₦airaland Forum

riversman:
****Moderators plizz back off, am only asking a question****


I am kinda concerned as the Nigerian Military bases and college are based in the north for the most part and if there is some form of unrest in Nigeria, the north basically has us on lockdown.

ALl of the military bases in the south are not self sufficient, all rely on fire power/ resources from Kaduna/Kano

Most of the ex-military leaders are all trying to stick thier smelly asses back into naija poltics, where is the conscience of these politicians?? When IBB and ATIKU have a bright political future in 2011, wat does that tell our jobless and educated youth, that they also have a shot with scraping all the icing on the national cake?

I would have called it a bluff if someone had told me that this arrant walk-off from inherent delusion could have been manifested by the dilapidated gray-matter that belongs to the original poster.

I guess that it is the idiocy in you that has severally propelled you into writing blasphemously against Ndigbo and other well meaning southerners who saw the diabolical schemes inculcated into the formation of Nigeria by the British and attempted to resolve them in 1966. You should also include your father, uncles and brothers in the construct of such skewed concerns when next you felt goofy enough to write.

While should an intellectual dimwit such as you question your godfathers about military installations in the cesspit called Nigeria while forgetting they are the same dupers that granted you and your forbearers the abandon property in Port Harcourt, Rivers States.

As far as I am concerned in today’s Nigeria, I will very much rather relax with northerners than with certain cross section of southerners.

@POST

This article, if true, confirms that Nigerian Senate is a congregation of selected idiots. The senate passed a resolution that elevated Vice President to Acting President based on the interview broadcasted by BBC. It is a brazen display of idiocy and reckless act of parliamentary procedure for the same Senate to require a written letter from the President who did not transmit similarly letter when he proceeded on vacation pertaining to health reason.

I urge the goons in the Senate to wait for a similar interview broadcasted by BBC to stand down the resolution that elevated VP to AP. Mr. President has no hand in the Senate’s political folly while he was away in Saudi Arabia and there is no code legally compelling him to do so or refer to VP as AP.

@POST

Did MEND ask correct questions and receive honest answers? My people say when a toddler that is yet to be adult starts to inquire what killed the toddler’s father, if care and caution are not on the side of the toddler what killed the toddler’s father will eventually kill the toddler.

Katsumoto:
Dede1
That is not what the debate is about. The position you stated above is wrong for the following reasons:
1. NCNC and NPC had an agreement and formed a coalition.
2. Igbo officers killed non-Igbo members of government. If you want to argue that it was not an Igbo coup, should Igbo sons now work towards ensuring that the other party to the agreement remain side-lined?
3. The co-existence of all tribes in Nigeria was predicated on a fragile balance. Arguing that the President, Prime Minister, Senate President, and GOC of the Armed Forces should all be Igbo/Eastern does amount to domination of other tribes by the Igbo.
4. My argument was always that after the actions of the Igbo officers, the action of the NCNC to ignore the agreement with the NPC is what gave credence to the belief that it was an Igbo coup and this is what led to the counter-coup of July 1966. It would have been difficult to argue that it was an Igbo coup if Ironsi foiled the coup, tried and executed the plotters immediately, and Orizu had maintained the balance of power and existing agreement by handing over to Dipcharima. Think about it for a minute or two
5. This debate is not about who was best for the job. We have seen that they were all clowns (Zik, Awo, Sardauna) and their actions have led Nigeria down the wrong path.

I perfectly understood your plank of the argument which makes sense to anybody who is unpatriotic toward Nigeria and tend to kick unity and oneness to the curb.

I do not think that this debate would change your mindset as you repeatedly stated that your argument hinges of Igbo officers taking over power. The last time I checked though, Igbo was not a country and had no standing army. The overthrow of Balewa government was precipitated by Nigerian armed forces period.

NPC members knew that coalition government between two parties detected that the senior partner produces the Prime Minister and junior partner produces the Ranking Minister who is, all intents and practical purposes, de facto deputy Prime Minister. If not for the issue of deep mistrust and a country created out of colonial machination, the idea of NPC ministers caucusing to select Dipcharima as PM without the coalition partners was wrong and unacceptable.

It is even pathetic that the ministers knew who deputizes for PM in certain occasions. The Ranking Minister would have become the acting PM and when situation is under control would work with the President and ministers in council to appoint another PM from the north probably Dipcharima because he was an NCNC member before joining NPC. The action of NPC ministers pointed to the thought process that northern political elites have always arrogated to themselves that the act of ruling Nigeria is their birth right with wholesome support from few deluded southern political elites.

I have never argued about who was the best or more educated in terms of European or western education for the job of Prime Minister. If educational qualification was the yard stick, there was no northern politician that would have landed a position of minister without portfolio talk less substantives minister.

@POST

I had posited that best and democratically approach to the issue of Yar Adua, Johnathan, National Assembly and section 145 will be appending amendment to the section while waiting for the President to come back. I have naver supported the idea of elevating someone to acting president without due process of constitutional detections.

It is very laughable to read that few Senators have the audacity to open their putrid mouth requesting the President to transmit a letter to NASS in order to stand down the Acting President. The President did not transmit a letter to the NASS about his ordeal while away in Saudi Arabia and should not be compel by any legal authority to do so.

@Post

These are bunch of malcontents and ungrateful pan-handlers. Anybody with an iota of cell brain would have no ears for these deluded wind chasers.

Onlytruth:
Bro Dede1, don't mind katsumoto, I don't think he can see your point easily. That war was lost at Ore, simple. All the players that took sides did so after the Ore debacle.

Bros, we must not fail to hammer the truth on Ndigbo in particular and Biafrans in general. I could not stop amusing myself when reading through the names of the pan-handlers at the convened meeting of the so-called south-south leaders from another thread.

@Post

What a bunch of pan-handlers. Good number of these hoard of idiots should have been cut to size for political treachery. These fools could whine to high heaven even God would not pay attention to them because one can not eat one’s cake and still have it.

A note of warning should be delivered to those goons that any attempt to even dream of their weird fantasy of breaking way from One Nigeria will be met with the most severe military action that will make the battles of Bulge look like a child’s play.

There are many names on this articles that can induce suicidal spree in me. These bunches of cock suckers should be praying seriously for their well being and that of their offspring because any spiral of arms in the colonial contraption will definitely spelt doom.

Katsumoto:
I understand what you are saying. But the reason Ojukwu chose Banjo was because he felt that a force headed by an upright Yoruba man would be more acceptable to the Yoruba. Banjo paid for that indecision at Ore with his life.

I[b] disagree with the the notion that Biafra would have won the war if the force got to Lagos. You seem to be ignoring the fact that Gowon would have sent the 2nd division after the BEF and the Biafrans would have been trapped between the 2nd division and the core of the brigades in Lagos which formed the 3rd Division. They would have been outnumbered and out-gunned.[/b]

Pal, you seem to have forgotten the moment of the time and prevailing political wind blowing across Nigeria at that particular time. The 2nd Division which was created out of 2nd Brigade with less than brigade strength and LGO that gave rise to 3MCDO were not even a brigade size military formation at the time and would have been scattered towards north where their leader (Gowon) would have been sitting in Kaduna. The moment the 101 entered Lagos, Ijebu people and otherYoruba would have joined forces with 101. Remember that three senior army officers of Yoruba stock had earlier gone to Gowon requesting that all the non-Yoruba forces should be moved out of Lagos and other Yoruba land. One of the officers later quit Nigerian army instead of fighting Biafrans.

The Biafra lost one of the major weapons of war at Ore and the weapon in reference is element of surprise. 101 collapsed primarily due to actions of the GOC who refused to continue the match to Lagos and bent on imprisoning his field commanders who dared to question his intentions of stopping at Ore for no military reasons. 

You remember that many fence-sitters were just waiting to see which direction the political winds seem to be blowing. When 101 came across, people were on the road sides jubilating but when 101 was on the run the same mass of humans came out to welcome Nigerian side.

Katsumoto:
The constitution could not have been the bases for selecting a new PM. The choice for a new PM lay with the coalition - NPC and NCNC. The choice of Balewa was as a result of agreements between NCNC and NPC. The agreement was that Azikiwe would be president while Balewa would be PM. Are you suggesting that another Easterner should have been PM when the President was Igbo, the senate president was Igbo? Why would the NPC agree to that considering that the murdered PM was a Northerner? Put into the equation that the NPC had more seats that NCNC. The choice of PM was for the NPC to make. I hope you can see why people at the time thought it was an Igbo coup. If a coup organised by Igbo officers killed the PM chosen by NPC, why should the new PM not be chosen by NPC considering that the position of the President (Igbo) was still safe?

The fact is that after those Igbo officers killed the Northern and Western leaders, the Igbo leaders at the time should have done the responsible thing but they didn't. This is what led to the subsequent mistrust in the polity and the military. Orizu should have handed power to Dipcharima and Ironsi should not have taken power forcefully.

In deciding who should be leader of a party or country, there is little regard for seniority. It is always down to politiking, compromise, and concessions. When Thatcher was removed, why did her post not go to Michael Heseltine (her deputy) or Nigel Lawson who were more senior to John Major. When Neil Kinnock stepped down as Labour leader, why did his position not go to Gordon Brown? Why did it go to Tony Blair?

This is partially correct because there was no indigenous government of Nigeria with the position of Prima Minister in 1959. However, this situation changed once the protectorates gained Independence in 1960 and new constitution was drawn. The 1960 Nigerian constitution stipulated how the office of Prime Minister should be filled in case vacancy occurred.

The arrangement of ministerial posts including that of the Prime Minister and Ranking Minister is negotiated by the parties that joined together to form a coalition government. The constitution declared that a candidate selected for position of Prime Minister must have unanimous support of the ministers of the parties in the coalition government.

NPC should not be allowed to pick Prime Minister because NPC could not form a government as a result of the polls that did not give NPC the enough majority seats to form government alone. If NPC should be granted the right to select the prime minister based on tribal composition, the party should also have been granted leverage to select the President, Senate President and House Speaker. If tribal prism was applied in selection of the Prime Minister, why did NPC present another Kanuri for the post?

I thought Nigeria was for all and one entity. The thought of Igbo being president and Igbo should not be a prime minister remains the corner stone of tribal stranglehold on Nigeria till today. Nigerians tend to wake from their political slumber when two or more Igbo persons are holding visible political post. This is a scenario that invokes the fear of Igbo domination from other ethnic groups. It would have been a smooth sailing if Hausa was the president and Hausa the prime minister.

Katsumoto:
Was the blunder in relation to the person appointed or in relation to the mission of getting to Lagos? Please give your reasons.

It was strategic blunder to have made Banjo the GOC of 101 Division. I would not have made Banjo commander of Battalion talk less as commanding officer of the invading force that had to pass through Yoruba lands in order to capture Lagos.

Such position should be reserved for commanding officers who are not emotionally connected to Yoruba. If 101 Division was commanded by Ibibio, Ijo, Ogoni, Annag or Igbo officer of the Biafran army, the war would have been won by the Biafra.

Banjo got to Ore and became sentimentally brain- washed by Awo and some other Yoruba leaders about the picture of turning Yoruba land into a battles field. There were few Yoruba that waited to join forces with 101 that would have forced Gowon to abandon Lagos for Kaduna.

Both Biafra and Nigeria depended on surprises but Biafra lost it at Ore.

Onlytruth:
I stopped discussing with you a long time ago. As a matter of fact I stopped discussing when I saw that almost all your people (about 99%) would never condemn the killing of innocent easterners after the coups of 1966, and the role Awolowo played in starving easterners to death. Unlike your people, the Igbo are ready to condemn even Zik for foisting a non-negotiated country on them. That is why Zik has far less value in Igboland than Ojukwu. Your people worship Awolowo even though he championed an immoral campaign during and after the war against easterners. All we need from you is a collective condemnation of evil perpetrated by Awolowo, but you are incapable of that because he truly did your will. Igbo can never condemn Ojukwu for the same reasons.

So, I am here these days to warn my people to be very realistic and strategic in their political maneuvers in Nigeria.

Bros, I pray you to keep your bull horn blasting with statements about indelible enemies of Ndigbo within the southern Nigeria.

One of the most damnable blunders committed by Ojukwu during war was appointing Banjo the GOC of 101 division assigned to race to Lagos in order to foreign supporters think twice about their support. I think this single blunder caused Biafra the war. I wondered if Ojukwu truly understood the past history of Nigeria or he was egocentrically drunk.

Katsumoto:
Dede1
Thank you for your post but if you read my post again you will discern that I stated that these were the reasons why the coup was perceived to be an Igbo coup. I never tried to rationalise the choice of Dip Charima. I introduced that point because it has been alleged that Nwafor Orizu was quick to hand over power to Ironsi because he was Igbo. The choice of PM was a matter for the coalition of NCNC and NPC and dependent on agreements and compromise. The most senior minister does not necessarily have to become the PM. I do not disagree with your post; I am well aware of most of your points.

Also, permit my ignorance but is it really stated in the 1963 contitution that in the event of a political impasse, the president should handover power to the GOC of the armed forces. Was there a time frame for handing over? Did Ironsi have to take over so quickly? Could he not just have crushed the coup while leaving the issue of the PM to be resolved between NPC and NCNC? Afterall, only NPC and NCNC members were present when Balewa was chosen as PM.

Please read below and come to your own conclusions:

The majority of those murdered were northerners, accompanied by some westerners and two Midwesterners.No easterner lost his or her life.On January 16, rather than approve the appointment of Zanna Bukar Dipcharima, a politician of northern origin, as acting Prime Minister, the acting President, Nwafor Orizu, himself of eastern origin, handed over power to Major-General JTU Aguiyi-Ironsi, the GOC of the Nigerian Army, also of eastern origin. This was allegedly at the behest of the rump cabinet, allegedly to enable Ironsi put down the revolt which, as of then, had already failed in southern Nigeria.Until it became apparent recently in separate testimony by Alhaji Shehu Shagari and Chief Richard Akinjide, it had always been publicly assumed in the lay Press that the hand-over was voluntary although unconstitutional - since no such provision existed in the Nigerian constitution.[/b]However, it does seem that as far back as 1969, Martin Dent pointed out the involuntary nature of the so-called hand-over in an academic paper, based on an interview with Alhaji Shettima Ali Monguno.

In July 2000, at a public book launching ceremony in Nigeria, Chief Richard Akinjide stated: “Talking on the first coup, when Balewa got missing, we knew Okotie-Eboh had been held, we knew Akintola had been killed. We, the members of the Balewa cabinet started meeting. But how can you have a cabinet meeting without the Prime Minister acting or Prime Minister presiding. [b]So, unanimously, we nominated acting Prime Minister amongst us. Then we continued holding our meetings. Then we got a message that we should all assemble at the Cabinet office. All the Ministers were requested by the G.O.C. of the Nigerian Army, General Ironsi to assemble. What was amazing at that time was that Ironsi was going all over Lagos unarmed. We assembled there. Having nominated ZANA Diphcharima as our acting Prime Minister in the absence of the Prime Minister, whose whereabout we didn't know, we approached the acting President, Nwafor Orizu to swear him in because he cannot legitimately act as the Prime Minister except he is sworn-in. Nwafor Orizu refused. He said he needed to contact Zik who was then in West Indies.

Under the law, that is, the Interpretation Act, as acting President, Nwazor Orizu had all the powers of the President. The GOC said he wanted to see all the cabinet ministers. And so we assembled at the cabinet office. Well, I have read in many books saying that we handed over to the military. We did not hand-over. Ironsi told us that "you either hand over as gentlemen or you hand-over by force". Those were his words. Is that voluntary hand-over? So we did not hand-over. We wanted an Acting Prime Minister to be in place but Ironsi forced us, and I use the word force advisedly, to handover to him. He was controlling the soldiers. The acting President, Nwafor Orizu, who did not cooperate with us, cooperated with the GOC. Dr. Orizu and the GOC prepared speeches which Nwafor Orizu broadcast handing over the government of the country to the army. I here state again categorically as a member of that cabinet that we did not hand-over voluntarily. It was a coup. “ Corroborating Akinjide’s account, according to Shehu Shagari, in his Book “Beckoned to
Serve”, “…, ….At about 7.00 am, I returned to Dipcharima’s residence to meet with some NPC ministers who had gathered there. Dipcharima was then the most senior NPC minister available. We received the latest reports on the situation, first from Alhaji Maitama Sule, Minister of Mines and Power, who had visited the PM’s residence by bicycle! We then heard from Alhaji Ibrahim Tako Galadima, the acting Minister of Defence, who had brought along with him Chief Fani-Kayode.

However, we decided to recognize Dipcharima, a Kanuri from Bornu, as our interim leader; and to ask the acting President, Dr. Orizu (President Azikiwe was away on leave), to appoint Dipcharima acting Prime Minister. We also summoned Major General Ironsi and gave him full authority to use every force at his disposal to suppress the rebellion. He moved his headquarters temporarily to the police headquarters at moloney street to facilitate easy communication with army units in the regions.  While at Dipcharima’s residence, we contacted the British High Commission and requested for military assistance in the event that our loyal troops should require any. The response was positive, but the British insisted that the request must be written by the PM; or, in his absence, by a properly appointed deputy. We, therefore, drove to the residence of Dr. Orizu, and requested him to appoint Dipcharima acting prime minister. Dr. Orizu requested to see our NCNC colleagues to confirm whether they supported our proposition, and they joined us soon afterwards. They had apparently been caucusing at Dr. Mbadiwe’s residence. He (Mbadiwe) was their choice of acting Prime Minister. This was naturally unacceptable to us since the NPC was the major governing party.

While we were at Orizu’s residence, Major-General Ironsi, who had seemingly secured Lagos, came in with some armed escorts. He requested for a tete-a-tete with Orizu. The two had a 40 minutes discussion in another room, while we waited anxiously in the sitting room, with the armed soldiers standing and staring at us. When Major-General Ironsi finally emerged, he talked to Dipcharima sotto voce; and then drove off with his troops. Dr. Orizu then joined us, regretted his inability in the circumstances to oblige our request. He suggested we all return to our homes and wait until we were required. All efforts to get any clarification failed, and we left in utter desperation.

[b]In fact President Azikiwe’s personal physician, Dr. Humphrey Idemudia Idehen, abandoned him abroad when he got tired of the “health trip”, having run out of his personal estacode allowance, unaware that there may have been a good reason why Azikiwe did not want to return to Nigeria, after their original planned return date in December 1965 passed.Not even the Commonwealth Leaders’ Conference hosted for the first time by the country in early January was incentive enough for the President to return, for obvious reasons of protocol.[/b]However, after the coup, in a statement to the Press in England on January 16, among other things, Azikiwe did not condemn the coup per se, but said: “Violence has never been an instrument used by us, as founding fathers of the Nigerian Republic, to solve political problems. ….I consider it most unfortunate that our 'Young Turks' decided to introduce the element of violent revolution into Nigerian politics. No matter how they and our general public might have been provoked by obstinate and perhaps grasping politicians, it is an unwise policy……, As far as I am concerned, I regard the killings of our political and military leaders as a national calamity….”

Major Ifeajuna was later to be accused by Major Patrick Nzeogwu, leader of northern operations, of bungling or ignoring an apparent understanding to assassinate General Ironsi in Lagos - an oversight, or “misguided consideration” (to use Nzeogwu’s words)that caused the failure of the coup.Indeed, Nzeogwu bluntly declared publicly that the execution of the coup in the South was tribalistic. Captain Emmanuel Nwobosi (rtd), leader of operations in the Western region, has since corroborated the view that operations in Lagos were compromised by nepotism.For this and other reasons, over the years, some analysts have come to view Nzeogwu, who was recruited two full months after the plot was already in progress, as a tool in a plot he never fully understood.[/b]Indeed, in offering condolences for the death of the Sardauna of Sokoto, [b]ex-Senate President Nwafor Orizu told Alhaji Shehu Shagari that Major Nzeogwu was “an unknown entity among the Ibos (sic) in the Eastern region.”

http://www.citizensfornigeria.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=45

I do not need to open the link with this article to realize that it was written by a hack writer such as Nowa Omoigui. I respect Nowa Omoigui for the efforts he puts into making certain readable history of Nigeria available to us. However, some of his work will wrongly abuse the mind of undiscerning reader instead of presenting balanced essay.   

The essay failed to tell the people that constitution did not provide the position of deputy PM. The author never made any attempt to educate the public about the intrigues that were involved in parliamentary government and the structure of coalition government of political parties.

He insinuated that Orizu should have appointed Dipcharima as the PM without following the detects of the constitution. I wonder why the hack writer did not insinuate that Mbadiwe should have appointed PM since Mbadiwe was not only the most senior minister but also the ranking minister in coalition government of NPC and NCNC.

The brainless writer deceitfully wrote that “So, unanimously, we nominated acting Prime Minister amongst us” but failed to inform the public that in such coalition government no single partner in the government can unanimously nominate a person as acting Prime Minister.

I am not surprise who actually paid the piper as the tone of this essay clearly stated so. Pal, Nowa Omoigui did a great job but he has never been credible. In fact, the whole essay is full of conjectural rubbish.

I get upset when bunch of southerners keep talking bad about the northerners forgetting that their parents and grandfathers made the northern political elites to develop the attitude of ruling Nigeria is their birth right. I can go on and on to rebut loads of rubbish dump on this essay.

Katsumoto:
I decided to answer your question afterall.

I do not think it was an Igbo coup; I don't think that Igbo people sat around and discussed how to get rid of Hausa/Fulani and Yoruba leaders. Having said that there are several points that must be taken into consideration which might have led certain people to conclude that it was an Igbo coup

1. The composition of the plotters
2. The victims
3. The absence of Zik even when there was a commonwealth conference in Nigeria that January
4. The unconstitutional manner Nwafor Orizu (an Igbo man) handed over power to Ironsi (another Igbo) for the purposes of suppressing the coup even when it was apparent that the coup had failed. Also when you consider that Ironsi did not need to be head of state to suppress the coup. Some argue that this was to prevent another Northerner Dip Charima from being prime minister.
5. The unconfirmed issue of Ifeajuna (the leader of the coup) being a cousin of Azikiwe (who had lost out in a power play to Balewa in 1964)
6. I believe that Nzeogwu and Ademoyega took part for ideological reasons. I also believe that Ifeajuna and other coupists were motivated by ethnic reasons.
This is just my analysis. I am only stating my own opinion. I don't have time to expend further; I will be engaged for the next few hours. Feel free to point out errors without insults and name-calling.

You, of all people, should know better than few posters that all these are conjectural nonsense. Anybody standing up argument against the constitutionality of Orizu handing power to GOC of the Nigerian armed forces either does not understand the letters of the 1963 Nigerian constitution or is deceitfully as hell.

There was no iota of unconstitutionality about the handing over power to Ironsi with regard to detects of 1963 Nigerian constitution and the prevailing circumstances in the country during aforementioned handing over of power.

It has been alleged that Ironsi has requested the appointment of Acting Prime Minister as demanded by the constitution. But such request could not be accomplished due to the complex structure of Nigerian government. Even when Ironsi was mandated by the convening ministers and acting President to seek military help from British High Commissioner, the reply was that such request should come as a written request from the PM. 

For the posterity sake, there was a coalition government between NPC and NCNC. Since the constitution did not provide a position for deputy PM, coalition government is arranged so that the senior partner produces the PM while junior partner provides the Ranking Minister as the de facto Deputy Prime Minister. In fact when the PM could not conduct the Ministerial meetings, such function is performed by the Ranking Minister.

The constitution had stipulated that vacancy in the office of PM should be filled by the appointment of the President with or without the advise of PM but with majority support of the parties in the coalition. As of the 1966, Zanna Buker Sulloma Dipcharima was neither most senior minister nor the ranking minister in the coalition headed by Tafawa Balewa. The most senior minister and ranking minister was K. O. Mbadiwe.  When Dipcharima was a minister without portfolio in ministry of commerce, K O Mbadiwe was the substantive minister of commerce and industry. 

The same thing that happened in 1966 is actually taking place in the issue of Yar adua and Goodluck Johnathan when certain people from certain location of Nigeria always think the leadership of Nigeria is their birth right. For intent and practical purposes, K O. Mbadiwe should have been appointed as the Acting Prime Minister in 1966. 

However, the north insisted that northern region of Nigeria should produce the acting PM. NPC and NCNC did not agree on a particular candidate as NPC nominated Dipcharima and NCNC nominated Mbadiwe. At this junction, the only options available to acting President is to dissolve the Parliament and call for new election or hand over the power to GOC of Nigerian armed forces. The latter option was made possible because of the military actions and coup raging in the country.

What a display of mature articulation from Katsumoto, Mikeansy and ndu_chucks. It is refreshing to read the display of your innate intellectual ability. Sometimes a gem could be found in the rough.

The same loose cannons that are purring insolences on the ministers especially Ojo while praising Johnathan could not discern, even if their lives depended on it, that Johanthan has been the acting President and supported every trip to Saudi Arabia

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=397601.msg5561723#msg5561723 date=1266846629]JProspero, I started reading your post with the impression that it would be a refreshing, honest, and balanced post. I was completely disappointed because you failed to mention a single wrong that the East or its leaders did or their contribution to the war. According to you, the East and its leaders did abosolutely nothing wrong and they could not have prevented the war.

Everyone knows that there is enough blame to go around on both sides, if you can't admit the culpability of your leaders, while pointing out those of Nigerian leaders, then your post is a dishonest one.

You may want to edit your post or rewrite it to give it credibility, as it stands, its a bunch of garbage. I'd suggest you watch the videos here before you make your revision: http://maxsiollun./2008/03/08/another-excellent-series-of-biafra-videos/[/quote]The link you attached to your post is a display of naiveté the remains the crux of arguments that had generated accusations and counter accusations. How balanced did you fancy such con job where all the interviewees except Ojukwu were adversaries of Biafra? What happened to the Biafran generals and leaders who were either in Nigerian army or at Aburi, Ghana with Ojukwu? I hate all deliberate attempts to paint skewed conjecture into factual facts.

A novice will even accept the conjectural rubbish as gospel truth based on tenancy of one man voice against many.

Katsumoto:
I get your point but if we all refuse to belong to the same country as our enemies, then certainly there would be as many countries as there are people. Not all Yoruba people get along; the same goes for Hausa/Fulani and Igbo. Sometimes, there are sworn enemies in families. Does that stop family members from bearing the same name? If Nigeria should disintegrate, it should not do so solely because of the war. Other reasons should come into play. Afterall, the US fought a civil war as well. The Spanish also fought a civil war. Whilst the American war was based on geographical lines, the Spanish war was based on ideological lines. Neighbours against neighbours, family members against other family members. But all these countries have moved on.

I understand that the war is still fresh in the minds of some but that generation is almost gone. The issues affecting the Igbo man are the same issues affecting the Yoruba, the Tiv, Ijaw, etc men in Nigeria. We are all affected by bad governance, bad roads, inadequate infrastructure, poverty, religious fanaticism, etc. Those are the issues facing us today. I am not advocating that we forget what about 40-45 years ago; I am only saying that when Nigeria has the kind of leaders that are sincere and not duplicitous, then the issues of the 60s can be revisited. Without the right leaders and the right time, we risk inflaming an already volatile scenario.

BTW, You want us to accept as gospel, the facts handed to you by your uncles and father? You got to be kidding me.

It should be an unforgivable treacherous act to draw analogy between the aftermath treatments meted to losers of Nigeria/Biafra war to those reserved for either losers of USA or Spanish civil wars.

The confederate states in USA were given everything that belong to them before the war and were granted equal opportunity to every endeavor of mankind. There was no abandoned property shenanigans, draconian boundary adjustment designed to cede crude oil producing areas of confederate states to the adjacent neighbors, premeditated economic strangulation of confederate states by given inhabitants only $20 regardless of the amount they had in bank, no quota system instituted for intake into colleges or military officer cadet, denial of federal presence in confederate states, refusal to build befitting International airport in the confederates states, negligence of network of roads and seaports in confederate states and either shunning the erection of memorials or naming roads and parks after confederate generals in Washington, DC. 

The issue of economic strangulation of the areas used to be known as Biafra may partially has something to do with leadership but wholesomely instigated by the Nigerian government institutionalized policy since after the civil war.

biina:
Ignoring the earlier nonsense, let address the real issues.
In the 1964 elections, all the parties were under 2 alliances NNA (NPC, NNDP & co) and UPGA (NCNC, AG &co). In the first round of elections, due to UPGA organized boycotts in the eastern region and lagos , only 261 constituencies were contested (51 were boycotted) and the NNA won 198 seats (out of a total of 312) giving them the majority in the house irrespective of the result of the boycotting constituencies. Supplemental elections were held in march 1965 and the NCNC won all the 51 seats to give them a total of 108. The UPGA lost the elections.

Fielding a candidate does not equate to popularity. If you were not popular enough to have the people honor your call for a boycott, then it can be said that you could not be popular enough to win the elections. No where in the world does an election equate into a democracy as a judge of a democracy is what is done when in office and not defined by how he got into it. Azikiwe and NCNC were in bed with the NPC prior to the elections and were left with the short end of the stick when the NPC found the alliance they needed in the NNDP. Boycotting the elctions was just crying sour grapes.

I have provided you with the relevant sections of the army act of 1960 which states clearly that mutiny is punishable by death.  If you have a counter reference please provide it.
Again, I have earlier provided you with a link to the 1960 constitution (which you also admit has minimal difference from the 1963 revision). If there is a section of the constitution that authorizes the senate president or acting president to hand over power to the GOC please point it out, else the handover was unconstitutional.
At no point did I say that a court martial was final, as the military was under the commander in chief, and thus can be overruled by the head of state. Point was Ironsi had the legal right to execute the mutineers as deserved but he chose not to. In fact, they weren't even put on trial. The gowon panel you like to make reference to was constituted in June 1966, and was too little too late. Subsequent government have not waited 6 month to try and execute coup plotters.
Justice was denied to the northerners when their prominent sons in the government , including the crowned prince of sokoto, and in the military were killed in cold blood, with the perpetrators not tried, talk less of being punished. You cannot claim that the Igbos felt as aggrieved about the deaths of Balewa and Sardauna like the northerners did, same as the northerners cannot claim anything similar about the pogrom or civil,war.
This is hilarious. The July coup was successful as the entire world recognized Gowon as the head of state of Nigeria. To demand seniority take precedence is to be naive about the implications of a coup. A coup plotter seeks to obtain power with total disregard for seniority. Ojukwu knew his demand would not be met, and eventually, after the needless shedding of blood, Ojukwu had to go into exile while Gown remained in power. Ojukwu's wish was never granted.
Gowon himself accepts that he did not follow the Aburi accord to the letter, instead claiming he had done everything in the 'spirit' of the accord. Like Adekunle said, Gowon was indolent, and Ojukwu had out-maneuvered him at aburi. He was simply trying to bully his way through his mistake.
Ojukwu implicitly declared war when he announced an independent state within a sovereign nation without the approval of the hosting government. The police action was just a formality. Gowon had reiterated that any attempt at secession would be met with force and yet Ojukwu went ahead. What did you expect from Gowon - a thank you note?

I have no interest in try to paint one ethnic group as being responsible for the problems of Nigeria, but rather see as the consequence of poor decisions by the leaders. I however have a problem with Igbo always trying to play the victim card as if they were innocent bystanders in the events that led to the civil war, when in truth they were right there at the genesis of the problem.

It is an unpardonably disingenuous and outright treacherous act for contributors to run around the forum with multiple handle names. I can satisfactorily declare that you are Kyuubi that gave me the link to 1960 constitution of Nigeria. I am grateful you gave me the link but pal you do not need to switch your forum handle names to make a point.

It is very interesting that you agreed with me that 1960 constitution was mirror image of 1963 constitution except the changes in the offices of Governor-General and Privy Council. Now I suggest you go beck to Section 63 Subsections 4C that dealt with the vacancy of the office of Prime Minister.

It is very funny you did not indicate in your early write-ups that UPGA boycotted the election but clearly stated that UPGA was defeated by NNA in 1964 election when in fact no seat was switched. I would want you to realize that election was boycotted due to cooked figures of the census. Some of the political positions being taken by people such you in today’s Nigeria beg for disintegration of the colonial contraption.

I shall leave you to discern that coup is a different ball game from mutiny. Believe me I am getting tired of these conjectural craps being offloaded onto the forum in order to justify the political treachery committed by certain stock of people in Nigeria. The fact that countless countries recognized a junta in Lagos does not make it successful. A successful coup does not experience a spot of military opposition talk less of a war.

There was no clause in 1963 constitution that granted authority to the Head of State or President or Governor-General to execute anybody on any circumstance. Where are the ingredients of education we all received in Nigeria? 

If Ojukwu’s demand for succession based on seniority that is common presence in military parlance of chain of command and adherence to strict discipline was pure naiveté, why are Nigerians swearing at Babangida, Abacha, Obasanjo, Buhari, Abubaker and scores of military officers that have ruined Nigeria stemming from Gowon’s usurpation of authority?

When Gowon created the 12 states out of 4 regions in Nigeria knowing fully well he did not have control of the Nigerian armed forces in eastern region of Nigeria, Gowon contravened the constitution he allegedly swore to uphold.

Katsumoto:
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. What I try to do is to provide reference to support my arguments. That is something that you rarely do. For instance you made mention of some biafran brigades but you have not provided information to support your argument. Also, you try to discredit Omoigui every now and then but you did not have a problem quoting him when you needed to.

With regards to the officers that were not mentioned in the campaigns at escravos, Bonny, Calabar, etc, I did not care to include them because you were making statements about Adekunle and I felt inclined to respond accordingly.

I am not totally driven by any special interest on the issues concerning Nigeria/Biafra war. However, it is an honor to present true version of certain stories concocted by individuals that were either trying very hard to deny the involvement of their ethnic stock in the civil war or flatly conjure blatant falsehood against Biafrans in order to justify the participation of their ethnicity in the aforementioned war on the side of northern region of Nigeria. I do not need references because my father was involved and my uncle was a battalion commander under 68 Brigade commanded by late Major Atumaka.

The war has been fought as enemies and friends were made in the process. The Biafrans understood the enemies of the state of the Biafra unless a stupid one. By the same token, Nigerian side classified Biafrans as their enemies as has been shown on this forum on many occasions. This prevailing situation had led to numerous calls for disintegration of Nigeria by true Biafrans simply because they felt uncomfortable sharing the same nationality with sworn and indelible enemies.

Katsumoto:
Most Biafrans do not like Adekunle and I know from your past posts that you do not like Adekunle. To say that Adekunle was ineffective is naive at best and disingenuous at worst. Most of the Nigerian success during the civil war was under Adekunle.

Adekunle was re-deployed after the failure to capture Owerri in May 1969 after leading the 3rd Marine Commando for aproximately 2 years. Why did the 3MCDO fail at Owerri? There were several blunders from AHQ. The support and supplies which were initially reliable suddenly became unreliable. For instance, when the 3MCDO started the Owerri offensive, its radios did not have batteries even though Adekunle had requested batteries. It has been argued that he was set up to fail because of his growing popularity.

Adekunle was never in charge of traffic; he was appointed Director of Training and Planning at the SHQ. He was subsequently made the Military Commandant of the Port Decongestion Task Force.

"Adekunle's boys in the Midwest seized Escravos, Burutu, Urhonigbe, Owa and Aladima. They captured Bomadi and Patani, Youngtown, Koko, Sapele, Ajagbodudu, Warri, Ughelli, Orerokpe, Umutu and Itagba Uno. They moved in force into Kwale, eventually linking up Murtala Mohammed's 2nd Division as he charged down from Owo through Sabongida Ora, Uzebba and Iruekpen, eventually arriving at Umunede and Ogwashi-Uku after taking Benin City through Ekpoma, Ehor and Oluku. Another one of Mohammed's Brigades advanced directly along a west-east axis from Ore.

Adekunle's next task was to take Calabar - Operation Tiger Claw - the success of which made Adekunle internationally famous. He quickly gained a reputation for fearlessness, daring, and tactical innovation. There were reports of him leading troops into battle - from the front. He even climbed into Air Force aircraft to personally supervise bombing runs or go on recce. However, Air Vice Marshall Yisa Doko (rtd) seems to recall that Adekunle did not find it funny when they flew into anti-aircraft fire on one occasion, frantically demanding to be taken back to base. Aware of his growing reputation, he began to court the Press. The popular musician, Sunny Ade, even waxed a record in his name.

Then he took on targets in the Uyo, Annang and Aba provinces. Although Port Harcourt and Owerri were initially part of the 2nd Division area of responsibility and Obubra under the 1st Division assignment, Adekunle took them all on under the wings of the 3MCDO. Witnesses say he often carried a club that he used to urge soldiers on in battle. By May 19th, 1968 he had taken the strategic city of Port Harcourt oblivious to a few disasters along the way like Onne, Arochukwu and Aletu."

http://www.dawodu.com/omoigui32.htm

I have no business in absolving either Nigeria or Biafra of commission of atrocities during Nigeria/Biafra war. My interest is not fanning the acts of bravery of battle field commanders in the aforementioned civil war as you and Omoigui are bent in doing but uncover the truth to best of my knowledge.

I could not believe that you and your friend Omoigui were willing to shower praises on Adekunle on the successes of Nigerian side in Escravos, Burutu, Bonny and Calaber without giving credit to Lt.Cmdr. Nelson Soroh, Lts. Aduwo, Abdullahi and British Naval officer Lt.Cmdr Cox.

When Adekunle was yanked as the commander of 3MCDO, Biafran brigades of 68, 63, 60 and 53 have proved in every category of combat that the commander of 3MCDO was very ineffective.

The traffics in Apapa wharf were suffocating hence his appointment as Military Commandant of the Port Decongestion Task Force. To me decongesting Apapa was traffic control. What better way to tell him that he was a sucker as battle field commander. Imagine from GOC of army division to Apapa Wharf traffic controller.

biina:
Yes we still remember
1. After the UPGA loses the 1964 elections, Azikiwe (an igbo) tries to use the military to seize power even though he didnt have the constitutional rights.
2. An Igbo dominated group of military mutineers, citing various excuses including corruption by the current NPC led government, killed prominent members of the government and military, of which only one (unegbe,  a supporter of maimalari) was Igbo
3. The coup was suppressed by Ironsi (Igbo) and he subsequently deposed the civilian government when orizu (Igbo) unconstitutionally handed over power to him.
4. For the next six months, the mutineers were neither executed nor tried, even though they should have been executed as mutineers under the armed forces act for killing their senior officers.
5. On the feeling of being denied justice and fear of a second coup to finish them off, the northern soldiers led by murtala, carried out a counter coup in June, an act that led to the unfortunate pogrom.
6. Gowon assumed power but then governor of the eastern region, ojukwu, refused to recognize him based on military hierarchy
7. The aburi meeting and subsequent accord failed to solve the matter as Gowon reneged on the agreement and made moves to check ojukwu.
8. Ojukwu declared an independent state of biafra in the eastern region.
9. Gowon initiates police action into the eastern region/biafra and thus began direct hostilities.

Please feel free to include any omissions or correction you deem necessary to suit your version of history.

This is one of most ridiculous craps I have read on this forum. This conjectural nonsense that is devoid of any sound reasoning and in conjunction with many bastardized smear campaigns against a particular ethnicity in Nigeria engender the nationalistic feelings that call for disintegration of Nigeria.

If anyone wants to blame Ndigbo, I say go ahead and do so but while on it be human enough to proffer correct reasons for doing so. It is either you are simply disingenuous or ignorance of the facts.

UPGA did not loss the election but boycotted the said election. The alliance boycotted the election in order not honor the nationalistic and democratic picture such election will reflect on the government of Tafawa Balewa. The number of seats did not change in the parliament as UPGA did not field candidates in the strong hold of NNA.

Again, please educate yourself on the issues such as coup and mutiny. On the constitutionality of Orizu handing power over to Ironsi, I am of the view that you still have many paragraphs to read in order to start getting the wind and intrigues of parliamentary government, hence the hand the over of power.

It was not the sole responsibility of Ironsi to engage in the trial and execution of the coup plotters. Besides in matters of life and death, court-marshal was not the final arbiter of such issue in 19966-Nigerian era.

For posterity sake, if justice was ever denied, it was not to northern region of Nigeria but to all Nigerians because the government led by Tafawa Balewa was not government of northern region of Nigeria. I think you are getting my drift by now and realizing how disingenuous you have appeared on this subject matter.

I would want you to remember that July 29, 1966 coup was unsuccessful because the eastern region of Nigeria was not under the control of the coup perpetrators. Since there was no outright authority over Nigerian armed forces, negotiation ensured. Like a true professional, brave and disciplined soldier, Ojukwu simply demanded the reign of chain of command which is the major supreme military doctrine of the armed forces of all countries of the world. While in Aburi, Ghana, Ojukwu, as a discipline soldier who did not need the salary from the armed forces to make a living, adamantly demanded that Brigadier Ogundipe (COSS), who is a Yoruba, should be Head of State and C-in-C in the absence of Ironsi. Remember Ojukwu could have easily requested for the power sharing but towed to the military doctrine.

Ojukwu broadcasted the resolution of the meeting at Aburi, Ghana before Nigerian side would have opportunity to tweak it into deliberate falsehood. This pre-emptive measure piqued the Gowon and Nigerian side. Gowon subsequently divided Nigeria into 12 states and Ojukwu retaliated by declaring eastern region of Nigeria an independent state of Biafra.

On July 6, 1967, Gowon and Nigeria declared war on Biafra.

okooyinbo:
But the great part of the debates relating to that WAR has been about the legitimacy or not of employing "blockade". And I have witnessed such hot debates live for many decades now. Some say it is legit, some believe it isn't. I believe blockade is a legitimate weapon of war, it becomes illegal if civilians are refused relieves. And as I understand, the then FMG of Nigeria never refused relieve to the civilians. It only insisted that she be in charge. However as many people from the affected ethnic group have said themselves, they refused the offer on the pretense of the founded or unjustified fear that the FMG might have poisened the food items. On another account, it was confirmed the Biafrans were misusing the relieve agencies to smuggle weapon into Nigerian territory controlled by them. Even Ojukwu himself admitted that they realized the war was no more to be won after the fall of Enugu, which legitimize the questions being asked why he surrendered 2 years after he realized the war was already lost.

For clarity, any part of a sovereign country that unilaterally declare itself independent does in effect declare war on the mother nation. BTW, the Brits, Americans, Russians, Egyptians and a host of other nations did directly or indirectly fought against Biafra, so why are you people singling out the Yorubas? And mind you, one of yours is even in the ARMY of the United States that helped Nigeria defeat his Nation as he proudly stated. Your claim that Yorubas enjoy parading themselves of defeating Biafra is quite untrue. We know a few incidence and the few lots who have claimed such a things and they are quite right in their assertion. You people claim the black scorpion is a villain but you happily surrendered to him and not to Muritala; which means the man might not be all that bad after all.

One can liken that to the situation during world war II. The Germans at defeat were happy to surrender to the Americans rather than the Russian led Soviet red army because the Russians were reported to be less humane in their treatment of the conquered people. I wish your leaders had surrendered to the mollas.

Any person or group of persons that unsuccessfully precipitated coup against a seating government and reneged on the negotiated agreement of succession to power based strictly on military doctrine and parlance has set the path for war. I hope you still remember the chronicle order of events that led to Nigeria/Biafra civil war.

It is laughable and very disingenuous of you to claim that Nigeria would willingly agree to feed her adversaries so that they will have more strength to continue the war. Are you referring to the same Nigeria that ordered its pilots to shoot down relief planes trying to bust the blockade trap?   

I did not single out Yoruba but will reiterate that any person or group of persons that fought Biafra on the Nigerian side will remain indelible enemy of Biafrans.

Biafra did not surrender to Adekunle but to 3MCDO of the Nigerian army. By the time the war ended, Biafra had reduced Murtala Mohammed to an ordinary soldier who had abandoned his unit and ran back to Kano. Also Biafra had exposed ineffectiveness of Adekunle as battle field commander and forced the Nigerian army headquarter to re-assign him to the unit that controlled traffic in Lagos.

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=399044.msg5550943#msg5550943 date=1266670000]Dede1, good try, but your excuse does not hold water. The high rate of starvation was reported by various international organizations, including time magazine. The whole world knew about the disaster that was about to happen which Ojukwu and his commanders allowed to happen, reportedly to score a cheap propaganda point and get the world's pity.

If you are now claiming that Ojukwu and his commanders were busy fighting hence oblivious to the high rate of death of their people, then Ojukwu and his commanders must have been incompetent, completely irresponsible, and should have never gone to war in the first place. How can they claim that they were ignorant of the deaths of say, half a million women and children because they were busy fighting? You mean to tell me that their scouts did not report these happenings to them? Your excuse is unreasonable to me, try another one.

Effiong eventually surrendered after the deaths of millions of women and children, while Ojukwu fled. I maintain that they should have surrendered much sooner because they had the information that these women and children were dying at the rate of 3000 per day!!![/quote]I had rather blame the blockade employed by the Nigeria for causing deaths in millions of women and children than blame Ojukwu for fighting without surrounding. War is not fun in the sun. However, my people say regardless of death war should be fought.

Granted that Biafra was defeated, I still appreciate the fact the Nigeria’s nose and those of her bloody allies were blooded by the tinny Biafra. If Ojukwu had surrounded, north and west regions of Nigeria would have been flexing for war since the end of civil war.

At least, Nigeria realized the weight of the burden of what it took to make tinny Biafra to capitulate.

I could not believe my eyes reading what the author had to say about interest of the north and the nonsensical question about the north. The writer should have done self criticism.

Whether the interest of north is narrowed to a gap or utterly wrong in formulation, I could not bet against such endeavor in achieving the political ends. The funny thing about all these political shenanigans remains that the so-called south shall be elevated to the position of errand boy tasked to make sure the narrow interest of the north is satisfied.

It happened in 1964, 1966 and 1967. A pal has poured unfettered praises on the sons of the north such as Maj Umar, Balarabe Musa, the late Aminu Kano, El Rufai, Nuhu Ribadu. All I have to say is the same narrow interest of the north produced these individuals. Evidence has shown that when push comes to shove, theses follows had and will always lineup behind the narrow interest of the north.

Regardless of how narrow or unfounded the interest of north may look, I always admire what I have seen coming from the north politically.

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=399044.msg5549334#msg5549334 date=1266632222]My friend, the decision did not require the mind of a brain surgeon. Please read the time magazine article posted by the OP and find that commanders refused to surrender even after women and children were dying at the rate of 3000 per day, haba! The dead women and children at that time were in the hundreds of thousands, sadly. Why should the war continue until over a million more civilian deaths? The reporter warned that the casaulties could reach 2 million and the reporter was right.[/quote]Why should you sacrifice the good nature of common sense on the altar of cheap and misguided political point? I guess you believe everything that is printed on a sheet of paper.

You believe that Biafran commanders at various sectors and battle theaters trying to fend off a determined enemy whose intensions were to massacre, rape and kill women, children and all people of Biafra would at the same time visiting the countless refugee camps scattered all over unoccupied territories of Biafra.

Anyway aftermath stories of war are filled with conjectural load of rubbish. As usual, most of the craps written after a war have never favored the loser.

They are qualified Efulefu. Such persons could be mistaken for sacrificial objects in their village.

@OP

It is not only ridiculous but absolutely laughable that a grown man does not and can not discern his originality. If this punk was fed unfounded story about his originality, I ask him whether the time has not come for him to re-examine the missing links in such convoluted concoction.

Let us assume that this homeless Prince of Bini Kingdom wondering around was so confused that he did not remember his name. Did he also forget the Edo collective words for own children that he used that of Igbo word, “UMU”, as in UMUNEDE? When will this stupidity end among certain idiotic fellows?

You will never be Igbo because a true Igbo person would not claim ancestry to a village empire such as Bini.

okooyinbo:
@Dede1:

Ofcourse blockade has always proved effective in ending wars. I do not need to give examples because it is countles. The Romans, the Persians, the Greeks, the old Egyptians, the Ottoman Turks, the Europeans and Americans and even some precolonial Africans kingdom and States have won countless WARs using the blockade tactics. You got to read books on war strategies and tactics.

If it is a legitimate weapon is arguably another thing. However, it has been employed succesfully for centuries.


@Post:

War is not a good thing, but one must rise to defend oneself if threatened.

To those that think that YORUBAs are the true enemy, please answer these: The reason Ojukwu declared the war among other "things" was the killing of the Igbos right; where did that take place? Were Igbos targeted and massacred during operation "weti e"?

There should be no argument about blockade being a legitimate weapon of the war. The issue in discourse is that since it is a strategic tool of the war and rightfully applied by the Nigerian side should not compel Ojukwu to surrender. Why is there no argument that Ojukwu should have simply surrendered at the sight of NNS Lokoja in the waters of Bight of Biafra?

For clarity sake, I must submit that Ojukwu never declared war on Nigeria. Anybody that fought against Biafra should be looked upon as indelible enemy of Biafrans. Yoruba as an ethnic nationality fought against Biafrans. The sons of Yoruba have flaunted pride and joy for being part of the enemy forces that fought and defeated Biafra. Few of them were worthy adversaries such as Alain Akirinenade, Alabi-Isama, Francies Shande and Olu Bajuwa

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=399044.msg5545882#msg5545882 date=1266591575]The bolded part is a very major factor which contributed to Biafra's loss of the war. I have to admit that given the determination of Biafran troops, their bravery and engineering prowess, and their will to defend their people, it would have taken much longer to have defeated Biafra had millitary hardware been distributed equitably among the regions. Ironsi and other Igbo officers underestimated the wisdom of the Northern leaders in this matter.

Blockade is usually a tool to pressure the enemy into submission or to make the enemy more vulnerable to defeat in battles. If an enemy region is blockaded and the flow of weaponry is reduced, that will weaken their position and make their defeat easier. Blockade alone does not typically decide the outcome of wars. My own blame for Ojukwu and his commanders is that, they continued to fight when women and children were dying of starvation by the hundreds of thousands! That to me was a big blunder.

Having said that, I will state here that the man Ojukwu is a brave man. To say that he is not revered by the Igbos will be a gross understatement. This man remains one of the most influencial men in Igboland and I personally admire his commitment to his people.[/quote]I had thought too that mere blockade does not and have never decided the outcome of a war. But I had to admit that it is one of the strategic tools of the war. Does it matter when both sides still think that the war was winnable regardless of strategy?

I would be first to tell you that Ojukwu committed unpardonable blunders during the civil war but not surrendering is certainly not one of them.  However, it would have been a wonderful sight to behold in Nigeria/Biafra war if blockade had not been invented.

In addition, I knew it was disingenuous on your part to continue to harp on Ojukwu’s refusal to surrender just because a blockade was thrown at Biafra. Initially, the war was winnable for both sides but the help that went to Nigeria’s way in the form of Britain, USSR and USA tilted the balance of the war to Nigeria.

akigbemaru:
Lost minded, I don’t know how to write, but I have never lost a battle with any Bia-rat on this forum. You can’t beat me by my own sh.it. You own half of Lagos? My answer is bulls$#@%!
If I WAS from iboland, you probably would have lionized or idolized me. Monkey arse fuuls.

You are an incredible Dusky-rat to have engaged in battles and never lost any to the Bia-rat. Please rat, while you are still at it, say hello to Cane-rat. 

@ndu_chucks


Please inform us within the annals of military conflicts where blockade had decided the outcome of a war? Ojukwu needed not to surrender simply because the Nigerian side had to itself the few frigates and MIGs.

This is another juncture where I had blamed both Ojukwu, Ironsi and all Igbo officers in Nigerian armed forces for not engaging in equitable military hardware distribution or installation among the regions when they had opportunity. The doctrine of north-south divide of Nigeria was idiotic because it left most of the armored vehicles, fighting aircrafts and ships either in Kaduna or Lagos. They should have realized that both Kaduna and Lagos had no good intensions for the eastern Nigerians.