Glad you thought it was funny, but it was actually motivated by the horrific idea that you are suggesting.
I presume you are exaggerating for effect. If not I refer you to Driver8’s posts above. If you want to clarity in the discussion I suggest you discuss.
Since I’m here, to answer the OP:
I would be strongly against outside intervention into Zimbabwe, at least from outside of Southern Africa. With Mugabe out of the picture a unity government consisting of the MDC and reasonable members of Zanu PF (they do exist) would be the best way forward. How they would actually dig the country out of its pit is beyond me, but I would certainly be one of the first to reinvest if this was the situation (time I mean, I have little money to offer!).
Hell no I’m not exaggerating for effect. Driver8’s post was flawed, as Martini Enfield pointed out already. There isn’t mass destruction, starvation, ethnic cleansing, and rampant AIDS in America. The analogy doesn’t apply to the situation we’re talking about. As for your assertion that there are people in Zimbabwe already who could run it properly, well, I think it’s pretty widely acknowledged that it was the white farmers (the ones who are getting screwed now) who were the driving force behind Rhodesia’s agricultural prosperity. (No, it wasn’t because they were white, it was because they had the benefit of modern agricultural technology.) Another civil war in Zimbabwe is just going to lead to another Mugabe.
Rhodesia, Rhodesia, Rhodesia. If only it was still around.
You should read some accounts of Rhodesians that were written during the times of prosperity, and view some photographs or videos of what the country was like before it became the horror-show that it is now. I think you’ll agree - it was better off.
I want to say that if I were around during the Bush War, I would have gone over there and volunteered for the Rhodesian army - but knowing what I know now, they never had a chance. The whole world was against them. The rest of the world turned their back on Rhodesia and supported the assholes who destroyed the country, and now look what we’ve got.
You are actually serious? Fair enough.
You believe that the population of Rhodesia should never have started their 2nd Chimurenga (the ‘Bush War’ you seem so keen to have been part of)? They should have been happy with their lot? That the latter part of Mugabe’s time in power is a direct and unavoidable consequence of majority rule? That life was better in 1965 Rhodesia than 1985 Zimbabwe?
Zimbabwe is facing almost insurmountable problems that make me want to weep with anger and frustration. But to support the idea of a colonial ‘golden age’, let alone a return to it, is an ignorant and offensive notion.
Well let me ask you - would YOU rather live in Rhodesia, or in present day Zimbabwe? And be honest now. Try to really visualize the situation as reality, and not just a hypothetical. Say you’re in the prime of your life with a wife and 2 kids. You’d rather settle down in a peaceful and prosperous place, or a third-world meat grinder?
That would make a good title for a comedic musical; perhaps you could do a double feature with “Springtime for Hitler”. Brian Cox could play Cecil Rhodes in a manner similar to his portrayal as Hannibal Lecter.
Stranger
Jesus, you’re really living up the illusion, aren’t you? Things might be peaceful and prosperous for white colonists; for natives forced (sometimes by physical coercion) to work in gold and diamond mines under inhumane conditions, life was not so good.
You have no concept whatsoever of what life was like for the native people of colonial Africa.
Stranger
Still though, I’d like you to answer the question. Anyone else can take a stab at it too, although it was directed towards our new guests. Would you rather live in Rhodesia or Zimbabwe?
Well I’m closing my eyes tight and trying real hard.
Nah, forget it, I’ll just rely on memory.
Neither place had a democratic government so I’ll pass on both thanks. Zimbabwe from 1980 to the mid-90s? Maybe a better option. A democratic, peaceful and prosperous future Zimbabwe? I can only hope.
And I suggest you ask your question to the average guy on the street in Bulawayo. You’re not going to get the answer you think.
Ah, great. I’ll be damned if anyone could actually answer that question. “Neither of them had a democratic government so I wouldn’t want to live in either.” Never mind that one of those undemocratic governments is a violent, brutal nightmare of massacres and corruption, and the other was just…a nondemocratic government that had minority rule. I knew that this question would be evaded instead of answered.
In any case, the future will show what’s in store for Zimbabwe. The killings and disease and poverty will continue, there will be another civil war, a new Mugabe will take over, we’ll have child-soldiers with AK-47s gunning each other down, towns on fire - it’ll be just like Darfur: a nightmarish disaster zone that the rest of the world is just going to ignore. They’ll put their fingers in their ears and go “la la la la la” while thousands and thousands of people die, and nobody will do anything about it.
And it all could have been avoided if the Rhodesian flag was still flying. But - ooohhh - they were evil evil colonialist imperialist racists, so Zimbabwe is better off as it is.
Okey doke. Since you want an answer to the silly question I’ll give you one.
Personally I’d rather be living in Rhodesia in the 70s than Zimbabwe now. At least I know that things are going to get better.
But do I get magical preknowledge of how things turn out?
But wait, what if you mean Zimbabwe in the last 20 years, or Rhodesia in its last 20? Then Zimbabwe, definitely.
Perhaps you could define a bit more? What socio-economic class am I? What tribe? What colour?
What a stupid question.
And on preview:
a) A Sudan type situation is not inevitable for Zimbabwe. They are completely different countries. Do you understand that? Nowhere near each other with as much in common as Belarus and Ireland.
b) What on earth are you suggesting? That a military intervention in Rhodesia during the 'Bush War" would have been a good idea? Or should we have just explained politely that the independence supporters were making an awful error and would be better off being a bit more subservient?
I believe I already told you this was rubbish the last thread you brought it up in - and I notice you never returned to rebutt it there. Maybe you should educate yourself in what things were actually like at the time:
[
](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,948221-1,00.html) While things started out OK, they rapidly went downhill. Smith left the new unity government with $500 million in debt. Some economic success there :rolleyes: White rule gutted Zimbabwe.
Huh?
Really?(warning, slightly graphic B&W image.
Not even the airways were safe…
What about biological warfare?
So that’s what you want to go back to?
Where did you *get *this stuff about post-UDI Rhodesia being some peaceful economic Wonderland? Let me guess, you’ve met a few “When-We’s”, right? They’re about as trustworthy on this as a KKK member is on the Civil Rights era.
…and practiced biological warfare…
You do realise you have been arguing with someone who, from their posts, seems to be a Zimbabwean, don’t you?
So you think that Zimbabwe now is better than Rhodesia in the 70s?
Anyway, whatever problems the Smith government had - I think it’s pretty ridiculous to compare them to the situation now.
Anyway, MrDibble, I think I’ve said enough about my own idea for the improvement of the country. What would you propose doing? (I’m not trying to be pushy, either, I’m just curious to know.)
Just to clarify, no. I’m British, born in Kenya. Lived in Rhodesia for 2 years in the 70s, and worked in Zimbabwe for most of 2000, filming the elections amongst other things. In between have travelled round most of the country and have many friends there.
It’s worth pointing out again what a beautiful country we are talking about.
Well no, that’s not what I said. Once again: Zimbabwe in the 80s and 90s was not a bad place at all, comparatively. For a start, there was a war going on for much of the 70s. I don’t think your comparison of the situation right now with that of a previous decade is a useful one at all.
Oh good, you agree.
No you haven’t. You seem to be suggesting a country-sized time machine? Or if you actually mean massive Western military intervention and a foreign-imposed government, then please say so.
I think the title of this previous Pit thread should tell you all about what I think should be done.
As for Zimbabwe, nothing. Let them sort it out themselves. Confine any interference to strictly humanitarian ones, under UN mandate.
Sorry about the misplacement, you spoke with some knowledge and memories.
Even if we did agree that minority rule was better off for more people, a return to that system would not solve the countries problems. It would only cause a short delay before the same problem happened again. If you do the same thing twice, you can’t expect different results.
That doesn’t sound even close to easy.
