Planetarion Forums - Forget Saddam. Heres a Murderous Tyrant we should be attacking.

Kurashima · 27 Feb 2003, 00:32

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/2800183.stm

The head of the US Agency for International Development, Andrew Natsios, agreed.

Zimbabwe had become "a basket case rapidly sliding into a disastrous famine that is politically induced," he said.

A government audit reportedly shows that many of the farms seized from white farmers have been allocated to government ministers and officials, rather than landless blacks.

Pyr0 MK III · 27 Feb 2003, 00:34

Of course its Mugabe's fault

Mushroom · 27 Feb 2003, 00:36

i quite agree. Mugabe's going to be like Stalin and watch his own people starve content that he's done things his way.
But ofc we have to attack Iraq. Iraq has oil...

Bloomers III · 27 Feb 2003, 00:39

Um,, when all the oil's gone what are we going to burn?!?!?!

Africans

Zimbabwe is a good investment for the future. INVADE ZIMBABWE!

Telhilion · 27 Feb 2003, 00:39

So many Tyrants, so few flumps.

Kurashima · 27 Feb 2003, 00:42

Anyone remember Idi Amin?

Did exactly the same thing , and not only did we stand by and do **** all , when he was finally deposed , we gave him a nice house in Jeddah , Saudi Arabia , to live out the remainder of his life.

World Politics sickens me sometimes.

Starbucks · 27 Feb 2003, 00:44

Eventually People Decompose

And you know what compressed decomosed living organisms are

thats right

oil

We will worry about mugabe in 1 million years when his people turn to oil, we have to think about the present threat (place of oil and tyrant) iraq

Ap0k · 27 Feb 2003, 00:45

its amazing how wankers like him are ever let into power.

if the situations were reversed and it was white d00dz kickin black guys outta their homes there'd be a huage racism cry :\

Nodrog · 27 Feb 2003, 04:03

first "he wouldnt even mug a bee" post in a Robert Mugabe thread

NEWSBOT3 · 27 Feb 2003, 04:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
first "he wouldnt even mug a bee" post in a Robert Mugabe thread

you really have gone downhill lately.

Judge · 27 Feb 2003, 07:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Rick
Zimbabwe is really a sad story of socialism being implimented.

To call the policy of Mugabe socialist is an insult to socialists.

To my knowledge no Socialist has ever considered stealing the property of one part of the population to give it to another, nor have they suggested a policy of starving. torturing and murdering political opponents.

Do not equate Socialism for communism, it would be the same as equating Republicans with Nazi's.

Marilyn Manson · 27 Feb 2003, 11:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Rick
Zimbabwe is really a sad story of socialism being implimented.

Racism and thuggery, more like.

27 Feb 2003, 11:14

Does Mugabe have any oil?

Marilyn Manson · 27 Feb 2003, 11:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge
To my knowledge no Socialist has ever considered stealing the property of one part of the population to give it to another,

Well there are anti-democratic socialists, but this is fairly irrelevant to the point, considering Mugabe is motivated by rather more base things than Socialism, and not many socialists propose stealing farms and giving them to their mates anyway.

sayonara · 27 Feb 2003, 11:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Rick
the few seeds they do use produce awful crops becaues they are the offspring of hybrids. (you would understand if you knew about hybridization)

I do, but the claim is still baffling without any useful biological details.

Marilyn Manson · 27 Feb 2003, 11:21

Quote:

Originally posted by sayonara
I do, but the claim is still baffling without any useful biological details.

'Rick in 'Pretending to know lots when actually knowing bugger all' shocker!'

ELeeming · 27 Feb 2003, 11:27

I advocated sorting out Mugabe months ago but did anyone listen? no.

Cmdr_Cyrax · 27 Feb 2003, 11:46

He has a silly little moustache
He blames the countries problems on a particular minority and tries to kill them
plus the french welcome him with open arms

I would say he was a black hitler, but thats Racist

Marilyn Manson · 27 Feb 2003, 13:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Cmdr_Cyrax
plus the french welcome him with open arms

When did Britain do anything particularly serious to stop Hitler pre-war, either, exactly?

The comparison falls down on this bit.

Judge · 27 Feb 2003, 18:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Well there are anti-democratic socialists, but this is fairly irrelevant to the point, considering Mugabe is motivated by rather more base things than Socialism, and not many socialists propose stealing farms and giving them to their mates anyway.

Very odd comment?

I was responding to a comment that clearly was attempting to defame socialists.

I made EXACTLY the same point you did. or did you not read it, and just posted the usual rubbish?

Chrism · 27 Feb 2003, 19:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Kurashima
Anyone remember Idi Amin?

Did exactly the same thing , and not only did we stand by and do **** all , when he was finally deposed , we gave him a nice house in Jeddah , Saudi Arabia , to live out the remainder of his life.

World Politics sickens me sometimes.

Not only did we sit by and do **** all to stop him, we let Tanzania bankrupt themselves removing him, and then did nothing to help them.

queball · 27 Feb 2003, 19:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge

To my knowledge no Socialist has ever considered stealing the property of one part of the population to give it to another

Isn't my money my property, and tax theft? How about rambler's rights, or forcing people to move to build public roads?

Judge · 27 Feb 2003, 23:00

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
Isn't my money my property, and tax theft? How about rambler's rights, or forcing people to move to build public roads?

Everyone has to pay tax, it is essential to maintain the structure of society.

Ramblers do not have any rights

as for forcing people to move, talk sense, they are financialy compensated.

queball · 27 Feb 2003, 23:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge
Everyone has to pay tax, it is essential to maintain the structure of society.

Ramblers do not have any rights

as for forcing people to move, talk sense, they are financialy compensated.

Yes yes, from a legal standpoint everything the government do might seem to make some sense. Don't you see that Mugabe has his reasons too, racist they might be? Everyone has to give up their farms, it's essential for the nation of Zimbabwe!

In Britain, people who had their land stolen got compensation. But they were forced to take that compensation; if given the choice they would not all have moved. If Robert Mugabe gave each white farmer a sum of money equal to the current value of their land (rather little now), would you find it acceptable?

I was probably referring to the British Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 by the way. Some people don't want ramblers on their land, but property rights seem to fall at the knees of social good.

Judge · 27 Feb 2003, 23:26

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
Yes yes, from a legal standpoint everything the government do might seem to make some sense. Don't you see that Mugabe has his reasons too, racist they might be? Everyone has to give up their farms, it's essential for the nation of Zimbabwe!

In Britain, people who had their land stolen got compensation. But they were forced to take that compensation; if given the choice they would not all have moved. If Robert Mugabe gave each white farmer a sum of money equal to the current value of their land (rather little now), would you find it acceptable?

I was probably referring to the British Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 by the way. Some people don't want ramblers on their land, but property rights seem to fall at the knees of social good.

the I was probably referring to the British Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Does absolutely nothing to give ramblers right of way, and tbh why should anyone have the right to wander around on other peoples property, damaging crops, potentially scaring livestock, allowing there stupid pet dogs to upset sheep cattle and anything else that is around.

On our Land we shoot Ramblers dog's out of hand, any dog running loose with or without the owner present gets a nice 12 bore round through it's head. If we could get away with it the Ramblers would get the same.

Cmdr_Cyrax · 28 Feb 2003, 01:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
When did Britain do anything particularly serious to stop Hitler pre-war, either, exactly?

The comparison falls down on this bit.

Twas a poke at the Vichy government

Kurashima · 28 Feb 2003, 01:22

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
Yes yes, from a legal standpoint everything the government do might seem to make some sense. Don't you see that Mugabe has his reasons too, racist they might be? Everyone has to give up their farms, it's essential for the nation of Zimbabwe!

I think this is where your argument falls down.

See , what Mugabe has done is take the land off the white landowners , give it to his friends (read the article , yes , and youll see most of the land has actually gone to government ministers) , and as others have pointed out in this thread , those people who have recieved the land have no idea how to farm it properly.

As a result , theres a massive famine. Which Mugabe wont care about, as he has the military backing him to say and do whatever he wants. If Zimbabwe loses 500,000 people to the famine (which is a considerably number in a population of only 14 milllion) , would you like to bet he blames it on the embargos put upon him "unjustly" by the evil white men (Britian in particular) ?

Do you honestly think he has his peoples best intentions at heart?

Have you never read the history of African Politics, and seen the succession of dictators held in power by the military , living in Ivory Castles whilst the people in their townships perish?

Muslim · 28 Feb 2003, 04:22

bloody racists

a black man, an olive man and a azn
tell me about who is bad

ELeeming · 28 Feb 2003, 10:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge

tbh why should anyone have the right to wander around on other peoples property, damaging crops, potentially scaring livestock, allowing there stupid pet dogs to upset sheep cattle and anything else that is around.

On our Land we shoot Ramblers dog's out of hand, any dog running loose with or without the owner present gets a nice 12 bore round through it's head. If we could get away with it the Ramblers would get the same.

Good call Judge. Agree with you 100%

ScotWiZ · 28 Feb 2003, 13:34

what's with jacques chirac gaining a special invite for mugabe into france and then shaking hands with him in front of all the cameras?

it's like a big **** you to tony blair on the same day, I think, that they were telling usa to **** off with attacking iraq.. although thats a different strory..

Marilyn Manson · 28 Feb 2003, 14:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge
I made EXACTLY the same point you did. or did you not read it, and just posted the usual rubbish?

No you didn't. You said that no socialists advocate stealing property, when clearly some do. Not many though.

This is how my point differed from yours.

And talking about anyone posting 'the usual rubbish' is a bit rich coming from you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge
Does absolutely nothing to give ramblers right of way .... If we could get away with it the Ramblers would get the same.

The ramblers have right of way on access land; it appears that you have revealed in a fairly ingeuous way here that you're fairly happy with the law when it suits you.

Oh, and Mugabe is neither acquiring the propery though any legal means, let alone doing it for any sane idea of the national intrest, with regard to whoever was saying he was.