It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Should we go to war if Mugabe is voted back in?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 01:56 PM
It seems we will go to war for anything these days accept in africa where millions of people are suffering because of corrupt regimes.
Doesnt anyone think it strange that we never help out apart from with food and water. Surely we need to do more than just throw money at a gov. who gives little back to their people.
Is it because they arent seen as a threat to us uk/usa and therefore we should just let them be.
The polticians harp on about making a better iraq and a more stable and free country for people to live in and yet Africa is in desperate need in a more democratic gov. and yet we do nothing.

IRAQ/IRAN= OIL- money in the bank
AFRICA=DYING PEOPLE- money out the bank

Its about time we start helping others for the right reasons instead of for our own means.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:01 PM
reply to post by neo2012

Unequivocal "yes, we should". Conquer it, and then let South Africa annex it. There would still be Black African self-determination at the end of the day.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by neo2012

There has been to little interest in the exploitation of African resources on a large scale mostly because the Gold is accounted for, the Jems and the Diamonds are more profitable if you have to black market them, the Oil is in the hands of the French and the Arabs and not much else is in need form the continent..

Its a hostile place.. businesses don't want to be there because of the uncertainty. Industries are well exploited and even furthered because of the uncertainty. If all was peaceful Diamonds would be much cheaper. And if an organized industry mined them, they would be dirt cheap.

Its best if little kids with AK's pick them out of river streams. From a western perspective.

Some countries like Algeria and Uganda have had a somewhat rise in businesses.. real business, like Western capitalism.. however there is still violence, and the starters are usually nationals who lived in the west, brought their ideas back just to see them flounder when the population can't understand the concept.

Its sad.. just look at the Congo.. but it is what it is because greed is to entrenched.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:26 PM
seems the chinese don't have a problem at all dealing with the african dictatorships - civil abuses and all
oh yah - they do speak the same language, don't they? ie. corruption, violence, and oppression!
complicates things a bit because the u.s. is in no position to ruffle chinese dragon feathers at the moment

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:39 PM
Good thread... seems like someone actually knows about the situation in Zimbabwe.

Use the link in my signature to take you to my article on the state of Zimbabwe. I hope you find it enlightening.

However intervention is the last thing that Zimbabwe needs. If it is to progress, it should do so of its own accord not by a coup.

Mugabe was brought into power by the backing of the British, who wanted to crush the Rhodesian state. I doubt intervention this time would bring anything better for the people of Zimbabwe.

If there was a time to act, it has surely passed now. Where were the cries for intervention when white farmers were mudered and their lands taken? Or where Indian and Chinese businesses were forced to fix their product prices below the cost of production.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:18 PM
reply to post by 44soulslayer

Great thread plenty of detail as to what has gone on in this struggling country.
If we will not intervene then we must hope that mugabe is voted out and goes quietly. Although it was said on the radio he may stall announcing the result and if it hasnt gone his way he will declare martial law.
I shall be watching the news closely for anything new.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:21 PM
reply to post by neo2012

If Mugabe has any brains at all (doubtful), he will flee the country. It appears to me he is in a no-win scenario. The people will not accept any other result than his party losing power, and I think all-out rioting is a very real possibility because the people have nothing to lose. The country is literally starving to death.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:41 PM
The reason governments give humanitarian aid (money) to countries like Zimbabwe is so they look like they are doing a good deed to help starving people. They do not care about the poor people in this world. They only care about being on the top of the list for the largest donation. 'USA gave this...Australia gave that...etc etc'.

There will be no intervention in Zimbabwe because world governments are not going to risk the manpower and waste their military stock when there is no OIL or other rare commodity to exploit.

The world has made a habit our of sitting back and witnessing civil rights abuse, political unrest and people starving. Why? Because it means people will die, less mouths to feed, less aid to send. Look up Kisssinger's policy on World Wide Population cull is happeing and has been for a long time.

If people and a country can not contribute to the almighty dollar and compete economically with the 'big players' then they are screwed.

Just my crazy thoughts on this

top topics


log in