but also incorporating the rights to secession in its constitution! The OAU itself has lost much of its relevance and became a talking shop for tin pot dictators, no longer able or willing to assert the principle of inviolable and sacrosanct boundaries.

(c) International Matters.

The Biafran war strategy was based on the goodness of the international community and their ability to intervene in the resolution of conflicts. Biafra believed that the international community would not stand by while acts of genocide were being committed. Again this idea was far ahead of its time. It was not until the 1990s in Rwanda, Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo and East Timor that the international community became involved in this way. At the time of Biafra, the international community was there all right but there was no unity of purpose between the wishes of the masses and their governments.

Thus while the masses and their organisations in Europe and North America i.e. charities funded by mass donations supported Biafra, their governments supported the Nigerian side. Nigeria's argument that other states should not interfere with its internal affairs was more or less accepted by the international community, except the aid agencies. Today, the situation is different in that governments can actually act according to the humanitarian impulses of the masses to prevent international disaster on the Biafran scale, territorial integrity or no territorial integrity, internal affairs or no internal affairs as seen recently in Kosovo.

(d) Religion: Islam vs. Christianity

This was another question thrown up by the Biafran struggle which was poorly understood at the time. Although the conflict between Islam and Christianity is a very old one, at the time of the Biafran struggle, the main ideological battle was between communism and capitalism. Biafra however presented the religious side of the conflict to the world, but again on this issue too, Biafra was far ahead of its time. Whereas Biafra saw the conflict as a struggle between Islam and Christianity, the Nigerian side was able to use Yakubu Gowon, Anthony Enahoro etc. as fronts to mask the religious dimension of the war.

With the end of the cold war and the emergence of Islamic fundamentalism world-wide threatening the interests of the USA and European states, the religious issue is viewed rather much differently today. The re-emergence of the Sharia etc. in Nigeria, Al Quida and Islamic international sponsored terrorism today shows a far clearer understanding of the question than was possible at the time of Biafra.

(e) The Concept of Hausa-Fulani Hegemony and the Role of Local Groups

Aside from the international ideological currency in favour of maintain territorial integrity of existing states at the time of Biafra, the other major reason for Biafran defeat was the role of local groups. Biafra interpreted the conflict in north-south terms, internal colonialism and the need to fight Hausa-Fulani domination. This idea turned out to be far ahead of its time in that many local groups did not buy the idea of Northern domination. Indeed, many Nigerian groups contested the notion of Hausa- Fulani domination and considered Igbo domination as a more dangerous threat to themselves.

This explained the pattern of alliances that occurred during the war. In Western Nigeria, the idea of Northern domination was bought only by a radical fringe made up of Wole Soyinka, Tai Solarin etc and was of no mobilising value. In the Midwest, the idea of Northern domination was totally rejected by all non-Igbo groups who considered Igbo domination to be far more dangerous. In Eastern Nigeria, not only was Hausa-Fulani domination rejected but non-Igbo groups saw the Hausa-Fulani as liberators from Igbo domination. This writer finds this attitude intriguing given that oil had not become as important in this area at the time. Ultimately the answer to this antipathy towards the Igbo must be found in pre-colonial history. Only in the 1990s after three decades did the idea of Hausa-Fulani domination begin to be accepted. Even then, how much this is weighted against the bogey of Igbo domination among southern Nigerian groups remains unclear.

(c) The Leadership Issue

Biafra lost the war also because we were outgunned and out manned by the Nigerian side. As a result of the local and international climate which existed at the time of Biafra, the Nigerian side was able to put together a far more formidable array of forces that eventually gave them more military clout and led to the fall of Biafra. Those international configurations of forces and ideologies have now shifted. I read an Hausa chap in Gamji.com recently proclaiming that the whole world would not sit by today and watch Nigeria murder two million Igbo as was the case in 1966-70. This is a fact. The local attitudinal climate also appears to have changed in such a way that will make it impossible to recreate the anti-Biafran alliances of the 1960s.

The idea that Ojukwu's personality was contributory to Biafra's Defeat is a myth created to scapegoat and demonise him after the war. Sociologically, there are three sources of legitimate authority: traditional, legal-rational and charismatic. Ojukwu was (and still is) a charismatic leader, precisely the sort of leadership you need to found a new state. Every other issue must be subordinated to that single aim and that was precisely what happened in Biafra. So, Ojukwu has done his bit. All the arm-chair theorists and back-stabbing internet revisionists are hereby reminded that modern states and nations are not founded by whingeing sissies, cringing fence-sitter or crumb eaters who believe in nothing and will ultimately die for nothing.

As things stand, it seems that the first Biafran war was merely a notice served to the effect that a state of that name will someday re-appear in the world map unless the grievances that led to war in the first place are addressed. In that respect, Ojukwu has played his historical role of putting Biafra on that map of world history complete with its own flag, national anthem, currency, postage stamps etc. No liberation struggle on the scale of Biafra has ever been totally and permanently defeated. Nigeria may well become a world first in this regard if the underlying grievances are addressed.

In May 2000, the anniversary of Biafra's independence the Biafran flag was hoisted anew in Igboland by a local group. Quite clearly, the Biafran saga is not over until it is over. Unless the grievances that lead to that war are satisfactorily addressed, those dry bones may yet rise. Triumphalism or revisionist posturing about Igbo, Biafra, Ojukwu etc. may be soothing, but they cannot by themselves change the course of world history.

Mazi K. Ani

Executive Director

CIVIL RIGHTS LEAGUE-NG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1Gtbm3OMb8&pp=sAQA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIiNFqTCifs&pp=sAQA
For other videos on the Biafran war, please visit - https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCYw7G2tSe02dBGZErJl-2Rg/videos

Issorite

I must agree that this is a piece of brilliant narratives by Mazi Ani and I salute his analysis of the events of the Civil War that in his views contributed largely to the defeat of Biafra.
However his attempt to exonerate Ojukwu did not fit into the narratives that he himselves postulated. It is part of accountability for leadership to be held responsible for the outcome of events or circumstances they presided on and Ojukwu can never be excused from the outcome of the civil war.
I am surprised that Mazi will attempt to remove Ojukwu from the context of inability to properly define his circumstances and developing strategies to overcome them. Those narratives as exposed by Mazi Ani did not fully satisfy why Igbos lost the war. To me Biafra was not ready when they entered into the war, the building of international allies and partners were not strong enough to justify the haste of going into war, a little perseverance for a more global support base would have helped.
Secondly, the preparedness of their arms readiness is also a factor to be questioned, as elucidated by Mazi, they were outgunned and significantly outnumbered on man to man, so I question the rationale of starting the war in such circumstances.
Relying on human sacrification in war situation and hoping for an outcry from international communities is foolish and as it played out, the world looked away while about 3million souls were wasted just because of the poor judgment of an individual.
Today indeed has significantly changed in world ideology, national configuration as Mazi said, but little has changed in the Igbo approach to the actualization of Biafra and it almost look certain that the outcome will not be different given what it is now. There hasn't been enough international support other than largely from Igbos based in the diaspora,
Igbos daily alienate other ethnic nationalties that should have been their allies by insulting and name-calling them thereby driving those that should have been a natural partner to the other edge. Today, the formation of ESN and killings of fellow igbos who is not on same page with them will continue to create internal divide and send wrong signals to others as to how the new Biafra will look like.
As a tribe, igbos must stop playing the victim and recalibrate their politics to a winning strategy that will create a new Nigeria that we can all thrive and flourish now and in the future.

Deep

Hmm

Biafra will be liberated very soon.

How are Igbos playing the victims?

Lifestone:
I must agree that this is a piece of brilliant narratives by Mazi Ani and I salute his analysis of the events of the Civil War that in his views contributed largely to the defeat of Biafra.
However his attempt to exonerate Ojukwu did not fit into the narratives that he himselves postulated. It is part of accountability for leadership to be held responsible for the outcome of events or circumstances they presided on and Ojukwu can never be excused from the outcome of the civil war.
I am surprised that Mazi will attempt to remove Ojukwu from the context of inability to properly define his circumstances and developing strategies to overcome them. Those narratives as exposed by Mazi Ani did not fully satisfy why Igbos lost the war. To me Biafra was not ready when they entered into the war, the building of international allies and partners were not strong enough to justify the haste of going into war, a little perseverance for a more global support base would have helped.
Secondly, the preparedness of their arms readiness is also a factor to be questioned, as elucidated by Mazi, they were outgunned and significantly outnumbered on man to man, so I question the rationale of starting the war in such circumstances.
Relying on human sacrification in war situation and hoping for an outcry from international communities is foolish and as it played out, the world looked away while about 3million souls were wasted just because of the poor judgment of an individual.
Today indeed has significantly changed in world ideology, national configuration as Mazi said, but little has changed in the Igbo approach to the actualization of Biafra and it almost look certain that the outcome will not be different given what it is now. There hasn't been enough international support other than largely from Igbos based in the diaspora,
Igbos daily alienate other ethnic nationalties that should have been their allies by insulting and name-calling them thereby driving those that should have been a natural partner to the other edge. Today, the formation of ESN and killings of fellow igbos who is not on same page with them will continue to create internal divide and send wrong signals to others as to how the new Biafra will look like.
As a tribe, igbos must stop playing the victim and recalibrate their politics to a winning strategy that will create a new Nigeria that we can all thrive and flourish now and in the future.

Uchek:
How are Igbos playing the victims?

They blame every other tribes except themselves for their woes

Biafra lost the against superpowers Britain and Russia as well as AU and the Arab lEague that didn't want Nigeria to break. It was never because of Nigeria's military might. Had it been both sides were left alone without outside interference, Biafra would have routed Nigeria.

FreeIgbos:
Biafra lost the against superpowers Britain and Russia as well as AU and the Arab lEague that didn't want Nigeria to break. It was never because of Nigeria's military might. Had it been both sides were left alone without outside interference, Biafra would have routed Nigeria.

Simple! Full stop!!

How British govt surreptitiously supplied over 79 million ammo to kill about 12 million Biafrans (starving plus 2 million kids to death) – to protect its oil interests (1967-70)

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-04-29-how-britains-labour-government-facilitated-the-massacre-of-biafrans-in-nigeria-to-protect-its-oil-interests/amp/

ekeday:
Issorite

First go through some facts about the war to understand if any country in Africa could defeat Biafra without Britain, Russia and Arab all round circled air-sea-land blockade by mainly British royal navy, Russian and Egyptian pilots and Cameron against two weeks police action prediction of which they met stalemate 2years into the war. 99% VICTIMS were actually civilians murdered in cold blood and kids deliberately starved to death

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abagana_Ambush

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogbunigwe

https://www.legit.ng/1082547-9-machines-invented-by-biafrans-civil-war-photos.html

FreeIgbos:
Biafra lost the against superpowers Britain and Russia as well as AU and the Arab lEague that didn't want Nigeria to break. It was never because of Nigeria's military might. Had it been both sides were left alone without outside interference, Biafra would have routed Nigeria.

If both side are left without interference, I swear to God, no body go dey bear igbo again

When the war started, the Nigeria military were just using sticks and dummy gun so the biafrans thought they had upper hand hence their Invasion, its was Britain that was holding Nigeria back then, when the Gowon complained the soldiers are dying to biafra real guns, this then justify the use of real force and that singlehandedly destroy biafra morale.
You can't win Nigeria, Nigeria was even holding back, forget story

SlyDev:


If both side are left without interference, I swear to God, no body go dey bear igbo again

When the war started, the Nigeria military were just using sticks and dummy gun so the biafrans thought they had upper hand hence their Invasion, its was Britain that was holding Nigeria back then, when the Gowon complained the soldiers are dying to biafra real guns, this then justify the use of real force and that singlehandedly destroy biafra morale.
You can't win Nigeria, Nigeria was even holding back, forget story

You lied.

Naijabad:



You lied.

Between a SAN and a just graduated law student, who is likely to win a case? Igbos have never experienced war of magnitude that Yoruba and hausa and Fulani have seen. How do you expect igbo to win. They lack strategy, their best advancement/Invasion was led by Yoruba brain box and after he was killed, they were lost and defeated. You can't compare igbo with hausa, Yoruba, even igala nupe and Bini in term of military strategy, you are below them.

SlyDev:


Between a SAN and a just graduated law student, who is likely to win a case? Igbos have never experienced war of magnitude that Yoruba and hausa and Fulani have seen. How do you expect igbo to win. They lack strategy, their best advancement/Invasion was led by Yoruba brain box and after he was killed, they were lost and defeated. You can't compare igbo with hausa, Yoruba, even igala nupe and Bini in term of military strategy, you are below them.

Smh same Nigeria that no body could fly plane because all the pilots were igbos that they had to be Egyptians ?

Make una talk another thing

This time it would be Fulani vs igbos ... central Africa republic would be child's play

mrvitalis:

Smh same Nigeria that no body could fly plane because all the pilots were igbos that they had to be Egyptians ?

Make una talk another thing

This time it would be Fulani vs igbos ... central Africa republic would be child's play

There is no Yoruba pilot, no fulani pilot or hausa pilot? They are igbos abi continue

If war should start again, it will still be igbo vs hausa/Fulani unless igbo repeated their mumu mistake again, then it will be Nigeria vs igbo.

SlyDev:


There is no Yoruba pilot, no fulani pilot or hausa pilot? They are igbos abi continue

If war should start again, it will still be igbo vs hausa/Fulani unless igbo repeated their mumu mistake again, then it will be Nigeria vs igbo.

Nigeria vs Igbo without external help igbos would win ...we only lost because we could not make bullets ...with lead deposit in ebonyi that's never happening again

Egyptians flew the Nigerian jet fighters go research ...igbos were the finest military personnel then because British picked by merit

Have fulanis topped any chat by merit before ?

mrvitalis:

Nigeria vs Igbo without external help igbos would win ...we only lost because we could not make bullets ...with lead deposit in ebonyi that's never happening again

Egyptians flew the Nigerian jet fighters go research ...igbos were the finest military personnel then because British picked by merit

Have fulanis topped any chat by merit before ?

The same chest beating that made your fathers lost the war. Yes your good because you have raw strength but the grey matter is lacking, which make you guy perfect for British coloniser.

Lifestone:
I must agree that this is a piece of brilliant narratives by Mazi Ani and I salute his analysis of the events of the Civil War that in his views contributed largely to the defeat of Biafra.
However his attempt to exonerate Ojukwu did not fit into the narratives that he himselves postulated. It is part of accountability for leadership to be held responsible for the outcome of events or circumstances they presided on and Ojukwu can never be excused from the outcome of the civil war.
I am surprised that Mazi will attempt to remove Ojukwu from the context of inability to properly define his circumstances and developing strategies to overcome them. Those narratives as exposed by Mazi Ani did not fully satisfy why Igbos lost the war. To me Biafra was not ready when they entered into the war, the building of international allies and partners were not strong enough to justify the haste of going into war, a little perseverance for a more global support base would have helped.
Secondly, the preparedness of their arms readiness is also a factor to be questioned, as elucidated by Mazi, they were outgunned and significantly outnumbered on man to man, so I question the rationale of starting the war in such circumstances.
Relying on human sacrification in war situation and hoping for an outcry from international communities is foolish and as it played out, the world looked away while about 3million souls were wasted just because of the poor judgment of an individual.
Today indeed has significantly changed in world ideology, national configuration as Mazi said, but little has changed in the Igbo approach to the actualization of Biafra and it almost look certain that the outcome will not be different given what it is now. There hasn't been enough international support other than largely from Igbos based in the diaspora,
Igbos daily alienate other ethnic nationalties that should have been their allies by insulting and name-calling them thereby driving those that should have been a natural partner to the other edge. Today, the formation of ESN and killings of fellow igbos who is not on same page with them will continue to create internal divide and send wrong signals to others as to how the new Biafra will look like.
As a tribe, igbos must stop playing the victim and recalibrate their politics to a winning strategy that will create a new Nigeria that we can all thrive and flourish now and in the future.

I agree with this m*fu*ker....
it's just as simple as this
Lifestone Nice one...

mrvitalis:

Nigeria vs Igbo without external help igbos would win ...we only lost because we could not make bullets ...with lead deposit in ebonyi that's never happening again

Egyptians flew the Nigerian jet fighters go research ...igbos were the finest military personnel then because British picked by merit

Have fulanis topped any chat by merit before ?

Nigga ,keep deceiving yourself

Hmm

SlyDev:

The same chest beating that made your fathers lost the war. Yes your good because you have raw strength but the grey matter is lacking, which make you guy perfect for British coloniser.

Even British know our ability that's why they said we can't be trusted with power

The igbo man is fearless , but is never the aggressor always the defender ... equity and justice is our watch words even when we have reason to dominate ...

We believe in competition that's fair and square ...we equaled the educational advancement of the Yoruba from zero in 1900 to equal in 1960

If the war start no body would be safe ooh ...a rocket that can sink sultan palace is less than #50m ... And worst still we have the man power to make it

mrvitalis:

Even British know our ability that's why they said we can't be trusted with power

The igbo man is fearless , but is never the aggressor always the defender ... equity and justice is our watch words even when we have reason to dominate ...

We believe in competition that's fair and square ...we equaled the educational advancement of the Yoruba from zero in 1900 to equal in 1960

If the war start no body would be safe ooh ...a rocket that can sink sultan palace is less than #50m ... And worst still we have the man power to make it

lol and you think the government can't afford $50mll....
fearless or not
education or not
if biafra should start any war today with the Nigerian governments. biafra will still lose..
no sentiments... it's fact

am sorry

SlyDev:


If both side are left without interference, I swear to God, no body go dey bear igbo again

When the war started, the Nigeria military were just using sticks and dummy gun so the biafrans thought they had upper hand hence their Invasion, its was Britain that was holding Nigeria back then, when the Gowon complained the soldiers are dying to biafra real guns, this then justify the use of real force and that singlehandedly destroy biafra morale.
You can't win Nigeria, Nigeria was even holding back, forget story

You know nothing about the war. British government were supplying Nigeria shiploads of arms, armoured cars, artillery and shells!

Russia was supplying Nigeria with Illushyin bomber planes!

Egypt was supplying Nigeria with pilots to fly the Russian planes!

Which one here is lie? Even Chadian mercenaries were fighting for Nigeria in large numbers!

Biafra was blockaded on all sides and couldn't get in arms which made them to be fighting with almost their bare hands and locally produced equipment.

These are irrefutable facts!!

I repeat, without outside help, Biafra would have totally routed Nigeria.

Pls where did the war started? Someone should pls help me ..I will like to know

FreeIgbos:
Biafra lost the against superpowers Britain and Russia as well as AU and the Arab lEague that didn't want Nigeria to break. It was never because of Nigeria's military might. Had it been both sides were left alone without outside interference, Biafra would have routed Nigeria.

War its' not a joke, you need strong allies to win a modern war,Should USA go to war without NATO they may lose.

FreeIgbos:


You know nothing about the war. British government were supplying Nigeria shiploads of arms, armoured cars, artillery and shells!

Russia was supplying Nigeria with Illushyin bomber planes!

Egypt was supplying Nigeria with pilots to fly the Russian planes!

Which one here is lie? Even Chadian mercenaries were fighting for Nigeria in large numbers!

Biafra was blockaded on all sides and couldn't get in arms which made them to be fighting with almost their bare hands and locally produced equipment.

These are irrefutable facts!!

I repeat, without outside help, Biafra would have totally routed Nigeria.

How did the Igbos get their guns and bomb?

mrvitalis:

Even British know our ability that's why they said we can't be trusted with power

The igbo man is fearless , but is never the aggressor always the defender ... equity and justice is our watch words even when we have reason to dominate ...

We believe in competition that's fair and square ...we equaled the educational advancement of the Yoruba from zero in 1900 to equal in 1960

If the war start no body would be safe ooh ...a rocket that can sink sultan palace is less than #50m ... And worst still we have the man power to make it

Who are Biafra allies? If War should start, it won't be battle, it would be annihilation. Do think hausa value life? They are tested warriors

SlyDev:


Who are Biafra allies? If War should start, it won't be battle, it would be annihilation. Do think hausa value life? They are tested warriors

And they were defeated and dominated by fulanis ? ... fulanis and hausa combined can't face one eastern state ...u think it's sword and knife war ?

U think education of the igbos is for nothing

Try shit we would sink sultans palace ,Kano emirs palace in 20 mins with one button

Who British empire is at its weakest won't save the north from A$s whooping

Northern minorities u have killed over the years would see chance to pay you back ...hausa fulanis stand no chance against igbos

Biafra lost the war because we didn't know how to make bullets. They did not beat us in the battle field per say, our bullets only finished!

mrvitalis:

And they were defeated and dominated by fulanis ? ... fulanis and hausa combined can't face one eastern state ...u think it's sword and knife war ?

U think education of the igbos is for nothing

Try shit we would sink sultans palace ,Kano emirs palace in 20 mins with one button

Who British empire is at its weakest won't save the north from A$s whooping

Northern minorities u have killed over the years would see chance to pay you back ...hausa fulanis stand no chance against igbos

Yet you allow kanu the illiterate Jew to lead you, your education was there when you are beheading people left and right like isis. Remove English, the Hausa Fulani are more civilized that igbos.

Southern minorities are waiting for the opportunity again to do you shege. You bomb Palace we bomb your existence out of Nigeria

SlyDev:


Yet you allow kanu the illiterate Jew to lead you, your education was there when you are beheading people left and right like isis. Remove English, the Hausa Fulani are more civilized that igbos.

Southern minorities are waiting for the opportunity again to do you shege. You bomb Palace we bomb your existence out of Nigeria

Igbos have no problem with Hausas ... fulanis are the people we want to give 5* central Africa republic treatment

Which southern Minorities ? LMAO