₦airaland Forum

I would rather be Biafran than Nigerian. All the false patriotism we see in posts like this only goes as far as writing but not in the way we act. Let's be honest with ourselves, there is no "Nigerian" fraternity and camaraderie among Nigerians. When we talk of terrorism in the North we say let the Northern leaders handle it, when we talk of loosing Bakassi to Cameroon, many say "as long as my village is not affected, what is my business?" One presenter on radio said something like this, believe it or not. If we are honest with ourselves, we realize that we do not care about our "fellow Nigerians" if he is not from the same ethnic group. This is why when people talk of kidnapping in the South-South or South-East, their approach depends on which side of the fence they are in - if they are from the region, they are concerned, if they are not they speak of the subject with Schandenfreude. The scenario the OP described, if it was not made up, shows that the Nigerian in the conversation was only being defensive. When the same person comes back to Nigeria, they behave and act differently. It is easy to be "patriotic" when you are studying in an expensive school like Yale, go to UNILAG and come and tell me whether you do not want to be American. Besides, I hope this Yale student is not using Nigerian government contract money - it is so difficult to be wealthy in an honest way in a corrupt country.

TUMIC: Well if break up will solve our problems, then what are we Waiting for

I guess we are waiting for enough Nigerians to develop the requisite amount of brain cells to accommodate that fact. The more we talk about it openly, the more brain cells and neural connections that are made.

TUMIC: Nigerians will always be Nigerians even if the country breaks.
The separate entities will still wake up one day and see no difference.

What a sad case.

True, but this would not apply to all. Biafrans would expunge all Nigerian diseases of zoning and rewarding mediocrity.

The pan-Africanist, Marcus Garvey inspired the design of the Biafran flag. Those who fought against bigotry, hatred and racism in America saw the Biafrans fighting against the same forces of evil in Nigeria. Those agents of the devil who are now in Nigerian delusions as heroes fought against God's own people. They think they won but God is still at work. He would resurrect the dream of freedom and true independence in Africa. God would lead his people, the Biafrans, as he led the Jewish people to Israel. God's time is the best and his will be done. God bless the Biafrans.

UncleJJ: Evrybody , talking Nigeria should break up.

Nobody has come out with a concise plan of how thing will be run when Nigeria breaks up. Atleast each region will be neighbor's.

How will east survive with no free movement on goods and services
How will north survive with our free movement of goods and services
How will west and SS or middle belt survive.

Do you know what it means to start afresh. or do you think one region has monopoly of mind power over the other.

However, does it not cause concern that it is still the same '76ers (ibo land) that are calling for Nigeria's division.

Even,when they gain big time from Nigeria's unity.

Is this idea of division a mere distraction or a valid solution.

Even in division, we must still collaborate and hence we still be unified in a way. Look at S.K and N.K, South Sudan and North and the other parts of old Prussia.

Why is division the only solution to Nigeria's problem ?

You've just answered your own question. You may not realize it but reread your comment. Division would force neighbors to cooperate and change like in the examples you gave - South and North Korea, South Sudan and North Sudan. Those countries are operating better now than they would have if they were together. Nobody is calling for separation and exclusion of neighbors, think man. Those countries you mentioned, how are they surviving with "restriction in movement". Long and short, leave Biafra alone to pursue her capitalist policies and adopt laws that brings to bear the democratic nature of Biafrans and watch us launch Africa into the future. God bless Biafra.

Jean-Paul Sartre had respect for Biafran determination for actualisation of nationhood. The French writer made public statements condemning the war. France, for all their disagreeable national character, produced truly great intellectuals, mathematicians and philosophers. Jean-Paul Sartre was one of them, a French product that France can be truly proud of.

[size=29pt]GOD BLESS BIAFRA AND THE BIAFRANS, HIS CHOSEN PEOPLE, AMEN![/size]
https://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/49152000/jpg/_49152085_pope_blessing_westcath_reuters.jpg

I welcome those interested in discussing solutions to the Nigerian problem and the future of Biafra to visit www.nairaland.com/1248907/preparing-east-post-nigeria-future and comment.

Thanks all.

kingoflag: Lies, lies and lies!!!

Ted Kennedy NEVER "SUPPORTED" BIAFRA!!! Neither did Chuck Goodell. The closest you can come to this phantom "support" only God knows where you dreamed it up is Don Lukens. Requesting for massive aid and evacuations for REFUGEES does not equal support. They wanted to help for humanitarian reasons and not because they supported the cause or felt that Biafra should separate from Nigeria!

Why do you guys like revising history so much?

you would not know what history revision is if it hit u in the face to take a chill pill son. If they did not overtly ask for recognition of Biafra, it was only due to British influence and politics. I regard them as Biafra heroes as they did better than the hell-bound bigots that insisted on starvation as a 'legitimate policy.' If u don't like it, bite me.

Richard West, a British journalist realised the importance of Biafra to African emergence on the global scene. He wrote in St Petersburg times during the tail end of the war "Biafra is more than a human tragedy. Its defeat, I believe, would mark the end of African independence. Biafra was the first place I had been to in Africa where the Africans themselves were truly in charge". Over 40 years later and we see that he was soooo right. The rise of Biafra would renew African independence, God bless Biafra.

kingoflag: Lies, lies and lies!!!

Ted Kennedy NEVER "SUPPORTED" BIAFRA!!! Neither did Chuck Goodell. The closest you can come to this phantom "support" only God knows where you dreamed it up is Don Lukens. Requesting for massive aid and evacuations for REFUGEES does not equal support. They wanted to help for humanitarian reasons and not because they supported the cause or felt that Biafra should separate from Nigeria!

Why do you guys like revising history so much?

you would not know what history revision is if it hit u in the face to take a chill pill son. If they did not overtly ask for recognition of Biafra, it was only due to British influence and politics. I regard them as Biafra heroes as they did better than the hell-bound bigots that insisted on starvation as a 'legitimate policy.' If u don't like it, bite me.

Richard West, a British journalist realised the importance of Biafra to African emergence on the global scene. He wrote in St Petersburg times during the tail end of the war "Biafra is more than a human tragedy. Its defeat, I believe, would mark the end of African independence. Biafra was the first place I had been to in Africa where the Africans themselves were truly in charge". Over 40 years later and we see that he was soooo right. The rise of Biafra would renew African independence, God bless Biafra.

Tolexander: you are just very funny! so you expect portugal and france to bring all the artilleries in their arsenal to alaigbo? Still wondering why you are refusing to believe they aren't intelligent as you supposed. Or better put, They are less intelligent than their counterpart.

Well if intelligence to you is sitting around and waiting for a genocidal army to kill you, then maybe they don't meet your requirement. Did Britain bring all their weaponry to Nigeria or did they just supply the Nigerians. It is embarrassing that I have to explain this. If the weapons supply from France was in good measure, if the gave Biafra legal recognition and military support in the way they gave the Americans - the way Western powers gave given weapons in their many proxy wars, the outcome would have been different. I don't know how to make it any simpler.

Andre Uweh: The Handiwork of Major Uchendu.

Was he in the airforce?

kingoflag: 1. Yes, the accord should have been adhered to and Ojukwu should have been pseudo-emperor of the Eastern Region with no one to call him to order whenever he decided to go nuts. Or dont you know that one of the main contentious issue that led to the civil war was Ojukwu demanding that the Head of State not have the power to remove him as Governor for any reason? Does that make sense to you? 2 Presidents in one country? Ojukwu got at least 8/10 of whatever requests he made to Nigeria, issues like the one I enumerated above are what drove him to war.

2. Yes, Biafra will "rise". Nigeria will fall and that will be "partly" because 5th columnists like the Eastern Region played their part perfectly to undermine the Union. I do not say this to absolve any other ethnic group, and I understand that the igbos want out of Nigeria so they'll do anything to weaken it like: not standing up to be counted when everyone else is railing against the removal of subsidy or that Nigeria deserves better than GEJ. What the Eastern Region does not understand is that---like your comment about 'Biafra opting out when the madness reaches its head'--- it will be heading into an unsolvable quagmire. I'd like to see how it would subjugate the minorities in the Eastern Region and bring them under the control of Biafra with Igbos at the head now that the Ijaws tasted what power and money feels like. Remember, Igboland is landlocked.

1. Ojukwu's action is none of anyone elses's concern but Biafrans. I would rather have a "nuts" Ojukwu protecting me in Biafra than a "sane" Murtala or other hacks that were active participants in the genocide. And finally on this point, that was not a contentious issue - not recognising the power of Gowon to do crap - as at the time the Aburi accord was signed, Gowon signed the accord, remember? Whatever makes sense to you, being part of Nigeria at that time when nothing was done to stop the killings does not make sense to me.

2. Nigeria would fall, yes. But y'all don't need our help and don't try to blame it on us. We only need to bid our time. Standing up to be counted for anything would mark us out and we would get blamed. As far back as 1956, the independence movement - named an Igbo movement by some British civil servants - was good enough excuse to kill Igbo people. So please, do not blame us for the actions of your leaders. How many non-Igbo people protested when the price of fuel in the East was not subsidized? The price of fuel in the East has been about the highest in the country, why did you not protest? Why would Eastern based citizens start protesting because the price was raised to levels near what it has always sold in the East? We owe Nigeria nothing. We gave y'all independence. Our work is done. Now let my people go.

And the talk of Igbo subjugating minorities is delusional. They can stay in Nigeria if they want. Only the regions that choose to be full members of Biafra are welcome. Aceess to the sea is not as important now as it was in the 19th century. That blackmail does not move us. Whatever the minorities of the South decide on their identities, we would trade with them as our ancestors traded with their ancestors. That's all that is important. Like I said, we would pursue common interests with hard nosed policies that protect our interests. Territories that want to retain their control over their land but still want to have some commonalities with Biafra like common military umbrella and educational standards can do so by having partial nationhood with Biafra like Saipan, Guam, etc currently have with Biafra if they meet minimum requirements. I have addressed this before in this post: https://www.nairaland.com/1155411/tribal-war-noise-making#13830349

joeyfire: Two heroes though not forgotten but I can't resist mentioning them.

1. Count Carl Gustav Von Rosen - crack pilot, humanitarian titan and adventurer.

2. Major Taffy Williams - welsh mercenary who fought for love and not money

Carl Gustav von Rosen destroyed Nigerian plans that were interfering with his humanitarian supplies to Biafra. Biafrans have a special place in their hearts for him.
Major Taffy Williams did all he did for Biafra for free. He only needed free food. He earned nothing while fighting the Nigerian vandals. He was given Biafran citizenship.

Tolexander: do you wanna claim biafra has no international support?

Like I said, intelligence avoids false equivalency. Biafra had some international support, but not on the scale that the Americans had. France did supply some arms to Biafra late in the war, but denied it. They did not give all out support. Portugal allowed Biafran pilots to land on their territories, but nothing more. The support was just not on the same level. If it were, Biafra would be an independent country and we would not have been sending soldiers to the field with few bullets.

CyberG: Abeg, don't turn logic on its head! Jesus did not make an agreement with the northerners at independence, then turned around to kill all their leaders when it dawned on him that he would remain an errand boy while the northerners would keep the actual power. Jesus did not out of pride rebel against federal authority when it became clear that a junior Gowon won the loyalty of the federal army and governors like ojuku would now take orders from the junior officer in Lagos! Jesus was not the one rejoicing on the grave of the Sadaunna and co. when Nzeogwu, Ifeajunna and co. killed them in cold blood! When ojuku declared a war with 120 Mark IV rifles and shakabula (hunter's rifle you must stuff with gun-powder after expelling each round), boasted on how the largest army in black Africa, etc would surprise Nigerians, Jesus was not in the picture then. When millions of iboz were dying, ojuku negotiated their lives for more weapons, what would Jesus have done? Ojuku rather than go north to fight the people dealing with the iboz who started the whole hullaballoo decided to go West on the way to where (Sokoto?) but his armies were massively stonewalled and smashed at the border of Ore, did Jesus send him there? The mid-West wanted non-agression and did not initially join either side like the Westerners but when the ibo misadventure came they met it headlong and their descendants today are proud of their valiant victories. Note that the people you are insulting in Nigeria have fought wars for hundreds of years...how will an ordinary army of a novice tribe, commanded by an ojuku who was not battle hardened but latte-sipping, egg-popping oxford history graduate? How would iboz follow a leader whose generations were not known to be military commanders, warriors, conquerors or even the high priests whose task it was to make sacrifices (perhaps human sacrifices of strangers in the land) before massive offensives that could last years of fighting? A lions is not trained to be the a lion, it is born and so are some of the war-like, battle hardened people in Nigeria of which IBOS are NOT! This is why Jesus has nothing to do with it: as you lay your bed so MUST you lie on it!

If you want to talk about logic, you would also know that Jesus did not put all the strange bed fellows into one country called Nigeria. I really would not want to waste time derailing this topic by addressing fully your convoluted post, but I would ask you to ask your relatives how they initially felt about the coup. The South rejoiced, given the turmoil that the ruling party was causing in the west. Westerners were BEGGING the military to intervene while the military men were supervising the elections. Awolowo was planning a coup before he was sent to prison, but hey, you are right, he aint Jesus; just another yoruba god. That's as far as I will go. Too much ignorance in your post, where do I start? Read more before you give false comments about the West wanting non-aggression - repeating lies again and again would not change facts.

eko ilee: All the people biafra killed, victimized, invaded, subjugated and dehumanized all over the SS and Mid west were not human beings right?


This is why they don't take you people seriously, you thong the sun set and shine only on your narrow biafran assss. You point fingers, you cry and mop around everyday as if it wasn't a war and you people didn't fire one bullet or kill anybody, you didn't brutalize anybody, you did not invade and subjugated anybody.

This is sickening I swear...

Someone accuses Nigeria of genocide and Nigerian defense is "well you shot guns too". I am amazed. This is even worse than the Turkish government response to accusation of the Armenian genocide. It is enough to let you know that Biafra declared independence to escape Nigeria's hate based killings while Nigeria declared war. If you feel Biafrans are unjustified in defending themselves from genocidal jihadists, you can't be helped. It is however interesting to note the reaction of the same Nigerians when there is report of killings, especially of NYSC members.

Saving the most important reply (so far) for last:

LADY OF RAGE: ....and my dearest uncle GILBERT OBI who fought for Biafra willingly without being forced to join the army. He was killed by his fellow Biafran soldiers mistakely in 1969. RIP Odogwu!




His pictures he took during the war still stands decorated in my maternal home. Adieu loved one!

It is for people like your uncle that I created this post. God grant him eternal rest and your family comfort. Heroes like him should not just be memorialized in your maternal home but also in Biafran culture - our history telling, our art, our monuments and most importantly, our hearts.

Katsumoto: You miss the mark widely. First, Ojukwu sent 5000 soldiers to the West. Even if they got to Lagos, they would have been isolated from the main Biafran Army by long distance which would have meant their deaths. 5000 can't hold Lagos with millions surrounding them on all sides. Second, the Second division (Murtala) was formed from units from the 3rd Marine Commando (Adekunle) and from sons of the mid-west and west who joined the war efforts earnestly. Third,the mission of the Second Division wasn't to protect Lagos but to chase the Biafrans out. It was the Biafran Expeditionary Force that was vulnerable to an encirclement. A lake doesn't encircle the land around it.

I think you are the one missing the mark. I put up a video emphasising the importance I place on flexible military strategies. The loyalty of Nigerians was up in the air - still is. Who told you Lagosians would continue to fight for Nigeria when the Biafran army, lead by a Yoruba son, liberates Lagos? Why do you think Awolowo demanded the withdrawal of Northern soldiers from the West before the conflict? The same Mid-Westerners were the ones who aided the Biafran liberation of the Mid-West. So, like I said, the loyalty of Nigerians to Nigeria is up in the air, and it still is. This is even more so for Nigerian leaders who would sell this country if they had an offer. After all, the Northern leadership at that time was entering into a "mutual protection pact" with Britain, a move British secret documents reveal as in pursuit of their own interests. And whoever told you that the number of soldiers must match up with the number of civilians? That hardly ever happens and does not ensure victory either. Read about Israel's war of Independence.

Katsumoto: If Biafra wanted to be its own country, then relying on the Nigerian currency surely was a huge mistake. It gained initially from taking Nigerian currency in the East and in Benin to buy weapons but that was a short term strategy. It didn't develop its own revenues sources. As for your comment about Biafra introducing counterfeit currencies, that wouldn't have worked for two reasons:
1. Biafra didn't have the means to print currency
2. Even if it did, it had no means of getting it into Nigeria. After Nigeria changed its currency in 1968, it improved its border controls to ensure that old currency couldn't get in. This had the effect of turning the currency the Biafrans took from the Central banks in the East into paper. Old currency was even stopped in places like Lome.
3. Once new currency was introduced, international agencies wouldn't have accepted Nigerian currency from Biafrans for obvious reasons.

I said nothing about relying on Nigerian currency. Biafra DID make their own currency so surely their could forge other currencies. And developing revenue sources is naturally done in peace time. Nigeria has not developed revenue sources beyond oil. Biafra undoubtedly would have done better. And trust me, there were means of circulating fake Nigerian currency to destroy the value.

Katsumoto: What are these excellent strategies that Ojukwu adopted? What was the main point of the Biafran strategy? How did Biafra plan to win the war?

You would benefit from good old research. There is no time and space to begin to answer your question. Thank goodness you have access to the internet.

Katsumoto: The biggest error made by Biafra was that it didn’t plan for war. Declaring Biafra too soon; Biafra was declared on May 29th, Nigeria launched its offensive on the 6th of July. Biafra did not have the time to source for weapons. Hence its locally made weapons were not sufficient to prosecute a full scale war.It rushed into war thinking that the perceived ‘bravery’ of its sons would enable it to prevail. Bravery enables you to win battles but strategy wins wars. Biafra should have been patient with its planning. Patience would have enabled it to acquire much needed military equipment and develop its intelligence network. It had no Navy or Airforce and that’s why Nigeria controlled the skies and waters for the duration of the war.

The second biggest error was that it didn’t seek alliances with its neighbors. The war was initially between the East and the North. Biafra should have pretended to be pacified and then started secret negotiations with its neighbors to the East and West. But instead, it tried to capture Lagos. If it captured Lagos, the victory would have been symbolic but not advantageous for the simple reason that the seat of power can be moved temporarily. For instance, Biafra did not collapse after Enugu, its capital, was captured in the first few months of the war. Similarly, De Gaulle and the Polish war leaders conducted their war efforts from England during the Second World War. If Lagos fell, Gowon would have simply moved to Kano or Kaduna. The move to Lagos irked its neighbors and enabled Gowon to recruit aggressively from groups that were initially neutral to the war effort.

Other errors include
1. Biafra based its capital so close to enemy territory. Enugu fell so quickly that Biafra was on the back foot throughout the war.
2. Not having the finances/revenue to prosecute a war. Biafra was reliant on collecting money in circulation and in the banks in the East. It also required its citizens to fund the war effort with their savings. The problem with that approach is that you need capital to generate revenue. That was the approach taken by Awo who introduced or increased taxes and treasury bills.
3. Not anticipating that super powers would support Nigeria (this is called short-sightedness) or obtaining strategic support from the super powers
4. Biafra did not have the means to feed its citizens with the war on its soil; this was exacerbated by not having a single ally on any of its borders.

The italicized statement is the reason we should discuss this topic more. Anyone presented with Biafra's situation or who actually knows the history of the war would be shocked at your thinking that liberating Lagos would not be advantageous. The liberation of the Mid-West alone made the British consider stopping arms supplies to Nigeria and suing for peace. One of Harold Wilson's advisers, Thomas, suggested that he should do just that. It took the British ambassador in Lagos, Sir David Hunt, to fly to Britain and convince the British administration to continue arms supplies. So just imagine if the mission was carried out, it would be more difficult for Nigeria to source for weapons. Wherever they want to use as their administrative center for war planning is irrelevant. As long as the coastal areas of Nigeria were supplying weapons to the Nigerian cause, they had to be cut off.
As for the rest of your post, pretending to be pacified would have meant being okay with the killings in the North and the rest of Nigeria. It would have also meant that the Govt's plan of divide and conquer which saw them creating 12 states instead of going for confederation as was agreed on. I agree with you insofar as deception being critical in warfare, but given the situation of the time and the already signed peace agreement, NO ONE would have accepted reneging on the Aburi accord.
Awolowo had the luxury of using taxes. Biafra didn't. After seizing Igbo-owned property in much of Nigeria, not much was left for taxes.
No one reading British intelligence would have imagined that Britain would support Nigeria. Infact, they declared neutrality until they saw that Biafra would not be a walk in the park for Nigeria. Read http://www.afrikanistik-online.de/archiv/2011/3042

As main backer of Nigeria's regime, Britain cannot be exonerated from responsibility for the many civilians who starved to death. It is unlikely, however, that the British government instigated the hostilities against the Igbo. Chibuike Uche, an Igbo scholar who studied recently declassified documents, found "no evidence that [Britain] encouraged the [July 1966] massacre. Archival evidence points to the contrary. The British High Commissioner at the time made spirited efforts to get Gowon to do more to stop the killing of Ibos". [154] After his talks with the Nigerian leadership in August and September 1966, the High Commissioner wrote to London that Gowon refused "to face up to the stark facts of the scale of brutalities in the North, and the extent of the Army's positive responsibilities for them". [155] For British diplomats, this denial was dangerous as it threatened the unity of Nigeria: "The Northern murderers are certainly making it as difficult as possible for the East to refrain from secession. The disastrous consequences for the Northern economy are brushed aside by even sophisticated Northerners as secondary to the need to make it quite impossible for the Ibos ever again to aspire to play any decisive part in the North". [156]

^^
Congratulations, keep it up and you would get a degree for correcting mispellings on a forum. U would finally have a cause to live for.

Tolexander: that isn't the point. I made mention of the 13 colonies and not the 11 confederate states.
George Washington and his warriors(american heroes) had crude weapons compared to the english colonial master. They still went ahead to win the war as a result of their bravery, courage and INTELLIGENCE.

Since u know more abt that history than I do, you should know that France supported America and that intelligence avoids false equivalency.

chosen04: Poster,

Did you forget Artur Alves Pereira, The legendary Biafran Pilot from Portugal who up to date still believes so much in the Biafran dream?......

http://massob.org/2012/12/09/my-escapades-as-biafran-warplane-pilot-%E2%80%93portuguese-pilotartur-alves-pereira/

Just read the interview. He probably interacted with other great airmen in the modest Biafran airforce like Count Carl Gustav von Rosen and Major Taffy Williams. Fighting colonial rascality and hate filled barbarism in Biafra was an honourable service to the God's people - the Biafrans. God speed, Pereira.

texazzpete: I'd suggest the true troll is the one hell bent on exhuming old battles and dreaming of a lost glory.

Read the introduction son, and try to understand it. This is an academic exercise. To challenge clowns who keep saying the Biafrans did not fight the war the right way. I am challenging such people to tell us what they would have done differently. Now, if you don't mind, run along and keep complaining about everything as a typical Nigerian while I find solutions to the Nigerian problem.

Tolexander: INTELLIGENCE!

Guess you seen not to understand what intelligence is.

An intelligent mind creates solution to his problems.
An intelligent soul acquires the materials around it to make an unfavorable condition favorable.
An intelligent body doesn't bank on his opponent to give it a clue before it can win and successful

An intelligent mind knows that your post describes the natural action to take in the face of genocide - find a solution, acquire materials to make the unfavourable favourable, distrust your enemy, [size=16pt]DECLARE A BIAFRAN NATION STATE INDEPENDENT AND DEFEND YOUR RIGHT TO LIFE.[/size] If only Nigerians would get that, the academic performance would improve.

The Brit who refused to be part of the rigging of the elections to favour the North - Harold Smith - should be honoured. He lost everything standing on the side of justice. His honour and reputation should be fully restored and acknowledged by Biafrans.

Technology is critical in fighting war. We have something to learn from Germany that developed guided missiles and Japan that developed a very complex hot air balloon device to fire bomb America. The importance of technology is the reason why Russian and American soldiers searched Germany for their best scientists and engineers after the end of the second world war. Getting the best German scientists was a matter of fierce competition among Russia and America and the German scientists help each side develop weapons and technologies they both used in fighting proxy wars during the cold war.

Tolexander: try not misunderstanding me. What i was saying is that you said biafran armies were intelligent? How come they couldn't pool their intelligence to win the war if they are really intelligent.
I will refer you to go an read the USA (the 13 colonies) war of independence.

You win wars with weapons as well as brain. You should know that. Like I said, we only needed half the supplies of guns - and guns alone, not airplanes and tanks - to win the war. That we did not have, thanks to the British.

I would ask that you read on that war yourself. If you did and studied the mistake of the confederates attacking the Union soldiers that had occupied high-ground, you would not have suggested that Biafrans go attacking the North leaving Lagos to freely import arms and ammunitions.

nnenna.1:
Bruce Mayrock, the American Columbia University student who burned himself to death in front of the United Nations building in New York.

He died in protest for the Biafran cause.

He is a true hero. Igbo leaders should pay a visit to his wife. I heard her interview on the BBC. It was a tough thing to deal with. She got a letter from him explaining his decision after he had burned himself. God be with his family.

kettykin: if Biafran Air-forces had destroyed the Sea ports in Lagos the Armoured Division in Kaduna and ibadan and their Armories ,The Federal forces would have had to go back to the drawing board , the biggest mistake according to Ojukwu was the Ore mistake even Britain acknowledged it as the turning point in the war Soyinka wrote about it too.

I want to thank you and others for addressing the topic and ignoring trolls.

Well, the mistake was not Ojukwu's, it was Victor Banjo's. The plan was to proceed to Lagos which was left unprotected. Stopping at Ore was a grievous miscalculation.

I like that military suggestions are focused on. I would also like other clandestine non-military actions to be suggested that could cause Nigeria economic sabotage.

noblezone: They are already doing that!
The Northern minorities are already severing ways with their task master.
The Niger Deltans are already saturated being Nigerians.

I think the only reason the South West is still being cautious is that they are yet feel the brunt the way the South East (genocide), North Central (forceful take over of their lands) and South South (internal colonisation of the oil wells) have felt the heat one after the other.

They almost had the heat during MKO saga, but the crises was averted when they were compensated with the presidency.

Yet, I know that it does not really matter, the North Central and the South south are enough to tackle the Jihardists. 2015, might be the date of fate!

Yes they are already fighting but it has not reached a head. When the North Central and the South South begin fighting against the North, that would be the ticket. This must happen first. And the Igbo must only watch at a distance, only interfering in terms of humanitarian aid and light military assistance. Getting too involved could quickly turn the anger away from the Core North and direct it towards the Igbo. Remember, despite Islamatisation effort, Tiv killings and all other oppression of the Northern minorities, the Northern minorities joined their muslim neighbours in killing Igbo people during the pogrom. Read www.afrikanistik-online.de/archiv/2011/3042

The coup plotters under the leadership of Lieutenant Colonel Murtalla Mohammed had initially aimed for secession. At the army headquarters in Lagos they had hoisted a flag that heralded a Republic of the North. The soldiers, however, were divided. The majority of the rank-and-file had been recruited in the Middle Belt, among the Tiv, Bachama, Berom and other minorities that were largely Christian or ‘traditionalist’. Most of them had little interest in joining a Republic of the North that would be dominated by the Hausa-Fulani. Under the NPC government, the minorities had never been given a chance to rule themselves. Their main political association, the United Middle Belt Congress, had continued its agitation for an autonomous Middle Belt Region, but the Hausa-Fulani elite had suppressed all separatist tendencies. Members of opposition parties had been bought off, intimidated or detained, and when the Tiv, the largest non-Muslim minority in the North, had risen in open revolt, their rebellion had been crushed by the army. Furthermore, in 1963 the Premier of the Northern Region had embarked on an Islamisation campaign to consolidate Hausa-Fulani hegemony in the potentially seditious Middle Belt. [119] The entire North, with its heterogeneous population, was to be united by a common faith and language, namely Hausa. This pacification strategy had created strong resentment among the minorities, but it seems that the fear of Igbo domination was stronger. When the army broke apart, the minorities did not side with their fellow-Christians from the South but joined the mobs that attacked the Igbo: "the killing spread out of the Muslim North into the Middle Belt areas where it was particularly savage. It was also much more indiscriminate with Christians and pagans as active as the Muslim soldiers among the killers". [120]

The same with the South South. Whatever partnership we shall have with the rest of Nigeria must be based firmly on mutual interests and not charity or fraternity. Otherwise they think you want to "dominate" them:

The creation of 12 states was also meant to sway the Eastern minorities to the federal side and instigate a revolt within the East. By taking charge of their own states, the minorities would have a chance to shake off Igbo rule. Under the administration of the Eastern Region, led by an Igbo prime minister, they had not been repressed as brutally as the Middle Belt minorities had been; [126] nevertheless most of them resented Igbo influence. Their main grievance was probably that Igbo traders and professionals had assumed such a prominent role in their economy. [127] Writing in the mid-1960s, a British social anthropologist described how one of these minority groups, the Kalabari, had experienced Igbo competition:

there was no longer anything to stop Ibo fishermen and fish traders from penetrating far into the Delta, and penetrate they did, in large numbers. Large-scale Ibo infiltration was bad enough in itself. What made it worse was the Kalabari man’s conviction that his Ibo neighbour, being far more willing to forego the elementary amenities of life, while still struggling to make his fortune would be able to undercut him sharply in the purchase and resale price of fish. Later still, large numbers of Ibo labourers began to drift into the seaport town of Abonnema, where again they competed all too effectively with local labour […]. Discontent over Ibo infiltration came to a head in 1947, with disturbances in Abonnema and other places and rumours (probably unfounded) of an impending massacre of Ibo. A great many Ibos left the Delta at this time; and their exodus relieved much of the tension. But although Kalabari fishermen and fish traders are far better organised today (1960s) than they were in the 1940s, they are still haunted by fears of an Ibo economic take-over of the Delta. [128]

noblezone: Your imagination is not ordinary! It is an inspired imagination!
Surely, Nigeria is gradually destroying herself.

We need to do some work now so as to be ready whenever it happens.
We should not be caught unprepared. For all I know, the Jihardists in the North will never reform.
It is a matter of time and 2015 might be the date with fate!

Imagination? No, I don't think so. Look at how Somaliland emerged as the peaceful, though unrecognised, nation state in the madness of the wars in Somalia. We only need to wait for other members of the Nigerian heresy start fighting themselves and opt out as gently as it is allowed. However, I do agree with you that we need to be prepared for any eventuality.

Alfamann: The greatest mistake was entrusting the command of the most important invasion in our short history to a man from the tribe of cowardice.

Just close your eyes for 10 seconds and imagine if the invasion to Lagos had been spearheaded by an Igboman. Imagine it.

That probably would have ended differently. I put the Sun Tzu documentary video to address the scenario suggested by some that say that attacking Lagos was a suicide mission. I don't believe this scenario as Lagos was left without any protection.

dr.laykay:
The single problem was that there was no defined map before the war begun.the biafrans were confused(never knew who/where/when to attack and who/where/when not to).
Better luck next time.

Obviously you are not aware of the war history. Attacking Lagos as a strategy is not something that a confused army would do. Two nation states were at war so targets are clear.

OkparaIgbo: The big issue I deduced from the war was our lack of transportation network in terms of water channels which in turn lead to lack of weapon and food and if GEJ in this his tenure can achieve that for us then we are smiling an buying time like you said. If we had an open waterway, it wouldn't have been difficult to ship in enough weapons of mass destruction as well as buying technological gadgets to reprogramme to our taste imagine programming an Ogbunigwe..! Oboy that would have just turned things around one time. Anyway whilst I don't support war, I believe if there is a reapeat, it will be kick ass on the Nigerians as we have so many military connections and personnel across the channels including the U.S and the bargaining power will be to our advantage

The Biafra of the future would need to concentrate mainly on air power. If we have this, we do not need immediate access to the sea in times of hostilities as aerial bombardment would immediately widen our reach Biafra needs to purchase and build drones.

network.recharg:
2days ago, Musa killed okoro,I did not talk because I ve never seen okoro before. | Yesterday,mohammed slaughtered chimezie,I did not complain because he is not my brother. | Today, ibrahim is chasing me with cutlass,he wants to kill me,nobody wants to HELP

Separation is the ultimate solution. That is the only way to help Okoro and Chimezie. An independent Biafra would not tolerate harassment of her citizens. For now, the best we can do is wait while crazy Northern leaders drive their criminals to a frenzy. In the words of Winston Churchill "Never stop your enemy from making a mistake".