Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 6/28/08 04:40 PM, ThePretenders wrote:

At 6/27/08 02:57 PM, Ledgey wrote: Oooh I wonder who's gonna win the election! I'm excited.

Only God can remove Robert Mugabe.

Damn, looks like he`s never going out of office...

I genuinely feel sorry for the people of Zimbabwe. The fact is that fear alone is keeping Mugabe in power. The "election" is a farce; a show; a formality. It's as if Mugabe and his supporters are pathetically attempting to convince themselves and the outside world that it is the will of the people that he remains in office.

I'm not a Buddhist, or a Hindu, but I do believe that a karma-like force does exist in life. If this is true, Mugabe has one hell of a karmic retribution heading his way.

All we know about Mugabe we get through the press. For all we know, the populace could love him, and they could view such a government as necessary in a tribal country. If that's untrue, Morgan Tsvanagari is a pussy.

It's not for us to overthrow leaders. We've never asked another country to overthrow one of our leaders; we do the whole Civil War thing.

At 6/29/08 06:38 AM, Earfetish wrote: All we know about Mugabe we get through the press. For all we know, the populace could love him, and they could view such a government as necessary in a tribal country. If that's untrue, Morgan Tsvanagari is a pussy.

To an extent I agree. The majority of information that we garner with regards to Mugabe is probably somewhat biased. At the same time though it seems from the amount of people now emigrating from Zimbabwe for fear of death or economic reasons (keeping in mind that Zimbabwe did have one of Africa's strongest economies during the 1980's) I would imagine that he is less thanpopular among many of his nation's people.

It's not for us to overthrow leaders. We've never asked another country to overthrow one of our leaders; we do the whole Civil War thing.

Again I agree. To me, this is the saddest thing of all. We have little right to overthrow the Zimbabwean regime; we are outsiders. Sure, the world governments can impose sanctions on Mugabe, but I doubt that it will do much good at this stage. Innocent men, women and children are suffering great hardship under this government, be it due to intimidation, or massive rates of hyperinflation. Yet we are effectively powerless to help.

I read that the Prime Minister of Kenya urged the African Union to send troops to Zimbabwe to take care of the situation. That's overdue though, they should have given the opposition an army of their own before the election. It's obvious that Mugabe had no intention of resigning, the opposition needed some military force of their own if they were to enforce the results of the elections.

Mugabe made all his loyal friends Generals and Senators, it's not just a dictatorship, it's an air-tight one-man rule. He put the whole country in a lock under his rule, the only way to get him out of power is with force.

At 6/29/08 08:06 AM, Alphabit wrote: I read that the Prime Minister of Kenya urged the African Union to send troops to Zimbabwe to take care of the situation. That's overdue though, they should have given the opposition an army of their own before the election. It's obvious that Mugabe had no intention of resigning, the opposition needed some military force of their own if they were to enforce the results of the elections.

Mugabe made all his loyal friends Generals and Senators, it's not just a dictatorship, it's an air-tight one-man rule. He put the whole country in a lock under his rule, the only way to get him out of power is with force.

You speak the truth. Mugabe's fall will most likely be either through force or death. But it begs the question; will fighting fire with fire actually work?

What I mean is, even IF Mugabe is overthrown by foreign armies, will Zimbabwe be made even more unstable? I mean, several (in particular sub-Saharan) African nations are in a state of civil war. Peacekeeping forces are probably the most viable option, but if they prove unpopular then all hell could break loose.

It's quite a conundrum: Whether Mugabe is removed or not, many people will suffer hardship regardless. Perhaps military action is the only way, but if so, let us hope that it does not escalate into all-out war.

After each war there is a little less democracy to save - Brooks Athkinson

At 6/29/08 08:06 AM, Alphabit wrote: I read that the Prime Minister of Kenya urged the African Union to send troops to Zimbabwe to take care of the situation. That's overdue though, they should have given the opposition an army of their own before the election. It's obvious that Mugabe had no intention of resigning, the opposition needed some military force of their own if they were to enforce the results of the elections.

Mugabe made all his loyal friends Generals and Senators, it's not just a dictatorship, it's an air-tight one-man rule. He put the whole country in a lock under his rule, the only way to get him out of power is with force.

Interesting point, and of course, true. With an army of African Union Troops on the ballot stands and the scrutinizing eye of the World, Mugabe wouldn't have been able to rig the election. If I remember well I think he got something along the lines of "116% of the votes", meaning that not only did children vote, but also there was 0% abstinence and the dead voted too!

In a dictatorship, you want to keep your friends close because they will sooner or later protect you. Or you can also reward a loyal member with a general title. This is most often the case and makes that "loyal troop" think his life purpose is to protect Bobby (Mugabe).

At 6/28/08 06:25 PM, x-Exodus-X wrote: Damn, looks like he`s never going out of office...

Mugabe's 84 years old, he wont last long, and an assassination attempt will probably kill him.

At 6/29/08 10:22 AM, arxarts wrote:

At 6/28/08 06:25 PM, x-Exodus-X wrote: Damn, looks like he`s never going out of office...

Mugabe's 84 years old, he wont last long, and an assassination attempt will probably kill him.

This is another issue: if this were a Middle Eastern country, he would've had numerous assasination attempts and/or suicide bombers take him out long ago - even his election win in 1980 involved threats of violence from his supporters against non-supporters, and during the 80's his rule saw the Ndeble tribe subjected to a campaign of murder and forced resettlement. Now they have food and oil shortages because of his policies.

Imagine the problems that'd be solved if one guy put a bullet in his head, or detonated next to him? Yet this never seems to happen in Africa - they may be shot in a military coup (most recently in Niger in 1999), but The People never seem to be too bothered in helping themselves.

Also, whilst Kenya may be putting forward armed intervention, it's 1202 miles from Nairobi to Harare or, to put it another way, they'd have to cross Tanzania, Mozambique (and possibly Malawi) to get there. That won't be happening, in other words - the way into Zimbabwe is overland, from either South Africa, Mozambique or Zambia, and which of these are willing to allow armed forces to mass within their borders? There's also a theory that most Africans won't do anything because Mugabe threw the White Oppressors out, so therefore he's good - a similar attitude to Idi Amin in Uganda, in other words.

South Africa are still too busy looking the other way. Whilst Desmond Tutu has come out and criticised the regime, he's also the first to do so by name - even Nelson Mandela didn't do so. And, as with England, their sanctions go so far as to prevent their cricket team playing Zimbabwe's. I get the feeling the only way they'll take any form of action is when their population gets bolstered by a few thousand Zimbabweans every week.

I put £10 on Mugabe at 10/1 to win the election.

Just had a sneaky feeling about this one.