₦airaland Forum

lezz:
Hmm, your Zulu-in-arms, Mzilakazi said as much. Just scroll to last night's posts. You had US mercenaries. Matter of fact, the Angolan army would have fenced your troops till they starved to death if it wasn't for the American mercenaries. You had British and American tanks, you lying thief.

So the soviet union collapsed and proposed you pulled out of Angola and Namibia? How's a dying man negotiating from the point of strength?

See how desperate your ill-written fiction is? The soviet union is collapsing, the SANDF should be dictating the terms of negotiations, not they asking you to concede Namibia and pull outta Angola. Your lie is so very unconvincing.


It's clear your troops were having their arses whooped that's why you surrendered to the negotiation table, pulled out of Angola with your tails behind your back and forewent your ambition in Namibia.

Simple fact.

I don't care what someone else said, it was never the intention for the NP to annex any country, if you say it was, provide a citation to prove it.

Nope there were no US mercenaries fighting for the SADF, neither did we have any US build Tanks.Angola on the other hand had thousands of Cuban troops plus sophisticated Soviet equipment

Actually the US were dictating the terms of the negotiations after the fall of the Soviet Union. After all we were fighting a proxy war on behalf of the US, thus it would be politically damaging to them if we continued our Angolan campaign and didn't give Namibia their independence after the fall of the Soviet Union. But honestly I don't expect you to understand geopolitics, as its a much to advanced concept for your tiny mind to fathom.

jln115:
I don't care what someone else said, it was never the intention for the NP to annex any country, if you say it was, provide a citation to prove it.

Nope there were no US mercenaries fighting for the SADF, neither did we have any US build Tanks.Angola on the other hand had thousands of Cuban troops plus sophisticated Soviet equipment

Actually the US were dictating the terms of the negotiations after the fall of the Soviet Union. After all we were fighting a proxy war on behalf of the US, thus it would be politically damaging to them if we continued our Angolan campaign and didn't give Namibia their independence after the fall of the Soviet Union. But honestly I don't expect you to understand geopolitics, as its a much to advanced concept for your tiny mind to fathom.

This is the second time in two days he has contradicted you. You should care what your compatriot says here.

He shot you in the foot. You should be bothered if you aren't an unhinged, uninhibited pathological liar.

Angola had teenage Cuban pilots; they rid the skies off the overhyped S.A pilots.

The US wasn't dictating the nagotiating terms, they were presuring the Angolan army not to butcher you completely.

If the negotiations was as a result Of the collapse of the Soviet Union, why would you be the one conceding, why not the russans?

lezz:
This is the second time in two days he has contradicted you. You should care what your compatriot says here.

He shot you in the foot. You should be bothered if you aren't an unhinged, uninhibited pathological lier.

Angola had teenage Cuban pilots; they rid the skies off the overhyped S.A pilots.

The US wasn't dictating the nagotiating terms, they were presuring the Angolan army not to butcher you completely.

If the negotiations was as a result Of the collapse of the Soviet Union, why would you be the one conceding, why not the russans?

1. Cuban pilots did no such thing

2. The Angolan army that did not win a single battle was going to butcher us?

3.Cubans met the terms We outlined

Simple facts

lezz:
Let me Zulu down to your level for easier comprehension.

Boers wanted the entire sandc to strengthen the hold of apartheid regime. Other countries especially Angola has been pushing for independence amongst southern African countries.

Your neighbours' anti-apartheid sentiments were growing stronger. Botha fears it is coming home and decided to quell the feud abroad before it spreads home and Zulus become wiser.

So the Boers backed regimes that promised to support apartheid in most southern African neighbouring countries, they interfered militarily and politically throughout the region for self-preservation.

When Angola proved unyielding, military option was the last resort for South Africa. The Angolans being so tiny only had teenage Cuban girls for pilots who shot the over hyped south African air force out of the skies.

You were backed by American mercenaries and amour. But you suffered defeat.

America pleaded on your behalf for negotiations, once the Angolan troops encircled the SANDF. In order to clear the last vestige of apartheid influence from the region, Angola demanded the independence of Namibia.

You can twist your points but it doesn't change history.

When Jacob Zuma went on a military parade and remembrance in Angola 2009, he acknowledged the facts and praised the Angolan military for humiliating the apartheid army.


Now whose report is more credible, Zuma, your president or that of a self-doubting, ego-haunting ,e-wanderer like you?

Where are you getting this from?

Not surprised... This is the same guy who though an American economist was going to kick us out of Brick

lezz:
Now you're beginning to have the similitude of a half-literate buffoon who can attempt to ask questions.

Do you want the source which proves all you've denied?

Or the one that established you're frightened man, who employs internet trolling for personal validation?

1. Answer the question, it is very simple
2. You are the self proclaimed troll, not me. So I assume your statement about trolling for personal validation was an act of projection on your part?

lezz:
Hmm, your Zulu-in-arms, Mzilakazi said as much. Just scroll to last night's posts. You had US mercenaries. Matter of fact, the Angolan army would have fenced your troops till they starved to death if it wasn't for the American mercenaries. You had British and American tanks, you lying thief.

So the soviet union collapsed and proposed you pulled out of Angola and Namibia? How's a dying man negotiating from the point of strength?

See how desperate your ill-written fiction is? The soviet union is collapsing, the SANDF should be dictating the terms of negotiations, not they asking you to concede Namibia and pull outta Angola. Your lie is so very unconvincing.


It's clear your troops were having their arses whooped that's why you surrendered to the negotiation table, pulled out of Angola with your tails behind your back and forewent your ambition in Namibia.

Simple fact.

Seriously, where are you getting your "facts" from?

Patchesagain:
Where are you getting this from?

Not surprised... This is the same guy who though an American economist was going to kick us out of Brick

My fovourite zulu, how's your desperatiOn going? Still singing the bric song? You have been Overtaken by events. You of all people should know that.

Patchesagain:
Seriously, where are you getting your "facts" from?

From the history books of your teachers. Those books you never like to read.

lezz:
My fovourite zulu, how's your desperatiOn going? Still singing the bric song? You have been Overtaken by events. You of all people should know that.

I find it interesting that you are desperate to avoid discussing the "source" of your "facts"

Your ad hominem attacks are utterly pathetic, adopt a new strategy

lezz:
From the history books of your teachers. Those books you never like to read.

You seem to be bending over backwards to avoid my question

Where do you get your "facts" from?

Patchesagain:
1. Answer the question, it is very simple
2. You are the self proclaimed troll, not me. So I assume your statement about trolling for personal validation was an act of projection on your part?

Patrick, you're a Leslie-wanna-be. A failed troll you are without the wits and wherewithal to be one.


You hide behind your facede of duplicity to spawn boring and lame jibes. You're too slow to be a troll with facts . your contribution is nuisance level here.

Patchesagain:
I find it interesting that you are desperate to avoid discussing the "source" of your "facts"

Your ad hominem attacks are utterly pathetic, adopt a new strategy

You have denied your name here, there's no dirt too putrid for your graceless hands

Patchesagain:
You seem to be bending over backwards to avoid my question

Where do you get your "facts" from?

You're not sane enough to spring a logical question or honest enough to ask a genuine one.

You're a pass-time, comic-relief.

lezz:
Patrick, you're a Leslie-wanna-be. A failed troll you are without the wits and wherewithal to be one.


You hide behind your facede of duplicity to spawn boring and lame jibes. You're too slow to be a troll, your contribution is nuisance level here.

OK, so despite saying that I am a troll - and then saying I am not a troll - within the space of 5 min, you have as of yet to deal with the substance of the argument

Instead you pull back and fire a barrage of personal insults, because you know that in an argument of fact and logic you stand no chance.

You are out if your league here, go play somewhere else.

lezz:
You're not sane enough to spring a logical question or honest enough to ask a genuine one.

You're a pass-time, comic-relief.

My question is both logical and honest

What is the source of your "facts"?

Peer reviewed journals? Respected military historians? Respected military organization's?

Why do you so desperately avoid the question?

lezz:
You have denied your name here, there's no dirt too putrid for your graceless hands

Look, the little snake spews venom when cornered

How cute

Patchesagain:
OK, so despite saying that I am a troll - and then saying I am not a troll - within the space of 5 min, you have as of yet to deal with the substance of the argument

Instead you pull back and fire a barrage of personal insults, because you know that in an argument of fact and logic you stand no chance.

You are out if your league here, go play somewhere else.

Why ask a question to which sources and proof have been supplied? You have denied the undeniable in your frustrated attempt at relevance here.

This very topic isn't the first. If you accept facts and proof like a man, this thread wouldn't be 5 years going.


You're the prince of personal insecurity, uncertainty and frightfulness.

I have dubbed you what you truely are: #DebateUnworthy

lezz:
Why ask a question to which sources and proof have been supplied? You have denied the undeniable in your frustrated attempt at relevance here.

This very topic isn't the first. If you accept facts and proof like a man, this thread wouldn't be 5 years going.


You're the prince of personal insecurity, uncertainty and frightfulness.

I have dubbed you what you truely are: #DebateUnworthy

You have yet to provide the source of your excerpt


Please do so, it is a simple request... I find it bizarre that I meet a wall of insults when I request it

It seems to me that you don't want me to see your source

Perhaps because it is not a trust worthy source, perhaps because it invalidates your entire argument

I'm not debating you, I am humiliating you

Patchesagain:
Look, the little snake spews venom when cornered

How cute

Our domiciled Pharisee is preaching the law which he as been found wanting. I came to this thread in 2013, 2 years after you and met you lying in the face of unshakable truth.

You want to rewrite your failed life on the pages of nairaland?

Patchesagain:
You have yet to provide the source of your excerpt


Please do so, it is a simple request... I find it bizarre that I meet a wall of insults when I request it

It seems to me that you don't want me to see your source

Perhaps because it is not a trust worthy source, perhaps because it invalidates your entire argument

I'm not debating you, I am humiliating you

six months ago this same argument ensued and I provided by sources. You took a hiatus and came up with a doctored wiki as a counter point. You want to go through the whole process of denial again? With a home made edited link?

That's how you've kept this thread for 4 years going?

lezz:
six months ago this same argument ensued and I provided by sources. You took a hiatus and came up with a doctored wiki as a counter point. You want to go through the whole process of denial again? With a home made edited link?

That's how you've kept this thread for 4 years going?

So now you are just making things up?

Are you avoiding my question because your "source" is a forum no different from this one?

Patchesagain:
You have yet to provide the source of your excerpt


Please do so, it is a simple request... I find it bizarre that I meet a wall of insults when I request it

It seems to me that you don't want me to see your source

Perhaps because it is not a trust worthy source, perhaps because it invalidates your entire argument

I'm not debating you, I am humiliating you

You need a source for Obasanjor's letter to Thatcher? Jeez! You're embarrassing the very name you bear, you clan and country.

If you need a source for Obasanjor's letter, I should question the circumstances surrounding your very birth and breeding.

You really need someone to gauge your level of Intelectual morbidity.

Patchesagain:
So now you are just making things up?

Are you avoiding my question because your "source" is a forum no different from this one?

I have called you by your name and like a demented dog, you heed not. Remember when agsugust talked about this letter? You asked for a citiation of it. I supplied you the entire letter.

You shifted and retorted, shamefully, "who cares about a worthless letter"

Now you're back to its source again? Bwahahaha, you're a circus monkey who loves going round and round and arriving at same spot. You have kept the longest thread in NL's history by sheer denial and vain repetition

Patchesagain:
So now you are just making things up?

Are you avoiding my question because your "source" is a forum no different from this one?

Are you doubting the entire articles written on nairaland?
****modified****You beat Patrick and he logs onto guest mode to observe and lick his wounds in the shadows

lezz:
This is the second time in two days he has contradicted you. You should care what your compatriot says here.

He shot you in the foot. You should be bothered if you aren't an unhinged, uninhibited pathological liar.

Angola had teenage Cuban pilots; they rid the skies off the overhyped S.A pilots.

The US wasn't dictating the nagotiating terms, they were presuring the Angolan army not to butcher you completely.

If the negotiations was as a result Of the collapse of the Soviet Union, why would you be the one conceding, why not the russans?

Why should I agree with anyone? Be it a South African or not? Do you agree with everything your country men say on this thread? Did you agree when one of your compatriots said air is more dens at higher altitude?

Citation that proves Cuban pilots shot down more SAAF pilots than SAAF pilots shot down Cuban pilots.

The Cubans and Russians withdrew out of Angola months before we withdrew, in fact our withdraw was 13 months behind schedule, thus the US put a lot of pressure on the SADF to withdraw out of Angola as it was politically damaging to them to have an Allie on foreign soil when there was no threat from the Soviet Union.

jln115:
Why should I agree with anyone? Be it a South African or not? Do you agree with everything your country men say on this thread? Did you agree when one of your compatriots said air is more dens at higher altitude?

Citation that proves Cuban pilots shot down more SAAF pilots than SAAF pilots shot down Cuban pilots.

The Cubans and Russians withdrew out of Angola months before we withdrew, in fact our withdraw was 13 months behind schedule, thus the US put a lot of pressure on the SADF to withdraw out of Angola as it was politically damaging to them to have an Allie on foreign soil when there was no threat from the Soviet Union.

I have never seen a contradictory submissions from any of my country men. You will want to point it out now.

Your fellow countryman contradicted you, sweatly aligning with the official pronouncements of your president and commander in chief.

Hmm, seems I needn't fire any shot in the first place.
You're the one out of order, young man.

Patchesagain:
My question is both logical and honest

What is the source of your "facts"?

Peer reviewed journals? Respected military historians? Respected military organization's?

Why do you so desperately avoid the question?

A "skilled" south African patriot, historian, military expert is asking for the source of Obasanjor's letter in 1986 to Margaret Thatcher pertaining apartheid.

Patrick,oh Patrick, what wiped shame and pride off your head.
You just proved you're a lame troll and a shallow ranter.

It would have been less shocking if you had asked for the source of the fact that Buhari is Nigeria's president.


You really like to keep the thread going. There most be so little going on in your life outside nairaland.

lezz:
I have never seen a contradictory submissions from any of my country men. You will want to point it out now.

Your fellow countryman contradicted you, sweatly aligning with the official pronouncements of your president and commander in chief.

Hmm, seems I needn't fire any shot in the first place.
You're the one out of order, young man.

Ok so air is more dens at higher altitude according to Nigerians? And you try to discredit our education system! Wow not only are you a retaaard but you're a hypocritical retaaard!! New lows mate, well done!

Anyway unlike you I research the facts, I don't take anything seriously posted on this thread be it from a South African or not if it hasn't been backed up by citations or if I've researched the topic my self.

And our president said nothing about Angola defeating the SADF mate!

As I said before: your trolling sucks dck bro!

jln115:
Ok so air is more dens at higher altitude according to Nigerians? And you try to discredit our education system! Wow not only are you a retaaard but you're a hypocritical retaaard!! New lows mate, well done!

Anyway unlike you I research the facts, I don't take anything seriously posted on this thread be it from a South African or not if it hasn't been backed up by citations or if I've researched the topic my self.

And our president said nothing about Angola defeating the SADF mate!

As I said before: your trolling sucks dck bro!

You say all these just to tell us that your president was wrong and you're right? I love the show of pain you're broadcasting.. Lolz.

And your research proved Zuma never made this praise on the Angolan army?

You're heaving with despair. Tell your President to retrace his speech that made you look like the muppet you are.

lezz:
You say all these just to tell us that your president was wrong and you're right? I love the show of pain you're broadcasting.. Lolz.

And your research proved Zuma never made this praise on the Angolan army.

You're heaving with despair. Tell your President to retrace his speech that made you look like the muppet you are.

Do you even read my posts thoroughly? If you did you would've noticed that I never said he never praised the Angolan army, but what I in-fact stated was that he never said anything about the Angolan army literally defeating the SADF!!

Now READ my post thoroughly, before you quote me again, I'm getting board of repeating myself over and over!

jln115:
Do you even read my posts thoroughly? If you did you would've noticed tha[b]t I never said he never praised the Angolan army,[/b] but what I in-fact stated was that he never said anything about the Angolan army literally defeating the SADF!!

Now READ my post thoroughly, before you quote me again, I'm getting board of repeating myself over and over!

So what's Zuma praising the Angolan army for? For surrendering to the SANDF and taking a beating?

Nope, he praised the Angolan army for bringing peace to the entire region and putting a stop to the progress of apartheid. He praised them for Namibian independence and for defeating the south African troop.

lezz:
So what's Zuma praising the Angolan army for? For surrendering to the SANDF and taking a beating?

Nope, he praised the Angolan army for bringing peace to the entire region and putting a stop to the progress of apartheid. He praised them for Namibian independence and for defeating the south African troop.

He praised them for the role they played in the fight against apartheid and having the bravery to take arms against a military superpower.NOT because they defeated the SADF.