Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by 7 Dying Trees, Jun 24, 2008.
Aww, they're the best of friends.
Actually they're quite smashing. I think they'll be all the rage in a few years!
I don't suppose either of their little black books are too full
Seriously, as callous as it is, there's nothing of value to us in Zimbabwe, and it's not in a particularly useful position strategically...therefore there's no will to 'liberate' it round to 'democracy', short of letting them sort themselves out.
I think the argument is if we are going to "liberate" countries and covert them to "democracy", then why not this one? That is the excuse that Bush gave for getting us into Iraq, after the WMD argument fell through.
Either we should get involved in every single humans right atrocity, or in none of them.
^ precisely, but if we intervene in Zim, we don't get anything tangible, and credability isn't worth the same effort that resources and a half decent staging post are worth
Aside from the 'no gain' argument - which is absolutely right - this is a situation which SADC should have well in hand. The poorest behaviour of the lot is from my own dear president who has done absolutely dick about a megalomaniac on his own border.
South Africans are scandalized by this - not only because of the humanitarian situation but, at the lowest end of the economic scale, because around 1/3 of the adult Zimbabwean population now lives and works in South Africa. Our own poor see that as stealing jobs from them, which led (in part at least) to the terrible xenophobic violence here over the last few weeks.
But Mbeki has a great deal to answer for and a token show of force in 2000/2001 when Mugabe a) passed laws to 'repatriate' White-owned farms and b) stole the first election he lost would have prevented the current situation. Similar to 'if the US had ousted the unelected President they wouldn't be in Iraq at the moment'. Hindsight is 20/20.
Personally I loathe Jacob Zuma who is a complete moron, but I think he recognises his own inadequacy and has surrounded himself with some very competent people, not like Mbeki and his gaggle of yes-men. Come the change of regime in SA (which is inevitable) I think it's highly likely there will be a far tougher stance.
African politics. It's a fuckin' laugh a minute.
Now, I know nothing about economics, but just a question here... I'm sure that exchange rate's not practical, and more an expression of value, but couldn't someone from somewhere more economically sound (Like the UK) simply invest a whole lot in the Zimbabwean economy?
Think about it. Even for us in the US, one dollar is 9 billion of their dollars. Since history is for the most part cyclical, one assumes that eventually their infrastructure will collapse and be rebuilt. As the country develops more (or gets outside assistance), the exchange rate will climb. If their currency ever gets anywhere close to ours, even at 1:100 exchange you're still a Zimbabwean multi-millionaire.
There won't be a cent of foreign aid until Mugabe is history. Dead would be preferable to retired.
More to the point, foreign aid for its own sake has no real value. Infrastructural rebuilding and job creation are both far more worthwhile. Zimbabwe has a benign climate, good soil (for Africa - that's always a qualifier), significant mineral resources and a fairly small population. There is no reason whatsoever that they can't get back on their own feet given incentives and a modicum of assistance.
Until 2000, they also had a white population who were extremely pro-Zimbabwe and provided most of the expertise involved in agriculture. Over the last 8 years the majority have been chased off the land and out of the country - Zambia has been GIVING South African and Zimbabwean farmers some of the best land in Africa in order to get production up and running again. It's working. Much of Zimbabwe's post-Mugabe problem will be enticing the right skill sets in/back in, the balance is removing the congenitally moronic and lazy off the farms they occupied and drove into the gro0und.
That seems to imply whites only - it doesn't. The majority of qualified - at anything! - black Zimbabweans are in South Africa as well.
It took Mugabe around 3 years to utterly destroy Zimbabwe's economy - for the last 5 it's been moribund at best - and it will take 20 minimum to restore it.
What we really need is someone like Uday Hussein in his government, who we could be fairly certain would take him out anyway given enough time...
A person like would likely be even worse than Mugabe unfortunately, and a Western country taking him out would just turn him into a martyr to a lot of the wrong people.
I suspect some random Zimbabwean who's been pushed past his limits will eventually whack him. It would still take a huge amount of time to repair what's been done to the country, but that would at least be the first step towards progress, as nothing will happen while Mugabe is in power.
Shouldn't you try to find usama bin ladin before you go invade another country without reason ?
And also, If you want to invade a place thats poor, and were the people have been fucked by it's leaders, why not try New Orleans.
Maybe the last word on the subject?
South African newspapers are not renowned for witty headlines - generally it's something along the lines of "Petrol price shock for motorists" about increase number 14 in a row. If they wanted a real shock, they'd lower the price.
Notwithstanding their poor track record, The Star came up with this yesterday:
SIDESHOW BOB'S ZIM CIRCUS
The clowns all seem to have been waiting for him at the AU summit.