Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
"a calculated, racist, terrorist attack on Zimbabwe"
talk about insecure
talk about insecure
This topic title is inaccurate.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Well we gave Africa a chance.
GG Mugabe, you fucked up.
GG Mugabe, you fucked up.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
No, we fucked Africa up and then we pulled out .Flecco wrote:
Well we gave Africa a chance.
GG Mugabe, you fucked up.
Still, Mugabe is a nasty piece of work, complete tool.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.Uzique wrote:
No, we fucked Africa up and then we pulled out .Flecco wrote:
Well we gave Africa a chance.
GG Mugabe, you fucked up.
Still, Mugabe is a nasty piece of work, complete tool.
Uzique, Zimbabwe was one of the strongest economies on Earth when England reliquished control.
Mugabe fucked it up.
Also: Braddock's thread on basically the same thing.
Mugabe fucked it up.
Also: Braddock's thread on basically the same thing.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
They'd be better off if a foreign power came in and killed a lot of people while striping them of the sovereignty ..lol.Turquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.Uzique wrote:
No, we fucked Africa up and then we pulled out .Flecco wrote:
Well we gave Africa a chance.
GG Mugabe, you fucked up.
Still, Mugabe is a nasty piece of work, complete tool.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Well it's not like the people have self determination under Mugabe. Rigged elections. Hurhurhur.Kmarion wrote:
They'd be better off if a foreign power came in and killed a lot of people while striping them of the sovereignty ..lol.Turquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.Uzique wrote:
No, we fucked Africa up and then we pulled out .
Still, Mugabe is a nasty piece of work, complete tool.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Kmarion... You know I'm normally anti-interventionist.Flecco wrote:
Well it's not like the people have self determination under Mugabe. Rigged elections. Hurhurhur.Kmarion wrote:
They'd be better off if a foreign power came in and killed a lot of people while striping them of the sovereignty ..lol.Turquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.
I only support intervention here because it's just such a pathetic situation.
Didn't they try that in the 19th century?Turquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.Uzique wrote:
No, we fucked Africa up and then we pulled out .Flecco wrote:
Well we gave Africa a chance.
GG Mugabe, you fucked up.
Still, Mugabe is a nasty piece of work, complete tool.
And wasn't them doing that the plehce is so FUBAR today?
I think we can agree that European colonialism fucked Africa pretty hard.DoctaStrangelove wrote:
Didn't they try that in the 19th century?Turquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.Uzique wrote:
No, we fucked Africa up and then we pulled out .
Still, Mugabe is a nasty piece of work, complete tool.
And wasn't them doing that the plehce is so FUBAR today?
However, as most African countries have shown, if you leave, things get worse. The British never should have left Zimbabwe, because they are worse off now than they've ever been.
The only permanent change has to be done by the people of that country. It has to be respected, and the only way to do that is to have them earn it themselves. At the most support the resistance (like the french did with us), but having countries going in and "taking over" is part of their problems.Flecco wrote:
Well it's not like the people have self determination under Mugabe. Rigged elections. Hurhurhur.Kmarion wrote:
They'd be better off if a foreign power came in and killed a lot of people while striping them of the sovereignty ..lol.Turquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.
I agree turq.. but I also understand the reality of the situation. Very rarely does a foreign power ever take over another country and have it yield good results. The idea of non interventionism is not something that you can just change from country to country. The results are nearly always the same. We must learn from our history.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
For the most part, I agree, but...Kmarion wrote:
The only permanent change has to be done by the people of their own country. It has to be respected, and the only way to do that is to have them earn it themselves. At the most support the resistance (like the french did with us), but having countries going in and "taking over" is part of their problems.Flecco wrote:
Well it's not like the people have self determination under Mugabe. Rigged elections. Hurhurhur.Kmarion wrote:
They'd be better off if a foreign power came in and killed a lot of people while striping them of the sovereignty ..lol.
I agree turq.. but I also understand the reality of the situation. Very rarely does a foreign power ever take over another country and have it yield good results. The idea of non interventionism is not something that you can just change from country to country. The results are nearly always the same. We must learn from our history.
America is an example of a country where foreign powers came in and made a permanent change. Sure, we did kill most of the natives, but the end result wasn't so bad. Australia is a similar country as well.
Again, I'm not saying invading Zimbabwe would be the most moral thing to do, but I'm sure Europe could make much better use out of it than apparently the people currently there can.
By wiping out most of the local populace and manipulating them into handing over most of their land we did them good ? Australia, well that was a penal colony that ended up bending over their locals as well. My opinion is based in morals also.. and that is way I prefer to see a lasting and good outcome for the people of Zimbabwe. It's tempting to try and apply quick band aid fixes.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
how so?Kmarion wrote:
This topic title is inaccurate.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
I agree that the people have to solve this. We could offer a little help, like a few jdams to ease to grip. Perhaps a few months of military government to facilitate elections.Kmarion wrote:
By wiping out most of the local populace and manipulating them into handing over most of their land we did them good ? Australia, well that was a penal colony that ended up bending over their locals as well. My opinion is based in morals also.. and that is way I prefer to see a lasting and good outcome for the people of Zimbabwe. It's tempting to try and apply quick band aid fixes.
..an ally of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe has said.FatherTed wrote:
how so?Kmarion wrote:
This topic title is inaccurate.
No biggie .
Xbone Stormsurgezz
What we did to the Native Americans was pretty awful, but again, look at the country we are today.Kmarion wrote:
By wiping out most of the local populace and manipulating them into handing over most of their land we did them good ? Australia, well that was a penal colony that ended up bending over their locals as well. My opinion is based in morals also.. and that is way I prefer to see a lasting and good outcome for the people of Zimbabwe. It's tempting to try and apply quick band aid fixes.
Given the discrepancies in technology and immunities between Europeans and Native Americans, they would have likely died one way or another without us having conquered them. It didn't take much contact with them to spread lots of nasty diseases to them that they had no immunity to, and this was before we even understood much about microorganisms.
I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that, sometimes, really horrible imperialistic shit happens that is virtually inevitable.
Technology may change, but people will always be the same. What we're seeing in Zimbabwe is just a precursor for another force invading them. Mugabe's government is shit, but they have neighbors that might be interested in invading them soon. There's always several factions going to war in sub-Saharan Africa, and as long as we let a country like Zimbabwe attempt a pathetic mockery of self-rule, they'll just be a bastion of poverty and disease.
So yes, I would have to say that I prefer imperialism over letting something like this fester.
A bunch of mostly Europeans. Are you suggesting that the EU turn Zimbabwe into a bunch of mostly Europeans? The idea is to focus on the people you are claiming to help.Turquoise wrote:
What we did to the Native Americans was pretty awful, but again, look at the country we are today.Kmarion wrote:
By wiping out most of the local populace and manipulating them into handing over most of their land we did them good ? Australia, well that was a penal colony that ended up bending over their locals as well. My opinion is based in morals also.. and that is way I prefer to see a lasting and good outcome for the people of Zimbabwe. It's tempting to try and apply quick band aid fixes.
This isn't much of an excuse for the irresponsibility of colonial America. The carnage we dealt to the natives was not driven by chance. It was a land grab never before seen in the history of mankind (I think you know this.). My point is that foreign powers rarely act in the best interest of the locals. More importantly it is the locals destiny. Only they can truly decide their fate.Given the discrepancies in technology and immunities between Europeans and Native Americans, they would have likely died one way or another without us having conquered them. It didn't take much contact with them to spread lots of nasty diseases to them that they had no immunity to, and this was before we even understood much about microorganisms.
An invasion will not solve Zimbawes's problems. Civilizations do change, some just take a little longer to come around. Look at Europe over the last four hundred years. We can't force the process. I've got history on my side.I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that, sometimes, really horrible imperialistic shit happens that is virtually inevitable.
Technology may change, but people will always be the same. What we're seeing in Zimbabwe is just a precursor for another force invading them. Mugabe's government is shit, but they have neighbors that might be interested in invading them soon. There's always several factions going to war in sub-Saharan Africa, and as long as we let a country like Zimbabwe attempt a pathetic mockery of self-rule, they'll just be a bastion of poverty and disease.
So yes, I would have to say that I prefer imperialism over letting something like this fester.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Didn't we force the change of civilization in a rather shock and awe sort of way here?
Seems like we forced that process pretty harshly.
Seems like we forced that process pretty harshly.
he's right
and Reagan invented AIDS
and Reagan invented AIDS
Mugabe began the process of fucking Zimbabwe when he ordered that farms be seized from white owners and distributed to black locals. The cholera epidemic we're seeing is just one result of Mugabe's ethnic cleansing.
If Mugabe thinks its a terrorist attack by the UK, why doesn't he just declare war on the UK?
If Mugabe thinks its a terrorist attack by the UK, why doesn't he just declare war on the UK?
Last edited by Pubic (2008-12-12 22:31:14)
we? you mean the euros right?Turquoise wrote:
What we did to the Native Americans was pretty awful, but again, look at the country we are today.
lolTurquoise wrote:
They'd be better off if the EU just went in and took over the place. Granted, you'd have to kill a lot of people first.