₦airaland Forum

coveredchic:
Nairalanders can be so rude! This is a person with 25 years experience. My dad retired after 30 years. That means the op must be quite elderly or at least middle-aged. Just recently, i was discussing with someone how difficult it was for Nigerian youths to find mentors and now i have my answer. The Nigerian youth indeed has a long way to go.

The internet has a cover of anonymity, which is why people can take it for granted and post anything. How are you sure that the chap actually has 25 years experience in the banking industry? Some of the claims he is making about the pay package of entry-level graduates is rather suspect, and some people find it to be an insult to their intelligence, especially those with proof of how the system works.

alizma:
lol, do you know there is a micro finance bank that paid a graduate 120 at entry level?
if you say majority of the banks pay below 200k, I am not disputing that but don't say no bank pays 200k at entry level.

The guy made it sound as if most banks were paying 250k and above as starting salaries to entry-level graduates, when that is blatantly untrue. The example of the microfinance bank you gave, is an exception. I know of at least 3 microfinance banks in Lagos, where starting salary for entry-level graduates is like 95k per month.

alizma:
why call someone you don't know a lier over an issue you don't have idea of?
ask questions if you find something strange rather than calling him a lier. by calling him a lier, u just expose your level of ignorance of the banking sector. the guy is right about the salary range for a core staff.

No, he is not. Entry level salaries for fresh banking graduates hover around 100k to 150k per month!

ednut1:
first bank, stanbic, keystone etc do not pay entry level 250k or more abeg. and some pay salary in full abeg. anyways fire on. educate them about banking not the General misconception they have.

They pay far lower than 250k a month to entry-level graduates.

Trecixnine:
This is a lie from the pit of hell, no wonder you are all dying to work in a bank. I have more than 25years of banking carrier and still counting, spanning 6 different banks. The pay is not as juicy as the guy has just painted .

You are right!

Sincere4u:
Ironsi was slated to be killed by the plotters. He only managed to escape with his life. This story wasn't without bias.

After Pam had warned him on the telephone.

raumdeuter:
Thats because some are cry babies and they are playing to get sympathies of the international communities. Th Buafran drew the first blood, commited a lot of atrocities in the mid west

Go and read Nowa Omoiguis records

http://www.dawodu.net/midwest.htm

Haba!! You want to make some people cry. They will soon come out & try to discredit the account of Dr. Nowa Omoigui, Max Siollun, Fola Oyewole, Michael R. Stafford etc., and other authors on the civil war in a bid to claim that such folks didn't know what was going on or that their perspectives were biased. Just wait and watch.

kanadian:
Let us observe a minute of silence for this guy's IDIOCY

And let us observe a day's silence for your ignorance & cluelessness.

eaglechild:
The man was driven away from the house and the conversations continued beyond there.

The person narrating the story is the son who remained in the house along with the rest of the family.

I have said that I condemn the coup but I still remain firm in saying that such narratives cannot be held as concrete truth.

The person was in the house with his family, but the soldiers who executed Pam (and were later arrested) were present at the point where the conversation continued, and were witnesses to the subsequent events that led to his death. Don't you think the person telling the story got access to their statements, later? When soldiers are arrested or court-martialled, they give statements that are documented.

Qelvin:
Provide the source or stop feeding enlightened minds here with lies, you made the claim that Ejoor and Ojukwu had some kind of agreement about not invading the Midwest, so it's also within your prerogative to back that up with some source? And I meant to write Garkem...it was the autocorrect stuff...dude are you this slow? The Federal side fired the first shots on Biafran territory so Biafra had every right to respond in kind my attacking Federal soil, why not go ask Ojukwu in his grave why he decided to invade the Midwest?

No, you are the slow one who keeps making twisted assertions without provide proof to back them up. And on this thread, everyone can see that you are the one spreading lies. Google is your friend. Even if I paste a whole excerpt on the battle at Garkem here for you to read, you would still disprove them & ignore them like you did with the one on Ore.

So why should I stop you from believing your twisted tales by moonlight??

Qelvin:
Of course every ardent student of history knows Biafrans were unprepared for the war, even the Midwest invasion was a preemptive effort to force the Nigerian troops to the negotiation table and withdraw the bulk of their First infantry Division fighting in Biafra! So there is hardly anything in these report that contradicts my point, you have the burden of proof to provide another account that collaborates Major Iluyomade's so called heroics at Ore so we have no case here, I haven't come across a single report from those that fought in the Midwest that validates any claim of a paltry amount of Federal soldiers holding back the Biafrans at Ore...all I know for a fact is that Biafrans were halted at Ore and saw little or no action till they were asked to withdraw without even a fight.

I have given you an excerpt from a book on the civil war titled Quick Kill in Slow Motion, written by an American, containing input from those on ground during the war, that confirms there was a decisive battle at Ore, in which the Biafran soldiers were routed. You chose to ignore it. I have also made reference to the book 'Tragedy of Victory' published by Godwin Alabi-Isama who was an eyewitness on the battlefield at Ore, but you have chosen to turn a blind eye to it.

Other sources are freely available in public domain, which you can cross-check to get factual accounts about the Ore battle, but you are too lazy to carry out the research. Instead you choose to believe the propaganda in Madiebo's book, that there was no battle at Ore. Ok, if such false stories make you feel better, who am I to stop you from believing them??

The burden of proof is on you, to provide facts to bolster the tales that you believe, isn't it? He who asserts must prove. So feel free to hold on to your shallow assertions that do not hold water. Afterall, the propaganda machine manned by Okokon Ndem on behalf of Biafra is still at work in your soul, and in many of your compatriots till today.

eaglechild:
I wonder the aim of this thread.
And what makes a one sided narrative from a witness who apparently has omniscient and telepathic powers ( he was upstairs and heard all the conversations including the ones that took place kilometers from the house), to become concrete truth.
I condemn the coup and the cold blooded killings but we should never accept one sided narratives as plain truth.

'One-sided' in what way? The man's wife was alive & present in the house, when they came to arrest her husband, o! At the scene where Pam was executed, there were soldiers who watched the act being carried out. So witnesses were present.

Qelvin:
Interesting, mind providing a source to that claim that Ojukwu and Ejoor agreed on the neutrality of the midwest?? And of course all is fair in war right? We didn't fire the first shots, your Federal side did at Garden (July 6,1967), and the invasion of the Midwest was only reactionary as well as diversionary...at the time the Midwest though neutral, was still very much Federal territory..so Biafrans had every right and reason to take the war to Nigerian soil as you did to ours

Guy, you want me to keep spoon-feeding you with information, kwa? Google is your friend. Do the research. The agreement between Ojukwu and Ejoor is well known. And the first shot was fired from Garkem, not Garden. That area is within the Middle-Belt or old north-Central region, not the old Midwest region. So why did Ojukwu order an attack on the old Midwest, instead of Garkem??

Qelvin:
Give me a neutral version aside from your Federal camp that Biafrans were roundly defeated at Ore? I need a neutral source, cause I'll definitely not swallow the tales from either your Nigerian archive of lies or even the Biafran side, both sides told culpable lies to boost their war propaganda's, so let's keep that in perspective...we can turn this into another academic debate and learn more that way.

What do you mean by a neutral version? I have asked you to read a book written by a soldier who was at the battlefront in Ore, and also provided the name of the person who led the platoon at Ore. And you are still asking for a 'neutral' source? Oh, you believe the account of Madiebo who was not anywhere near Ore, is far more superior to that of Godwin Alabi-Isama who watched Major Raphael Iluyomade in action, at Ore? Okay, here is another account. let us hope you would believe this one.

Quick Kill in Slow Motion:] The Nigerian Civil War by Major Michael R. Stafford, USA |

The Biafrans probably lacked the capability to conduct such an offensive operation. In his book, Reluctant Rebel, Fola Oyewole details the lack of preparation for the Midwest offensive by his company. Here is a summary of one episode. Upon his return from a battalion field exercise, he was ordered to form a new company at Onitsha. He delivered his car and possessions to family members in that city and reported immediately to his battalion.

Within hours he moved to the Midwest. His unit's mission was the capture of the army barracks at Ugbelli. With an officer cadet as his executive officer and no experienced noncommissioned officers, the company was bused to the objective area. Ten miles from Ughelli, he stopped the column and provided a short briefing, though he was without intelligence or reconnaissance. Fortunately there was no opposition at the objective.

Even so, the untrained and undisciplined troops engaged in sporadic firing which resulted in one wound. Such episodes illustrate just how unprepared the Rebels were for the war. The vehicles used for the attack included homemade armored cars, farm trucks and passenger cars. The Biafran soldiers were poorly equipped, and many were without uniforms. They were lucky to meet only token resistance from the few Federal Forces.

From the Federal side, the Midwest Invasion achieved one significant result. It broke the complacency surrounding the Federal war effort, and unified the ojectives of Lagos, the West and the North. The entire country was intimidation by the aggressiveness of the Eastern Ibo and the response was immediate. In a demand for Federal action, anti-Ibo riots broke out in Lagos and Ibadan. A dawn-to-dusk curfew was imposed at Ibadan, and troops and armored cars presented a show of force in Lagos to buoy public confidence.

Militarily, the reaction was more substantive. A war cabinet was formed in Lagos. Remaining Federal forces operating in the Midwest fell back to blocking positions, most notably to the south of Ore about 120 miles from Lagos on the overland axis of advance from Benin. There they were reinforced by a company of Federal Guards from Lagos. A new unit, 2 Division, commanded by then Lieutenant Colonel Murtala Mohammed, sent its 7 Brigade to Ore, while the 6 and 8 Brigades were placed on the northern border of the Midwest to occupy the Biafran's right flank.

Lagos must have been reminiscent of Paris and her taxis during the first battle of the Marne. Ground wagons and red-and-silver buses delivered soldiers from Lagos to the front. Six hundred soldiers were recalled from Bonny, and 500 more were moved by rail from Kaduna in the north. The war in the north of Biafra slowed as attention and resources were drawn to overcome the threat in the Midwest. Nigeria's leading playwright, Wole Soyinka, observed that "the short, surgical police action is being conducted with blunt and unsterile scapels."

By mid-August, blown bridges and their own hesitation had stopped the Biafrans. The very factor which had hampered the Federal offensive earlier, long lines of communcations, now was a problem for the Rebels. A small force from the beginning, it was stretched too far to withstand the growing Federal pressure.

Abruptly, the Rebel offensive ended as the Federals took the initiative. After a single, fierce, battalion-level, infantry battle at Foriku, just south of Ore, Biafran resistance faded into an "accelerating retreat" characterized by minor delaying actions, blown bridges and cratered roads. The two northern brigades were in a race to outflank the Biafrans and cut off their retreat to the Niger River Bridge at Onitsha. In their haste, the Biafrans left behind many soldiers who did not receive word to withdraw and were consequently captured.

The destruction of the bridge, a giant edifice commemorative of Nigerian progress, was symbolic of a final isolation for Biafra and a new and deadlier phase of the war.

From the Midwest Invasion the Biafrans had hoped to show the world that they were a legitimate power deserving of international recognition; instead the foray ended with disaster. The Rebels gained some food, materiel, and the assets of the Bank of Benin which were expropriated in the occupation. But the losses far overshadowed those minor gains:

_{Excerpts from Quick Kill in Slow Motion: The Nigerian Civil War by Major Michael R. Stafford, USA | 2 April 1984 | Marine Corps Command and Staff College | Marine Corps Development and Education Command | Quantico, Virginia 22134}
Read the rest here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1984/SMR.htm

kanadian:
Are you a fool or an idiot

Nope. But you are the one exhibiting both traits on this thread.

Qelvin:
Element of surprise can make a small force look spartan buddy...for the umpteenth time the Midwest region was a buffer zone and was deemed neural at the outbreak of hostility, so it's very much conceivable that the region would have fallen very easily to the Biafrans cause it wasn't heavily defended, the Biafrans SURPRISED the Federal side as they didn't even see the invasion coming, and when it did the Nigerian side were pretty much in hasty retreat, the Biafrans had the momentum of surprise,speed, and a degree of good Intel...that was why the entire Midwest crumbled like a pack of wild cards when the Biafrans struck, and such was the success of the invasion that the Biafrans covered far more ground that they even anticipated, Ore was there for the taking but Banjo decided for reasons best known to him halt the attack, even your Alabi Isama reported that Biafrans had the momentum, cause he was with the Biafrans before he defected to the Nigerian side... the Nigerian troops were surely not better trained, Igbos always had the best cream of military officers...Nigerian soldiers were simply better equipped, and that alone didn't save them when they were wiped out by a small Biafran force at the botched river crossing attempt three times.

Again, you persist in churning out the fallacy that the Biafran forces wiped out the Nigerian soldiers at Ore, when nothing could be further from the truth, all because you have chosen to swallow Madiebo's tales. Madiebo was far from the battlefield and was relying on second-hand information & dispatches. Those who were right there, have made it clear that the federal side vanquished the Biafran soldiers at Ore, still you are disputing the facts. Ok, believe what you like if it makes you feel better!

As for the Midwest, the Biafran forces took advantage of the fact that the federal side did not have a battalion on ground in that region, to attack the old Midwest. Ojukwu had agreed with Ejoor, that the Midwest would remain a neutral territory. But when Ejoor's back was turned, what did Ojukwu do? He gave instructions for the invasion. Less than a month later, the federal side took over the old Midwest again, & retrieved it from the Biafran forces. Where were your effective Biafran forces when the federal soldiers regained hold of the territory?

kanadian:
Let us observe a minute of silence for this guy's IDIOCY

And let us observe a week's silence for yours'.

Naija9090:
Tell me one thing, just one thing Igbo have ever done to Yorubas? Just one! I'm waiting! I'll tell you 10 or more evil, wicked and heartless things Yorubas have done to Igbos for no reason but out the hate, wickedness and heartlessness innately in your hearts. Hypocrites!

Na wa, o!! Why is this matter paining you so much??

Qelvin:
I'm not disproving the veracity of claims made by your war heroes, I'm just addled with laughter at how much we are so gullible to believe everything the so called war heroes reported as "true" and this goes on both sides cause there are Biafran versions of Hollywood like feats as well...as for the size of the Biafrans that invaded the Midwest, I would never know the actual strength cause I wasn't there, but if I go by accounts of what I read to that effect, then I would say about a motley Brigade size of Biafran troops loaded on improvised armoured tanks and civilian vehicles invaded the Midwest in the dawn of August 7,1967, definitely a vastly understrength force to the large column of Nigerian troops that were later assembled under Muritala Mohammed , the Biafran troops were definitely thin in numbers and could not have been more than a company or platoon size sparsely defending the Midwest at the time the Nigerians counter attacked from Benin city...the weaponry was just as abysmal as the whole Biafran troops as we all know Biafra had no weapons like the Nigerians did, whatever weaponry that was absorbed came from the Midwest armoury when the Biafrans entered the region.

So you believe "the Biafran troops were definitely thin in numbers and could not have been more than a company or platoon size," and yet "Biafra had no weapons like the Nigerians did", were able to win the battle at Ore?? As compared to a better equipped & better trained Nigerian side, with more weapons?? Is that what you think?? Is that why you believe Madiebo's account?

Qelvin:
Lol Hollywood flick narration, if you believe that balderdash about 32 soldiers holding back a large force of Biafrans, then I have a castle in the air to sell to you...how come these unimaginable feat of bravery wasn't widely reported apart from Major Iluyomade's own version of home cooked tales by moonlight?

You seem to be very sure of your own folktales about the bravery of the troops that Banjo was leading to Ore. Ok, what was the size of the Biafran contingent that was on its way to Lagos, and how much ammunition did they have? Let us compare and contrast the two battalions, on both sides.

gwine0047:
Maj Kaduna Nzeogwu never supported Ojukwu's plan to secede. All he wanted was a better life for the Igbos in Nigeria.

He never supported Ojukwu's plan to secede? So what was he doing fighting on the side of the Biafran forces during the civil war? The Igbo officers that did not support Ojukwu, did not fight for him.

logica:
Even before then, the "Biafran Liberation Force" was held up at a bridge at Ore by about 180 soldiers before they received backup from Abeokuta and Ibadan. An old soldier amongst this group of 180 told the story 2 years ago (widely reported in the dailies).

Yes, it was Major Raphael Iluyomade. He commanded the Nigerian troops. His platoon was initially made up of 32 soldiers, but they later received a reinforcement of 175 soldiers to join them.

Qelvin:
You can believe the version of Alabi Osama, while I take the side of Alexander Madiebo a Biafran general who also saw it all...also read the book written by Madiebo called "The Nigerian revolution and the Biafran war."

Madiebo was NOT on the Ore battle-field, but Godwin Alabi-Isama was there.

Qelvin:
Pick up the book called "the Biafran story" by Frederick Forsyth a British journalist who covered the events of the war and read dude, I would rather take the version of a neutral party serious than any source from the Biafran or Nigerian side, the transparency of truth should never be tainted by ethnic sentiments, Biafran troops were not brutally defeated at Ore, the Federal garrison defending Ore was routed, Ore and Okitipupa were firmly in Biafran hands on August 8, 1967, the ofusu bridge had to be blown by retreating Nigerian troops to halt rapid Biafran advance while the main vanguard force of Biafran troops were HALTED by Banjo himself at Ore..countless courses from books written by foreign journalist even confirmed this report! Another book worth reading is the "Brothers war" by John De St Jorre...another journalist who covered the war from both sides, that has to be the most neutral version of the war as it spelled in black and white the true events of the Nigerian civil war.

Forsyth was definitely NOT neutral. He was a hack writer recruited by Ojukwu, to write his biography in the most flattering way possible. So how on earth could he have been objective? This same Forsyth came up a few years later to claim he was an M16 agent at that time, working for the British secret service. The MI6 declined to corroborate his claims.

As for the battle at Ore, please read the book written by Godwin Alabi-Isama titled the Tragedy of Victory, for a first hand account of what took place on the Ore battle-field.

owodokiri:
No time for back and forth with confusionist.. If you didnt understand me, ask for clarification and i will oblige you.. Read all i wrote here and you will understand all i wanted to say.. HaVe a nice day..

NB

About Max, i was referring to his Isreal vs Biafra comparison... I dont think there are much differences with what he said and what i wrote. I didnt mean that the ONLY reason Ojukwu went to war was cos of Ogundipe.., dont even know how you came up with that.. , because i asked a question about Ogundipe? I mentioned Ogundipe to inform the person i quoted that Ojukwu didnt wake up to declare a war. Neither did he insist on an igbo leadership only.. You are just desperate to approach the discourse from the pettiest angle and you latched on that. Go back to my several posts here and understand my position.

Desperate to approach the discourse from the pettiest angle??! Oga, haba!! All the pettiness is actually oozing from your words, nah. All the points you made were duly noted, and I responded to them citing various sources. You are the one that chose to ignore them, because they did not fit into your preconceived notions.

It's the same way you are jettisoning Max Siollun's observations, now. His reasoning is very simple really. Isn't it better for a man (i.e. Ojukwu) to take 80% of what is on offer, and then go back to re-negotiate for the remaining 20% at a later date, than to reject everything outright, in a bid to get 100% and then still be left with 0%? You sef, check am nah! This was what informed Siollun's comparison of Israel and Biafra.

seunmsg:
https://www.nairaland.com/3177965/mythbuster-version-coup-jan-15th

The full story of major Okafors corruption is well documented in the above link.

Thanks a lot!

hammerF:
Fact Igbos are the original people to settle in Bini and mix with yorubas and as a result the Bini Language was created.

This is a huge fallacy! Igbo were the original settlers in Benin?? Chai!! Where is your evidence? Come, has that Oguta girl been giving you something to drink? You are definitely high on something!

Cire80:
Yes, you're very correct. I implore everybody to leave this thread for them. This was supposed to be an Issele Uku thread and by extension, Anioma thread but I've seen many people here asking the Edo people to leave because it's an Igbo thread. Last time I checked, what gave rise to this argument was people that noticed the striking resemblance between the Oba's dressing and that of the Obi and his chiefs. Igbos as usual got jealous and hijacked the thread and named it an Igbo thread.

I think it's best for us to leave it for them and wait for them to also take their ancestral land as they always call it in all Igbo forums I've visited. If this people can claim aborigines of Bini, Igala, idoma and even Yoruba, it doesn't surprise me when I hear them claim Anioma their land. Like they always say, they will come to chase away all Bini settlers in Anioma land and reclaim their land. We're waiting for you guys.

You are right!! You Ika guys have done your best. More respect!! You have done your best to unveil the truth, but when some folks close their minds to the truth and chose to believe in sheer conjecture, whose fault is it?

owodokiri:
No time for back and forth with confusionist.. If you didnt understand me, ask for clarification and i will oblige you.. Read all i wrote here and you will understand all i wanted to say.. HaVe a nice day..

Oga, but you are the confusionist, nah. Please you should also go back & read what I wrote with an open mind. Do have a good day, too....

owodokiri:
You know i dont understand what you really want here anymore. I told you that Ojukwu insisted that Ogundipe be made the supreme commander after Ironsis murder, False?.. I later told you of issue revolving around Aburri and confederation. I mentioned creation of states BEFORE the war by Gowon. whats the fuss? What are we arguing about? And you are quoting yesterday writer like Max when on this thread up-to 5 books written by players and direct observers in those events have been mentioned. And Max is comparing Isreal with Biafra? You are juxtaposing an Isreal that had all western support post world war after the genocide with a Biafra standing against Britain USSR and the rest? You just trying to muddle up the whole discuss.., Get a grip bro..

Oga, you are the one that needs to get a grip, o!! You stated clearly in an earlier post that Ojukwu went to war because of Ogundipe. That claim was debunked. You later denied it. Your post in which you made that statement was then called up as evidence.

Then you digressed and spoke about police action. Sources were cited to show what led to the police action (i.e. Ojukwu's rejection of decree 8, the killing of Nd'Igbo in the North, and subsequent appropriation of FG assets in his region etc.). Max Siollun is one of the respected chroniclers of the civil war and the events that preceded it. So he was cited as a source. But you have called him a 'yesterday writer' simply because you do not like his impartial views.

Now you are accusing me of muddling things up. How? Please get a grip, o!

logica:
Are you aware of the corruption charge Major Okafor had faced? Are you aware that his career was rescued (as he should have been dishonorably dismissed) by his boss (Maimalari) whom he later murdered?

I heard about this, too! Please can you provide the name of the book where it was documented? Thanks.

decasey:
hmmmm, bros y u day lie na.

Haba, but all the lies are oozing from your mouth nah. You no see am?

malton:
I don't know about Kogi, but Ahmadu Bello definitely isn't anything more than a human to Plateau people.

Nobody here would bat an eyelid even if you cursed out his mother. As a matter of fact, a lot of people actually hate anything that has to do with the man because they see him more as someone who embarked on a mission to spread Islam. They hate anything Islam.

Kogi's outlook might be different due to their Muslim background.

Personally, as an abusite, it can be said that I benefitted from the solid educational foundation he laid, but that's about it. Most people owe him gratitude, not violent disposition.

If you notice, Plateau was not included in my list, but there are parts of that state that still respect his memory. My response was made in reaction to a guy who said he was from Katsina and was hailing Nzeogwu for killing the Sardauna. It just didn't jell.

owodokiri:
Dude, i cant remember telling you Ojukwu went to war because of Ogundipe. The problem with you lot is that you hate the truth. These are historical facts that i am stating here and you are talking to a political scientist of over ten years experience. I mentioned Ogundipe to inform readers that it is a lie that Ojukwu jumped into a war. At a point he was willing to follow the command of the most senior officer rather than following Gowon who was his junior. Thats a fact! You lot have written your own side of the story obliterating facts. There was a January 66 coup, then a counter coup in july 66. Ojukwu refused to take orders from Gowon! Ojukwu told the coupists to hand over to Brigadier Ogundipe and he will be fine with that, They posted Ogundipe to the Nigerian High commission in London and the northern officers insisted on Gowon leading. Then there was the progroms, Aburri, more progroms, state creation and all that. Then war.., with the FIRST shot being fired by federal forces in what Gowon termed "police operation"..Those are the facts

Bros, abeg match brake on top this your tales by moonlight. Historical records are available for anyone who wants to know why Ojukwu went to war. You say you have 10 years experience as a political scientist. Ok, congratulations. But it doesn't change the fact that your premise is wrong.

Were you not the one that made this statement below:

owodokiri:
How did Ojukwu declare a civil war? By insisting that Brigadier Ogindipe who was the most senior in the army should take over after Ironsis assassination?

What led to the police action, you made reference to? Ojukwu had annexed or appropriated all FG property within his region, and despite several entreaties and warnings, he refused to heed the voices of reason.

There are many perspectives of the war, because there were many participants in that war. War is not pretty. And there are always casualties, on all sides.

Different books on the events that took place at that time need to be read along with other accounts of the Civil War, in order to compare the different perspectives so that readers can draw their own conclusions. Some of the books listed below are independent accounts of the war.

Please read the following:

1). Reflections on the Nigerian Civil War : Facing the Future by Ralph Uwechue
Publisher: Trafford Publishing (2004) 236pp
ISBN-1412223628,
ISBN-9781412223621
Read the review here: http://meniru..com/2009/10/ojukwu-or-uwechue-who-is-biafran-war.html

2). Oil, Politics and Violence: Nigeria's Military Coup Culture (1966-1976) by Max Siollun
Published by Algora Publishing (2009) 268pp.
ISBN-13: 978-0875867083
ISBN-10: 0875867081
Read the review here: https://maxsiollun./my-book/

3). The Biafran War: The Struggle for Modern Nigeria by Michael Gould
Published by I. B. Tauris (2013) 288pp
ISBN-10: 1780764634
ISBN-13: 978-1780764634

4). There Was a Country: A Personal History of Biafra Hardcover by Chinua Achebe
Publisher: Penguin Press; US (2012) 352pp
ISBN-10: 9781594204821
ISBN-13: 978-1594204821
ASIN: 1594204829
Please read the 1st review here: http://www.nigeriaintel.com/2013/03/31/biafra-the-facts-the-fiction/
Please read the 2nd review: http://www.amazon.com/There-Was-Country-Personal-History/dp/1594204829/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8
Please read the 3rd review: http://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/108978-achebes-there-was-a-country-an-outsiders-review-by-femke-van-zeijl.html ; http://adegoke.info/2015/04/19/stop-teaching-tribal-superiority/

4). The Nigerian Revolution and the Biafran War by Alexander A. Madiebo
Publisher: Fourth Dimension Publishing Co.; Reissue edition (2000) 424pp
ISBN-10: 9781561173
ISBN-13: 978-9781561177
2 reviews here: http://www.amazon.com/The-Nigerian-Revolution-Biafran-War/dp/9781561173

5) The Tragedy of Victory: On-the-spot Account of the Nigeria-Biafra War in the Atlantic by Godwin Alabi-Isama
Publisher: Spectrum Books Limited, Ibadan, Nigeria (2013) 757pp
ASIN: B00G6HFDRQ
File Size: 18071 KB
Kindle e-book available
Please read the review here: http://www.amazon.com/The-Tragedy-Victory-spot-Nigeria-Biafra-ebook/dp/B00G6HFDRQ
Please read the 2nd review: http://dailyindependentnig.com/2014/02/alabi-isamas-tragedy-of-victory-a-review-2/

According to Nigerian scholars in 2011, over 69 books and pamphlets, 53 government publications, 3 bibliographies and various theses have
been published on the 30 month long Nigerian Civil War that took place between 1967 and 1970. In the US, over 2,000 books were written about their own civil war.

So there is still a need to write more. People need to tell their stories about what happened during the war, because in the words of Chimamanda Adichie "we all remember differently."

Here is also another perspective. Maybe this excerpt will shed more light on it.

Ojukwu: Hero or Villain? | By Max Siollun on December 16, 2007

The federal government attempted to implement the Aburi agreement in diluted form by enacting a modified Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree which turned Nigeria into a de facto confederation. Ojukwu declined to accept the initial draft and insisted on a full and complete implementation of the accords reached at Aburi.

Nonetheless as the weaker party he could still have showed greater pragmatism to spare further suffering for his people. At this point Ojukwu’s decision making must be questioned. Ojukwu would have saved many lives had he shown a greater degree of flexibility by accepting the Decree as it gave him 90% of what he wanted. In the “winner takes all” mentality that is so symptomatic of Nigerian politics, Ojukwu unrealistically held out for 100% of his demands and in the end, received 0%.

His intransigence placed him and his people in a worse position than they started in. Rather than turning Nigeria into a confederation (which is what Decree 8 did), Ojukwu ’s intransigence gave the federal government an opportunity to overrun the Eastern Region, carve the country into several states and concentrate massive powers in the central government. Forty years later many Nigerians now call for the restructuring of Nigeria, and for devolution of power to its regions.

Ojukwu had a golden opportunity to achieve this over 40 years ago but squandered it. Had he shown some patience he may have achieved his objectives – albeit at a later date. The old adage is that “the best comes to those who wait.”

Ojukwu could have taken a leaf from the book of another infant country named Israel. For several decades Jews fought to be given their own state in what was then British Mandate Palestine. In 1947, they were granted their state but only on half the land that they wanted.

Realizing that it is best to accept what is achievable today, rather than risk holding out for 100% and getting nothing, Israel’s first leader David Ben-Gurion accepted a state but cleverly did not enunciate the borders of this state – this leaving the door open to agitate for more land at a later date. Today the “green line” borders of Israel encompass more land than it originally had at independence. [/color] https://maxsiollun./tag/ojukwu/

kingsouthie:
Ofcourse they have to love their own,n i beg to differ...i think the late sarduana established more of almajiri educ system n not western educational system in the north

The Sardauna did not establish the Almajiri system in the North. It was the Northern religious leaders that did that.