Britain could invade Zimbabwe: archbishop

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by yank_eyetie, Jul 2, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I don't really think we have the resources and i for one don't want to support another country by cancelling its debt and bank rolling it.

    They wanted independance from Britain. Why should we feel any obligation to interfere.

    Why don't S.A. do something? Or the U.N



    Edited - spelling V Poor, and Grammar - V Poor!!
     
  2. Agree with you there Wija. Personally i don't want Britain to be part of the 'World Police Force'.
     
  3. However if we did go to Iraq to 'liberate its people from oppression' then why not Zimbabwe. I know we're overstretched and the political situation is volatile as it is.
     
  4. Zimbabwe does not have or is not a threat to oil.
     
  5. They do not have invisible WMD....!
     
  6. This to my mind would have been a much more fitting intervention and regime change scenario than Iraq. Instead though we're stuck in Basra and southern Iraq having to cope with the fallout after the Coalition, mainly the US, knocked the place over without much of a plan on how to fix it afterwards.

    Mugabe is killing a hell of a lot of more people than Saddam was. Unlike Iraq until recently Zimbabwe had a thriving economy, well built infrastructure, rule of law and good education levels. So whilst it'd still take a fair amount of time for them to get things vaguely sorted out post-Mugabe it'd still be less time than Iraq I would have thought of. And maybe it's just me being a little sentimental but they are a member of the Commonwealth, an institution that Blair has been criminally neglectful of. Even the Queens been rather narked off about that IIRC.

    I don't really think it'd take almost anything at all to topple them considering in such a horrendous way the country is in. You're certainly not talking about anything close to Falklands strength. Get in there, topple Mugabe et al, stabilise the situation for a very short period and then hand off to someone like the UN or similar group to run the reconstruction work and unbuggering of the place.
     
  7. And the resources to do this will come from where? There's been plenty of complaints about the amount of tours people have undergone as it is on this site, unless those who are advocating this aren't that bothered about adding another one to thier list as the amount of LSSA will be worth it. And just think.........another medal!
     
  8. Zimbabwe deserves what they have sown. Why as a country who were shown the door, be prepared to re-enter because the populace (so we are led to believe) no longer want Mugabe in power. Like most countries in Africa you could see this coming. I find it very hard to believe that someone from Zim has not tried to assisinate him - perhaps there is no will to do this, or more cynically if a foreign power did it then they would be obliged to spend money putting the country back on its feet again where as if its done within the country by his countrymen then no help would be forthcoming.
     
  9. We did once. We probably couldn't afford to now. They'd run out of bullets for the Maxims, let alone the lack of helicopters.
     
  10. Rhodesia was a developed country, especially by African standards, when it was handed over. The economy worked, they had education, health, roads, railways, agriculture. It was one country where the African couldn't claim that they'd been fleeced, and left with nothing by the colonialists. And they've knackered the place royally.

    This has been coming for a long time. It's not our place to intervene. The only way to put it right would be to put the whites back in control. Shock, horror. No point in ousting Mugabe, and putting some other equally corrupt and incompetant African in. Same story all over again, before too long. Let them get on with it.
     
  11. The thing that grips me about their situation was the fact that there were British passport holders getting beaten and murdered and the British Govt. did nothing yet we help out every other fcuker who wants help. Shameful.
     
  12. I can see it now . . white troops going in and taking control, reinstating the white farmers to get the economy back on track . . Peter Hain would have an apoplectic fit. To be honest its the only sensible thing to do but can you see it happening? I think not.
     
  13. Rhodesia worked because itwas being run by a group of Europeans and Africans who knew what they were doing. There were and are plenty of Zimbabwe nationals European and African who could have continued this. Instead we chose to hand over a thriving economy which had survived years of sanctions, to a bunch of stoneage thugs who have destroyed it.
     
  14. That's right. The powers that be have to get out of the mindset that sees the British Army as being the armed wing of Oxfam. Africa's biggest problem is that it's full of Africans, and corruption is endemic. It's not PC to say it, but there you go.

    No doubt Gordon and the Development Minister will bung Mugabe's successor another few hundred mill of our money, to justify their existance, but it's not our problem (apart from the British passport holders, as JD rightly pointed out).

    Sounds more like a job for 'Sir' Bono, and 'Sir' St Bob, not the British Army.