Printable View
I see Obama couldn't even write an original line to memorialize the event. He stole Stanton's line regarding Lincoln's death "he belongs to the ages" without attribution. I supposed he'll say he thought of it first but telepathically influenced Stanton in the past or some such rot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
Bailey....my point if you chose to read it correctly is that the British viewed the Colonial Army as nothing more than a band of terrorists ( for their ambush and sniping techniques and unconventional warfare ...for fighting "unfair" and were not inclined to even treat our troops as standard soldiers of war but criminals. I have read extensively on this topic. Read about the prison barges they kept the colonial troops in. Next time, don't distort what I wrote to jump on the bandwagon. It's not like you. Obviously I wasn't equating our founding fathers to Al Aqadea. With that being said, I'm out for now.
Hell the blacks in SA even hate the black Angolans that fought for SA during the Border Wars. Take a look at Pomfret where 32 Battalion soldiers got dumped off. They get treated like crap by the ANC just because they fought on the SA side of the war.
Considering SA is far worse now than it was then, how can you say that Mandela did anything good for the country, or the people of the country, or the world?
Oh, whites were oppressing blacks there? Evidently with good reason. How can you argue against that? Their actions to keep a lid on this behavior have been retroactively proven justified. If you can't behave civilized, then you deserve to be treated like a second class citizen. And that goes for any skin color, anywhere.
And if you can't behave civilized, and you can't stand being treated like a second class citizen, and you start blowing stuff up to get your way, you are a terrorist. You're not a freedom fighter.
Historically, white colonists in Africa (see: Rhodesia, South Africa, and Zambia) have been subjected to pretty harsh treatment and oppression. I would classify some of the events that happened to Rhodesians as near-genocidal. Of the South African contractors (one actually identified himself as Rhodesian) I met in Afghanistan, the general consensus was "South Africa was a safer and more productive place before Mandela took control."Quote:
Originally Posted by generalmeow
Imagine if the American colonists threw off the yoke of their British oppressors only to immediately fall into decline, and become the rape and HIV capital of the world. Would George Washington be revered all over the world?
Obviously the revolution would be called a huge mistake, and GW would be a joke. I can't figure out how Mandela has escaped this.
I know I said I was out but this warranted a reply. The atrocities committed by all races in SA was horrible. It was a product of Apartheid. If you systematically treat people unethically a monster will be unleashed. Poverty creates violence and a host of other issues. It doesn't matter if your black, white, Indian or Asian. Look at Northern Irleland or some of the many other nations that have felt "oppressed". Less than 10% of the population of SA ruled over and created a separate code of living for the rest of the nation. How could this not end in violence or revolution? Ask yourself what would happen here if 10% of a particular ethnic group voted itself all powerful? Would you lay down your guns and comply with your new rules? Would you move to the newly formed Ghettos or would you fight? I read a book when I was about 15 called "Kafir Boy". It lead to me reading a host of other books on South Africa and apartheid. There is never a good reason to treat one ethnic group differently than another. Just ask those in the Balkans. It will not end well. As a reply to some, I don't support all things black. That's just stupid. Mugabe is a monster and deserves to be treated a such. As does any other dictator that advocates violence against its people. Whites oppressing blacks for good reason? Is it possible they created this monster? Mandela wasn't a saint, but I believe in what he fought for.
I agree that if I were part of the 90% being oppressed by the 10%, that I wouldn't like it, and I would want to fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by RMAC757
But as an outsider I can see that the 10% were right to be scared and in trying to oppress the 90%. They have been proven correct, haven't they? Their standard of safe living has been destroyed.
It turns out that the 90% didn't mind living like they were. They don't even mind living even worse now. They live worse, and they love Mandela for it. They just didn't want anyone living better than themselves. They were jealous.
The 10% were the good guys. Or maybe not good, but they had very good reasons (and have been vindicated) for oppressing the 90%. Namely, "If we let you have the power, we'll become the rape and HIV capital of the world, so no, you can't have the power".
I see the same issues arising in Israel if "the world" has its way.
South Africa was a tribal hell hole before white colonialists civilized it as much as they could.
Israel remains an oasis of civilization surrounded by savage nations.
If you remove the protectors of civilization from a region, lawlessness will rapidly take its place.
Personally, I believe the continent of Africa should have been left alone from the beginning. However, the greed of politicians will not allow.
It has been proven many times that you cannot bring a third world state up to a first world state quickly. Does not work. Lead a horse to water... Afghanistan is likely the most recent example.
Third world morals are not the same as first world morals.
Without a higher moral standard, civilization cannot exist.
CNN just reported Mandela was on the terrorist watch list until 2008.