NationStates Jolt Archive

http://rhodesian.server101.com/terror_on_the_veld.htm

www.africancrisis.org/photos16.asp

http://rhodesian.server101.com/sa_on_the_brink.htm

http://rhodesian.server101.com/coming_darkness.htm

http://rhodesian.server101.com/sa_farm_attacks.htm

http://www.etherzone.com/2004/cdale070904.shtml

http://www.etherzone.com/2004/dale060304.shtml

http://www.etherzone.com/2004/dale060904.shtml

http://www.etherzone.com/2004/dale110504.shtml

www.africancrisis.org/photos11.asp

http://home.mweb.co.za/sa/savimbi/imagesterror.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1703595.stm (courtesy of Dian)

bump

This is what happens when the negro is allowed to control a country...

And we must grant these savages "affirmative action" and be tolerant... :rolleyes:

You'd think someone claimed it was without flaw. It certainly has its flaws, but it is a beautiful country that is at least making progress, albeit slower than would be ideal.

This is what happens when the negro is allowed to control a country...

And we must grant these savages "affirmative action" and be tolerant... :rolleyes:

Please refrain from posting racist comments on my thread, thanks.

hm you oppress the majority for decades and then wonder why they're pissed off....

hm you oppress the majority for decades and then wonder why they're pissed off....

Ah, but most of the whites who were killed were in no way affiliated with the former government. And if you click on the links, you'll see that many of the victims were- surprise!- blacks.

This is what happens when the negro is allowed to control a country...

And we must grant these savages "affirmative action" and be tolerant... :rolleyes:



said the middle class white american child, trying to compensate for his lack of sexual prowess.





I'm just joking, just kidding around with you, hey.

hm you oppress the majority for decades and then wonder why they're pissed off....

Also, do you know why apartheid remained in place for as long as it did?

In my opnion, the transition went almost as well as it possibly could.


Everyone is lucky that it did not end in all the black nationalist groups trying to take out all the whiteys, the whiteys shooting everybody trying to survive, and in addition to that all the black nationalist groups fighting each other for power, and then the english whiteys and the dutch whiteys start shooting at each other two.

At least the blacks and whites co-exist peacefully, if not equaly, no?

hm you oppress the majority for decades and then wonder why they're pissed off....

The country was once ruled by a minority (whites) that oppressed the majority (blacks). Now, it's ruled by a majority (blacks) that oppresses the minority and the majority.

Ah, but most of the whites who were killed were in no way affiliated with the former government. And if you click on the links, you'll see that many of the victims were- surprise!- blacks.

This is unfortunantly true. But, to attribute this to the country or its government would be unfortunate. Poverty is so extreme there and the resources for governance so limited it along with the racial tension you would have to have a police state for crime to be completely solved.

At least the blacks and whites co-exist peacefully, if not equaly, no?

No, they don't. Race relations are at an all-time low.

Also, do you know why apartheid remained in place for as long as it did?



why not? The white guys could do it, why the hell would you want to dismount when your riding high?

I would have done the same thing had I been a white politician in goverment, and if you guys grew up in white south africa, you probably would have two.

It makes perfects sense.

Same thing in the states.

This is unfortunantly true. But, to attribute this to the country or its government would be unfortunate. Poverty is so extreme there and the resources for governance so limited it along with the racial tension you would have to have a police state for crime to be completely solved.

The government is ruled by people who committed these atrocities as well as those who support and sympathize with those who committed the atrocities.

Also, do you know why apartheid remained in place for as long as it did?

bah, in response to your other point, I didn't look at all the links so I missed that bit.

In response to what you've just said, I don't know much about the end of apartheid tbh, but I have heard all the negative aspects from its earlier days.

why not? The white guys could do it, why the hell would you want to dismount when your riding high?

I would have done the same thing had I been a white politician in goverment, and if you guys grew up in white south africa, you probably would have two.

It makes perfects sense.

Same thing in the states.

Apartheid's main purpose was to prevent a communist takeover. Of course, racism was a major factor, too (some laws, such as outlawing interracial sex and marriage, obviously had nothing to do with communism), the SA government was painfully aware that many of the blacks were communists, controlled by the communists, or at least intimidated into complying with them by their violent threats. They knew a communist victory would bring a horrible bloodbath. As bad as the apartheid government was- and it has done some very, very bad things- it is not nearly as bad as the government they have now.

No, they don't. Race relations are at an all-time low.



That is untrue. Race relations have been getting steadily better.

Most of the whites accept the black rulingnessness with little more than a grumble, as they still live in there beautifull sub-urbs with there tons of money.

The blacks accept that the whites will always be richer, and that they arn't going to just dissapear.

Sure, there are extremist guys, and even killers, on each side, but that will never end. You yankees prove us that very well.

That is untrue. Race relations have been getting steadily better.

Most of the whites accept the black rulingnessness with little more than a grumble, as they still live in there beautifull sub-urbs with there tons of money.

The blacks accept that the whites will always be richer, and that they arn't going to just dissapear.

Sure, there are extremist guys, and even killers, on each side, but that will never end. You yankees prove us that very well.

Untrue, eh? Look at all the racial violence in South Africa today. It's far, far worse than it ever was under apartheid. Moreover, the government's radical affirmative action refutes the idea that the whites are always going to be richer. If race relations are so great, why are so many whites fleeing the country?

Apartheid's main purpose was to prevent a communist takeover. Of course, racism was a major factor, too (some laws, such as outlawing interracial sex and marriage, obviously had nothing to do with communism), the SA government was painfully aware that many of the blacks were communists, controlled by the communists, or at least intimidated into complying with them by their violent threats. They knew a communist victory would bring a horrible bloodbath. As bad as the apartheid government was- and it has done some very, very bad things- it is not nearly as bad as the government they have now.



Nay, my friend.

What happened was that the whites needed the blacks for there wealth. They needed(and still need) the blacks to farm the fields of there estates, to work there nice little factories, to keep the economy afloat.

Without the blacks as uneducated workers, the whites would have been nothing.

Now, many blacks were naturaly distraught at this terrible situation, and many longed for the beautyfull promise of Marxism, and factories and wealth that would not be earned by them only to go to there white masters, and so there were yes, many Marxist black nationalists.

And so naturaly, the whites hated marxists aswell as blacks, and lumped them together. I mean, for Marxism to take place, they would lose all there money and power!

And so Apartheid was not to prevent Communist takeover in the least, it was to prevent them from losing there power.

It was to maintain there position on top.

It was to prevent black rule.


And can you blame them? Who does not like to be rich and powerfull?

Nay, my friend.

What happened was that the whites needed the blacks for there wealth. They needed(and still need) the blacks to farm the fields of there estates, to work there nice little factories, to keep the economy afloat.

Without the blacks as uneducated workers, the whites would have been nothing.

Now, many blacks were naturaly distraught at this terrible situation, and many longed for the beautyfull promise of Marxism, and factories and wealth that would not be earned by them only to go to there white masters, and so there were yes, many Marxist black nationalists.

And so naturaly, the whites hated marxists aswell as blacks, and lumped them together. I mean, for Marxism to take place, they would lose all there money and power!

And so Apartheid was not to prevent Communist takeover in the least, it was to prevent them from losing there power.

It was to maintain there position on top.

It was to prevent black rule.


And can you blame them? Who does not like to be rich and powerfull?

Apartheid started out as a deterrent to black rule (and as I stated, many of its laws were influenced by racism, rather than fear of communism), but the government's anti-communism far exceeded its racism.

Btw, I commend you for not flaming.

Untrue, eh? Look at all the racial violence in South Africa today. It's far, far worse than it ever was under apartheid. Moreover, the government's radical affirmative action refutes the idea that the whites are always going to be richer. If race relations are so great, why are so many whites fleeing the country?


Having been there and talked to people who live there personally, the view you are presenting is extremist and truly is based on the fringes of society on both sides. The majority of the people who live there are peaceful and kind and gracious. Not one time while I was there did members of either race behave in an uncivilized manner in my presence.

Untrue, eh? Look at all the racial violence in South Africa today. It's far, far worse than it ever was under apartheid. Moreover, the government's radical affirmative action refutes the idea that the whites are always going to be richer. If race relations are so great, why are so many whites fleeing the country?


The thing there my friend, is the reason that there is more interacial violence, is because blacks can commit racial violence without being stopped.During apartheid, the white rulers could surpress the blacks any way they like, shooting, intimidation, whatever you like! And so naturally people were afraid.

But now, all those whose brothers were sent to prison to die, all those whose mothers were raped, can now take out there agression much easier in violent manner.

And the whites who are willing to kill say to themselves"We are no longer on top! I am oh so furious! This is not right! I must put these kaffirs in there place!"

And so that is what happens.

Having been there and talked to people who live there personally, the view you are presenting is extremist and truly is based on the fringes of society on both sides. The majority of the people who live there are peaceful and kind and gracious. Not one time while I was there did members of either race behave in an uncivilized manner in my presence.


THat's right! Well put!

Having been there and talked to people who live there personally, the view you are presenting is extremist and truly is based on the fringes of society on both sides. The majority of the people who live there are peaceful and kind and gracious. Not one time while I was there did members of either race behave in an uncivilized manner in my presence.

I agree, most South Africans are gentle peaceful and abhor violence. I am not saying South Africans are uncivilized or barbarous, only that the actions of uncivilized and barbarous people are crippling that country, and that it is far from the shining beacon the media portrays it as.

The thing there my friend, is the reason that there is more interacial violence, is because blacks can commit racial violence without being stopped.During apartheid, the white rulers could surpress the blacks any way they like, shooting, intimidation, whatever you like! And so naturally people were afraid.

But now, all those whose brothers were sent to prison to die, all those whose mothers were raped, can now take out there agression much easier in violent manner.

And the whites who are willing to kill say to themselves"We are no longer on top! I am oh so furious! This is not right! I must put these kaffirs in there place!"

And so that is what happens.

You make an excellent point there. :)

Having been there and talked to people who live there personally, the view you are presenting is extremist and truly is based on the fringes of society on both sides. The majority of the people who live there are peaceful and kind and gracious. Not one time while I was there did members of either race behave in an uncivilized manner in my presence.

If it sounded like I was implying South Africans were that way, I apologize.

Apartheid started out as a deterrent to black rule (and as I stated, many of its laws were influenced by racism, rather than fear of communism), but the government's anti-communism far exceeded its racism.

Btw, I commend you for not flaming.



The only communists in South Africa were black, and communism would also mean the end of white rule, so naturally the whites did not take to this.(I'm sorry, I saw naturally way to often)


The black terrorists/activists were lumped in with the communists, and vice versa.

Also, the white goverment used it's anti-communist thing to hide there blatantly racist ways from the rest of the world.


"No, Mister U.S. Press person, we do not hate blacks, we did not kill black proptestors! We were killing COMMUNIST protestors! Silly journalist, plastic bullets are for commies!"

Meanwhile....

"Hey mister U.S president, see, no reason for that little trade embargo, and perhaps you can reconsider that little idea of economic aid?"

You make an excellent point there. :)


why thank you.



by the way, I am sorry, I am not really familiar with internet lingo much, what is flaming?

Insults and the likes?

The only communists in South Africa were black, and communism would also mean the end of white rule, so naturally the whites did not take to this.(I'm sorry, I saw naturally way to often)


The black terrorists/activists were lumped in with the communists, and vice versa.

Also, the white goverment used it's anti-communist thing to hide there blatantly racist ways from the rest of the world.


"No, Mister U.S. Press person, we do not hate blacks, we did not kill black proptestors! We were killing COMMUNIST protestors! Silly journalist, plastic bullets are for commies!"

Meanwhile....

"Hey mister U.S president, see, no reason for that little trade embargo, and perhaps you can reconsider that little idea of economic aid?"

You're not wrong about that.

why thank you.



by the way, I am sorry, I am not really familiar with internet lingo much, what is flaming?

Insults and the likes?

You're welcome.

You are fun to debate with. You are courteous, polite, civil, and use rational thinking rather than flames to make your point.

(Yes, flaming is insulting)

.....I'm confused.

What are we arguing about?

I agree, most South Africans are gentle peaceful and abhor violence. I am not saying South Africans are uncivilized or barbarous, only that the actions of uncivilized and barbarous people are crippling that country, and that it is far from the shining beacon the media portrays it as.

I guess I missed it being portrayed as a shining beacon. The only news I ever hear about it is negative and my impression is that the violence there has been quite sensationalized. I don't see the country as crippled though. I see it as growing and going through the kind of things that are to be expected based on its history and the history of human kind in general.

I'd love to chat longer, but I really need to get home. Have a good evening.

You're welcome.

You are fun to debate with. You are courteous, polite, civil, and use rational thinking rather than flames to make your point.

(Yes, flaming is insulting)



oh, I see. Insults.




That is awfully kind of you too say though.

I guess I missed it being portrayed as a shining beacon. The only news I ever hear about it is negative and my impression is that the violence there has been quite sensationalized. I don't see the country as crippled though. I see it as growing and going through the kind of things that are to be expected based on its history and the history of human kind in general.

I'd love to chat longer, but I really need to get home. Have a good evening.


nice talking with you.


Have a nice evening yourself there.

It's somewhat odd that you did not mention that S. Africa is also the baby rape capital of the world. Apparently, there is a myth there that if you rape a baby or little kid, you will be cured of AIDS....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1703595.stm

The core of the trouble is that there is a corrupt, worthless government. Still, at least it's better than most African governments...

It's somewhat odd that you did not mention that S. Africa is also the baby rape capital of the world. Apparently, there is a myth there that if you rape a baby or little kid, you will be cured of AIDS....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1703595.stm

One of the links mentions it.

That myth is indeed a very big causer of problems in South Africa.

However, it says that sex with A VIRGIN, not a baby, will cure Aids(the mythical healing qualities of this have been found throughout the world)

The rape of babies is just because it is a gurantee that a baby is a virgin.

I guess I missed it being portrayed as a shining beacon. The only news I ever hear about it is negative and my impression is that the violence there has been quite sensationalized. I don't see the country as crippled though. I see it as growing and going through the kind of things that are to be expected based on its history and the history of human kind in general.

I'd love to chat longer, but I really need to get home. Have a good evening.

Thanks, you have a good evening, too.

As for the 'shining beacon,' part, almost everything I read talks about how bad and evil apartheid South Africa was, and how South Africa is now this great, racism-free democracy, etc.

That myth is indeed a very big causer of problems in South Africa.

However, it says that sex with A VIRGIN, not a baby, will cure Aids(the mythical healing qualities of this have been found throughout the world)

The rape of babies is just because it is a gurantee that a baby is a virgin.

It's sad. I read once about a week-old baby being raped. The government's extreme softness on crime is no help, either. :(

The core of the trouble is that there is a corrupt, worthless government. Still, at least it's better than most African governments...

Yeah, but that's not saying much. :(

It's somewhat odd that you did not mention that S. Africa is also the baby rape capital of the world. Apparently, there is a myth there that if you rape a baby or little kid, you will be cured of AIDS....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1703595.stm

Check the second www.etherzone.com.... link

Well, nice talking with you, I had fun, but I'm gonna take off now. See you around.