Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Sunday November 19 2017, @01:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the nothing-lasts-forever dept.

Zimbabwe awaits news on Mugabe's future

Zimbabweans are waiting to see what steps the military will take next after seizing control of the country. President Robert Mugabe is said to be under house arrest but the whereabouts of his wife Grace, who was bidding to succeed him as president, are unknown.

South African ministers have been in the capital Harare meeting the army and political parties. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) regional bloc will hold emergency talks on Thursday.

President Mugabe, 93, has been in control of Zimbabwe since it gained independence from Britain in 1980. But the power struggle over who might succeed him, between Mrs Mugabe and her rival former vice-president Emmerson Mnangagwa, has split the ruling Zanu-PF party in recent months.

More about Zimbabwe and former President Robert Mugabe.

Here is your emoji: 🇿🇼. Use it well.

CNN: Zimbabwe: Talks underway to form transitional government, source says
NYT editorial: For Zimbabwe, a Coup Isn't the Answer

Extras from BBC: Zimbabwe: Did Robert Mugabe finally go too far? - BBC News
Zimbabwe latest: How can you tell if a coup is happening?

Update: 'Mugabe Must Go': Thousands in Zimbabwe Rally Against Leader
Zimbabwe: Zanu-PF leaders meeting to decide Mugabe future
Pressure weighs on Mugabe to quit after mass protests

Update 2: Zanu-PF has removed Mugabe as party leader, and he may be impeached if he does not resign the Presidency by Monday.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday November 19 2017, @03:22PM (13 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday November 19 2017, @03:22PM (#598932) Journal
    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:11PM (12 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:11PM (#598943) Journal

    The NYT "credits" Mugabe with a trifling 20,000 dead. The Guardian "credits" Idi Amin with half a million - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2003/aug/18/guardianobituaries [theguardian.com]

    I don't suppose that we need do a search on Pol Pot to recognize that Mugabe and Amin were minor wannabe killers. Then, we have Stalin, Mao, and Hitler in the real major leagues.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:25PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:25PM (#598948)

      ...20000 is barely a pinch compared to bush, obama, trump

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:33PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:33PM (#598950)

        No worries, Mate! The Americans kill brown people, almost exclusively. Few blacks were harmed in the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Fuckistan.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:28PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:28PM (#598993)
      20,000 "only"? If that's true the US cops have probably killed more over the same number of decades ;).

      The USA has 20 times the population, but even so a developed world democracy should be doing much better than that right?
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Whoever on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:29PM (8 children)

      by Whoever (4524) on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:29PM (#598994) Journal

      That 20,000 doesn't include all the people who starved to death because of the way he ruled the country.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:41PM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:41PM (#598997)
        Well if you play that game the USA's head count is even higher than Mugabe's.

        The mess in Iraq is because the USA lied and "regime changed" Iraq (Saddam was the USA's dog, he actually asked the US ambassador about Kuwait and the ambassador screwed up, so Saddam bit Kuwait and the USA put him down later based on lies about their ex-pet dog).
        The mess in Libya is because the USA "successfully" regime changed it and replaced Gaddafi with muslim extremists.
        The mess in Syria is because the USA financed the Syrian opposition and then supplied arms to the rebellion.
        The USA isn't making things better in Yemen either.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @09:27PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @09:27PM (#599043)

          What's with this whataboutism? Can we just agree that all these governments are awful, to varying degrees?

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @07:57AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @07:57AM (#599180)
            The difference is when Mugabe screws up his country the rest of us outside are fairly safe from the consequences.

            Not so if Trump decides to start Global Thermonuclear War because he happened to go full retard that day.
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 20 2017, @01:53AM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 20 2017, @01:53AM (#599098) Journal

          Well if you play that game the USA's head count is even higher than Mugabe's.

          Unless of course, it's not. How are you making this apples to apples comparison between a country of 340 million and one of 16 million?

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @04:32AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @04:32AM (#599147)

            Mugabe destroyed Zimbabwe but he didn't destroy as many OTHER countries as the USA did.

            Even when you divide by 20 the USA's wrongful kills count is higher:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change#Cold_War_era [wikipedia.org]
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_of_the_United_States#Covert_actions [wikipedia.org]

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 20 2017, @03:08PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 20 2017, @03:08PM (#599250) Journal
              Apples to apples comparison, remember? No point to counting wars involving US involvement (which let us note have yet to destroy a single country - changing leadership of a country is not its destruction) when you fail to count wars involving Zimbabwe involvement.

              We'll need to include Zimbabwe's interference [wikipedia.org] in the Second Congo War, particularly in providing the dominant air force in the war to the eventual victor, Joseph Kabila [wikipedia.org]. That war is thought to have killed 3 to almost 6 million people through mostly disease and starvation. With that multiplier of 20, things don't look so good for Zimbabwe anymore.

              I await your next round of whataboutism.
      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:42PM (1 child)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:42PM (#598998) Journal

        That's interesting. Wonder how many other dictators death counts include the numbers of people who starved, or otherwise died due to a failed economy. North Korea, for instance. We read and hear stories of peasants starving throughout the winter - but no one offers numbers. I mean, no numbers at all, nevermind credible numbers. Stalin, on the other hand, has a fairly credible inventory of deaths due to his failed policies. Pol Pot's numbers are largely due to starvation, denial of health services, and the destruction of infrastructure. Hitler's numbers, on the other hand, are almost all directly due to violence and persecution.

        Food for thought.

        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @07:23PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @07:23PM (#599014)

          Today you can still visit the killing tree. There are guided tours.

          The killing tree is now a pretty think tree. The trunk is perhaps a meter thick. All around the tree, in a macabre forest, human bones stick up out of the soil.

          The tree was used to kill babies. Numerous babies were swung by their feet, causing their heads to be cracked against the trunk of the tree.

          That isn't just starvation. It makes gas chambers look civilized and gentle. Imagine being the guard. Imagine being a parent forced to watch.

          People would also be slow-roasted while dangling over a smoldering fire.

          Much of this, though not the tree, is in the movie The Killing Fields. It's a great movie, very true to what happened yet still a well-done movie with a great story. The story (photographer trapped, tortured, escaped) is real. The lead actor was actually a survivor with a similar experience, and he re-starved himself to look right for the role.