Mandela was just a man, and that made what he did extraordinary - Page 2




 
--
Boots
 
December 8th, 2013  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
He was a man who rightfully wanted an end to Apartheid, and would not accept personal freedom to sell his dream down the river.

It's called having some moral backbone. I'd like to think that placed in his time and position I'd have what it takes to do the same.

Here again we see a great similarity to the Palestine/Israel thing. The Palestinians won't accept a "peaceful solution", because to do so would mean they give up all they are entitled to.
I think you are missing my point, he sold himself as being the guy who wanted a non-violent end to apartheid but would not renounce violence.

I am not going to argue the evils of apartheid nor the methods used to achieve its end but you can not preach non-violence and refuse to renounce it at the same time that is hypocritical, had he been the guy that just said we want an end to apartheid and we will do what it takes to achieve that I would agree with you but he wasn't that guy.

As for the Palestinians I don't agree that they wont accept a peaceful solution in fact I think if Israel offered an equitable variation of the 1967 borders with a shared Jerusalem tomorrow there would be a Palestinian state by the following Friday.
December 8th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Yes I get your point, as with the Israelis, the South Africans wanted him to renounce violence while they continued with their oppression. Do you honestly believe that the south Africans would have given full recognition to the non whites? Just based on their previous history, I'm damned sure I don't.

Why should the Palestinians give up that which is rightfully theirs just so the Israelis can have it all their own way and live on the spoils of their criminality in peace. That's not an agreement, that is a travesty of justice, an abandonment of human morality and all legal principles.

You can't honestly say that in view of all the reading you have done on the matter of previous Israeli "Agreements" that you believe that the Palestinians would be allowed to have a workable State. Any resulting Palestinian state would be completely unworkable, and only at best be an Israeli puppet, it couldn't be any other way with Israel controlling virtually all of their economically viable land. and having wrecked and dismantled all of their infrastructure, isolating their towns and diverting their water supplies, etc., etc......
December 8th, 2013  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Yes I get your point, as with the Israelis, the South Africans wanted him to renounce violence while they continued with their oppression. Do you honestly believe that the south Africans would have given full recognition to the non whites? Just based on their previous history, I'm damned sure I don't.

Why should the Palestinians give up that which is rightfully theirs just so the Israelis can have it all their own way and live on the spoils of their criminality in peace. That's not an agreement, that is a travesty of justice, an abandonment of human morality and all legal principles.

You can't honestly say that in view of all the reading you have done on the matter of previous Israeli "Agreements" that you believe that the Palestinians would be allowed to have a workable State. Any resulting Palestinian state would be completely unworkable, and only at best be an Israeli puppet, it couldn't be any other way with Israel controlling virtually all of their economically viable land. and having wrecked and dismantled all of their infrastructure, isolating their towns and diverting their water supplies, etc., etc......
I do not want to turn this thread into a Palestine/Israel debate we have other areas for that so my last word on this (in this thread) will be that whatever decisions are made by Palestinians as to what they will or wont accept is theirs to make not mine or yours it doesnt matter whether we think they are good decisions or not.

I agree with most of what you have said but it is not our decision to make and if the Palestinians believe they can live with it and we can end the mess that the region has become then good on them.

Now back to Mandela I am sorry but for any good that he has done and it is probably considerable (South Africans can decide that) I consider his actions hypocritical and selfserving.
--
Boots
December 8th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Well Monty, I will always argue for that which is right, whether it is my call or not. I can't see that as a Black mark against my name.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
December 8th, 2013  
BritinAfrica
 
 
Since Mandela became president in 1994 the infrastructure is slowly but surely falling apart, corruption among the ANC is endemic, the theft of and abuse of public funds is mind boggling, crime has gone through the roof, murders of both blacks and whites has climbed to a staggering height. South Africa is now one of the most dangerous places in the world second only to if I remember correctly Brazil.

Mandela didn't end apartheid neither did De Klerk it was the whites who voted during a referendum to end apartheid that led to the elections in 1994.
December 8th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
You throw the reins to a group who've had precisely no experience in running a country except having been subjected to all that was worst in the Apartheid regime, and expect. the country not to fall into chaos?

The whites only voted that way because they were rapidly becoming the Pariah of the civilised world and subject to threats of trade embargoes. They didn't want to do it, and that is straight from the mouth of "Joopie" Joubert and his wife, South Africans who settled here in my town.

Their underlying hatred of non Whites, is palpable,... unless of course, they are underpaid hired hands. They hate not having maids and gardeners all paid a mere pittance.

But of course we must forgive them because they are great followers of their Church which they travel 80Kms to attend all day every Sunday.
December 8th, 2013  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
A typical one eyed US Republican's answer, unfortunately most of the civilised world would disagree with you.

Obama has done more for the US world credibility than anyone since JFK, and, yeah, I know, he was no angel either. It's all relative.
"For extraordinary efforts to strenthen int. diplomacy and cooperation between peoples". What a crock of sh*t! He was nominated 2 weeks after taking Office. His accomplishments @ that point was being the 1st black to be elected President & giving Liberals around the World a thrill. Compared to Mandela & other winners who were jailed for lenthy periods Obama "winning" is a pathetic farce.
December 8th, 2013  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
You throw the reins to a group who've had precisely no experience in running a country except having been subjected to all that was worst in the Apartheid regime, and expect the country not to fall into chaos?
S.A. has apparently has done better than Rhodesia/Zimbabwe has done with Mugabe running things. Of course the Libs ignore that large numbers of sub-Saharan blacks fled to, not from, S.A. for better economic opportunity & may have been safer under the "opressive" whites than under their own black govts back home.
December 8th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by George
S.A. has apparently has done better than Rhodesia/Zimbabwe has done with Mugabe running things. Of course the Libs ignore that large numbers of sub-Saharan blacks fled to, not from, S.A. for better economic opportunity & may have been safer under the "opressive" whites than under their own black govts back home.
Generally you are correct, but I'd like to know where you got the info that, "sub-Saharan blacks fled to S.A." as I can't find any mention of it on the internet. I would also dispute that Blacks were safer or more importantly better off under the Apartheid regime. The most noticeable difference that I noted being the attitude if the inhabitants and condition of the townships such as Soweto, white reporters were wandering around freely whereas during the apartheid years they would have needed an armed escort and would have risked death.
December 9th, 2013  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Generally you are correct, but I'd like to know where you got the info that, "sub-Saharan blacks fled to S.A." as I can't find any mention of it on the internet.
Not everything shows up on Google. There was an article that was contemporary to the events talking about how black oppession in a number of Countries was ignored in favor of bashing S.A. becuse it was White run vs equal or worse in a number of black run States. I recall Equitorial Guinea(if I remember right) killed or ran off a 1/4 of their population. Kinda like Cambodia with out the P.R. You never hear Jessie Jackson, Al Sharton, and other black "leaders" commenting on that. Was also some numbers presented on immigrants moving to S.A.