News and Politics Forum

You know, if the USA were able to successfully kick the ass of a few minor dictators without the Democrats gratuitously attacking the move just to score political points; we would very quickly not NEED to kick any more ass.

But those traitorous fuckers are too stupid to understand how their bullshit DESTABILIZES the world.

I have no idea what you're babbling about half the time.

We won't do anything because there is nothing to be gained politically or economically.

Crash6 wrote:

We won't do anything because there is nothing to be gained politically or economically.

As if.

Hell, we get involved in shit all the time where there's nothing to be gained politically or economically.  In fact, for some people in the US, the absence of any political or economic gain is the sine qua non for any type of military intervention.

dubfan wrote:

Crash6 wrote:

We won't do anything because there is nothing to be gained politically or economically.

As if.

Hell, we get involved in shit all the time where there's nothing to be gained politically or economically.  In fact, for some people in the US, the absence of any political or economic gain is the sine qua non for any type of military intervention.

QFT.

Maxor, in my opinion, the key difference between US involvement in Iraq and any possible involvement in ZW is a matter of the US government basing the actions taken in Iraq on an implicit threat posed to Americans.

That said, I don't believe the United States should involve itself in ZW's political affairs now, because, frankly, I don't believe this administration nor the individual Senate has appointed to direct our nation's intelligence knows a goddamn thing about the post-colonial continent of Africa.

Mugabe is in the middle of a defensive or self-coup d'etat, in a country that has had it's independence all of 28 years.  Let them sort themselves out for once.  The people want to follow a democratic process, and now they're learning why it's important that government acknowledges (and facilitates) it.  It's a good lesson for the rest of the continent.

Last edited by Charles Taylor (06-25-2008 02:55 AM)

dubfan wrote:

But when I hear stories about Mugabe's thugs chopping the hands & feet off the wife of one of his political opponents and then burning her alive, I really, REALLY want to let the JDAMs fly.

It's Africa. What do you expect but savagery?

dubfan wrote:

Charles Taylor wrote:

Mugabe is in the middle of a defensive or self-coup d'etat, in a country that has had it's independence all of 28 years.  Let them sort themselves out for once.  The people want to follow a democratic process, and now they're learning why it's important that government acknowledges (and facilitates) it.  It's a good lesson for the rest of the continent.

That's the rational response, of course.

But when I hear stories about Mugabe's thugs chopping the hands & feet off the wife of one of his political opponents and then burning her alive, I really, REALLY want to let the JDAMs fly.

I don't disagree with the feeling at all.  But, if the US were to intervene now, I fear it might compromise the efforts of the MDC. 

I can only think of it being almost like, if during the Selma march, an international 3rd party performed a surgical air strike against Jim Clark and his posse.  The comparison is a stretch of course... but you see what I'm getting at.

Last edited by Charles Taylor (06-25-2008 03:50 AM)

I've found that most problems like this in the world are easily cured with a platoon full of armored D-9 Cats, and a handful of tanks.  Just send notice that on Friday, anyone still fighting will see their community scraped to the ground in 3 days.  Resistors will be shot on sight.  We will pay to rebuild for those who are left (we're doing that anyway -- might as well just solve the problem right up front).

Last edited by glfredrick (06-25-2008 01:42 PM)

Charles Taylor wrote:

dubfan wrote:

Charles Taylor wrote:

Mugabe is in the middle of a defensive or self-coup d'etat, in a country that has had it's independence all of 28 years.  Let them sort themselves out for once.  The people want to follow a democratic process, and now they're learning why it's important that government acknowledges (and facilitates) it.  It's a good lesson for the rest of the continent.

That's the rational response, of course.

But when I hear stories about Mugabe's thugs chopping the hands & feet off the wife of one of his political opponents and then burning her alive, I really, REALLY want to let the JDAMs fly.

I don't disagree with the feeling at all.  But, if the US were to intervene now, I fear it might compromise the efforts of the MDC. 

I can only think of it being almost like, if during the Selma march, an international 3rd party performed a surgical air strike against Jim Clark and his posse.  The comparison is a stretch of course... but you see what I'm getting at.

Yeah, I see what you're getting at, but .. I dunno.  It is really a stretch.  The US is a mature country with strong institutions and a free press and a history of political opposition and a tradition of respect for people with different views, etc.

And Zimbabwe.... isn't.  And won't be as long as Mugabe is in power.

I had to do some reading about the US invasion of Panama yesterday, and I was surprised to find out that something like 92% of the Panamanian people backed the US action.  They HATED Noriega.  It's obviously a mistake to assume that every intervention would be supported like that, but it's probably just as foolish to assume the opposite.

dubfan wrote:

Charles Taylor wrote:

dubfan wrote:

That's the rational response, of course.

But when I hear stories about Mugabe's thugs chopping the hands & feet off the wife of one of his political opponents and then burning her alive, I really, REALLY want to let the JDAMs fly.

I don't disagree with the feeling at all.  But, if the US were to intervene now, I fear it might compromise the efforts of the MDC. 

I can only think of it being almost like, if during the Selma march, an international 3rd party performed a surgical air strike against Jim Clark and his posse.  The comparison is a stretch of course... but you see what I'm getting at.

Yeah, I see what you're getting at, but .. I dunno.  It is really a stretch.  The US is a mature country with strong institutions and a free press and a history of political opposition and a tradition of respect for people with different views, etc.

And Zimbabwe.... isn't.  And won't be as long as Mugabe is in power.

I had to do some reading about the US invasion of Panama yesterday, and I was surprised to find out that something like 92% of the Panamanian people backed the US action.  They HATED Noriega.  It's obviously a mistake to assume that every intervention would be supported like that, but it's probably just as foolish to assume the opposite.

I've realized I'm probably explaining an overview of how I'm looking at self-sufficiency of Africa happening, more so than the direct and specific implications of US involvement in ZW.

There have been over 80 successful coups in Africa, from 1960 to now.  Over 180 unsuccessful ones.  There are examples right now in Sudan, and in Chad, of full blown genocide.  There are areas of Africa, engrossed in complete civil war... that the United States is not aggressively involved in, nor interested in being involved in. 

The combination of problems that are faced by the people and government in these regions, are so large and all encompassing, that in many cases, these conflicts have no end in sight.  Cumulatively, we have stood by, and acknowledged millions of deaths on that continent; our record of inaction, has clearly stated that human rights violations of that scale are not a catalyst for US involvement.

Given that... let's turn to ZW, who by all rights, is on the cusp of democratic revolution after 28 years of independence.  This is a place where the AU, can effectively demonstrate without intervention, that they understand the importance of democracy, and are capable of autonomously developing it. 

We (The world, not just African's) need Africa to be able to do this, more than we need America to be able to perform a surgical air strike on Mugabe's palace, regardless of how warranted that air strike may be.

I read an amazing statement from Reuben Abati, (Chairman of Nigeria's Guardian Newspaper group), who I will paraphrase in saying that, 'for a developing country, democracy is visual. People relate to what they can see, and what they can feel.  When you engage in abstractions, those abstractions mean nothing to the ordinary man, who just wants basic things.'

Until the ordinary man connects Democracy to the concepts of accountability, there can be no change in Africa.   They have to understand it, they have to see it, they have to feel it, and they must self-sufficiently take it.

It cannot be given, and alternatives cannot be destroyed with missiles or bullets, because they exist in the minds of the people.

edit - I need to add, in case it wasn't clear... that external intervention regarding ZW must come from the AU.

Last edited by Charles Taylor (06-26-2008 08:21 AM)

maxor wrote:

What should be done by foreign nations to solve this crisis?

I wasn't aware that Zimbabwe used apartheid, OR that it recently stopped.  Here I was thinking Mugabe had been in power for almost 30 years...