No more white farmers: Govt vows (Zimbabwe)

[Osomir]

Not what I said....usual lib tactic of trying to put words in peoples mouth and argue that instead. From what I see plenty of western money and aid is flowing into the country....... doesnt look like sanctions to me.

Sanctions are not all the same. That's not how sanctions work. We have sanctions on Russian interests as well currently but we can still do business with them in other areas. Traditionally sanctions also don't cover emergency food aid, this has largely been true even for some of our most strict sanctions like our historical ones against North Korea (for a time). The existence of food aid does not, in any way, indicate a lack of sanctions or a lack of condemnation.

allows the problem to continue...sanctioning people what were putting cash in his pocket directly........ridiculous.......to think this paltry effort will do anything.

That's how (pretty much all) sanctions work. The fact that they aren't as rigid as you want them to be doesn't mean that they don't exist.

No ...no its not........btw if you think he's not getting his cut on whats coming in ya might be a rube

Yes, yes it is. I would direct your attention to Russian sanctions, South Sudanese Sanctions, Central African Republic Sanctions, etc. Essentially all of the sanctions that have been constructed recently. Not even our Syrian sanctions, would preclude the host country from receiving emergency food aid. Probably one of our strongest sets of sanctions that exists recently has been against Iran.

All told, Zimbabwe is actually one of our harsher sanction regiments in place at the moment.

 

[Manonthestreet]

So did we sanction Castro or Cuba.............

 

[Osomir]

So did we sanction Castro or Cuba.............

US sanctions in various regions generally target specific people and business entities and limit the extent to which US entities can interact with them / the governments in general. what you are probably thinking of would be more akin to a complete embargo / blockade, which is not what sanctions usually are. Even under some of the most restrictive modern blockades though (like Israel's blockade in Gaza) it is generally international practice to allow in humanitarian and food aid.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986[1] was a law enacted by the United States Congress. The law imposed sanctions against South Africa and stated five preconditions for lifting the sanctions that would essentially end the system of apartheid. The sanctions were repealed in July 1991 after South Africa took steps towards meeting the preconditions of the act. Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Osomir]

The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986[1] was a law enacted by the United States Congress. The law imposed sanctions against South Africa and stated five preconditions for lifting the sanctions that would essentially end the system of apartheid. The sanctions were repealed in July 1991 after South Africa took steps towards meeting the preconditions of the act. Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

And prior to that presidents like Nixon and Reagan supported South Africa. Reagan only did an about face when he faced heavy internal and international pressure to do so.

 

[Manonthestreet]

I would argue those to need to be re-instated as you have the same situation reversed or worse.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986[1] was a law enacted by the United States Congress. The law imposed sanctions against South Africa and stated five preconditions for lifting the sanctions that would essentially end the system of apartheid. The sanctions were repealed in July 1991 after South Africa took steps towards meeting the preconditions of the act. Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

And prior to that presidents like Nixon and Reagan supported South Africa. Reagan only did an about face when he faced heavy internal and international pressure to do so.

Who or how it passed isnt the point

 

[Osomir]

The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986[1] was a law enacted by the United States Congress. The law imposed sanctions against South Africa and stated five preconditions for lifting the sanctions that would essentially end the system of apartheid. The sanctions were repealed in July 1991 after South Africa took steps towards meeting the preconditions of the act. Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

And prior to that presidents like Nixon and Reagan supported South Africa. Reagan only did an about face when he faced heavy internal and international pressure to do so.

Who or how it passed isnt the point

Apartheid South Africa is also completely different from the situation in Zimbabwe. We didn't sanction South Africa or the British when they did what Mugabe in Zimbabwe is currently doing. So on that end, we are treating Zimbabwe much more strictly than we historically treated South Africa.

 

[reconmark]

It's pretty ironic. White folk on this board pissing and moaning about the injustices supposedly committed against whites in Africa.
Yet , they willfully lie and state that whites committed no genocides or slaughters to come into the control of the lands they stole or they state that those actions were justified because they elevated Africans to a higher standard of living.

Why is it that the actions that the Africans may be taking against whites is so atrocious but not when the whites were doing it to the Africans???

 

[Manonthestreet]

Always the excuses..............lib hypocrisy on parade and exposed...........bbut but the british..............

 

[Manonthestreet]

It's pretty ironic. White folk on this board pissing and moaning about the injustices supposedly committed against whites in Africa.
Yet , they willfully lie and state that whites committed no genocides or slaughters to come into the control of the lands they stole or they state that those actions were justified because they elevated Africans to a higher standard of living.

Why is it that the actions that the Africans may be taking against whites is so atrocious but not when the whites were doing it to the Africans???

WAs SA committing genocide................

 

[Manonthestreet]

Didnt we also have broad sanctions against China prior to Nixon

 

[DriftingSand]

Racism against those "oppressive" whites is and always will be TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE from the Libtard point of view. The blacks of South Africa never enjoyed the riches of their land until that land was plowed up, planted, and mined by the Dutch and English. Apparently they prefer to go back in time and become another Haiti:

Link to anyone in this thread calling racism and massacres acceptable? (besides those calling the massacres of blacks acceptable).

You might be within the minority. I don't know much about you so time will tell. Nevertheless, why isn't Obama screaming about the abuse? Why isn't he sending American troops to protect the white farmers? Why? Because I believe he hates white people.

 

[squeeze berry]

Totally racist regime, if a European country said no black farmers all hell would be breaking loose.

If blacks did to Europe what they've been doing to africa all...would be fine, right?

really?

the former colonies were propped up propped up by the European nations with massive aid and it was squandered

Africa, welfare continent

 

[squeeze berry]

The "Scramble for Africa" (also the Partition of Africa and the Conquest of Africa) was the invasion and occupation, colonization and annexation of African territory by European powers during the period of New Imperialism, between 1881 and 1914. In 1870, 10 percent of Africa was under European control; by 1914 it was 90 percent of the continent, with only Abyssinia (Ethiopia) and Liberia still independent.

Scramble for Africa - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

the Europeans pulled out in the early 60s this is how much later?

 

[Osomir]

Always the excuses..............lib hypocrisy on parade and exposed...........bbut but the british..............

I'm not excusing anything. If you see it that way then you are viewing it incorrectly.

 

[Manonthestreet]

......................... my perception ....true........ dont think its just mine though

 

[Osomir]

Totally racist regime, if a European country said no black farmers all hell would be breaking loose.

If blacks did to Europe what they've been doing to africa all...would be fine, right?

really?

the former colonies were propped up propped up by the European nations with massive aid and it was squandered

Africa, welfare continent

Squandered largely because of the systems of government that colonial entities left behind were conducive to such malpractices. The blame game isn't necessarily very important though, how we solve it moving forward is. In either case, it is impossible to really separate the colonial experience from the governments in these coutnries that we see even today in many cases.

 

[Osomir]

rriiiggghhhttttttt

Let me know when you have an actual argument or anything in the way of facts to support your stances.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Racism against those "oppressive" whites is and always will be TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE from the Libtard point of view. The blacks of South Africa never enjoyed the riches of their land until that land was plowed up, planted, and mined by the Dutch and English. Apparently they prefer to go back in time and become another Haiti:

Link to anyone in this thread calling racism and massacres acceptable? (besides those calling the massacres of blacks acceptable).

You might be within the minority. I don't know much about you so time will tell. Nevertheless, why isn't Obama screaming about the abuse? Why isn't he sending American troops to protect the white farmers? Why? Because I believe he hates white people.

So then no one is saying massacres are acceptable then? (Except for massacres against blacks)