WHEN THE WHITE MAN CEASES TO RULE - THIS IS THE TRAGIC RESULT

[BIGTEX]

We can once again thank the liberal idiots who brought us this disaster.

<http://www.american.com/archive/2007/september-0907/the-tragedy-of-zimbabwe/>

[Peter1469]

I agree that the disaster in Rhodesia is horrible.  But it effects not US national security interests.  F'em. 

[BIGTEX]

It DOES affect us, however.

The United States is one of the leading suppliers of food aid in the world.  We are now providing such aid to Rhodesia.

When the white man ruled Rhodesia, it was the "breadbasket of Africa," providing not only enough food for its own needs, but was also the largest (by far) exporter of food in all Africa.

Liberal idiots, by insisting on Negro rule for that nation, DESTROYED IT, and now the USA is paying (in the form of humanitarian aid) for the consequences.

The ONLY reason we are having trouble with Iran these days is due to the fact the liberal idiots wanted the Shah gone.  It happened, and what once was America's greatest ally in the Persian Gulf is now its greatest enemy.

Liberals are idiots.

Anyone who disagrees with that fact is a liberal.

[Peter1469]

Why should we give them food aid?  Seems like a waste of money to me. 

[BIGTEX]

It IS a waste of money. 

We have a very liberal government, however.

[lastone13]

It DOES affect us, however.

The United States is one of the leading suppliers of food aid in the world.  We are now providing such aid to Rhodesia.

When the white man ruled Rhodesia, it was the "breadbasket of Africa," providing not only enough food for its own needs, but was also the largest (by far) exporter of food in all Africa.

Liberal idiots, by insisting on Negro rule for that nation, DESTROYED IT, and now the USA is paying (in the form of humanitarian aid) for the consequences.

The ONLY reason we are having trouble with Iran these days is due to the fact the liberal idiots wanted the Shah gone.  It happened, and what once was America's greatest ally in the Persian Gulf is now its greatest enemy.

Liberals are idiots.

Anyone who disagrees with that fact is a liberal.

This shows opinion based on ignorance, not fact. 

The Shah was driven out of Iran by radical reactionary Islamists - the kind of men who beat their wives for not covering up their faces or not having the food on the table at the appointed time.   How on earth do you call them liberal? 

Which liberal idiots insisted on self-rule for Rhodesia?   The problems in Rhodesia are related to corrupt government and intertribal warfare that has resulted in the deaths and deliberate starvation of millions of people.  Liberals do not starve people to death. 

The people of Rhodesia were able to feed themselves quite well without the white men.  When the White Men came, the British - John Rhodes, hence the name Rhodesia - they came in search of gold.  The natives did not interfere with the white men doing this because gold held no fascination for them.  The natives and the Brits each farmed different types of soil, so there was no conflict over agriculture. 

You, my friend, need to do some reading.  It sounds like you've been using the John Birch Society as your primary source. 

[SDML]

This is shaping up to be an entertaining little spat.

[Vermouth]

Botswana, Zimbabwe's neighbor, seems to be doing okay without "white man" rule.

...Botswana has long maintained one of the highest economic growth rates in the world, moving from the third poorest nation at its independence in 1966 to being an "upper middle income" country by the time it celebrated its pearl anniversary in 1996.
...
[T]he country's first president, Sir Seretse Khama ... who led Botswana until his death in 1980, and his successor Ketumile Masire, who governed until his retirement in 1998, were steadfastly committed to building a free society.
...
Largely due to Botswana's openness and a vibrant press, there is a refreshing absence of corruption – the bane of many African regimes. Botswana has a lively free press and freedom of expression.
...
[T]he politics of racial resentment which Mugabe has exploited in Zimbabwe had no place in independent Botswana. Instead, Botswana's leaders forged a strong bond with the country's whites, who still make up some 7% of the population.
....
And, unlike other nationalist leaders, the elder Khama and Masire adopted a series of pro-market policies which paid rich dividends over the years, including low and stable taxes for foreign investors, liberal trade terms, and low income tax rates for its citizens and businesses...

http://worlddefensereview.com/pham041708.shtml

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

Rhodesia was indeed the breadbasket of Africa until it gained independence. No surprise there. Post colonial fiasco:Take 16? 17?

The problems in Rhodesia are related to corrupt government and intertribal warfare that has resulted in the deaths and deliberate starvation of millions of people

In other words, the problem is Black rule. lol

I don't think liberal is the term he should use. There is no doubt, however, that leftist elements in the West demanded Black rule and there is also no doubt that the Negro was not ready for self rule as events in Zimbabwe (most recently) clearly show.

Good fellows those Birchers ....

[SDML]

That's twice the word "negro" has been used in this thread. Did you guys come of age in the 1960s or something?

Memo from the 21st century: "Negro" is now, more often than not, taken as a slur. It is not, and has not been for a long time, an accepted synonym for "black" or "African-American" or even "colored" (which is also no longer considered an acceptable term).

OK...now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[spunkloaf]

There's no motivation on my part to post in this thread, other than to say how pointless it is.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

SDML There I go offending your sensibilities again. Sorry, man. Let me rephrase: The Black African was not ready for self rule.

Spunk 

[BIGTEX]

Has anyone here ever heard of the "United NEGRO College Fund?"

Hmmmm?

[BIGTEX]

lastone 13 wrote:



"This shows opinion based on ignorance, not fact. 

The Shah was driven out of Iran by radical reactionary Islamists - the kind of men who beat their wives for not covering up their faces or not having the food on the table at the appointed time.   How on earth do you call them liberal? 

Which liberal idiots insisted on self-rule for Rhodesia?   The problems in Rhodesia are related to corrupt government and intertribal warfare that has resulted in the deaths and deliberate starvation of millions of people.  Liberals do not starve people to death. 

The people of Rhodesia were able to feed themselves quite well without the white men.  When the White Men came, the British - John Rhodes, hence the name Rhodesia - they came in search of gold.  The natives did not interfere with the white men doing this because gold held no fascination for them.  The natives and the Brits each farmed different types of soil, so there was no conflict over agriculture."



BIGTEX WILL NOT ALLOW lastone TO PERPETUATE LIBERAL MYTHS UNCHALLENGED.

The government of the Shah of Iran had the Islamofascists under firm control until LIBERAL IDIOTS in Western nations started an incessant criticism of his "human rights" record.  The Shah (Reza Palavi) had broken the influence of the dirty mullahs, and had them penned up just where they needed to be.  But the liberal idiots would hear NONE of that. 

Led by Jimmy "The Grinning Dunce" Carter, international pressure of a magnitude rarely seen was brought to bear on the Shah.  Liberal idiots gave spiritual, material and media support to the Islamofascist, emboldening them to the point that the Shah (fatally ill with cancer), finally tossed in the towel and left. 

The result?  LIBERAL IDIOTS SUCCEEDED IN BECOMING MIDWIVES TO THE BIRTH OF THE MOST VILE REGIME IN THE MIDEAST!

THANKS, LIBERAL IDIOTS (REDUNDANCY)!



NOTE TO LASTONE:

BIGTEX was, at one time, a professor of history.  You challenge him at the risk of appearing a fool.

[BIGTEX]

Vermouth:

Thank you for proving (unwittingly) the point BIGTEX was asserting.

It is BECAUSE Botswana has allowed its approximately 7% European population to remain in control of the means of foreign exchange (read: DIAMOND MINES) that the nation has prospered.

In this regard Botswana is quite similar to - shall we say - Kuwait or the UAE.  The natives of those lands could not have a functioning society (much less a prosperous one) without the white man's leadership and technological prowess.

The Negroes of Botswana were - for thousands of years - tripping over diamonds as big as hen's eggs without knowing at all what sort of a resource they had.  The white man changed that.

Likewise, each and every time you view a photo of the skyline of Dubai, it would behoove you to repeat to yourself, "None of this would have EVER been possible without the white man."