humanitarian disaster in mugabe's zimbabwe

for the past twenty years robert mugabe has turned one of the wealthiest and most well educated countries in africa into a nation on the brink of catastrophe.
people have no fresh water, no food - a loaf of bread now costs a week's wages - little or no electricity, and no jobs. also, anyone who dares speak out against mugabe is likely to end up dead or in jail. though of course there are 'elections' but if someone doesn't vote for mugabe they are likely to get a visit from the 'green bombers' a groups of brainwashed young thugs who will proceed to beat the person to a pulp. right now the average age a citizen of zimbabwe can expect to live to is just 35 years. together with AIDS, malnutrition, and lack of health care, it is expected to be even less than 35 within the next few years.
yet gordon brown has still not imposed sanctions on this country, and the UN have no real presence there, so what is happening?
of course military action by the west would be as disasterous as the present situation, but sanctions should have been imposed long ago, and the UN should definitely have monitors in place to observe voting procedures.
is this just another case of the world turning away from problems in africa.
perhaps if they had oil......?

 

Its a fiasco and will not be resolved easily as he is firmly in control and entrenched, whats more he is popular in the rest of SA so little local pressure from surrounding countries

 

i agree.
though that said, it did say on the news last night that some african nations have brought pressure to bear but obviously with little result, also i suppose those african nations surrounding zimbabwe are poor nations themselves and ill equipped to take the floods of refugees they might well attract if they made a stand against mugabe.

 

Sorry, but who cares? Mugabe and his henchment have driven Zimbabwe to the the catastrophe it now faces. Why is it anything to do with the UN? Sanctions would do nothing.

 

your compassion is notable only by its complete and utter absence.
if we all took the attitude then this world would be an even sorrier place than it is now.
perhaps we should just tell organisations like amnesty international and medicine sans frontiers to just throw in the towel and get a life!
people like you never cease to amaze me!

 

How are sanctions going to help?

They will only make things worse for the people.

The problem is UN is a toothless body, which works at a pace, less than that of a snail.

It is just good at passing resolutions and condemning human rights violations. Beyond that, there is hardly any action ever.

By the time UN actually does anything, it is usually too late.

 

Mugabe has been trying to take the piss out of the UK since he gained power and make no mistake, his policy of evicting white farmers and seizing their lands was tacitly supported by neighbouring and other African countries who viewed it as sticking it to the colonial powers. They could have shut down Mugabe years ago. South Africa, for example, could have closed down Mugabe's government by blocking the import route through their country but have instead, chosen to support him instead.

What are the UN to do? Invade Zimbabwe? That's the only way they could get observers on the ground! The UK tried for years to gain support for moves against Mugabe to bring an end to his form of Government but were always blocked by those nations who thought it better to see Mugabe 'stand up to the UK' rather than the people get fed.

So why should I give a toss now that the fruits of Mugabe's labour have come to pass?

 

i am not suggesting an invasion of any kind.
but just sitting on our hands feeling miffed because mugabe has it in for brits due to our previous colonisation of the land isn't going to help,
gordon brown must impose sanctions, and britain must be prepared to take as many zimbabwean refugees as we can.
also the UN can still do a lot in zimbabwe, with observers put in place during elections, and generally keeping the thugs away from the voters.
to be defeatist is only assuring mugabe a trouble free reign for the next goodness knows how many years.

 

It's not about 'feeling miffed' it's that Britain has been trying for many years to prevent the catastrophe and has been blocked and at times even ridiculed at every turn.

Not f****** likely! There's an entire Continent surrounding Zimbabwe. That's where the refugees should be resettled, not a small island in Europe.

This has got nothing to do with the UK. Leave them to sort out their own mess.

 

unless you hadn't noticed we have already accepted zimbabwean refugees and asylum seekers, and as a wealthy first world country who once colonised the nation, then called rhodesia, we do have a moral obligation to help ease the suffering of its people.
those african countries surrounding zimbabwe are too poor or unstable to take refugees.
just because you don' t like mugabe, and lets admit it how does? why take it out on a suffering nation.
every first world nation should extend a helpful hand to people in this situation, i for one work for an international charity that works with such people and do not like the implication that such work is regarded as useless or not neccessary by people like you.

 

No we don't. We have zero obligation to Zimbabwe. It was working just fine when it was handed it's independence. It was in fact, one of the most successful countries in Africa. Our obligation ended there.

Why? Let the African continent do something about it. Get some African countries to open their doors. They won't and people like you are quite happy to accept their excuses for not doing so. The bottom line is the African countries could have done something about Zimbabwe years ago but chose not to, they could take in the refugees but choose not to - I fail to see why this is anything whatsoever to do with the UK, one of ther few countries that tried to prevent it in the first place?

Good for you. Keep it up. It's your own inner voice you're hearing, not my writing in a single thread on a webmaster forum.

 

i can see that it is useless to try to convert someone who has the 'leave for someone else to sort it out' type attitude. of course it is easier to sit back in our comfortable armchairs and smugly state that this is not our call, that we did our bit years ago, so why should it concern us.
we did that with rwanda remember, and over a million were killed in a ruthless genocide.
we cannot wash our hands of africa simply because we consider it to be africa's problem, and i didn't mention the charity work i do because i wanted recognition for it, i get paid, others volunteer, they are the real heroes. i mentioned it because thankfully for every armchair critic like you there are hundreds more who are willing to 'yes' we need to help these people out, and it doesn't matter where they live geographically, what matters is the abject suffering they are going through. as human beings, we should do all that we can.
and i believe that gordon brown will impose sanctions, and the UN will become involved. simply because those good british citizens who do feel the same as me will put pressure on the government to act and gordon will put pressure on the UN to be more pro-active.
as for the armchair critics, well, as always, they will just sit at home and whinge.

 

Mate, I'd much rather something was done about the abject poverty and despair in my own country than a self-imposed one in some African country. If they want to kill each other then leave them to it.

 

It's a shame Zimbabwe wasn't an oil rich country in a perfect strategical location in the Middle East, Bush and the rest of the scumbag Neocons would be all over the f*cker.

What Mugabe has done is a disgrace.

 

It's a a shame that you are not the forthcoming with a condemnation about terrorists.

 

how do we define 'terror'.
in my book mugabe is a terrorist.
a teacher in zimbabwe appeared on tv last night giving an interview about the horrors he faces alongside all his fellow countrymen knowing full well that afterwards he would suffer the consequences.
to me that is terror.
it comes in many forms and shapes.

 

It was and is, exactly the same thing Idi Amin did in Uganda. He was so preoccupied with sticking it to Britain he chucked out all the Asians and seized their businesses. The economy simply collapsed because the middle class Asians were the ones who kept it running. The UK took in 50,000 refugees that time, mostly because it was felt the obligation was still upon Britain at that time as it had only been about 10 years since Uganda had been given its independence.

 

I agree, it's just that AGS has a thing about the ones who like fireworks & other loud bangs

 

It's really simple to understand. Zimbabwe = no oil. The western leaders don't care about nations that they can't take anything from.

 

Mugabe said:
White farmers no good. Black people working for white farmers no good. Black people better take the farms and give them to poor black people.
Racism against the whites.
Good black man is not always a good manager.
Business is business, you have to have knowledge and expertise to run it.
Even some educated people are different in abilities among themselves.
Many white managers were let go so black men take their positions, just because they black.
Black men with little or no qualification run big businesses in Zimbabwe. Result hyperinflation and starvation.