On Zimbabwe and the wonderful UN [Archive]

View Full Version : On Zimbabwe and the wonderful UN

Nimrod's Son

10-13-2005, 10:36 AM

Robert Mugabe is at it
again. Just days after attending the U.N.'s 60th General Assembly meeting New
York where he <a href="http://www.un.org/webcast/summit2005/statements/zim050914eng.pdf">shamelessly
lectured others</a> about pursuing reforms that are "open, transparent and
consultative," Mugabe <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=GYASPHPU23AELQFIQMFSM5WAVCBQ 0JVC?xml=/news/2005/09/22/wzim22.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/09/22/ixportal.html">sent
his goons to finish the job of confiscating land from Zimbabwe's white farmers</a>:
<blockquote>
"In what
appears to be the start of the final clearance of Zimbabwe's remaining white
farmers, Mr Mugabe's security forces launched a dawn raid yesterday, firing
automatic <img height="239" src="http://realclearpolitics.com/images/banners/wzim22.jpg" width="160" align="left">weapons
against Mr Wilding-Davies, his white farm manager and a neighbour in Chipinge,
south-eastern Zimbabwe.
The operation
followed Mr Mugabe's alteration of the constitution last month, for the 17th
time since independence from Britain in 1980. He nationalised all white-owned
land and prevented white farmers going to court to challenge seizure of about
22 million acres.
</blockquote>
Under Mugabe's disastrous
reign Zimbabwe has lost more than a third of its national economy in the last
three years. <a href="http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/zi.html#Econ" target="_blank">Unemployment
is currently at 70%</a>. Between 1994-2003 the country's <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Zimbabwe">weighted
average annual rate of inflation was 314.66 percent</a>. Even by the miserable
standards of economic basket cases across the African continent, Zimbabwe <a href="http://www.weforum.org/site/homepublic.nsf/Content/World+Economic+Forum+Africa+Competitiveness+Report +2004+-+Identifying+Problems+and+Offering+Solutions+to+Af rica's+Economic+Performance">consistently
ranks as one of the very worst</a>.
Just a few weeks ago
Mugabe flew into a rage when aides presented him with a bailout offer from South
Africa because the loan was conditional upon Mugabe doing the following: 1)
entering into talks with the political opposition, 2) repealing a series of
repressive laws and 3) implementing economic reforms. Mugabe
"humiliated" his aides, rejected the offer, and came up with Plan B to
pay the money owed to the IMF - <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=0NYNIV5GSURWJQFIQMFSM5WAVCBQ 0JVC?xml=/news/2005/09/17/wzim17.xml" target="_blank">steal
it</a>:
<blockquote>
"Sources in
Harare said that the Reserve Bank raided the foreign currency accounts of
exporters, seizing american dollars and paying for them in the worthless local
currency. One mining company is reported to have lost £5 million."
</blockquote>
<img height="152" src="http://realclearpolitics.com/images/banners/zimbabwe.jpg" width="203" align="right">Mugabe's
sinister coup de grâce, of course, was his order this past May to
begin bulldozing the homes of the poor surrounding Harare. <a href="http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/0/country_information/bulletins/zimbabwe_02_2005.html">Operation
Murambatsvina</a> (translated to "drive out rubbish" or "clean up
the filth") displaced an estimated 200,000-300,000 Zimbabweans, some of
whom were placed inside barbed wire "holding camps" outside the city
where they underwent "political re-education."
Naturally, human rights
groups around the globe were outraged. The strongest words of condemnation,
however, came from the United Nations which issued a statement calling Mugabe's
policy "<a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1650991,00.html">a
new apartheid</a>."
Naturally, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/article/0,2763,1537484,00.html">Mugabe
ignored the U.N</a>.
And naturally, in a
fitting symbol of the fecklessness and moral bankruptcy of the organization,
just weeks later the United Nations let Mugabe take the stage in New York and <a href="http://www.un.org/webcast/summit2005/statements/zim050914eng.pdf">call
on the international community to</a>:
<blockquote>
"remain true
to the original principles and objectives of the United Nations Charter to
achieve peace, security and development. This will allow us to bequeath the
future generation with a far safer, prosperous and stable world."
</blockquote>
Yep. And John Bolton is
the real problem at the UN.

Injektilo

10-13-2005, 01:51 PM

so.... they're supposed to kick zimbabwe out of the UN?

if they prevented anyone who represented a country which had done something wrong from taking part, the UN would consist of Sweden.

Nimrod's Son

10-13-2005, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Injektilo
so.... they're supposed to kick zimbabwe out of the UN?

if they prevented anyone who represented a country which had done something wrong from taking part, the UN would consist of Sweden.
I think you're mising the point here chief

The UN put mass murdering countries on the Human Rights Comission for crying out loud

RopeyLopey

10-13-2005, 03:54 PM

I agree those reforms are open and transparent to me - I know what's going on.

Zimbabwe and its people seem to be another God-forgotten land.

TIMb

10-14-2005, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by RopeyLopey
Zimbabwe and its people seem to be another God-forgotten land.

my father arrives there this morning!!! he'll enter the country on a british passport... i'm a bit worried.

he's visiting his parents.... god only knows why they haven't left the fucking country!! my dad and his brother have tried to convince them.

anyways... he's taken soap, toothpaste, face clothes, undrwear... etc... all shit that they can't get there!!!!

pastry sharp

10-14-2005, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
Yep. And John Bolton is
the real problem at the UN.

i'm sorry. are you suggesting that it's okay that john bolton is completely unqaulified to do the job because the UN is fucked up in other ways anyway?

Nimrod's Son

10-14-2005, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by pastry sharp

i'm sorry. are you suggesting that it's okay that john bolton is completely unqaulified to do the job because the UN is fucked up in other ways anyway?
John Bolton is completely qualified for the position. The congressional stalemate against him as political.

I think the point was that everyone is arguing about how Bolton is the worst thing ever to hit the UN and how it's such a great and nobnle institution when in fact there are far worse things to focus upon.

BTW I think Bolton was a fantastic choice

Injektilo

10-17-2005, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

I think you're mising the point here chief

The UN put mass murdering countries on the Human Rights Comission for crying out loud

well, i see that the UN had some strong words for zimbabwe, infact, "the strongest words of all" according to this blog entry you posted.

So the problem is that he was still allowed to speak a few weeks later? i don't see how that's a big suprise. Something tells me that a country/leader is still allowed to speak at the UN as long as it/he/she is a part of the UN.

To me, it looks like the point is that Mugabe is an incredible hypocrite and liar.

and if the UN forbade all hypocrites and liars from speaking at the UN, there wouldn't be anyone left.

i do agree though that's its pretty fucked up that certain countries are on the HRC though. But.... that's what happens when they try to be as fair as possible.

pastry sharp

10-17-2005, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

John Bolton is completely qualified for the position. The congressional stalemate against him as political.

I think the point was that everyone is arguing about how Bolton is the worst thing ever to hit the UN and how it's such a great and nobnle institution when in fact there are far worse things to focus upon.

BTW I think Bolton was a fantastic choice

interesting... a person with a demonstrated contempt for the un, completely lacking in diplomacy was the best person for the job. i never thought of it that way.

Nimrod's Son

10-17-2005, 01:26 PM

Originally posted by pastry sharp

interesting... a person with a demonstrated contempt for the un, completely lacking in diplomacy was the best person for the job. i never thought of it that way. Yes, he's more likely to exact changes and not cowtow

pastry sharp

10-17-2005, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
Yes, he's more likely to exact changes and not cowtow

no way. it's not as if he is in any position to force the un to do his bidding.

Nimrod's Son

10-17-2005, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by pastry sharp

no way. it's not as if he is in any position to force the un to do his bidding. And thankfully now the opposite is also true

pastry sharp

10-17-2005, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
And thankfully now the opposite is also true

we've never been forced into doing the bidding of the un. we've always played rough with the organization. the only difference was that this president wanted to send a big, obvious fuck you, which he has. i don't see the value in it. it's just dick waiving.

Nimrod's Son

10-18-2005, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by pastry sharp

we've never been forced into doing the bidding of the un. we've always played rough with the organization.
1993-2001. United States Kings Kofi and Butros Butros

pastry sharp

10-18-2005, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

1993-2001. United States Kings Kofi and Butros Butros

thats a dramatic over simplification at best.