Death toll rises in South Africa as violence and pogroms, looting spreads

[Litwin]

What "Bantu empire"

do you agree that SA is politically totally dominated by Bantu?

 

[Fledermaus]

do you agree that SA is politically totally dominated by Bantu?

Irrelevant.

South Africa isn't an "empire".

 

[Litwin]

There is no solution other than a cultural change, which is highly unlikely.

When I was there years ago, there was little stigma attributed to corruption. This is illustrated by the widespread support for ex president Zuma, who was clearly misappropriating taxpayers funds.

The whites that are still there are keeping the economy rolling around, but their taxes are being wasted due to corruption and inefficiency.

There are many capable blacks in SA, but sadly nowhere near enough in number to make enough of an improvement right now.

i stand for 4 states solution

 

[Fledermaus]

yes, its not an easy task to rule an empire , Englishmen could (not anymore )

Neither could the Germans, the US, the Belgians, the Ottomans, the Japanese, etc.

Bantu and

The Bantu were not an Empire.

Muscovites couldn't´ ...

And Muscovy ceased when RUSSIA became a Tsardom.

Afrikaners could until 80s, not anymore ,

Neither was South Africa.


Do you even understand the word 'empire'?

qestion what´d be done in SA and Muscovy ?

RUSSIA is irrelevant to South Africa.

 

[Litwin]

Do ethnic Russians have the right to live in Lithuania and push for unification with Russia, the rightful ruler of the Baltic’s

"the rightful ruler of the Baltic’s" according only TV.ru and back100, thats why USA didn´t recognize ussr´s occupation of the Baltics , as i said before , in LR live very few Muscovites (most of them supper happy living in EU) , you´d read at least wiki before trolling me on this subject

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

"the rightful ruler of the Baltic’s" according only TV.ru and back100, thats why USA didn´t recognize ussr´s occupation of the Baltics , as i said before , in LR live very few Muscovites (most of them supper happy living in EU) , you´d read at least wiki before trolling me on this subject

If you look at a map from the 1950's you will simply see that the Baltics belonged to Russia. They historically belonged to Russia and Putin will take them back as it is their historical right to control that area.

 

[Fledermaus]

"the rightful ruler of the Baltic’s" according only TV.ru and back100, thats why USA didn´t recognize ussr´s occupation of the Baltics , as i said before , in LR live very few Muscovites (most of them supper happy living in EU) , you´d read at least wiki before trolling me on this subject

The Baltics were RUSSIAN lands back in the 1700s.

Great Northern War in 1721 gave Estonia and Latvia. 1795 Lithuania joined RUSSIA.

The Baltics were for the most part ruled by everyone but themselves for centuries.

 

[Litwin]

If you look at a.....

Prime Minister: the US policy of non-recognition of the occupation has consolidated the statehood of the Baltic states

Today marks the 80th anniversary of the United States’ refusal to recognize the occupation and annexation of the Baltic states. On 23 July 1940, the United States’ acting Secretary of State Sumner Welles issued a statement on the situation in the...

lrv.lt

NATO:


After the Second World War, soldiers from across the Baltics who had fought on both sides of the war disappeared into the forests to wage Europe's bloodiest guerrilla war against the occupying Soviet forces. This short docu drama includes interviews with former partisan fighters and those who supported them and dramatic battle scene recreations and interviews with modern-day Special Forces of Lithuania, the direct descendants of the Forest Brothers.


looks like a Candian man promotes here the liberal order´s N1 enemy narratives, are you a Putin´s poodle ?

 

[Litwin]

The Baltics were RUSSIAN lands back in the 1700s.

according your pro - Moscow Logic , Irtysh , Tuva, Chukotka, Kamachatka, with all islands , Novaya zemlya, all North Caucasus ´d be the independent states ? and Moscow return to its creators (legal Mongol czars) ? i like it, whats about your Moscow bosses ?

 

[Fledermaus]

Prime Minister: the US policy of non-recognition of the occupation has consolidated the statehood of the Baltic states

Today marks the 80th anniversary of the United States’ refusal to recognize the occupation and annexation of the Baltic states. On 23 July 1940, the United States’ acting Secretary of State Sumner Welles issued a statement on the situation in the...

lrv.lt

NATO:

After the Second World War, soldiers from across the Baltics who had fought on both sides of the war disappeared into the forests to wage Europe's bloodiest guerrilla war against the occupying Soviet forces. This short docu drama includes interviews with former partisan fighters and those who supported them and dramatic battle scene recreations and interviews with modern-day Special Forces of Lithuania, the direct descendants of the Forest Brothers.

The Baltics were RUSSIAN lands back in the 1700s.

Great Northern War in 1721 gave Estonia and Latvia. 1795 Lithuania joined RUSSIA.

The Baltics were for the most part ruled by everyone but themselves for centuries.

looks like a Candian man promotes here the liberal order´s N1 enemy narratives, are you a Putin´s poodle ?

Looks like you are making stupid accusations. What did he say that was not true?

And your name calling is childish.

 

[Fledermaus]

according your pro - Moscow Logic , Irtysh , Tuva, Chukotka, Kamachatka, with all islands , Novaya zemlya, all North Caucasus ´d be the independent states ? and Moscow return to its creators (legal Mongol czars) ? i like it, whats about your Moscow bosses ?

What are you babbling about?

What "pro-moscow" logic?

Yes, the RUSSIAN EMPIRE defeated the MONGOL khanates.

You do know the Caucasus, Siberia, etc. were former MONGOLIAN territory.

And there were no "Mongol czars". Mongols had Khans.

 

[Tigerace117]

There is no evidence from South Africa that the blacks elected to run the government have done anything but ruin the nations economy.

Similar situations exist all over Africa.....the most backward continent in the world.

And yet all are still far more “advanced” that the Europeans longing for the days of colonialism and apartheid

 

[Tigerace117]

Ap

I mean the amounts of cognitive dissonance it takes to write this must be astounding.

This is basically a confession that Democracy is new to South Africa, having been brought by white colonists, and that the now majority black elected government needs a long time to learn how to competently manage a country that is one of the most violent and dysfunctional in the world. Astounding

Apartheid South Africa was hardly a “democracy”. It was a tinpot tyranny fighting a forever war on just about every border.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Ap

Apartheid South Africa was hardly a “democracy”. It was a tinpot tyranny fighting a forever war on just about every border.

Yeah and the new regime without such wars cannot even keep the lights on.

So you’re saying old regime was objectively more competent

 

[Infinite Chaos]

did Afrikaners introduce apartheid in 17c ? for all Bantu in SA?
did apartheid laws treat Khoisan and Bantu people equally ?

Apartheid was introduced in 1948 but KhoeKhoe and San peoples had their lands stolen and their cattle confiscated before many were put into slavery. Why do you ask me easily verifiable questions?

You have claimed they are "stoking" the looting and pillaging.

Are you so misguided that you believe blacks need whites to stoke them to loot and pillage?

Your suggestion is absurd.

You either have a reading comprehension problem or you are deliberately lying again. In my post #15, I was clearly referring to the stoking of tensions that always happens when there is bad news about South Africa. White nationalist groups get themselves involved in talking about how bad things are and how bad it is that in the first 30-40 years since the African majority have been in power, that things are not going as easily as they would when whites ran the country and kept the economy running on virtual slave labour.

Just please stop with deliberately misrepresenting what I write.

Er, again you make things up.

They are able to run an economy.....they just do so incredibly badly in most cases.

It's not that hard to understand, especially if you don't twist my words.

Is there a difference between running an economy incredibly badly and "done anything but ruin the nations economy. Similar situations exist all over Africa...."

I'm not even getting into the cold war any why many corrupt leaders were put in place or propped up by intercontinental geo-politics, I just want you to get the basics correct if you can.

Oh please....surely you haven't forgotten your silly claim that whites were "stoking" the violence in South Africa?

You either have a reading comprehension problem or you are deliberately lying again. Which is it?

I even posted links from the current situation and there are plenty of similar examples from the past, usually every time since the internet that Africans have come to power that white nationalist groups take up the cause of white farmers and landowners (and where did they get that land if not by raids, pillaging and looting into slavery?) to get sympathy for their cause?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Yeah and the new regime without such wars cannot even keep the lights on.

So you’re saying old regime was objectively more competent

Democracy "American style," where only white people could vote and the black slaves worked to keep the lights running. South Africa gave up on Apartheid because they knew they couldn't keep fighting those wars forever and more of the world finally stood up to international companies buying and trading with Apartheid governments.

 

[Tigerace117]

Yeah and the new regime without such wars cannot even keep the lights on.

So you’re saying old regime was objectively more competent

It certainly wasn’t, as shown by the fact that it LOST every one of those forever wars.

 

[Litwin]

Apartheid was introduced in 1948 but KhoeKhoe and San peoples had their lands stolen and their cattle confiscated before many were put into slavery. Why do you ask me easily verifiable questions?



....

why you didn´t start that Bantu stolen 90% (?) of land from KhoeKhoe and San peoples? and today they have very very difficult relations with Bantu majority ?


Since the arrival of the Bantu expansion .... The advancing Bantu encroached on the Khoikhoi territory, forcing survivors of the indigenous populations to move to more arid areas of the Kalahari.....


Since the 2010s, there has been a "Khoisan activist" movement demanding recognition and land rights from the Bantu majority.[8]

 

[EMNofSeattle]

It certainly wasn’t, as shown by the fact that it LOST every one of those forever wars.

I mean, only in the sense that they Didn’t have country is willing to directly trade with them. If the United States had fully supported the South African government it would never have fallen.

 

[Tigerace117]

I mean, only in the sense that they Didn’t have country is willing to directly trade with them. If the United States had fully supported the South African government it would never have fallen.

The US fully supporting apartheid would have been a colossally moronic idea, and even if they had been “fully supported by the US” it still wouldn’t have stopped the regime from collapsing....because, again, it was nothing more than a tinpot tyranny.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The US fully supporting apartheid would have been a colossally moronic idea, and even if they had been “fully supported by the US” it still wouldn’t have stopped the regime from collapsing....because, again, it was nothing more than a tinpot tyranny.

Yes it would. The tribesman would never defeat a fully empowered South African state with a blank check. Also there were plenty of blacks allied to the white government.

It would’ve been a bad idea, but only because we spent decades forcing our allies to decolonize which was one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century

 

[TypicalRussian]

Death toll rises in South Africa as violence and pogroms, looting spreads​

sounds like 1917 in Moscow empire, does it mean that Bantu dominated SA is near collapse ? whats future of SA, anybody from SA is here?

south africa has nothing to do with russia

 

[Litwin]

south africa has nothing to do with russia

read this

Pogroms in the Russian Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

South Africa's xenophobic attacks: Why migrants won't be deterred

The wave of anti-foreigner attacks are a symptom of a bigger problem, writes Andrew Harding.

www.bbc.com

 

[Tigerace117]

Yes it would. The tribesman would never defeat a fully empowered South African state with a blank check. Also there were plenty of blacks allied to the white government.

It would’ve been a bad idea, but only because we spent decades forcing our allies to decolonize which was one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century

The “tribesmen” didn’t need to roll tanks into Pretoria. All they needed was for the decent people of South Africa to get tired of being under the thumb of a tyrannical regime which oppressed its own people....which is what happened.

It was a moronic idea by any definition of the term. It would have given the Soviets literally thousands upon thousands of tons of propaganda to deploy and cost us the support of pretty much the entire Third World.

The British and French decolonized because they couldn’t afford to continue brutally oppressing half the globe, and the people of those countries had no desire to remain under the thumb of European regimes.

Trying to prop up the European colonial empires would have been downright disastrous. Even ignoring the brutality of colonial rule, it simply wasn’t possible.

 

[Tigerace117]

read this

Pogroms in the Russian Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

South Africa's xenophobic attacks: Why migrants won't be deterred

The wave of anti-foreigner attacks are a symptom of a bigger problem, writes Andrew Harding.

www.bbc.com

Which has literally nothing to do with South Africa.