Moammar Gadhafi chosen to lead African Union

Dismay as Gadhafi chosen to lead African Union





Reactions to this?

Libya is currently a member of the Arab League and now holds the leader of the African Union. As a current leader of the African Union he does not have any real political power, and many seem to be opposed to him among the African Nations, but this is understandable as there are rarely more than a few African Nations that agree with each other.

And what to think of the idea of a "United States of Africa"??

The current states of Africa were poorly established political boundaries by European colonizers, how would a Unites States of Africa hold up if it would ever be established?

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Zachman225]

There are two countries in Africa that are stable and South Africa is NOT one of them(They abstain from the African Union anyway). Libya and Egypt. Egypt has even less clout in Africa, so it was really a choice between nothing and Libya. Everything else is on fire or completely destabilized by war or rampant poverty. Libya is actually in very good shape and has managed to normalize relations with the US since 9/11.

I'm surprised. I didn't realize the hamster was still alive.

So he wants to run the entire continent of Africa? Okay .. what's he going to do about slavery which is still a thriving business? How about the pirate problems? How about .... etc etc etc??

It will never happen. The tribes are too militaristic and won't cooperate.

But that doesn't mean there is no common ground. Africa is also starving and Libya is in the best political position to help in these situations. You'd have to know how Libya operates internally and why Moammar Gadhafi says and does what he says and does. He is a man of HIS people first(Which is why it is a stable country). They have their problem, sure, but they won't take Egypt seriously because of one simple factor:

Egypt does not care about Africa. They care about the Middle East.

You know, letting the natives redraw their own political boundaries will cost a fortune and raise a few eyebrows but it would help to end some of the ethnic and religious warfare and stabilize the region. Forcing a lot of warring tribes to compete for the same land and resources was stupid and destructive. I wouldn't mind paying much more for gas if it meant ending wars that are doing nothing but destroying a lot of people and the environment to no positive end.

I sure wish I was there to see Quaddafi's entrance, that must have been a sight straight out of WWE wrestling! It would be hilarious to watch one of these summits if they weren't so dangerous, there are a hell of a lot of eccentric characters in that union.

reply to post by FlyersFan

---

I agree with that, although back in August of 2008 Gadhafi was given the title "King of Kings" among about 40-50 (If I remember correctly?) of the continents largest tribal chiefs, kings, etc. He does seem to have large support among many of the traditional tribes and did some things to end the apartheid regime in S. Africa.

He has also promised to support any tribe that chooses to fall out from the established government rulers that are in place right now. I believe that they very much have this right as they have been kicked around for quite some time now.

What do I think? Establish democracies in those states under "U.S. Africa" and you might be able to make it work. Their sphere of influence might also expand in time if it survived resistance from nearby territories.