₦airaland Forum

[img]http://4.bp..com/-PIinz7PhACw/T8Ho20iTaLI/AAAAAAAACMM/5fUqDDX6PUM/s1600/Central_Africa_Map.gif[/img]

Cameroon is 100 percent central Africa and Nigeria is rather 5 percent central Africa... Look at a map!!

CAMEROONPRIDE: first we are not the puppets of someone please it's not because Biya makes accords with french that Came/Cameroonians are puppets ...2/we are 30millions and if we join Ecowas we will be at least the 2nd powerful country.....Ghana is nothing comparing to Cameroon i say nothing...it's not because an election is approved by the international community that this country is a great country.....Ghana is having an Economic boom but you can neglect what Cameroon could bring to your organization.....lol by the way don't be arrogant i don't think your president can do something without the approval of the USA.....we are taking care of Chad whenever we go they will follow us +-

Puppet, you are not half the country Ghana is!! Go to Wikipedia and check!! You would not even be 3rd... Ivory coast is better!!! NO FRENCH PUPPETS!!!! We already have enough!! On a serious note I don't think it is possible! If it was put up for a vote I think you would get in MAYBE!

Cameroon is in central Africa and is NOT west African country!!

West Africa not sub Sahara

Do you really want to play third fiddle to GLORIOUS GHANA?? Does west Africa really need 20 million more black French puppets!!! ? If we add Cameroon then why not Chad?

Ikengawo: Great news, hopefully the registration agencies aren't a clever ploy to block nigerian business through paperwork bottle necks

Ghanaians are so nice!!!! What a civilized bunch!!

Just say NO ladies!! Get yourself a Good man! Get yourself a Ghanaian

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/05-2/nigeria-480x600.jpg[img][/img]

Now, to summarize, GIVE me the high class and you can have the whores!!!

Ptolomeus: First, I am a man, and do not understand male beauty (yes of female beauty).
I never saw a Ghanaian, just remember seeing them when Ghana faced Uruguay in World Cup 2010 (South Africa) and ... actually in my opinion ... I have seldom seen men more ugly than Ghanaians.
But it's a personal opinion, of course!

You sound like a jealous emasculated Nigerian man!!
Ghanaian team
https://mefirighana.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Ghana_Football_Team_African_Cup_of_Nations_Me_FiRi_GHANA_dot_com_4.jpg

Part 2

https://www.ghanasoccernet.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/ghana-team-reuters_1671750i.jpg



Nigerian Boko team

https://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/30/article-1277927712512-0A284B48000005DC-843636_466x310.jpg


Just looking at it randomly it is not even close... Ghana wins!! when you mix the class and proper way of speaking Ghana wins by a huge margin!!

Boko, stop talking tough!

Every lady needs a good man!

https://enviro-map.com/maps/sahara_map.jpg

Saharan desert!

Now do your analysis. Clearly some countries in West Africa are not Sub-Saharan. Now, are you ready to debate a man! You can't kid. I will knock you OUT!

It is a useless term that should be abandoned NOW!

West African is what you call me NOT Sub-Saharan African because the term itself as it is used is not geographically correct.

slowpoke, your map showed South Sudan as part of the Arab world. Geographically Sudan and Mauritania are in SSA So, is it a geographic term??

Dumbass I am am dancing circles around you because you are soft!! Once again the main debate is the term SSA is invalid. You are only proving my point dummy!!

[quote author=O.D.B.]list of predominantly Arab countries in Africa

1. Morroco
2. Algeria
3. Tunisia
4. Egypt
5. Libya
6. Sudan
7. Somalia
8. Djibouti
9. Mauritania

When has Arab equal to African? Never!


There are many was of categorizing Black Africa and this i.e. sub-Saharan is the most politically correct.

Arab is not equal to Africans.

Are Russians the same as Mongoloids or Korean or Chinese?[/quote]Some of those countries are in Sub-Saharan Africa(if it is a geographic term you dumb slowpoke!! If Arab is a linguistic term not all those countries speak Arabic as their first language!The Eastern part of Mauritania has always been in West Africa and the people who live there are West African people. South Sudan has never been an Arabian country. This makes the term even more invalid if you analyze it the way you are doing it!

How do I put ODB on ignore? The guy adds nothing to this site

Olodostein: Wow. You are absolutely correct. Back in early school days, we knew ourselves as West Africans, Southern Africans, East Africans and North Africans. Today, we are group together and defined unnecessarily.

You seem deeply knowledgable about this. You should think of writing books related to it in debunking these lazy cheap propaganda.

Na waoo, our people are being indirectly brainwashed. Can you imagine everyone being put in one big basket.

We are West Africans and Africa is Africa!!!!!

Thanks

ow11: @smoothcrim

Now you can go buy yourself a bottle of Gulder. . .

Well, the Mali example is an example of Laziness just like the many reports call Eastern Europeans (slavic people) or Tartars and Tajiks/Turkmens/Uzbeks, Caucaus or Burmese/Cambodians/Laotian, Indo-China. It is a way to put people in super groups. Lazy, yes but taking offense is a tad pendantic.

It is not offensive if it is a super group. I think the offense is actually calling Koreans, Chinese or Calling Malians, Sudanese.

It is offensive when the Super group is diverse. It is very offensive when a Minority is acknowledged but, the majority are not even considered worthy of researching. Yes, I AM offended by the laziness of the term!!

Olodostein: There is power in a spoken word. That was how the Jews were categorised, dehumanized to the extent that the word "Jew" connoted something deeply negative in mainstream public discourse. Even Joseph Goebbles used it to his own advantage to influence public opinion which led to the extermination of millions of them.

Today Germans are very careful of the tune by which they mention "Jew" or else the anti-defamation league will be after them.

In order to take your place at the high table, you have to stop letting people define you, your history and destiny. You have to define yourself.

Propaganda is a very effective and dangerous weapon.

Good post!!

ow11: Means you were talking about something outside of the discussion at hand.[b] Of course, it is a lazy [/b]way to talk. A more specific grouping would be strictly cardinal points. But then again, we have Middle East, Far East and United states of America everyone including many Nigerians call America.

Funny enough, South Americans don't like the Laziness or Latin America (Guyanese speak English and can't understand why their continent is called Latin America). We are not being racist to the South Americans when we call USA, America , it is just us being lazy. It is sort of a human thing rather than being racist.

Fine. Either way, call me the master troll because I have diverted the debate and won it!

Laziness is offensive to me thus, the term is offensive. For example in Mali they say the people in the North are Tuareg and Arabs and the rest in the North are Sub-Saharan Africans. Are they too lazy to find out that the majority of the people are not Tuareg and Arabs and, the so called "Sub-Saharan Africans are the Songhay,Fula, and Bambara??


Why are they naming the minority Arabs and Tuaregs up there and simply glossing over the other Ethnic groups there who happen to be in the majority!

Now you see what gets on my nerves about this!

[quote author=O.D.B.]You are a nonentity why then will you suppose they will consult you on how best to describe regions of black Africa? Should it be more appropriate if they called it ; Sh1tville since every corner south of the Sahara is hopelessly messed up[/quote]Not really! The fact that you don't know that shows you lack of intelligence!

Let me also clarify one thing. Historically no West African wants to be a North African or Arabian! The West Africans who accepted Islam as a religion NEVER accepted to become Arabians. This was not the case in other areas of the world including North Africa and parts of East Africa. Thus, to insinuate that West Africans have historically wanted anything to do with North Africans or Arabians is a big joke.

Get off that tangent and get on the real debate!

ow11: The idea behind this thread pre-supposes on the fact that describing African countries that actually lie within and below the Sahara desert as sub-saharan is a condescending term. This would mean that someone is feeling insecure about himself and is demanding an acknowledgement based upon conjectures and absurdities.

A lot more people are not offended and see it as what it is, a geographical description based upon what is acceptable worldwide. Maybe you should cease to speak English since it is borrowed and means it is the white man's deliberate attempt to kill your native tongue.

I certainly do not see any racial undertone and there are many more standards we have like the Calender for example. The muslim world can complain all they want but everyone knows this is 2012. Whether ancient Nigerians used a 4-day week is irrelevant, What matters now is that a week is 7 days old.

Geography has a set of rules drummed up by someone or a group of people and if it became popular, so be it. Trying to force fit racial undertones to the rule set is disingenous.

It is condescending but, not for some of the reasons stated. It is condescending because it is too general and lazy... The "sub" debate does not resonate with me and I don't care for it. What I do care about is the laziness in which sub-Saharan African it is used. Do you agree it is lazy?

The Nazi's were Supra-Saharan people! Watch out for them

ow11: Let me indulge you a little, even if the map is oriented East, all we get that African countries with predominantly black population would be called what 'East-Saharan or something of the sort' countries OR even in the upside down parallel universe where black people enslaved white people, it would be called SupraSaharan as the countries are grouped with reference to the Desert. So if we are to automatically decide to make all our maps due south and sub-saharan countries become supra-saharan countries, would that mean that the average European bigot would begin to see the African as superior?

Sub just means below as Supra means above. . . So how is that condescending? Maybe the Chinese people would need to get offended when their country which is bigger than India is called yes 'a country' whilst India has the luxury of being called the sub-continent or maybe it is the Indians that should be offended that their country is called the sub of the continent

Let me clarify, as a geographic term it is not offensive but, it is so useless it should not be used. The way it is used and the laziness behind how it is used is what is offensive. It seems some here believe that some are offended because they want to be related to North Africans. I will state it clearly here. I want in NO WAY to be related to them. I am NOT related them! All I am asking for is calling people what they are and being more specific as that is more useful.

There has never been a famine in Southern Africa so to say there is a famine in Sub-Sarahan Africa is an insult to the good governance in Southern Africa.

The Aids rate is low in West Africa thus, to say there is an AIDS problem in Sub-Saharan Africa is an insult to the prevention of the disease there. you see, when you go into details you get more useful information and can focus on and solve the problems in various areas!

[quote author=ekt_bear]1. Sure. Anyone can debate anything. But the question is, what conclusion would most reasonably intelligent people come to.

2. I think most reasonable people, upon recalling the history of north africa well, would agree with point (1).

3. Pretty much nobody is going to say the Arabs are a black/white hybrid. They don't look it, for the most part (aside from of course certain places where indeed the population is full of black African descent folk. Which is not the majority of the arab world), and genetic testing also will not give a result that says, for example, 80% of arabs are of black African ancestry.

And this is just the "black" part of the "black/white" hybrid. We've not even touched the white aspect.

4. There is nothing really left to debate about sub-Saharan Africa as a term. This bone has been picked dry and has no meat left[/quote]Like I said you are both right and wrong. It should be noted that I am NOT NOT NOT calling North Africans or Arabs black and don't want to have this debate

I am saying that I am West African and want to be acknowledged as such!

The debate I want to have is if the term sub-Saharan African is more useful than the term West African, Southern African etc etc.


Debate me on these issues please! The other debates are tireless, fruitless debates which are of no benefit! I have studied African history in depth and debated issues with more intelligent people, what I want to debate is this NEW issue but, it seems those who post here lack the intelligence!

I am asking for Africa to be viewed this way!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Carte_Afrique_CAF.png

As it can help focus on problem areas and solve issues easier. Eventually I support the principals of the OAU and the AU of unity but, first focus on the above mentioned areas of the continent!

[quote author=ekt_bear]lwkmd

Ok, well, that was kind of amusing

Anyway, so, what have we learned today?

1. North Africa is more connected historically to Europe and the Middle East then Africa
2. Arabs are not black/white hybrids
3. Hannibal was not a black African

Not bad for roughly 15-20 minutes worth of work[/quote]All of your statements are not absolute. The first two are at least debatable. Lastly, North Africa is not homogenous. It is a diverse area. The Maghreb region of North Africa is more related to each other than to Egypt for example. The Berbers, Copts, Arabs are all distinct ethnic groups historically. Lastly, many Arabs are mixed with black. Only a fool would deny that but, that is not the debate. The debate is about sub-Saharan Africa and how valid the term is.

ow11: Rivers flow from HIGHlands to LOWlands. Your words were 'LOWER EGYPT' and 'UPPER EGYPT'. Why is it easier to believe that a map you have never seen was upside down rather than simple topographical reasons to describe places. Very soon you would tell me the Ancient Egyptians were very advanced and went to space which the white man who is meant to be weaker managed to destroy. According to rossike, The map was upside down rather than the Nile flowed from the upper portion has to be the reason.

YES, your example of NIgeria is pointless and bears no relation to your point and is in your words absolutely rubbish!

Stop being obtuse with the inaccurate explanations about the origins of the cardinal points. You have made valid arguments defending the black race in the past especially your argument proving that Nigeria is a far developed country today than before the Brits left. However, on this point, you are wrong and I have to call you out here.

Sub-sahara is a description and only an insecure fellow would find it offensive. One wonders why the same white people call themselves the West (pointing to the USA) when the sun sets in the west. Perhaps an insecure American would begin to blame the Russians and Japanese for rotating the map to say the sun sets in their land. These are just silly conjectures drummed up by a simple mind to explain their inadequacies.

Any evidence of the bolded part? Inherent in your statement is the idea that there is something about sub-Saharan Africa to feel inferior about? I disagree!! Now, prove your offensive claim!! It is human nature to want to be acknowledged as what you are.

[quote author=O.D.B.][/quote]Why are Supra-Saharan's so interested in West African affairs??

get out of our affairs and mind your own business!

If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!

If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!
If they are North African then, I am West African!


Call me a West African or ELSE!!!!

[quote author=ekt_bear]anyway, I think most people will agree that shymmex's claim of Arab = "mix of black and white" is pure and utter nonsense

Just as nonsensical as his previous claim that North Africa didn't have connections to Europe and the Middle East until after the enlightenment, or whatever he said[/quote]Both of you are right and wrong. Now can we focus on the real issues and get off this tangent!!