ezeagu:

Well, the most important organisation Nigeria has is the EFCC and this is the only depiction of the Nigerian eagle:



Bald!

You cannot tell a species purely by its phenotype.

Or maybe you're an expert on eagles?

ezeagu

To answer your previous questions --

"Are you aware of the history of the United States? Do you know the reason why a section of America is called New England or why the term WASP is used in the US? Because if you did I don't think this would have been made a point."

the two LARGEST populations to immigrate to the U.S. in its earliest stages were the Chinese and African slaves -- they outnumbered people of European descendant up until the post-industrial era, I believe.  This fact is rarely mentioned in U.S. history books, however.


"So where is the eagle in Nigerian folktales, mythology or other customs. Where does the eagle surpass the Leopards, tortoise, lions or even the snakes symbolism in Nigerian cultures?"

Nigeria has plenty of wildlife -- you inevitably have to settle on one.  There's no point in debating the merits of one animal over another -- you weren't a part of making that decision, and in all likelihood, neither was the U.S.


You also asked if the bald eagle was endangered -- it was in the late 20th century, but apparently has been removed from the endagered species list, so I stand corrected.  This change only occurred in 2007, however,


"I must be missing something, because as far as I can see China and Russia do not have states, I didnt even know communist countries were so keen to divide power like that. Anyway, if they do, and I've missed this vital information, can YOU kindly provide the name of these divisions known as states."

Different countries have different names for their administrative districts.  Nigeria's definition of statehood, for instance, might not be the same as the United States (in fact, they are defined differently by the Nigerian and the American constitutions).  So its the same term, but not entirely the same concept.  China and Russia have states/provinces/municipalities.  As does the UK - or Australia - or Japan - or Brazil.  "State" is just one of many terms for how you organize a country - if it makes you feel better, than just call them "regions".

ezeagu:

How many of them are bald eagles?

I think the U.S. would be unique in their choice of bald eagle - none of these countries (Nigeria included) have copied that.

Albania, Armenia, Austria, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Panama, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Serbia, and Zambia also list eagles as one of or their only national animal.  There's just something about that species!

Where to even begin?

Many countries have similar seals.

Nollywood takes after Hollywood because America's is the largest film industry in the world -- they're therefore entitled to set the standard. But then again, there are many cities in America named after European ones. They're not so concerned with being original.

It's always struck me as funny that America would choose the eagle as the national animal, since eagles are more endemic in Africa and parts of Eurasia. Nigeria alone has at least 13 species of eagle, whereas the U.S. uses the bald eagle -- which is endangered in that country.

There are plenty of countries with even less territory that are divided into states -- that you've chosen the United States as a standard of comparison (50 states for 9.6 million sq km) as opposed to Russia or China speaks to the fact that YOU are the one who considers it the ideal. You want Nigeria to be original and stop copying the U.S., but at the same time it should adhere to the U.S.'s standards when establishing states?

I think it is sad but true -- if the government refuses to provide these things, it will ultimately be the responsibility of the private sector to spur on development. I think you're overestimating how profitable it might be, however: you'll have to pay for maintenance, pay wages, and even if it's privately owned, local politicians will undoubtedly want a "stake". These costs are, in fact, the very reason that the government usually takes care of these things.

A degree, and accountability.

I see a lack of education as the main problem here.

Judging by all the other answers, PESSIMISTIC.

Seems like a good idea to invest in trade schools

I wasn't aware that U.S. officials spoke such awkward English.

Cohesion amongst the peoples of more successful nations has been marked by a separation of powers: of CHURCH and STATE, and of TRIBE and STATE.

The elites wrongly allow these elements (tribal/ethnic/religious distinctions) to seep into the political sphere -- where they have no place.  Politics shouldn't be a balancing act, and it shouldn't be about who dominates who.  I understand why one would want Nigeria to break-up, but people should understand that these problems aren't inherent -- that rather than fostering an environment in which diversity is accepted and celebrated, the elites have pit everyone against each other.

A break-up would not solve these problems as well as leaders who place the interests of Nigeria above individual tribes/faiths.

Therefore, I suppose those who advocate a break-up see no hope for such a change?

Civilisation indeed!

Can one [i]WO[/i]man deliver Nigeria from all evils?

Naive.

Infrastructure and security. INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY!!!

If Nigeria had these very SIMPLE things, incidents like this could never take place and -- trust me -- no one would be talking about a break-up.

Ethnic/religious clashes on this scale don't take place in nations that are stable and secure.

I love the positivity!

In your response you seem to validate my claim -- your isolation of only one line reflects your unwillingness to examine the larger picture.

You aren't saying anything new - Nigeria is well aware of its own potential, as much as its people are aware of their impotence in the face of a corrupt government. Being well-intentioned and having potential isn't enough to spur on potential.

What do you think is holding Nigeria back from developing? Try to actually understand this, because I said earlier, I don't think you understand what is going on very well.

akinolasam:

ACTUALLY,I WAS THINKING THAT THIS OUR GENERATION (30 - 50 YEARS) COULD WITNESS A LITTLE OUT OF THE EXPECTED BETTER NAIJA' OR WILL IT JUST BE A SONG NEVER LEARNT?

And I was thinking that my generation (20-30 years) could help build that future, but shouldn't we start with better hospitals first?

babaearly:

See as you dey talk as if no be naija you dey. Stop daydreaming.

^ A true naija can have no hope then?

I don't blame you for being realistic, but I still find this sort of thing sad.

Beaf:

Are you saying the region that sustains the whole country isn't economically viable?

Yes -- look at the history (and the current state!) of other single-commodity based economies, and in particular those based on oil. Their fortunes hinge almost entirely on the rise and fall of the world economy. If the South left, would it -- as an independent state -- survive the next economic downturn? More developed countries are not doing well in this climate, but could this region take such a hit on its own?

All this talk of secession presupposes that these regions are sustainable as independent economic entities, when the reality is, these regions would be worse off. Nigeria is wealthy -- what remains is to find a leader that lets all Nigerians share in that wealth.

I can't believe I missed this, but,

Beaf:


[list]
[li]the core North is free to practise sharia[/li]
[/list]

No -- absolutely NO sharia. I'm not anti-Muslim or anti-North, but this in NO way serves the interests of Nigeria.

I want the PDP (as an organization, not as people) dead. I want them out of the country.

redsun:

When we keep dwelling on yaradua,we tend to forget that he and his pdp cohorts are illegitimate in the first place,nigerian never elected them into office and this is a chance to start all over again.

Don't nigerians see what is going on in the world?how people constitutional,protestingly and resiliently stand their grounds against evil and backward leadership,even in crazy iran,people are still making efforts for self freedom.

Nigerians are no different from north koreans,placid,ignorant,numb and disillusioned masses.

Though I understand the spirit in which they are made, I am sick of these sorts of posts.

Placid? Ignorant? Numb? And comparing Nigeria to the North Koreans? Where to even begin!

You cannot compare the inaction of the Nigerian people to actions of those in these other nations. To launch an actual revolution -- to risk life and limb for the sake of one's country -- requires some SENSE that one is, in fact, a part of a country. You operate under the supposition that people even have a sense that there is a Nigeria -- a unified political body and A PEOPLE -- to even fight for. The Iranians are patriots, because Iran is a nation. Nigeria is a hot mess, and is a country only in name. Is it worth it to save something that you don't even believe is real?

And these leaders are, for some reason, under the impression that Nigeria is a monarchy.

RichyBlacK:

Deals to what end? Selling your constitutional right to fools can never be a deal.

Quote me, this disrespect will continue unless he does something to immediately stop it.

Let's not even pretend that Goodluck has any agency here.

I am tired of people saying "Jonathan is responsible for X" and yet "Jonathan has no power over Y" all in the same breath. Nigerian politics is a circus, and you cannot affirm and disavow this at the same time.

Fhemmmy:

Only on papers.
Send the military in the North to go and wipe out Nassarawa and you will see how loyal they could be.
As well, send Yoruba major to lead troop to go and wipe out his state and you will find out.

You've misunderstood me. I'm not saying that the army has attained such an ideal -- only that nobody here seems to have that ideal in mind AT ALL.

The "assimilation" of Mend into the army would not help matters -- in fact, I'm sure it could make things worse. You don't mitigate tribalist/regionalist tensions by "filling out" their ranks with different peoples. Individuals will retain their loyalties, the people will remain divided.

The core ideology must change first.

Consider this: an army of the people, that serves the interests of its country, rather those of its region/tribe.

An army should be a-political.

Speaking as someone out in diaspora, I have no doubt that Nigerians abroad would be open to creating new employment opportunities here -- but the lack of infrastructure within the country -- the very same that discourages foreign investment -- more or less guarantees that such an effort would be pointless.

These steps are hardly "Simple".

You've gone a few too many steps ahead.

Electoral reform first. End corruption. Then discuss development.