observer Posted June 24, 2008 Report Share Posted June 24, 2008 Bob Mugabe is clearly a naughty boy (actually old man); who's taken a leaf out of the EU Eurocrats book by refusing to accept the verdict of his people. So now we've got a round of hand wringing by the global political class, who are clearly impotent to do anything about it. PS: and he's got no oil either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve the Original Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Basicly no one cares if he hasnt any oil but then again he does have other comodities that we could use so who knows when Iraq is over and our boys dont have anything else to do we could march in and take over... Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 What is the difference between the world banning sport with South Africa (Apartheid) yet still playing cricket with Zimbabwe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 25, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Errm, Ste, think you've forgot Afghanistan, which should tie up "our boys" for a generation, by which time Bob will be dead and gone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Can't Mark Thatcher organise another coup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Get the international court to charge him with genocide. Steps out of Zim and he gets arrested. Sanctions on those who aid and abet a criminal. Nah that would take bottle from most of Africa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 25, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Well we've made a start: taking his honoury knighthood off him and not playing cricket against Zimbabwe - what more do you want?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted June 28, 2008 Report Share Posted June 28, 2008 Hopefully the African congress will complete the job and finish him off one way or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 28, 2008 Report Share Posted June 28, 2008 Well apparently, after coercing and pushing through; with dodgy deals, and veiled threats and getting the vote result he wanted, Gordon Brown has now turned his attentions to sorting out Mugabe!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 There is of course one way to get rid of Uncle Bob. A CIA style black ops mission to take him out - sorted. As long as Mark Thatcher has nothing to do with it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Hopefully the African congress will complete the job and finish him off one way or another. Doubt it Geoff, a number of their members don't exactly have a human rights record to be proud of. He is propped up by the military and the police, if the leaders of those forces can be persuaded that when Mugabe ceases to be in power that they will be dangling from a rope or worse unless they cease to support him, their own self interest and survival instincts may encourage them to switch their support. Couple this to the removal by the UN of diplomatic immunity for Zimbabwean officials, there might be some progress in removing this terrorist from power.....a terrorist...or is that a freedom fighter who the UK helped to put in power. Guess the alternative could be a laser guided missile that seem to be effective in taking out Taliban and Iraqis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Seems the African Union have invited Bob to their next meeting, as if nothing unsual has happened; which perhaps sums up the state of Africa as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 This from The Times highlights the problem: From Times OnlineJune 30, 2008 Robert Mugabe hailed a hero at African Union summit Sonia Verma in Sharm el-Sheikh, and Philippe Naughton Robert Mugabe was hailed a "hero" by Africa's longest-serving head of state as he joined his fellow leaders at an African Union summit. "He was elected, he took an oath, and he is here with us, so he is President and we cannot ask him more," said Omar Bongo, President of Gabon since 1967. "He conducted elections and I think he won." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Levy Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 This from The Times highlights the problem: From Times OnlineJune 30, 2008 Robert Mugabe hailed a hero at African Union summit Sonia Verma in Sharm el-Sheikh, and Philippe Naughton Robert Mugabe was hailed a "hero" by Africa's longest-serving head of state as he joined his fellow leaders at an African Union summit. "He was elected, he took an oath, and he is here with us, so he is President and we cannot ask him more," said Omar Bongo, President of Gabon since 1967. "He conducted elections and I think he won." Deary me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 I wonder if Gordon has been picking up a few tips for 2010!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 Think he'd struggle to get the Army or the Police to support him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Uncle Bob has a point, when he said at the AU, "people in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones" = Egypt, Libya, Equatorial WA, Sudan - none of whom have democratically elected Presidents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 But are those countries starving their people and brutalising them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Deary me Shouldn't there be an "r" after the "D" Jonathan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Pete, probably just those that complain! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Levy Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Deary me Shouldn't there be an "r" after the "D" Jonathan? Huh? Please explain what you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Oh Boy!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw Posted July 4, 2008 Report Share Posted July 4, 2008 I have a good friend who fled Zimbabwe as a child due to the wise decisions of 'Bob' , according to him he is essentially a terrorist who gained power through violence and coersion *hardly a recipe for a healthy democracy - but i supposse he is hardly unbiased*, however he said very wisely that we should be very wary of deposing such a man without considering who might rise to power in his wake *Iraq too *, afterall who says the ''democratic'' oppossition will be the answer to the problem? He thinks it may better the devil you know in some ways for now until a real solution is solved, but he definately needs to go. I also think it is important to remember that Zimbabwe is more than good old Bob, he is part of the system and he could represent deeper and more complex problems for Zimbabwe, the issues are more than one man, afterall he couldn't survive very long if he wasn't playing up to the 'right people', of course if we don't change the system, the next president who comes along who may have good intentions could be moulded and confined by the corruption of the system, as has occured so so many times in history. Let's not make another neo-con mistake of simply blasting the bad guys and waiting for democracy to work its sweet magic, it's not magic, it's fragile and unique to every nation and state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2008 Prior to the end of the cold war, tyrants were tolerated, as long as they were OUR tyrants, and in the game of global politics lesser evils were accepted in the interests of conquering the greater evil - balance of power was the name of the game. With the end of the cold war and the collaspe of the Soviet Empire, the US neo-cons believed they now had free range to exploit the globe, under the guise of democratisation, which meant regime change for any non-compliant dictators (eg Saddam) IF they had national resources worth exploiting (ie oil). To sustain this burst of US global domination it was necessary to get domestic opinion on side, so radical Islam became the bogeyman, even though the US had originally trained and equiped Al Quaida against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. As for the African States, yes they are the products of a rapid colonial retreat, and unfortunately have led to Dictatorships like Mugabe's; however, in the world of trade and exploitation, democracy doesn't represent a major consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.