Zimbabwe- don't send food send guns

Remove all ads!

I read this article and I am thoroughly depressed. Now I admit that the author is a conservative blogger, however I work with a few former South Africans and they have been talking about this for weeks. It looks like we are about to see another "attempted genocide" in our time. It is a long read with a lot of links, but I think it is well worth the time.

 

If the food sent to the people is confiscated as soon as the aid workers leave, then keep the aid workers there until the people have been fed. If the aid workers are threatened, then send in peace keepers. If the peace keepers are attacked, then invade and topple those regimes. And keep toppling them until human rights prevail!

Genocide is the most morally wrong thing a nation can do today. It will not only continue, but escalate until someone steps in and ends it. Why not just send in the Americans? Tell Bush that they're harbouring Terrorists and supplying them with WMD's and they won't believe otherwise until after they've toppled the offending government...

 

I'm a bit torn about situations such as this. On the one hand I don't want to intervene in the inner problems of a nation, on the other hand that attitude might be dangerous in the long run when those problems start pouring over the borders of that nation.

In the end the result will be the same. No one will do anything, since quite frankly why would anyone want to do anything about Zimbabwe? It's not our problem, atleast not yet.

 

What good is international law if it's not going to be enforced? You can complain about Genocide until you're blue in the face, but unless you're actually ready to send troops in to fix the problem--even at the risk of war, it's not going away.

 

I am honest to god getting tired of Africa, I am going to sound like an old fashioned imperialistic colonial European now but that cant be helped. Sometimes I just want to reoccupy more or less the entire continent or send in a proper army to sweet the continent and show every tin war lord what real might is. It is just so frustrating to see place after place fall to pieces becaue a few dudes found some AK's and thought they were big men.

 

The Sacry thing is that the Colonialists had it right. With proper government, and propper military presence, maybe Africa could be saved. If not, they should be quarantined and ignored.

 

I noted this in a previous topic . As I have mentioned before, there is less interest here because there is nothing of real value there, like oil or a staging area for troops or weapons deployed for future attack.

 

This whole situation brings up the issue I've harped about for years. If the U.S. -- or any western power, for that matter -- dives in and tries to help the people being systematically killed, then they are evil Imperialists meddling in the internal affairs of other countries, imposing their Horrid Western Value System on a people who does not want it, and otherwise thoroughly out of line and destined for hell.

If they stay out of it, then they are Evil racists seclusionists who don't really believe in the equality of mankind because they are allowing Black people to be killed, and if they were decent people they'd just nip right in and fight for what's right, but they don't because they are disgusting racists and it's THEIR fault that group A is killing group B (even if they've never heard of Group A, let alone support them) and they are destined for hell

Either way, someone finds a way to rip on the West. You'll note the deliberately hysterical and clearly illogical tone I took in both examples. It's a no win situation.

From where I sit, the West should go in, all guns blazing, and kill the militants. Then they should offer citizenship to the decent people there. Those people are more than welcome to come to the West and partake of the pretty decent lifestyle we have here. If they bring their fight with them, though, back they go and they can fight it out, but the decent innocents who behave themselves in their new countries (ie: not committing felonies) should have a way to escape the insanity.

 

I agree. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't, you might as well earn the condemnation you're gonna get. Do what you think is right, your enemies will rip on you anyway...

 

You cannot hand out liberty and freedom as though they were diplomas at a high school graduation ceremony.

 

Why do people assume I'm referring to the U.S.? If I had the resources of any of the advanced nations, I would make sure the food got to these who needed it. It may be difficult but I would try. Have armed escorts for the food and aid. I made no mention of using military force to remove Mugabe.

 

That's a start, and make sure that Mugabe knows that if your escorts are fired upon, then you'll increase your military presence to the point where his soldiers will have to wait behing yours to use the mens room. If he doesn't like it, then that's his problem...

 

Gnarff,

What a funny image.

 

If they are so desperatly set to kill each other, then in the name of god: let em.

The winner will be shot, and the Country will be rebuild as the world largest golf course.


Same with all those other dudes around the world, killing each other for various absolutely stupid reasons.


:eeeek: look at the USofA... still being the savages they alwys were, they still managed to build the (possibly) greatest Nation on this cursed planet.


Why is it impossible for the other dudes? I mean were Blowing sick amounts of money for that into their asses.

 

Thank God we have Bob Geldorf and Bono. They can save Africa, can't they?

 

@Snook:

Anyhow, I'm all for letting the idiots kill each other, but what about the innocents killed in the crossfire? People who don't particularly support Agenda "A" or "B" but just want to work their farm, get anough to eat, and live a decent life? It's for those people that stronger, wealthier nations should take action.

A related issue: Gangs in the U.S. -- I say let the stupid gangs members kill each other with impunity -- if they kill any innocent bystanders, though, then the law should drop on them with full force and slaughter all the gang members.

 

Easy for you to say there in Canada -- you don't have to clean the blood. Of course things would be a lot easier in the US with gangs if the drugs could be stopped at the border (either Canada or Mexico).

 

There is no intrests for the western world to stop these genocides anyone who thinks anyone would do it just to stop the genocide is a naive dreamer, especially when the genocide goes on in Africa. We might be able to take down a country or two but rebuilding and restabilizing them would take years, perhaps even decades. If we don't do that then there would be just another scumbag on the throne doing the same things as the previous one with the exception that he might choose a different ethnic group for the persecution.

Waging war in Africa would be a waste of our money and resources. The only time I think the west should seriously intervene is if they become a threat to the western world or invade their neighbours. Otherwise waging war against them would be pointless.

No one in the western world has ever given a rats ass about Africa or their problems. The most funny example is Leopold II and his little operation in Kongo which ended up with approximately 8 million dead africans, and guess whose statue still stands in central Brussels?

 

The colonialists caused a large proportion of Africa's current problems through the manner by which they ruled and eventually left.

Totally reordering established regions to suit your needs and then one day deciding "screw it, we're leaving; good luck have fun" tends to have unfortunate results.

 

The problem is that these things are still reported in the news or over the net, so people will find out, and decide they don't like the situation. Sooner or later one of these people will get to George W on a day when he's bored and maybe he'll invade, right?