Mugabe: How Much Longer In Power?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Robert Mugabe, dog-and-ponying an, uh, election just like Saddam Hussein's last one, has five years or so more to complete Zimbabwe's ruination.

Unless of course he and his lackeys get removed. Interestingly, there seem to be no known worse replacements for this lot around.

So, aside from Robert Mugabe dying of old age -- he just celebrated his 84th birthday -- how many years are likely to pass before he's removed from his position of screwing everything in Zimbabwe up?

Economic History of Zimbabwe -- Wiki.

Voice of America

Cato Institute

Sokwanele's Blog

Another View -- no comment.

[xoxoxoBruce]

As long as the Chinese, Russians, and South Africans, support him.

[TheMercenary]

Until someone has the balls to knock him off. Yep, they did a great thing for that country when they ran off the white farmers and took back the land. Good job. Hungry yet?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

They sure are. ZANU-PF dies with Mugabe.

[Aliantha]

It's not just the Chinese, Russians and South Africans who're supporting him. Practically every western nation is along with all the rest. There was an interesting article on Sky News about it a week or so ago and a rep from Tesco was on there talking about how if they stopped importing fresh produce from Zimbabwe the farmers and their families would suffer etc.

Same story you'll get from just about anyone who does business with a corrupt government anywhere. 'it's the little people who will suffer if we stop doing business with them'. Never mind that they're probaby paying the so called little people a fraction of what they pay the corrupt government for allowing them to pillage the countryside.

[Sundae]

I won't buy anything labelled as produce of Zimbabwe.
To be honest I haven't seen anything recently, but it was a conscious decision a few years back.

And even that makes me wonder if I am doing the right thing. It's hard to hurt a ruler without hurting their (often unwilling) subjects.

[Aliantha]

And even that makes me wonder if I am doing the right thing. It's hard to hurt a ruler without hurting their (often unwilling) subjects.

That's true. It's a tough one, and I suppose there could always be a civil war when the people get tired of his regimen. That's about the only solution atm, but in a country which is still recovering from the last one, I wonder if the 'little people' haven't just lost the will to fight, so they just go along with whoever happens to be in charge for the time being as long as they get to feed their family.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

I won't buy anything labelled as produce of Zimbabwe.

The things you buy from Zimbabwe, are labeled "Made in China". China is outsourcing billions of dollars worth of work to Zimbabwe, for their cheap labor.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

It's not just the Chinese, Russians and South Africans who're supporting him. Practically every western nation is along with all the rest. There was an interesting article on Sky News about it a week or so ago and a rep from Tesco was on there talking about how if they stopped importing fresh produce from Zimbabwe the farmers and their families would suffer etc.

Same story you'll get from just about anyone who does business with a corrupt government anywhere. 'it's the little people who will suffer if we stop doing business with them'. Never mind that they're probaby paying the so called little people a fraction of what they pay the corrupt government for allowing them to pillage the countryside.

What would you suggest? Certainly you would not support an armed over throw by force? I would.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Heheheh. Second the notion.

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

What would you suggest? Certainly you would not support an armed over throw by force? I would.

So GWB says your country is going to involve itself in another conflict even though your resources are stretched to the limit already and you say that's ok?

My suggestion would be world wide trade sanctions however, western nations are unlikely to do that it would seem. The leader before Mugabe was corrupt and once Mugabe seized power, his government has become corrupt also.

Is it the job of the rest of the world to force this country to govern itself without corruption when evidence of 'old boy' deals are obvious at the highest levels of government at home? Sending more soldiers off to die in someone else's war may not be received as whole heartedly as you may think Merc.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

My suggestion would be world wide trade sanctions however, western nations are unlikely to do that it would seem.

But that might interfere with business. The people that control our government, would rather use the military to do foreign adjustments, so those people can conduct business as usual.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

So GWB says your country is going to involve itself in another conflict even though your resources are stretched to the limit already and you say that's ok?

My suggestion would be world wide trade sanctions however, western nations are unlikely to do that it would seem. The leader before Mugabe was corrupt and once Mugabe seized power, his government has become corrupt also.

Is it the job of the rest of the world to force this country to govern itself without corruption when evidence of 'old boy' deals are obvious at the highest levels of government at home? Sending more soldiers off to die in someone else's war may not be received as whole heartedly as you may think Merc.

I never said the US should do it.

[Aliantha]

Then who?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Then who?

African Nations. I felt the same way when we went to Bosnia, not our problem, that is Europe's problem. Same for Somalia, screw that place. And now Darfur, not our problem.