Posted on 06/23/2008 4:58:35 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Paddy Ashdown: Military intervention in Zimbabwe 'would be justified'
Lord Ashdown says terror must be ended
Michael Evans, Defence Editor and Catherine Philp in Harare
Military intervention in Zimbabwe would be justified to stop the violence there deteriorating into mass slaughter, Paddy Ashdown told The Times last night.
Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon said: “The situation in Zimbabwe could deteriorate to a point where genocide could be a possible outcome - something that looks like [another] Rwanda.”
In that case, international military action, with Britain playing a “delicate role”, would have to be considered, said the former European Union High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina. Britain and the United States became the first countries to refuse to recognise Robert Mugabe as President of Zimbabwe yesterday after Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), sought refuge at the Dutch Embassy.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
The handwriting was on the wall for Whites the day that Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, and they should have made plans to leave then. Many families would be alive today instead of butchered by government thugs.
Name one African country that isn’t beset with tribal warfare. It’s the way they have always behaved and probably always will.
Not to sound harsh, but I fail to see a compelling national interest.
exactly...the life expectancy in Zimbabwe is 37 years now, 1/4 of the population has fled, and the economy has collapsed. If not for the cash the Chinese keep sending Mugabe for mineral rights, his regime would have been done already. Just like in Sudan, the Chinese prop up a thug because it fits their economic interests. The ship 2 months ago filled with guns and ammunition form China to Mugabe was just a down payment on platinum or some other mineral china needs.
If there ever were an example of why the UN is not only helpless, but actually counter productive to world peace, this is it. The UN should be taking the lead and marshalling the world to throw out this tyrant. That Mugabe was in Italy earlier this month attending a UN Conference on world hunger speaks volumes about how usefull the UN really is.
No, leave Africa to the Africans. They wanted to remove white rule. Let ‘em stew in their own juices. Whites died to make something of Africa and now we are supposed to lose our lives saving the wreck? Mugabe was their blue eyed boy and they can keep him.
“...with Britain playing a “delicate role”,...”
What the “H” is this crap about “delicate”? Here’s a guy advocating “Military Action” to prevent “Genocide” and using the word “Delicate” in the same breath so-to-speak.
If the UK is going to advocate “International Military Action” then they need back it up with something other than them taking a “Delicate Position”.
“Here, Here I’ll hold your coat while YOU bloody their nose”.
I have a particular fondness for Ethiopia after they did our bidding by smashing Al Qaeda in neighboring Somalia, so I'd be all for helping Ethiopia if they needed us...
...and I'd put forth that criteria above as the "Bright Line" for U.S. military intervention. Which is to say, if an African country is shedding their blood on our behalf, then absolutely we help them should they ever need it.
Zimbabwe, though nominally against Al Qaeda, would hardly meet that test today.
Yes Yes. And meanwhile, we should offer asylum to all white rhodesians and south africans.
Give Jimmah a rifle.
Plus the Horn of Africa is geographically much more important than the interior of southern Africa. The only thing that gives me pause is what affect a Zim collapse might have on South Africa.
Well, we should send him over there.
And that's all. Mugabe's just the part of the iceberg that's above water.
I'm afraid he's been in power too long for removing him to have any effect.
Actually I don't expect any outside intervention either. It is just talk. Any white left should get sanctuary somewhere and lets see if the remaining savages can feed themselves with some of the best farmland in Africa.
Let the white people go so they have no excuse for their hunger.
Zimbabwe should have collapsed a few years ago. 40% of its population has already fled. It’s killed its economy, and even whole tribes (e.g. voted for Tsvangirai) aren’t safe from rampaging mobs.
Outside medlers prop up the communist dictator Mugabe, who can still move around his militia so as to protect a small amount of property/minerals from overt looting, but the court system is broken (you can’t convict a “war veteran”) so the only “law” is at the barrel of a militiaman.
40% of the country is gone, another 30% is starving, and a majority of Zimbabwe has some incurable disease (e.g. AIDS). They’ve got hyperinflation (essentially a worthless national currency incapable of supporting local commerce) and their life expectancies have declined (for Blacks) from 57 years when Mugabe took over to 37 years today.
Zimbabwe is a rare case where a collapse of a country into anarchy would actually improve their current lot.
Africa is the LAST place on the planet that America should send troops on a “Nation Building” exercise...
To flatten Somalia — fine.
To flatten Libya — fine.
To flatten Sudan — fine.
To flatten any other hot bed of militant Islamic Jihadists — fine.
But do it from the air..
If troops MUST go in - have them walk in over a single layer of smoldering ruins....
NO MORE NATION BUILDING — that is for the nation’s citizens.
The military is primarily a force for destruction......
That they appear to be successful at many other tasks, does not and should not alter their primary mission.
But why should the people of Zimbabwe have to live with these consequences?
If we must do it, do it quickly, shoot everyone of Mugabe’s goons, and slowly bring the country back to what’s left of normal.
Paddy Pantsdown pull em up long enough to shoulder a rifle.
And who would that be?
The only nation in that region with any credible military is South Africa; their Prime Minister Mbeki is an apologist for Mugabe.
Executive Outcomes could have taken care of this easily.
Jimmy Carter is British?
Actually, White Rhodesians and South Africans would be AFRICAN Americans...
Funny how that happens, I work with a couple white SA Engineers... They are key holed as African Americans, even though the darker African Americans will argue they are not African based solely on skin tone...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.