User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 10:33:23 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
wasn't there fighting between the two groups while they were also fighting the Government as well? Plus weren't the ZANLA forces the first group that Mugabe went after following taking power? Mugabe was forced to share power which only happened for 2 years I believe. Both groups were folded in with each other into I believe they called it the Patriotic front towards the end. Yes Mugabe went after ZAPU. NKOMO fled the country in fear for his life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 10:34:44 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
wasn't there fighting between the two groups while they were also fighting the Government as well? Plus weren't the ZANLA forces the first group that Mugabe went after following taking power? Yes, after he consolidated power he mostly genocided Nkomo's faction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 10:41:18 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know. The general problem with ARF and GD in general is that AVERAGE IQ is 87 with a very wide standard deviation.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Hey you got a few allies in here.  The general problem with ARF and GD in general is that AVERAGE IQ is 87 with a very wide standard deviation. I wish I knew which side of the curve I'm on, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 10:53:00 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The truth is I think countries like Belgium wanted their former colonies to fail. The difference between Rhodesia and the rest of Africa was Rhodesia basically gave the finger to the UK and they never forgot it Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Pointing out facts is not racist. Please tell me which subsaharan country is thriving on their own. The difference between Rhodesia and the rest of Africa was Rhodesia basically gave the finger to the UK and they never forgot it The UK fucked Rhodesia over. They used 'em in two world wars and then said "fuck you, everything you fought, bled, and died for doesn't matter. This isn't yours anymore." Rhodesia said fuck you back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 10:55:12 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hey you got a few allies in here. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You wanna know how I know that you don't know what you are talking about? Blacks were allowed to vote in Rhodesia and absolutely had some level representation in Parliament (no not the majority). In fact, the voting eligibility on both the A rolls and B rolls was significantly lower for blacks when compared to whites. To be on the A roll as a white for example you had to have a University education, for a black, it was a high school education. Therfore as time went on you had increasing black representation UNDER the Smith government, up to the 1980 election where a black majority government was elected. Furthermore the blacks living on the TTL's basically were self governing and also had representation through their tribal leaders. The shitheads that started ZANU had legitimate greivances at the time, but they chose to work outside of the system not with it or within it. Fun fact Ian Smith could easily have had Nkomo and Mugabe killed when they were detained from 1964-1974, he did not, in fact he let him go as a sign of good faith. And of course they immediately turned to terrorism upon release. I'm not holding up Smith as a saint or his solutions as perfect BTW, but Nkomo and Mugabe and what they did were/are functionally Hitler in comparison. I swear to god its like http://static.srcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Dumb-and-Dumber-To-Harry-and-Lloyd.jpg In here... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 10:58:32 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You wanna know how I know that you don't know what you are talking about? Blacks were allowed to vote in Rhodesia and absolutely had some level representation in Parliament (no not the majority). In fact, the voting eligibility on both the A rolls and B rolls was significantly lower for blacks when compared to whites. To be on the A roll as a white for example you had to have a University education, for a black, it was a high school education. Therfore as time went on you had increasing black representation UNDER the Smith government, up to the 1980 election where a black majority government was elected. Furthermore the blacks living on the TTL's basically were self governing and also had representation through their tribal leaders. Under the 1969 constitution: A roll (95% white) elected 50 reps (locked) B roll elected 8 reps (variable) Tribal 8 The number of B roll reps would grow as the economic output of Blacks increased. Lets assume that Blacks matched the output of whites and were awarded up to the 50 seats outlined in the '69 consitution (I realize that was never likely with Whites controlling the vast majority of capital in the country and no outside streams would become available due to sanctions, but I digress.) A roll has 50 B roll has 50 Tribal has 8 So the vast majority of the population is only equal to a very small minority in terms of representatives. With a majority when tribal reps are included. This is under the absolute best outcome outlined in the 1969 constitution and you have a hard time understanding why blacks started working outside of the system. They were getting a shit deal under the 1969 constitution and even if they did everything "right" they were still going to get shafted. But Im just a dumb rube who doesnt understand the nuance needed to rationalize systematic racism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:03:27 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I really think the west should have pushed for some colonial reform; letting the native populations gradually get a much larger say in affairs, while maintaining Western living standards. Instead, the USSR helped push the west out of Africa as quickly as possible, for the purpose of sticking it to NATO member countries (not because the USSR actually gave a damn about black Africans). The Internal settlement deal (with Muzorewa) might have worked for Zimbabwe Rhodesia, but the UN crapped on it (I despise the UN so much). Serious question: what would have happened if the Rhodies held out a couple more years (say, until '82 or '83) when the Reagan administration got rolling? Would the Reagan administration done anything differently? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:06:04 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bro (and what an apropos name you have chosen btw) Smith and to various extents his advisers absolutely DID believe this, or eventually came to believe this, you can read all about it in his biography for one. You know in actual books made of dead trees that are hard to edit, not wikipedia. Furthermore, Smith DID give up power to majority elected black government. And ZAPU was formed 10 days after UDI FYI, and whoa turns out it was bankrolled by the soviets from the start, and staffed with their star marxist pupils Mugabe, Nkomo and Sithole that worked to overthrow the government from day 10. Seriously, I'm not sure if its your ignorance or arrogance that people in this thread find more offensive. "Eventually came to believe" is a lot different from 'always believed'. In 1964 after UDI Ian Smith said "There will be no African nationalist government here in my lifetime". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:06:10 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Smith didn't believe in a gradual transition of power, he believed in gradually granting blacks more power while always maintaining white dominance of the government. Gradual granting power would always result in loss of white dominance. The only question is the time scale. When you grant the majority more power they will eventually want and get more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:23:46 AM EST
[#10]
Hate to interrupt this historical political discussion, with gun talk.
But damn you AR-15.com. Once again you're going to empty my wallet. This thread made me decide to get this out of storage and build it. 
Now do I want to order a type I or type II receiver? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:33:18 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The fact that 80% of the people fighting to keep white rule were actually black volunteers should answer that question for you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Here's a rhetorical question, Which regime would you rather live in: Communism or Racial segregation. Both are really shitty |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:37:02 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lots of words, lets put numbers to it: Under the 1969 constitution: A roll (95% white) elected 50 reps (locked) B roll elected 8 reps (variable) Tribal 8 The number of B roll reps would grow as the economic output of Blacks increased. Lets assume that Blacks matched the output of whites and were awarded up to the 50 seats outlined in the '69 consitution (I realize that was never likely with Whites controlling the vast majority of capital in the country and no outside streams would become available due to sanctions, but I digress.) A roll has 50 B roll has 50 Tribal has 8 So the vast majority of the population is only equal to a very small minority in terms of representatives. With a majority when tribal reps are included. This is under the absolute best outcome outlined in the 1969 constitution and you have a hard time understanding why blacks started working outside of the system. They were getting a shit deal under the 1969 constitution and even if they did everything "right" they were still going to get shafted. But Im just a dumb rube who doesnt understand the nuance needed to rationalize systematic racism. "Really you are surprised that a revolutionary party sprang up shortly after 4% of the population told the rest of the country that they would have no say in how it was governed? Seems like a reasonable assumption. " To moving the goal posts to actual numbers and facts once challenged on your misleading BS... Yes, the whites controlled the government until 1979, I've never claimed otherwise. But blacks did have political power in Rhodesia and it did grow from 61-80 to get to the point of majority black elections, UNDER the "racist" Smith government but I'm sure you have some good rationalization for that too.... Smith was hardly a racist IMO and fully understood that Rhodesia needed to get to majority black rule, but it had to do so in a functioning manner unlike every other country around them. Seriously, read his biography, its fairly interesting and he discusses alot of these issues and its vastly more complicated than "its racist". And were all those black soldiers supporting the evil white racist government racists too? So far most of the arguments I've heard in this thread from your ilk are Black genocide > minority rule... I'm pretty sure the genocide victims would have chosen the latter over the former. My point is that while minority rule sucked in various ways for the black population (and legitimately so) it was vastly preferable to the alternative, and Smith over time legitimately worked toward trying to fix the issue, right up to majority black rule, when he freely gave up power. But the British couldn't let Smith have a "win" so they fucked over an entire country and put them on the road to genocide, thanks wankers... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:38:42 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hate to interrupt this historical political discussion, with gun talk. But damn you AR-15.com. Once again you're going to empty my wallet. This thread made me decide to get this out of storage and build it. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/268039/20170331-121234-178034.jpg Now do I want to order a type I or type II receiver? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:39:15 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ZAPU was formed in 1961 after the National Democratic Party was outlawed, before being outlawed themselves in 1962. "Eventually came to believe" is a lot different from 'always believed'. In 1964 after UDI Ian Smith said "There will be no African nationalist government here in my lifetime". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:40:49 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hey you got a few allies in here. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You wanna know how I know that you don't know what you are talking about? Blacks were allowed to vote in Rhodesia and absolutely had some level representation in Parliament (no not the majority). In fact, the voting eligibility on both the A rolls and B rolls was significantly lower for blacks when compared to whites. To be on the A roll as a white for example you had to have a University education, for a black, it was a high school education. Therfore as time went on you had increasing black representation UNDER the Smith government, up to the 1980 election where a black majority government was elected. Furthermore the blacks living on the TTL's basically were self governing and also had representation through their tribal leaders. The shitheads that started ZANU had legitimate greivances at the time, but they chose to work outside of the system not with it or within it. Fun fact Ian Smith could easily have had Nkomo and Mugabe killed when they were detained from 1964-1974, he did not, in fact he let him go as a sign of good faith. And of course they immediately turned to terrorism upon release. I'm not holding up Smith as a saint or his solutions as perfect BTW, but Nkomo and Mugabe and what they did were/are functionally Hitler in comparison. I swear to god its like http://static.srcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Dumb-and-Dumber-To-Harry-and-Lloyd.jpg In here... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:42:09 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That doesn't even make sense. Gradual granting power would always result in loss of white dominance. The only question is the time scale. When you grant the majority more power they will eventually want and get more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:43:54 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hate to interrupt this historical political discussion, with gun talk. But damn you AR-15.com. Once again you're going to empty my wallet. This thread made me decide to get this out of storage and build it. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/268039/20170331-121234-178034.jpg Now do I want to order a type I or type II receiver? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:44:21 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More than a few damnit  , I can't find the beer mug smiley under the new format.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 11:48:45 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you want to fully poop paint it up? Also my google skills failed me, what's the DSA 1.5 receiver? Couldn'the find anything on their site or google |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:15:16 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Smith basically understood the problem of a illiterate black population with no history of self rule, and gradually bringing them into a modern functioning democratic state. Its the same fucking thing in the middle east, you take a people with a history of despotism and dictators, and you magically expect Jeffersonian democracy to take root after you chop of the dictators head. Its a laughably ignorant position. Democracy in the west barely functions as it is and we have hundreds of years of it as a tradition. That is also why they have taken over the education system itself. So they can brainwash and turn intelligent people into mindless drones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:20:59 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I really think the west should have pushed for some colonial reform; letting the native populations gradually get a much larger say in affairs, while maintaining Western living standards. Instead, the USSR helped push the west out of Africa as quickly as possible, for the purpose of sticking it to NATO member countries (not because the USSR actually gave a damn about black Africans). The Internal settlement deal (with Muzorewa) might have worked for Zimbabwe Rhodesia, but the UN crapped on it (I despise the UN so much). Serious question: what would have happened if the Rhodies held out a couple more years (say, until '82 or '83) when the Reagan administration got rolling? Would the Reagan administration done anything differently? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:21:15 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Leftists are pushing for the dumbing of society for a reason. Look at Venezuela. The government has support because of the illiterate peasant class. Look at our own inner cities. The majority that support the failed Socialist policies are the drop outs and rejects. In Black America, Educated Blacks are mocked and ridiculed as being "Oreos" and "Uncle Toms". That is also why they have taken over the education system itself. So they can brainwash and turn intelligent people into mindless drones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:21:49 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lots of words, lets put numbers to it: Under the 1969 constitution: A roll (95% white) elected 50 reps (locked) B roll elected 8 reps (variable) Tribal 8 The number of B roll reps would grow as the economic output of Blacks increased. Lets assume that Blacks matched the output of whites and were awarded up to the 50 seats outlined in the '69 consitution (I realize that was never likely with Whites controlling the vast majority of capital in the country and no outside streams would become available due to sanctions, but I digress.) A roll has 50 B roll has 50 Tribal has 8 So the vast majority of the population is only equal to a very small minority in terms of representatives. With a majority when tribal reps are included. This is under the absolute best outcome outlined in the 1969 constitution and you have a hard time understanding why blacks started working outside of the system. They were getting a shit deal under the 1969 constitution and even if they did everything "right" they were still going to get shafted. But Im just a dumb rube who doesnt understand the nuance needed to rationalize systematic racism. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You wanna know how I know that you don't know what you are talking about? Blacks were allowed to vote in Rhodesia and absolutely had some level representation in Parliament (no not the majority). In fact, the voting eligibility on both the A rolls and B rolls was significantly lower for blacks when compared to whites. To be on the A roll as a white for example you had to have a University education, for a black, it was a high school education. Therfore as time went on you had increasing black representation UNDER the Smith government, up to the 1980 election where a black majority government was elected. Furthermore the blacks living on the TTL's basically were self governing and also had representation through their tribal leaders. Under the 1969 constitution: A roll (95% white) elected 50 reps (locked) B roll elected 8 reps (variable) Tribal 8 The number of B roll reps would grow as the economic output of Blacks increased. Lets assume that Blacks matched the output of whites and were awarded up to the 50 seats outlined in the '69 consitution (I realize that was never likely with Whites controlling the vast majority of capital in the country and no outside streams would become available due to sanctions, but I digress.) A roll has 50 B roll has 50 Tribal has 8 So the vast majority of the population is only equal to a very small minority in terms of representatives. With a majority when tribal reps are included. This is under the absolute best outcome outlined in the 1969 constitution and you have a hard time understanding why blacks started working outside of the system. They were getting a shit deal under the 1969 constitution and even if they did everything "right" they were still going to get shafted. But Im just a dumb rube who doesnt understand the nuance needed to rationalize systematic racism. Want proof? Have a look at what they did once they achieved power. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:23:02 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Carter pushed to have the '80 election so his commie buddy could get elected. Reagan wouldn't have done that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:23:35 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Leftists are pushing for the dumbing of society for a reason. Look at Venezuela. The government has support because of the illiterate peasant class. Look at our own inner cities. The majority that support the failed Socialist policies are the drop outs and rejects. In Black America, Educated Blacks are mocked and ridiculed as being "Oreos" and "Uncle Toms". That is also why they have taken over the education system itself. So they can brainwash and turn intelligent people into mindless drones. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Smith basically understood the problem of a illiterate black population with no history of self rule, and gradually bringing them into a modern functioning democratic state. Its the same fucking thing in the middle east, you take a people with a history of despotism and dictators, and you magically expect Jeffersonian democracy to take root after you chop of the dictators head. Its a laughably ignorant position. Democracy in the west barely functions as it is and we have hundreds of years of it as a tradition. That is also why they have taken over the education system itself. So they can brainwash and turn intelligent people into mindless drones. Jewish schools do their best to teach their students to be good Jews. Islamic schools do their best to teach their students to be good Muslims. ... what do you think state schools do their best to teach their students? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:25:08 PM EST
[#26]
Good to see a thread on Rhodesia.
For the fellow buffs, I'd recommend checking out @rhodesianarms on Instagram. They literally have a ton of pics on their page. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:25:53 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its an interesting theory, but I don't think Regan would have backed Rhodesia, the Brits absolutely and totally hated the Smith government and did everything they could to collapse it. Regan wouldn't have risked loosing the good graces of the British over Rhodesia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:48:01 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Reagan supported the RSA when the Brits were against them. So it is possible that he would have supported Rhodesia-Zimbabwe. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Its an interesting theory, but I don't think Regan would have backed Rhodesia, the Brits absolutely and totally hated the Smith government and did everything they could to collapse it. Regan wouldn't have risked loosing the good graces of the British over Rhodesia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:53:00 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Agree. Also look at his administrations actions in Afghanistan and Nicaragua. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its an interesting theory, but I don't think Regan would have backed Rhodesia, the Brits absolutely and totally hated the Smith government and did everything they could to collapse it. Regan wouldn't have risked loosing the good graces of the British over Rhodesia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:54:16 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Smith basically understood the problem of a illiterate black population with no history of self rule, and gradually bringing them into a modern functioning democratic state. Its the same fucking thing in the middle east, you take a people with a history of despotism and dictators, and you magically expect Jeffersonian democracy to take root after you chop of the dictators head. Its a laughably ignorant position. Democracy in the west barely functions as it is and we have hundreds of years of it as a tradition. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That doesn't even make sense. Gradual granting power would always result in loss of white dominance. The only question is the time scale. When you grant the majority more power they will eventually want and get more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 12:54:55 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Catholic schools do their best to teach their students to be good Catholics. Jewish schools do their best to teach their students to be good Jews. Islamic schools do their best to teach their students to be good Muslims. ... what do you think state schools do their best to teach their students? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:01:34 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its an interesting theory, but I don't think Regan would have backed Rhodesia, the Brits absolutely and totally hated the Smith government and did everything they could to collapse it. Regan wouldn't have risked loosing the good graces of the British over Rhodesia. I mean look at the whole Falklands mess, the US and the argies had reasonable relations prior, and under the bus they went the moment they crossed the British... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Carter pushed to have the '80 election so his commie buddy could get elected. Reagan wouldn't have done that. Argentina caused its own problems. US State Depart had a lot of pro Argie elements. For that matter, so did the Brit Foreign office. The Brits were pushing the islanders to submit to Argie rule, but refused to force them. Hence the diplomacy was working much slower than the Argies wanted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:02:57 PM EST
[#33]
Besides one or two of us here online, Who in this thread has actually been to Africa, or Rhodesia, or ZA and sat and talked with real AFRICANS, WHITE OR BLACK. that conversation will blow your mind. They also saw it as commies vs their world and that's from both Black and White Africans.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:08:06 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm far from trying to rationalize anything, it was a white run state. But now we have gone from your brilliant BS statement of no- representation. "Really you are surprised that a revolutionary party sprang up shortly after 4% of the population told the rest of the country that they would have no say in how it was governed? Seems like a reasonable assumption. " To moving the goal posts to actual numbers and facts once challenged on your misleading BS... Yes, the whites controlled the government until 1979, I've never claimed otherwise. But blacks did have political power in Rhodesia and it did grow from 61-80 to get to the point of majority black elections, UNDER the "racist" Smith government but I'm sure you have some good rationalization for that too.... Smith was hardly a racist IMO and fully understood that Rhodesia needed to get to majority black rule, but it had to do so in a functioning manner unlike every other country around them. Seriously, read his biography, its fairly interesting and he discusses alot of these issues and its vastly more complicated than "its racist". And were all those black soldiers supporting the evil white racist government racists too? So far most of the arguments I've heard in this thread from your ilk are Black genocide > minority rule... I'm pretty sure the genocide victims would have chosen the latter over the former. My point is that while minority rule sucked in various ways for the black population (and legitimately so) it was vastly preferable to the alternative, and Smith over time legitimately worked toward trying to fix the issue, right up to majority black rule, when he freely gave up power. But the British couldn't let Smith have a "win" so they fucked over an entire country and put them on the road to genocide, thanks wankers... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:21:26 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
THEY wanted 100% "African Rule". They got it and we can see the results, they are the same as what is happening to South Africa even now. At this point, the evidence is pretty Goddamn clear. They are incapable of governing themselves in any fashion but Tribal JuJu Bullshit, even when given the Keys to the Kingdom, they managed to fuck it up. It's simple fact, plain to see. I don't give a fuck "Why, Why, Why?"....I deal in reality not existential, feel good bullshit. Fuck them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm far from trying to rationalize anything, it was a white run state. But now we have gone from your brilliant BS statement of no- representation. "Really you are surprised that a revolutionary party sprang up shortly after 4% of the population told the rest of the country that they would have no say in how it was governed? Seems like a reasonable assumption. " To moving the goal posts to actual numbers and facts once challenged on your misleading BS... Yes, the whites controlled the government until 1979, I've never claimed otherwise. But blacks did have political power in Rhodesia and it did grow from 61-80 to get to the point of majority black elections, UNDER the "racist" Smith government but I'm sure you have some good rationalization for that too.... Smith was hardly a racist IMO and fully understood that Rhodesia needed to get to majority black rule, but it had to do so in a functioning manner unlike every other country around them. Seriously, read his biography, its fairly interesting and he discusses alot of these issues and its vastly more complicated than "its racist". And were all those black soldiers supporting the evil white racist government racists too? So far most of the arguments I've heard in this thread from your ilk are Black genocide > minority rule... I'm pretty sure the genocide victims would have chosen the latter over the former. My point is that while minority rule sucked in various ways for the black population (and legitimately so) it was vastly preferable to the alternative, and Smith over time legitimately worked toward trying to fix the issue, right up to majority black rule, when he freely gave up power. But the British couldn't let Smith have a "win" so they fucked over an entire country and put them on the road to genocide, thanks wankers... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:21:52 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Besides one or two of us here online, Who in this thread has actually been to Africa, or Rhodesia, or ZA and sat and talked with real AFRICANS, WHITE OR BLACK. that conversation will blow your mind. They also saw it as commies vs their world and that's from both Black and White Africans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:24:16 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It isn't a theory, Carter was pushing the Brits on the issue. He wasn't happy with the '79 election and he pushed for the '80 election. Reagan wouldn't have done that. Argentina caused its own problems. US State Depart had a lot of pro Argie elements. For that matter, so did the Brit Foreign office. The Brits were pushing the islanders to submit to Argie rule, but refused to force them. Hence the diplomacy was working much slower than the Argies wanted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:26:10 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
THEY wanted 100% "African Rule". They got it and we can see the results, they are the same as what is happening to South Africa even now. At this point, the evidence is pretty Goddamn clear. They are incapable of governing themselves in any fashion but Tribal JuJu Bullshit, even when given the Keys to the Kingdom, they managed to fuck it up. It's simple fact, plain to see. I don't give a fuck "Why, Why, Why?"....I deal in reality not existential, feel good bullshit. Fuck them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm far from trying to rationalize anything, it was a white run state. But now we have gone from your brilliant BS statement of no- representation. "Really you are surprised that a revolutionary party sprang up shortly after 4% of the population told the rest of the country that they would have no say in how it was governed? Seems like a reasonable assumption. " To moving the goal posts to actual numbers and facts once challenged on your misleading BS... Yes, the whites controlled the government until 1979, I've never claimed otherwise. But blacks did have political power in Rhodesia and it did grow from 61-80 to get to the point of majority black elections, UNDER the "racist" Smith government but I'm sure you have some good rationalization for that too.... Smith was hardly a racist IMO and fully understood that Rhodesia needed to get to majority black rule, but it had to do so in a functioning manner unlike every other country around them. Seriously, read his biography, its fairly interesting and he discusses alot of these issues and its vastly more complicated than "its racist". And were all those black soldiers supporting the evil white racist government racists too? So far most of the arguments I've heard in this thread from your ilk are Black genocide > minority rule... I'm pretty sure the genocide victims would have chosen the latter over the former. My point is that while minority rule sucked in various ways for the black population (and legitimately so) it was vastly preferable to the alternative, and Smith over time legitimately worked toward trying to fix the issue, right up to majority black rule, when he freely gave up power. But the British couldn't let Smith have a "win" so they fucked over an entire country and put them on the road to genocide, thanks wankers... Look at it like this, Airman Snuffy fucks up an airplane. Do I just yell at Snuffy for being an idiot or do I look who signed off Snuffy on the task and see how long Snuffy has been working on the jet and how long he has been doing this task, and also who trained him. If they guy who taught Snuffy this task just signed him off and never really taught Snuffy, did Snuffy fuck up or did the guy who taught Snuffy also fuck up. Or maybe Snuffy was taught it the right way and he's just an idiot. Without asking why and just taking everything at surface level you don't get the whole picture |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:31:24 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Why Why Why explains the reason shit is the way it is though. If you don't ask why its fucked up rather than just say well they fucked it up they're idiots you don't get the whole picture. Look at it like this, Airman Snuffy fucks up an airplane. Do I just yell at Snuffy for being an idiot or do I look who signed off Snuffy on the task and see how long Snuffy has been working on the jet and how long he has been doing this task, and also who trained him. If they guy who taught Snuffy this task just signed him off and never really taught Snuffy, did Snuffy fuck up or did the guy who taught Snuffy also fuck up. Or maybe Snuffy was taught it the right way and he's just an idiot. Without asking why and just taking everything at surface level you don't get the whole picture |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:33:23 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The reason is the culture there. It wasn't European colonialism that is at the root of their problem. If you are colonized by a small number of people you outnumber, look into the mirror to see who's fault it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:34:44 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I suppose... Then again, communist schools taught folks to be good communists... But there was a small problem, very few people actually believed it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Catholic schools do their best to teach their students to be good Catholics. Jewish schools do their best to teach their students to be good Jews. Islamic schools do their best to teach their students to be good Muslims. ... what do you think state schools do their best to teach their students? That said, the majority of people seem more than willing to accept the "religion of the state". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:36:03 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The theory was that Regan would have backed a Smith goverment. I'm familiar with Carter and his policies and he wasn't the only one pushing it. Like I said, the foreign ministry wanted to make an example of the Smith government. And I doubt that Regan would have spent any political capital on it. Reagan's central goal was the defeat of the USSR. His policy in Rhodesia would have likely been similar to his policy in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, and Angola. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:44:56 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You realize that wasn't my post, but that other guys quote right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:45:00 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Carter wanted the communists at the table there. Reagan wouldn't have. That is itself is a huge difference. Reagan's central goal was the defeat of the USSR. His policy in Rhodesia would have likely been similar to his policy in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, and Angola. Zambia was put in a interesting position. They hosted camps for ZANLA and ZIPRA. But that was about it. Also when Zimbabwe kicked the white farmers out Zambia was one of the nation's to welcome them in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:49:13 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I said "do their best" :) Lots of atheists come out of Catholic schools too. That said, the majority of people seem more than willing to accept the "religion of the state". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:50:22 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Besides one or two of us here online, Who in this thread has actually been to Africa, or Rhodesia, or ZA and sat and talked with real AFRICANS, WHITE OR BLACK. that conversation will blow your mind. They also saw it as commies vs their world and that's from both Black and White Africans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:50:38 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Carter wanted the communists at the table there. Reagan wouldn't have. That is itself is a huge difference. Reagan's central goal was the defeat of the USSR. His policy in Rhodesia would have likely been similar to his policy in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, and Angola. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:51:19 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree. Zambia was put in a interesting position. They hosted camps for ZANLA and ZIPRA. But that was about it. Also when Zimbabwe kicked the white farmers out Zambia was one of the nation's to welcome them in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:54:10 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because they realized how valuable they actually were... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2017 1:55:31 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Why Why Why explains the reason shit is the way it is though. If you don't ask why its fucked up rather than just say well they fucked it up they're idiots you don't get the whole picture. Look at it like this, Airman Snuffy fucks up an airplane. Do I just yell at Snuffy for being an idiot or do I look who signed off Snuffy on the task and see how long Snuffy has been working on the jet and how long he has been doing this task, and also who trained him. If they guy who taught Snuffy this task just signed him off and never really taught Snuffy, did Snuffy fuck up or did the guy who taught Snuffy also fuck up. Or maybe Snuffy was taught it the right way and he's just an idiot. Without asking why and just taking everything at surface level you don't get the whole picture |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
