Zimbabwe's latest crisis

Hunger crisis grips Zimbabwe (msn.com)

"This is all a part of a climate driven disaster" says Bettina Luescher, UN Food
Program speaker.
She is stating a fact, but not the truth. The truth is most of what happens in
Zimbabwe is human driven disaster.
It's someone else's fault - most likely the Capitalist nations (China not included)
Climate effects all nations.
Why can't people call a spade a spade, and stop blaming others for the failure
of policies they often support?

 

Duh uh

It's a P.C. thing.
You may NOT call out a Black government's corruptions nor failures.
Nor Saint Obama's.

@Poohbear - love the spade statement considering .
How innocent?
I guess it's racial sensitivity class for you


Moi

Don't further ize
​

 

There is no food shortage, just a distribution problem.

Just like Puerto Rico, they probably have too much food on hand but are too stupid to figure out how to get it to the people.

 

Could be more of a production issue - white farmers driven off their land; socialist policies;
dictatorship; tribalism... that kind of thing. Coming soon to South Africa.

 

Doubtful in this nation as I haven't heard of any major disruption in their production and besides their would be plenty of international aid given.

I have no doubt that South Africa will be destroyed as a nation in all but name. The white farmers are being murdered but even the black ones are having their crops or equipment stolen.

There literally is no way out for them unless they have a time machine.

South Africa will go down as one of the biggest blunders in political history.

 

The video acknowledges both aspects. It literally says in the last statement "grim reminder of a brutal legacy"

There is a significant and unprecedented drought on top of all the other social issues.

Completely your idea. Nothing in the video suggested that.

 

True. There was drought on the Korean peninsula about 20 years ago.
It was an inconvenience to South Korea, a death sentence to two million
in North Korea.
There was drought across central Europe in the 1930's - bad for Western
farmers but cost the lives of millions of Ukrainians under Communism.
Same for China.

 

Some fools in the West feel they do not need to care for the destruction they have done to the planet while enjoying the good life as long as the brown people who they soothe their consience by calling idiots are the first to die....and yes it will hit South Africa probably very soon. They have been having great problems getting their people water in recent years....but still the jokers go about demanding we make the planet worse as to them it means nothing if those who come after them have no planet to live on and millions die and are made homeless. Will they give them refuge in their country when where they live can no longer support them. Of course not.

 

Did your imaginary deity "push" you to regurgitate that debunked racist FALSEHOOD above?

Does posting that kind of racist content what it means to be "living a Christian life"?

Sad!

 

I think 'brown people' have a lot to answer for when it comes to setting fire to the planet,
killing of the 'mega fauna', bringing disease and cannibalism to earlier inhabitants and such.
Just today - new DNA research on the islands Columbus first visited - seems there weren't
that many people there after all, and the 'indigenous' people had invaded from Sth America
and basically, like in Japan, Hawaii, Natal in Sth Africa, Chatham Island NZ etc. just murdered
all the real native people. I have a grudging respect for white people.

 

Your gruding respect for white people at the expense of other people as you wrote is called White Supremacy.

We know that it is the West who has brought this planet to the edge of destruction and the people who did least remain the poorest and those to be first affected. I think ecoside and working in a direction which will cause human extinction must be the worst crime possible.

 

duplicate

 

sadly, the title "christian" in america generally translates as "racist" in english.

 

the vanity LMAO.

so prideful.

 

Poor governance and drought = humanitarian disaster. On that we agree.

 

Yes, the Spanish are well-known for their generosity and humanity in the colonization of South America. Our British ancestors have a harmonious history with the Aboriginal people here in Aus as well...a little heavy with the shotgun perhaps in Tasmania (where we committed genocide of the entire indigenous population)...but at least they were quick, humane deaths, eh?

 

Why rich Arab countries do not accept African immigrants ?
Why do you blame the West ?

 

Yeah, we talked about Tasmania yesterday, conversation went something like this, "That story
of the British forming a line and marching across the island, killing all the aborigines is just a
myth."
The main issue with the two small tribes in Tasmania was their determination to fight to the end.
They were pretty good at, BTW - attacking towns, using rifles etc.. They aren't all really 'gone' in
a sense - I am part Tasmanoid myself.
Where I live today we have the aboriginal settlement at Barmah on the Murray River. The natives
there have never been harmed. Living well off 'aboriginal land' and white man's luxuries.

ps if you were in Mexico when Cortez arrived, who would you support, the Aztecs or the Spanish?

 

I think 'poor governance' is inadequate in describing Communism.
The policies of Communism weren't 'poor' to Communists, they
were exactly what the Communists intended them be - political
control via food, political control over the means of production.
Only Stalin could bring rural Russia into the Communist system,
only he had the 'steel' (as they said) for the brutal collectivization.

 

Esau, please, WHAT ethnic group do YOU most like?

ps I am proud of white people - you go to Europe or America and see their
racially diverse populations and exclusive policies - I don't recall anyone in
Africa, for instance, being like this in history. India for instance is perhaps the
world's most racist and sexist nation, as admitted by themselves in polls.

 

It's been technically declared as genecide, but if you claim to be of Aboriginal descent then what would I know...

I was talking about South America. I generally don't support going into other countries and slaughtering their civilisations just because they repelled the intruders

 

Repelling invaders is a vague concept. Ever watched that movie 'Zulu' ? Excellent attempt
at portraying the humanity of both sides. But in this case it really was the Zulu nation which
best bore the descriptive 'genocide' as they migrated down to the Cape, waging total warfare
on all the 'native' tribes of South Africa. Neither the Dutch nor the English did this.

I live in Moama, BTW. And having 1/64 Tasmanoid genes gives me no authority on the subject,
anymore than having 50% genes. What most 1930's Germans didn't know was they were part
Chinese and Jewish, genetically speaking. We are all the same, we are all conquerors and we
have all killed 'natives.'

 

I blame Britain. They could have helped Rhodesia work out something, the same way they could have helped S. Africa if they wanted to. Having separate States within a federated system would have been the best for both countries - although I'm not quite sure of what the situation was in Rhodesia before it became Zambabwe.

In the US, integration was never forced on the native Americans. The natives who didn't want to assimilate into the society, were given their own nations so they could continue their own way of life. With the Blacks in the US it was different, since they were not natives and didn't have their own homelands - nor did they retain their own standards and way of life. They had already assimilated and wanted equality.

What Britain did was force integration on a native population through propaganda and coercion, whose standards conflicted with that of the white Afrikaners. By forcing them to accept the standards of the Afrikaners, rather than living among their own, automatically put them at a psychological disadvantage. So it certainly didn't work towards the benefit of the Blacks - if that was the intent.

Either the British are idiots, which they are not, or they did it to please some other nations in the 'commonwealth'.

Poor Britannia! We no more rules the waves.
And now we must compensate, our former slaves.

It matters not though what they want,
and what might be their need.

All we want is to show the world,
is we did a righteous deed -Jeannette

​

 

People have asked me why Cubans are either white or black but not indian or mestizo. The reason is that the Spanish completely wiped out the native population. I mean completely. The blacks, of course, are descended from slaves. Genocide has even occurred in our lifetime.

 

Yet the natives in the Americas slayed more natives than the Europeans did. So it's just misplaced anger. I had come across something recently about the Comanches, and found out that the reason the Spanish settled the coasts but not the interior of the US, was because of them. They were ferocious fighters, but real savages. Their tortures were unbelievable.

As the Europeans settled the East, the native tribes moved westward into Comanche territory and that was the end of them. In order to defeat them, Washington decided to kill off their food source. Buffalo hunting became a big sport around the turn of the last century.

Here's Quanah Parker, the last Comanche chief. His mother was a European who was kidnapped when she was 8 years old. He's a nice looking guy, but a real ham.