Zimbabwe and Liberia, get ready for the U.S - Bush is chompi

[Urban Rubble]

So it seems as though we are about to be involved in Liberia. I haven't read too much about the situation down there so I would love for someone to give me some background.

It also seems they are starting to put pressure on Mugabe in Zimbabwe. The same goes for this, I would love some background info. I've read a little about this, but not much. I've heard people on here defending Mugabe but from what I've read he seems pretty bad. I'd love to hear more about this.

Anyway, here's a link to a shitty MSN article.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/935935.asp?vts=070920031710

[Umoja]

Bush is there for oil, I'm starting to believe that.

[Urban Rubble]

Are you serious ?

I didn't know Liberia or ZImbabwe had oil.

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

oil could be one part of it and i bet its prolly the only thing that makes Bush want to go there. I mean look at this, we went affter iraq and now look at all the oil Bush gots now. But from what i hear and read in the news i belive that sombody has to go down there and help these people in africa because there is a lot of suffering and illness over there. but if they didn't have oil or anything the US Gov would have never considerd going there in the fist place. correct me if im wrong but in colombia right now there is realy bad fighting between guerrillas and the gov and is the US considering helping the colombian people? why all of a suddun they want to help zimbabwe when countrys all over africa are in need of help. why? because of the oil and benifits they would get over there. seems to me like robbing candy from a baby.

[CubanFox]

According to the CIA World Factbook 2002, Zimbabwe has coal, chromium ore, asbestos, gold, nickel, copper, iron ore, vanadium, lithium, tin and platinum group metals. Liberia has iron ore, timber, diamonds, gold and hydropower. I'm actually suprised that they're not in Sierra Leone taking all them industrial diamonds.

[praxis1966]

I would venture to say that the U$ will probably enter Liberia for the raw materials. They need them for waging war. To a large military power, gold and diamonds aren't that important. Thinks like iron ore are much more valuable (at least from the gov't's perspective).

[Umoja]

Bush is touring all of Africa, and Nigeria, and other areas around it in the bulge of Africa have oil. For example, Sao Tome and Principe has a huge oil reserve that is largely untapped.

[Invader Zim]

Zimbabwe is not an oil produser on nearly a large enough scale to warrent an invasion like in Iraq, that suggestion is simply foolish. As Zimbabwe has the potential to be a massive food exporter throughout Africa (as it has been in the past) then obviously profits could be made from the exporting of food. Though that seems unlikly, the USA has much bigger fish to fry. I do not believe that the USA has any profitable reason to invade Zimbabwe. However that odes not mean that an invasion of a government run fascist police state should not be invaded and its corrupt leaders expelled from power. In my belief as soon as Mugabi became a dictator by rigging the election he should have been removed by force of arms or by a sniper bullet... However it is not too late to rectify that situation.

[Urban Rubble]

Well Ak, I can't comment on Mugabe because I don't know shit about the guy. I do agree with you on one point, I seriously doubt we are going in there for oil, iron or any other raw matierials. My personal theory is this, very basic, the Bush administration is feeling the heat, they need to do something that people will not be able to complain about. They need to save some face. From what I've read, there is no real profitable reason to go there, sounds like a PR campaign to me.

[Latin America]

Bush starting shit with Zimbabwe and Liberia! I wonder how this guy gets support from his people! This guy is going nuts! I really don't want him to win the US presidency in 2004! He suck's!

Well we all know he is doing it for something! but not to help the people! I yet I wonder if the US is going to get another budget crisis! Some states in the US are having problems getting the money to help on the last budget crisis! I still think in one way he is not doing a good job in the US, if you all know what I mean! I think education and health care are suffering the most in the US! Some people not happy about it!!!

[Invader Zim]

Unfortunatly idiot americans (no offence anyone) dont seem to realise what a complete idiot they have in power. I simply dont see how thay can possibly like him... the guys a complete fool, he should be in play school not the white house.

[Inti]

Well as you know, Bush wasnt really elected.. It was rigged from the beginning.. Look at the nice people who sits in the government.. The second candidate wasnt good either.. The thing is it that many americans dont vote and there are the ones that want vote but arent allowed to vote, and the greens and the reds they never have sufficient funding for buying tv time and making big promotions of themselves.. Have you ever heard of a red or green movement having lots of money? Zimbabwe seemed to be a pretty nice country when I was there but that is like four years ago, but then again I didnt stay there for more than a couple of days. When I went to a hairdresser there though, they talked a lot to me about south africa and they told me that there are still lots of places where the black can get killed on the street without the interference of the cops if you show them some bills.. Sick..

I dont think that Bush will invade Zimbabwe, but Liberia has potential though, a great Pr stunt.. Actually Liberia has been asking for the help of US forces, something which I can never understand.. The US have fucked up the African continent for too long.. They helped and funded RENAMO in Mocambique to get rid of Frelimo (though frelimo "won" at the end).. US has had its sticky fingers in lots more of places, but that would take up too much space..

[Marxist in Nebraska]

I know very little about the situation in Africa. What I do know is that Bush practices an opportunistic version of militarism. Iraq has oil and could not defend itself, so he went after them. The cost was low and the benefit high, so he acted.

Africa does have tremendous resources, and the countries in question are certainly not military powers in any sense of the phrase. That these nations are ruled by dictators gives Bush a great opportunity in propaganda to capitalize on.

He can play the democracy card again to distract the American people from domestic strife. Beating the war drums leading up to the invasion of Iraq gave Bush's reactionary regime cover to roll back reform, cut taxes for the obscenely rich, and force the "opposition party" (the Democrats) to bow down and give the Republicans more seats in the Congress.

Now Bush can play "peacekeeper" in Africa. Doing so, he reinforces his image as "compassionate conservative" and distract people from the fact that he manipulated evidence to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein was huffing, puffing, and planning to blow our house down.

One other motive Bush may have to take military action in Africa would be to prepare for a possible "regime change" in Nigeria. Nigeria, which has one of the greater supplies of oil in the world, has had some rebellion problems of their own recently, or so I have heard. These rebellions are threatening drilling sites claimed by American oil corporations, which are clearly one of Bush's primary concerns.

Perhaps military actions in Liberia and Zimbabwe could be training excercises for an invasion of Nigeria. Perhaps the militarists need a home base for future operations on the African continent.

I acknowledge that at this point, my thoughts are largely speculative. Does anyone have any good, solid reports from these African regions? I would like to know.

[Rastafari]

Lets get this straight-Robert Mugabe is a fucking idiot sometimes.

Putting aside these occaisional lapses, however, one could easily put him alongside Jomo Kenyatta and Nelson Mandela as the great African leaders of the century (as well as HIM, of course).

It seems that Bush doesn't recognize the African nations as seperate entities, and tries to lump them together, probably in an attempt to actually understand something. By doing this, he is reverting the status of many of these nations back to what they were in Imperialist times in the US, and I think that we will definately see some action in West Africa especially.

This being said, lets encourage some Red action over there, maybe "Commies in the Congo", seen?










sorry, I just woke up 5 hours ago and am still screwed up

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Rastafari on 7:59 pm on July 11, 2003
Lets get this straight-Robert Mugabe is a fucking idiot sometimes.

Putting aside these occaisional lapses, however, one could easily put him alongside Jomo Kenyatta and Nelson Mandela as the great African leaders of the century (as well as HIM, of course).

It seems that Bush doesn't recognize the African nations as seperate entities, and tries to lump them together, probably in an attempt to actually understand something. By doing this, he is reverting the status of many of these nations back to what they were in Imperialist times in the US, and I think that we will definately see some action in West Africa especially.

This being said, lets encourage some Red action over there, maybe "Commies in the Congo", seen?

sorry, I just woke up 5 hours ago and am still screwed up

Putting aside these occaisional lapses,

Occasional lapses??? Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

Mugabe is not a great leader or even slightly left wing. His sudden stripping of white farmers of land and giving to the people is a complete sham. He did it to garner any reminance of support his people continue hold for him. Also it must be noted that the land has not been given to the people but to rich capitalists who support his dictatorship. These people do not however have the experiance necessary to farm land effectivly, those which did/do have been exciled for being white. This is as you well know causing a famine in "Africa's bread basket". Any food remaining in the country has been horded by the government to feed his partys supporters, while the people starve.

In short Mugabi has created stringent socio-economic controls, created a nation in fear of his Zanu PF employed thugs (rather like Hitlers SS), A nation where a single race is discriminated against and being forced to flee, he has also rigged and corrupted the nations elections and has had the oppostion leader arrested on obviously false charges.

Lets review this shall we: -

1. Created strict socio-economic controls.
2. Is a racist.
3. Removed all oppostion (making him a dictator)
4. Uses fear as a weapon to control his people.

Now lets take a look at the dictionarys definition of fascism: -



Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

source (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fascism)

In short all he needs to do now is wright a book called Mien Kampf...

however, one could easily put him alongside Jomo Kenyatta and Nelson Mandela as the great African leaders of the century (as well as HIM, of course).

After the above I hope you realise why I do not even take you completely seriously anymore. Mugabi's a fascist dictator and the enemy of any true leftists, infact the enemy of any person with any morality what so ever. If you support Mugabi you are a fool and a traitor to every thing you say you stand for.

I hope that you will review your opinion on this matter.

[pamskillet]

bush in africa makes me want to die. seriously.

why can't he leave them alone.

it's the absolute last thing africans need.

(Edited by pamskillet at 2:09 am on July 12, 2003)

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

Quote: from pamskillet on 9:07 pm on July 11, 2003
bush in africa makes me want to die. seriously.

why can't he leave them alone.

it's the absolute last thing africans need.

(Edited by pamskillet at 2:09 am on July 12, 2003)


right now bush isn't making any military preporations for africa. or at least we have not been informed of any. but as of right now bush is only talking about health care in the region and to be saying that health care is the last thing africa needs is compleatly fauls. thats the 1st thing they need if any. but i do agree with the fact that america should not target africa as a sorce of rebounding from all the crap that happend to them in iraq on tha count that they have no really big resorses.

[Severian]

The point about West African oil is relevant; I think. At any rate, you have to see Liberia in a regional context.

Also regionally, the U.S. has been gradually displacing French imperialism from more and more of its traditional spheres of influence in Africa. Solidifying Washington's domination over Liberia would put them in a stronger position to continue this.

[Urban Rubble]

Damn, I'm agreeing with Ak on this one. Mugabe seems like no kind of socialist, from what I've read.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Precisely Severian. The economic benefits to occupying either of these countries is nil. The only reasons for occupation would be strategic territorial influence and like comrade Rubble stated, a bit of face saving for the GOP.

[Lefty]

Mugabe needs to die. However, his people don't need to suffer any more than they already have to. I think a new leader is sorely needed if the conditions of the people of Africa are to improve.

[KickMcCann]

Speaking of Imperialism and armies, don't forget that Europe has invaded any African countries, Sierra Lieone, the Ivory Coast, and they are already in Liberia. And the UK and South Africa seem itching to invade Zimbabewe.
No doubt there is oil in Africa, its just a matter of time before America tries to take it.

[ovrproofmentalz]

i cannot see the USA coming to "help" out Zimbabwe in any form..... i lived there from 1988 - 1990, and coming from a dirty poor background in the caribbean i can honestly say that mugabe was a different, and well meaning leader at the time.... he did ride around in his mercedes motorcades, and demanded respect - but the political climate was much different... Mugabe is a product of his political enviroment.... imperialist powers are what messed mugabe up so bad...
now he is a horrible leader, and should go... but the zimbabweans must do it themselves.... the US just creates power vacums which they do not stay around to stabalize....

Liberia??? just a launchpad into nigeria....

if the texas gunslinger wants to stop a war and do some "good" aka stop people getting slaughtered, go to the congo... they only been in a civil war since lumumba was assasinated by the belgian colonial authorities and CIA back in the start of the 60's....

guidance

[Sensitive]

I suggest that you all should read this article:
What's Behind the Crisis in Liberia? (http://www.counterpunch.org/sustar07122003.html)

[Saint-Just]

Urban Rubble:

The population of Zimbabwe is 13 million. The white population accounts for 70,000. 4,500 whites control half of the country's 81 million acres of arable land, while close to a million black farmers are crammed into the rest. The land the big landowners occupy is the most fertile, while that which the working black farmers have is the least fertile.

Following independance Mugabe said: 'It could never be a correct justification that because the whites oppressed us when they had power, the blacks must oppress them today because they have power.'

So an agreement was drawn up with collaboration with the UK and U.S. known as the Lancaster House agreement that stated no land redistribution would take place for 10 years, although it could purchase the land back. The U.S. agreed the donation of $2 billion to help the government purchase the land. An agreement had been drawn up for white-black co-operation. However the whites rejected the agreement and the U.S. failed to donate the $2 billion. As a result Mugabe decided to confiscate the land or else Zimbabwe would forever live in the shadow of colonialism. This is what provoked the imperialist press and white farmers.

Zanu PF also decided to reject the IMF's 'Austerity programme'. As a result sanctions were enforced and requests for loans rejected. In addition to this white farmers engaged in crop sabotage with co-operation from the imperialist powers. Whilst this went on the region saw problems with droughts to further worsen the situation.

It is not simply just this that has provoked the imperialist powers. You may be wondering why they have decided to pay such attention to this country of South Africa so far away from U.S. It is because in addition to what I have already mentioned, Zimbabwe has sent troops to aid the government in Congo in their repulsion of Rwandan and Ugandan forces, the invasion having been incited by the U.S. imperialists, as the U.S. became enraged at Congo's rejection of the U.S. economic designs for Africa.

And what about the great MDC (Movement for Democratic Change), I wonder who set up this movement and funds it?? This very movement that supports the IMF and free market, that wants retension of land by the white minority and withdrawal of troops from Congo. And which individual is in league with the MDC as part of the U.S. set up Zimbabwe Democracy Trust, Chester Crocker, the notorious racist supporter of the Apartheid regime.

The truth is that only 160 members of opposition have died in the last 2 years, hardly noteworthy since most of the deaths have nothing to do with Mugabe. Generally the imperialist press rant about economic failure in Zimbabwe and of the suppression of the imperialist press who continue to write lies about Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe has few great economic resources for the U.S., you are right, but the Congo does. And the U.S. have already organised forces into the Congo to depose the anti-imperialist government there so that the U.S. may take advantage of the great mineral and oil resources. Zimbabwe menawhile has sent in troops to aid the Congo in beating out the foreign invaders. These Zimbabwean troops are the only ones denying Americans of leaking into Congo. This is why the American economic interests in Africa would massively benefit from removing Mugabe and Zanu PF.

In addition, Mugabe is a Marxist and has bought working-class reforms to Zimbabwe. He has not introduced Marxist change yet or he liekly never will because of the obvious difficulties, look at what Zimbabwe faces at the moment never mind any more radical anti-imperialist, proletarian movement.

Neither is the economic downturn the fault of Zanu PF, rather it is the illegitimate imperialist sanctions and the fact that the CIA and imperialist dog farmers have taken to burning masses of crop fields to sabotage the economy. In addition, in the last 3 years the region has seen a massive economic downturn due to drought. Zimbabwe has actually come off better than the surrounding nations because of its residual economic strength that earnt it that so cliched title of the imperialist press.

Isn't it strange that Mugabe has been in power since the early 80's and has been elected for 5 successive terms. Indeed, he and Zanu PF alone made Zimbabwe the 'breadbasket of Africa' and the best educated country in Africa that has the 86% literacy rate that is by far the highest.

Zanu PF and Mugabe are great people, and they deserve our respect and support. Why do so many of you continue to believe the imperialists, we know what they're aims are don't we? Please see what I am saying Urban Rubble, look at the facts and check some of them out for yourself, but don't believe lies and those who twist the truth.

One last thing... the MDC, i'll reiterate, is a joke. They are a weak group of rich imperialists hastily banded together by the U.S. They'll never defeat Zanu PF and the masses of working people in Zimbabwe. The imperialist campaign against them is effective, it was damage them greatly, but it is far from destroying them.

[Monks Aflame]

Washington might be either using this as a PR stunt, and pulling out after the media is happy (like afghanistan) or it could be establishing a springboard in a turbulent region (like israel). the counterpunch.com article says Washington has supported groups trying to get rid of Charles Taylor (leader of Liberia) but the group is all corrupt and crooked.

This seems like Iraq in the sense that the people are in a shitty situation (capital doesn't have running water or electricity) but Washington can only fuck it up more.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Chairman Mao on 2:11 pm on July 14, 2003
Urban Rubble:

The population of Zimbabwe is 13 million. The white population accounts for 70,000. 4,500 whites control half of the country's 81 million acres of arable land, while close to a million black farmers are crammed into the rest. The land the big landowners occupy is the most fertile, while that which the working black farmers have is the least fertile.

Following independance Mugabe said: 'It could never be a correct justification that because the whites oppressed us when they had power, the blacks must oppress them today because they have power.'

So an agreement was drawn up with collaboration with the UK and U.S. known as the Lancaster House agreement that stated no land redistribution would take place for 10 years, although it could purchase the land back. The U.S. agreed the donation of $2 billion to help the government purchase the land. An agreement had been drawn up for white-black co-operation. However the whites rejected the agreement and the U.S. failed to donate the $2 billion. As a result Mugabe decided to confiscate the land or else Zimbabwe would forever live in the shadow of colonialism. This is what provoked the imperialist press and white farmers.

Zanu PF also decided to reject the IMF's 'Austerity programme'. As a result sanctions were enforced and requests for loans rejected. In addition to this white farmers engaged in crop sabotage with co-operation from the imperialist powers. Whilst this went on the region saw problems with droughts to further worsen the situation.

It is not simply just this that has provoked the imperialist powers. You may be wondering why they have decided to pay such attention to this country of South Africa so far away from U.S. It is because in addition to what I have already mentioned, Zimbabwe has sent troops to aid the government in Congo in their repulsion of Rwandan and Ugandan forces, the invasion having been incited by the U.S. imperialists, as the U.S. became enraged at Congo's rejection of the U.S. economic designs for Africa.

And what about the great MDC (Movement for Democratic Change), I wonder who set up this movement and funds it?? This very movement that supports the IMF and free market, that wants retension of land by the white minority and withdrawal of troops from Congo. And which individual is in league with the MDC as part of the U.S. set up Zimbabwe Democracy Trust, Chester Crocker, the notorious racist supporter of the Apartheid regime.

The truth is that only 160 members of opposition have died in the last 2 years, hardly noteworthy since most of the deaths have nothing to do with Mugabe. Generally the imperialist press rant about economic failure in Zimbabwe and of the suppression of the imperialist press who continue to write lies about Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe has few great economic resources for the U.S., you are right, but the Congo does. And the U.S. have already organised forces into the Congo to depose the anti-imperialist government there so that the U.S. may take advantage of the great mineral and oil resources. Zimbabwe menawhile has sent in troops to aid the Congo in beating out the foreign invaders. These Zimbabwean troops are the only ones denying Americans of leaking into Congo. This is why the American economic interests in Africa would massively benefit from removing Mugabe and Zanu PF.

In addition, Mugabe is a Marxist and has bought working-class reforms to Zimbabwe. He has not introduced Marxist change yet or he liekly never will because of the obvious difficulties, look at what Zimbabwe faces at the moment never mind any more radical anti-imperialist, proletarian movement.

Neither is the economic downturn the fault of Zanu PF, rather it is the illegitimate imperialist sanctions and the fact that the CIA and imperialist dog farmers have taken to burning masses of crop fields to sabotage the economy. In addition, in the last 3 years the region has seen a massive economic downturn due to drought. Zimbabwe has actually come off better than the surrounding nations because of its residual economic strength that earnt it that so cliched title of the imperialist press.

Isn't it strange that Mugabe has been in power since the early 80's and has been elected for 5 successive terms. Indeed, he and Zanu PF alone made Zimbabwe the 'breadbasket of Africa' and the best educated country in Africa that has the 86% literacy rate that is by far the highest.

Zanu PF and Mugabe are great people, and they deserve our respect and support. Why do so many of you continue to believe the imperialists, we know what they're aims are don't we? Please see what I am saying Urban Rubble, look at the facts and check some of them out for yourself, but don't believe lies and those who twist the truth.

One last thing... the MDC, i'll reiterate, is a joke. They are a weak group of rich imperialists hastily banded together by the U.S. They'll never defeat Zanu PF and the masses of working people in Zimbabwe. The imperialist campaign against them is effective, it was damage them greatly, but it is far from destroying them.


What a load of crap.

Please read this letter from amnisty international, and then carefully review your opinion on this fascist piece of shit.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAF...RIES%5CZIMBABWE (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAFR460152000?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CZIMBABWE?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CZIMBABWE)

That answers just about your entire post.

[Saint-Just]

'What a load of crap.

Please read this letter from amnisty international, and then carefully review your opinion on this fascist piece of shit.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAF...RIES%5CZIMBABWE (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAFR460152000?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CZIMBABWE?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CZIMBABWE)

That answers just about your entire post.'

Consider this: in my post I talked about international agreements, the economy (development, problems and land onership), economic interests, political interests and conflict.

I gave around 3 lines to the issues that this letter gives pages to. I would conclude then, that this letter doesn't address the issues I was talking about.

All this letter does is criticise Zanu PF and Mugabe for suppression of political opposition.

They have removed press from the country and stopped meetings of shoddily organised imperialists. Yes, Amnesty international would oppose this, because regardless of the aims of any group; e.g. aggressive, reactionary imperialists, they think they should be afforded free speech.

Regardless of that, the link you gave offers no argument against the overhwelming majority of the body of text I produced. Indeed, I would suggest that Amnesty international would agree with some of my points.

I can't fathom what you were thinking when you wrote your post. It is of little relevance to my post. You haven't refuted any of my claims. Your strongest argument was to suggest that what I carefully detailed and substantiated was a 'piece of shit'. In addition, if you were an American Imperialist, your argument would not change. They do the same; calling him a fascist shit etc.

I was mostly hoping that Urban Rubble would read this since he seems to have an open mind. I have given my opinion on the basis of all the facts I know and research I have done. Urban Rubble as he stated knows little about this issue and so wants people's views.

AK47, you did little to substantiate what you said earlier in this thread. I clearly detailed the economic circumstance in Zimbabwe. If you have ever heard Mugabe speak or read what he has wrote you will notice he is not a racist. Did you not notice the part where I said 4,500 whites control half of the nations arable land. This is a hangover from colonial times, times when racism controlled such issues.

I would accuse anyone who says these whites deserve this land as being racists. These whites only own this land because they have inherited it from previous colonial conqeustors. And unfortunately the rest of the population is now crammed onto poor land where they inevitably are born again and again into great poverty.

So not only do you oppose wealth redistribution, but specifacally you oppose it in this instance where does who hold the wealth are whites and those who are being economically subjugated are black.

Are you a socialist only amongst white people as you are a rabid racist. All whites are equal, but he blacks are inferior?

This sounds very similar to national socialism.

I imagine you may well support the apartheid style MDC that is run by racists left over from the South African Aparheid regime?

I agree with Rastafari's comparison with 'Jomo Kenyatta and Nelson Mandela as the great African leaders of the century'. Maybe Rastafari is black so his opinion is not clouded by an abundance of racism against black Africans as yours seems to be AK47.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Chairman Mao on 5:42 pm on July 14, 2003
'What a load of crap.

Please read this letter from amnisty international, and then carefully review your opinion on this fascist piece of shit.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAF...RIES%5CZIMBABWE (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAFR460152000?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CZIMBABWE?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CZIMBABWE)

That answers just about your entire post.'

Consider this: in my post I talked about international agreements, the economy (development, problems and land onership), economic interests, political interests and conflict.

I gave around 3 lines to the issues that this letter gives pages to. I would conclude then, that this letter doesn't address the issues I was talking about.

All this letter does is criticise Zanu PF and Mugabe for suppression of political opposition.

They have removed press from the country and stopped meetings of shoddily organised imperialists. Yes, Amnesty international would oppose this, because regardless of the aims of any group; e.g. aggressive, reactionary imperialists, they think they should be afforded free speech.

Regardless of that, the link you gave offers no argument against the overhwelming majority of the body of text I produced. Indeed, I would suggest that Amnesty international would agree with some of my points.

I can't fathom what you were thinking when you wrote your post. It is of little relevance to my post. You haven't refuted any of my claims. Your strongest argument was to suggest that what I carefully detailed and substantiated was a 'piece of shit'. In addition, if you were an American Imperialist, your argument would not change. They do the same; calling him a fascist shit etc.

I was mostly hoping that Urban Rubble would read this since he seems to have an open mind. I have given my opinion on the basis of all the facts I know and research I have done. Urban Rubble as he stated knows little about this issue and so wants people's views.

AK47, you did little to substantiate what you said earlier in this thread. I clearly detailed the economic circumstance in Zimbabwe. If you have ever heard Mugabe speak or read what he has wrote you will notice he is not a racist. Did you not notice the part where I said 4,500 whites control half of the nations arable land. This is a hangover from colonial times, times when racism controlled such issues.

I would accuse anyone who says these whites deserve this land as being racists. These whites only own this land because they have inherited it from previous colonial conqeustors. And unfortunately the rest of the population is now crammed onto poor land where they inevitably are born again and again into great poverty.

So not only do you oppose wealth redistribution, but specifacally you oppose it in this instance where does who hold the wealth are whites and those who are being economically subjugated are black.

Are you a socialist only amongst white people as you are a rabid racist. All whites are equal, but he blacks are inferior?

This sounds very similar to national socialism.

I imagine you may well support the apartheid style MDC that is run by racists left over from the South African Aparheid regime?

I agree with Rastafari's comparison with 'Jomo Kenyatta and Nelson Mandela as the great African leaders of the century'. Maybe Rastafari is black so his opinion is not clouded by an abundance of racism against black Africans as yours seems to be AK47.



To be honist I am really cannot be bothered to prove to you that Mugabe is a complete and utter fascist, but you have spurred me on by calling me a racist, which I am not.

Ok As you wish I will pull your post to pieces.

The population of Zimbabwe is 13 million. The white population accounts for 70,000. 4,500 whites control half of the country's 81 million acres of arable land, while close to a million black farmers are crammed into the rest. The land the big landowners occupy is the most fertile, while that which the working black farmers have is the least fertile.

All true, but do you really think that by replacing the owners of the farms with rich capitalists whose only qualification for gaining the land is to have made a donation and given support to Zanu PF a good replacement. To me it seems like bribary and corruption and is hardly Marxist, infact it seems more like capitalist corruption to me.

Following independance Mugabe said: 'It could never be a correct justification that because the whites oppressed us when they had power, the blacks must oppress them today because they have power.'


Mugabe was quite correct, shame he has ignored his own sentiments.

So an agreement was drawn up with collaboration with the UK and U.S. known as the Lancaster House agreement that stated no land redistribution would take place for 10 years, although it could purchase the land back. The U.S. agreed the donation of $2 billion to help the government purchase the land. An agreement had been drawn up for white-black co-operation. However the whites rejected the agreement and the U.S. failed to donate the $2 billion. As a result Mugabe decided to confiscate the land or else Zimbabwe would forever live in the shadow of colonialism. This is what provoked the imperialist press and white farmers.

I do remember briefly reading about this agreement when scanning over the issue a little while ago. As I am sure you are aware the terms of the agreement over a decade ago, yet until about a year ago Mugabe does nothing. He however suddenly acts when he see's his support falling away before an election. It seems that he was simply trying to raise support from the poor black working class. However as he was forced to cheat in the elections it seems that the people saw through his petty attempt to stay in power. The term to describe this is "too little too late."

Zanu PF also decided to reject the IMF's 'Austerity programme'. As a result sanctions were enforced and requests for loans rejected. In addition to this white farmers engaged in crop sabotage with co-operation from the imperialist powers. Whilst this went on the region saw problems with droughts to further worsen the situation.

Replacing the skilled white farmers with decades of experience, with Zanu PF supporters with out the knowledge or experience to farm the land efficiently, I think you will find is the real cause of the economic fall in Zimbabwe. Do not try and blame some minor crop sabotage by pissed off white farmers, when we all know it is the fault of Mugabe's pathetic attempts to stay in power.

It is not simply just this that has provoked the imperialist powers. You may be wondering why they have decided to pay such attention to this country of South Africa so far away from U.S. It is because in addition to what I have already mentioned, Zimbabwe has sent troops to aid the government in Congo in their repulsion of Rwandan and Ugandan forces, the invasion having been incited by the U.S. imperialists, as the U.S. became enraged at Congo's rejection of the U.S. economic designs for Africa.


That is quite probably true, it is not however the issue.

And what about the great MDC (Movement for Democratic Change), I wonder who set up this movement and funds it?? This very movement that supports the IMF and free market, that wants retension of land by the white minority and withdrawal of troops from Congo. And which individual is in league with the MDC as part of the U.S. set up Zimbabwe Democracy Trust, Chester Crocker, the notorious racist supporter of the Apartheid regime.

Quite possibly, however if you are saying that the many black members of that party are racist against there own people, then you should take a look in the dictionary. The History of both parties is also irrelevant, we are discussing the crimes of the election thief Mugabe.

However not that you mention that the MDC wants free trade, I think you will find that for the past 20 years under maugabe, Zimbabwe has been heavily involved with free trade through out Africa, hence the reason why it got the nick name "the bread basket of Africa". Not to mention Mugabe himself has taken many characteristics of a fascist since he has come under mounting political pressure. Those I consider far worse that petty capitalist policies, the fact he has resorted to state controlled racism to try and gain votes is sickening.

The truth is that only 160 members of opposition have died in the last 2 years, hardly noteworthy since most of the deaths have nothing to do with Mugabe.

After reading the letter from Amnisty international I hope you will be revising that statement.

In addition, Mugabe is a Marxist and has bought working-class reforms to Zimbabwe. He has not introduced Marxist change yet or he likely never will because of the obvious difficulties, look at what Zimbabwe faces at the moment never mind any more radical anti-imperialist, proletarian movement.

Mugabe is about as much of a Marxist as Hitler, If you care to review an earlier post of mine in this thread showing that Mugabe is a fascist then you will see my reasoning.

Neither is the economic downturn the fault of Zanu PF, rather it is the illegitimate imperialist sanctions and the fact that the CIA and imperialist dog farmers have taken to burning masses of crop fields to sabotage the economy. In addition, in the last 3 years the region has seen a massive economic downturn due to drought. Zimbabwe has actually come off better than the surrounding nations because of its residual economic strength that earned it that so cliched title of the imperialist press.

I have answered that earlier in this post.

Isn't it strange that Mugabe has been in power since the early 80's and has been elected for 5 successive terms. Indeed, he and Zanu PF alone made Zimbabwe the 'breadbasket of Africa' and the best educated country in Africa that has the 86% literacy rate that is by far the highest.

I think that you will find that the northern African countries such Morocco have considerably better standards of living.

Zanu PF and Mugabe are great people, and they deserve our respect and support.

Mugabe is no more disserving of our support than Hitler, as I have made abundantly clear earlier in the thread.

One last thing... the MDC, i'll reiterate, is a joke. They are a weak group of rich imperialists hastily banded together by the U.S.

I the majority are in support of the MDC, not Mugabe and his fascists. Also considering that Mugabe is replacing the white farmers with "rich imperialists" and supporters of his party, rather than the people exactly the same can be said, if not worse about him and Zanu PF.

They have removed press from the country and stopped meetings of shoddily organised imperialists

MDC are neither shoddily organised or imperialists. What they are however are the popular party, who have had their election victories stolen from them by a power hungry fascist.

Amnesty international would oppose this, because regardless of the aims of any group; e.g. aggressive, reactionary imperialists, they think they should be afforded free speech.

I think that you will find that the MDC have not had violent protests except when they have been attacked by Zanu PF hired thugs, though you can hardly blame the MDC for that violence. So I have dispute with you claim that the MDC is even remotely aggressive, in fact it is very pacifist. If I was in control of such a party then there would have been a revolution by now.

Your strongest argument was to suggest that what I carefully detailed and substantiated was a 'piece of shit'.

It may not have been a strong argument it was however accurate.

If you have ever heard Mugabe speak or read what he has wrote you will notice he is not a racist.

A skilled orator can easily appear to be many different things, so the propaganda he places in his speeches is pretty much meaningless. As a leftist who I have to say I respect I would have thought you would see through such flagrant and blatant propaganda, I believe the term is "Demagogue".

I would accuse anyone who says these whites deserve this land as being racists.

I never said they did, I have only said that the people deserve it, not crony’s of Mugabe.

So not only do you oppose wealth redistribution, but specifically you oppose it in this instance where does who hold the wealth are whites and those who are being economically subjugated are black.

No I oppose the wealth distribution strait to those who belong to Zanu PF rather than to the people. Skin colour is meaningless.

All whites are equal, but he blacks are inferior?

I challenge you to find where I said that, your accusation of my being a racist is pathetic as it is unfounded.

Maybe Rastafari is black so his opinion is not clouded by an abundance of racism against black Africans as yours seems to be AK47.

Again I challenge you to find one even remotely racist comment. When you find your search to be obviously inconclusive I will accept your apology.

[Saint-Just]

I will start by giving criticism over what has led to your views. I think you believe that the imperialist press tells the truth. You are partly right, indeed the Guardian and Independant occasionally tell the truth, but other than that there is little of it. If you questioned all the imperialist press I think you would have a better socialist viewpoint. As everything you said is the precise same argument the imperialists give, indeed it is Morgan Tsvangiri who started calling Mugabe a fascist. The real fascists are racist American pigs and imperialist puppets such as Tsvangiri. How can you possible believe all the imperialist lies, its like the imperialists themselves believing everything Pravda ever said.

'All true, but do you really think that by replacing the owners of the farms with rich capitalists whose only qualification for gaining the land is to have made a donation and given support to Zanu PF a good replacement. To me it seems like bribary and corruption and is hardly Marxist, infact it seems more like capitalist corruption to me.'

The imperialists rarely suggest this, and when they do they hint at it since they know its a lie. Not even did Mugabe force the land in to the hands of capitalists, it was at first spontaneously taken back by the poor blacks who have been stuffed in the most infertile, arid parts of the country.

The Guardian:
[they]"seized 841 white-owned farms in one week, and large groups of squatters were camped out on the farms, dividing their energies between planting out maize and singing revolutionary songs. One squatter leader is quoted as saying, "This land used to belong to our forefathers. We need this land. Our government will not tell us to move from here. Even if the police tell us to move, we will stay."

The Independant on Morgan Tsvangiri:
'this clown’s lack of "track record in the…struggle for independence" makes him dubious presidential material'

Well, let's also think about this. The only extents the government has gone too is to constitutionally legalise these land occupations. In fact, anyone is open to go to the courts and to the police and protest. Indeed, the police have gone to the courts to protest against what would have previously been a crime in illegal occupation of land. This is class struggle, that Zanu PF, and Mugabe, as socialists have facilitated in what they hope to make a state independant from imperialism and the ills it brings.

Blak workers on white farms are forced to live in terrible conditions, working on the massive white estates picking coffee, tobacco, tea etc. Sounds a little familiar, what about 1800's U.S.?? this time though there are 4000 confederates backed by a superpower with a confederate mentality against all the landless blacks.

In 1997, the Guardian told how these workers, demanding to be paid £42 a month, "launched a wave of strikes that has brought the country’s commercial farming sector to its knees". "Thousands of singing, chanting workers … blocked highways for days," they reported, quoting one striker as saying: "We have been downtrodden too long. Zimbabwe is independent. We can stand up for our rights. We want better pay so our families can live better."

'some minor crop sabotage'

Ok, well how has this affected the other countries in the region with a 100+% increase in the shortfall in maize production.

I would go on but I lost the whole post because of problems with the site. So I will leave the other points. Anyway, my argument towards you is that you simply believe the imperialists, who if you are a socialist you know often lie and only give the reactionary perspective. One last point, you say most of Zimbabwe supports MDC, well as you see above, some of the imperialist press doubt that the 10 million voters do.

I suggest we end our argument; we will never agree. I knew you would not agree, this was meant for Urban Rubble because ostensibly he seems open-minded.

[Invader Zim]

Unfortunatly I have to go to lessons now, however I will edit this post later to answer your post, however I believe that this site does most of it for me.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-zwe/index

Do look at pages 2,3 and 4 as well.

[Saint-Just]

These again don't deal with my main issues. That being of the economy and land redistribution.

In addition, I am a Marxist-Leninist, I believe those racists should be imprisoned for being racists and trying to turn Zimbabwe into a puppet for the imperialists.

Anyway we should end this argument for the reasons I stated earlier..

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Chairman Mao on 12:39 pm on July 15, 2003
These again don't deal with my main issues. That being of the economy and land redistribution.

In addition, I am a Marxist-Leninist, I believe those racists should be imprisoned for being racists and trying to turn Zimbabwe into a puppet for the imperialists.

Anyway we should end this argument for the reasons I stated earlier..

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, however ludicrus it may appear to me.

So I will respect your wish to end this argument. I will save my responces to your previous post until another time when this topic comes under discussion.

[trotskycadre]

First off, as far as benefits of US intervention in Liberia go, they'll be strategically situated to undermine any national liberation movements and prop up pro-Washington dictatorships. The point of the matter is that the US has no right to intervene in any governments affairs, and judging from the history of US interventions one cannot say they've been pretty or beneficial to any of the local populations. The opposition forces against the Charles Taylor government (the ones the US supports which will probably take power after taylor leaves) called Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy have a horrible record of human rights abuses, earning them a condemnation from Human Rights Watch for "kidnapping,summary executions, looting, rape, and forced recruitment". Check out http://www.socialistworker.org/2003-2/460/...5_Liberia.shtml (http://www.socialistworker.org/2003-2/460/460_05_Liberia.shtml) for more info