The Congo Crisis - What's Going on in the Congo ?

youngdan wrote:

That is like saying a lot of the British people saying that they wanted the north to remain part of Britain. What the British or Congolese want is immaterial..

What the British or Congolese want is absolutely material. Supposing California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas decided they wanted to secede from the US and rejoin Mexico. Would you consider that their business or the business of the whole US?

Anyway from next year Congo will have a new constitution under which Katanga will cease to exist. It's being split into 4 separate provinces.

youngdan wrote:

The future of northern Ireland is for the people of NI to decide and the future of Katanga was for the people of Katanga to decide...

Already decided

youngdan wrote:

The whole thing was a fight for the minerals. Same as always.

Exactly, a crisis manufactured by greedy capitalists in Belgium and compounded by interference from the US and the Soviets.

From today's Irish Independent.

Quote :

Leader of Congo battalion dies

Friday July 04 2008



Colonel Mort Buckley (above) has died. He led the first Irish infantry battalion to the Congo in 1960. Colonel Buckley, from Kerry, lived in Cloghan, Co Offaly.
He died on Tuesday at the age of 93. He is survived by two sons and four daughters. His funeral, with military honours, will take place in Clonmacnoise this morning.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/leader-of-congo-battalion-dies-1427478.html

You are saying Congolese as if they were a cohesive group of people like the British. Congo is a made up country. We are dealing with tribes. Did you not have the difference pointed out to you in nearby Rhanda recently. You dont want people to be free that is your problem.
California is becoming Hispanic and if they decide to become free then good luck to any retard who wants to stop them.

youngdan wrote:

You are saying Congolese as if they were a cohesive group of people like the British. Congo is a made up country. We are dealing with tribes..

Britain is a made up country. So is Ireland. So is every place in the whole world. Katanga, by the way, would not have been a cohesive state either.

youngdan wrote:

You dont want people to be free that is your problem.

Define free.

Tribalism is a problem. The last thing we need is thousands of little tribal states all over the world. It would lead to constant warfare. Apart from the fact that most of them wouldn't be economically viable.

youngdan wrote:

California is becoming Hispanic and if they decide to become free then good luck to any retard who wants to stop them.

Didn't you lads have a civil war over that sort of thing.

It would be more difficult to find fools today to get themselves killed fighting those rebs. It is the large countries that appear not to be economically viable now. I can see plenty of secession movements here and I expect Europe to break apart shortly. Time will tell if I am correct re Europe. Thankfully Lisbon was defeated and so far so good.

youngdan wrote:

That is like saying a lot of the British people saying that they wanted the north to remain part of Britain. What the British or Congolese want is immaterial. The future of northern Ireland is for the people of NI to decide and the future of Katanga was for the people of Katanga to decide. It is called self determination. This report has the central government killing thousands of baluba and my understanding is that they were divided http://www.congostamps.com/katanga/KATANGA%201960.htm Why could not the baluba go where they wanted as they are a separate tribe.
The whole thing was a fight for the minerals. Same as always.

When did the Katangese decide on seccession? Tshombe's won an election, that was all the mandate he had. The party he narrowly lost to was Sendwe's BALUBAKAT, a Baluba party. After Katanga's seccession the Baluba faced massacre in their homeland and rebelled against the Katanga state. Their votes didn't count all of a sudden.

Have you never wondered why no country, not even Belgium, recognised Katanga as a state? They thought it was all about the minerals too.

So all of a sudden the elected leader can not decide the course of action to take. However we are told that 26 countries can be signed up for Lisbon by their leaders sayso.
The baluba were divided between both sides but who was stopping them forming their own country. Don't give me this too small to survive stuff when tiny burundi is doing fine beside it.
You don't even want Ireland to be an independent country with this line of reasoning.

Are you saying that Europes leaders were right to do a Tshombe? How much say do think the average Katangese got in their leader's actions? There was nothing to stop the Baluba setting up their own country except the Katangese, who decided autonomy was good enough for them but not for the Baluba.

I would like to see the baluba tribe given independence right now, hows that. You did not answer my question . Do you want Ireland to be an independent country.

youngdan wrote:

You don't even want Ireland to be an independent country with this line of reasoning.

That's a funny looking question. It's not one that dignifies an answer.

As for the Baluba, how do you know they want independence?

3 times I have asked you if you want Ireland to be an independent country and you don't have the spine to say yes or no. Are you a child.

Dan I would like Squire Hall to be independent along with its overseas territories, but outside that I couldn't care less. What difference to me if ruled by a bunch of wasters in Dublin, London or Brussels? They all have notions above their station and like to meddle.

At some point I have to cooperate with my neighbours so they don't discharge sewerage into the ditch along the boundary, and if the old girl up the hill falls ill I would rather she didn't just decompose in her bedroom. Also need cooperation for services, to build roads etc. So question is what is the smallest effective size of government? Also when you get right down to it for me there is an attraction in living in a vastly larger state than some parochial hell hole run by the local druid.

The Congo like most African countries is a European construct, but because that construct or constructs existed you will have those in most regions in that continent who have moved and are in an ethnic minority. It could even be that the original inhabitants are the minority. How it will ever be resolved is beyond me. Of course outside powers fuel the division and interfere in the political system so as to secure contracts and access to resources. In the case of Congo at the time of independence there was also the matter of the cold war and Communist regimes were not exactly flavour of the month in the USA but were portrayed in USSR as beacons of hope throwing off the yoke of imperialist oppressors. Both versions of reality are decidedly dubious. For me the average person anywhere just wants to feed their family and get on with life. It is the Freedom fighters and political wasters who are the troublesome minority and who cause the problems and the press and media barons to discriminate the poison.

In many ways Africa is like Europe. It is a continent where linguistic and racial groups do not match the political borders. They actually need an African Union. The problem with your California analysis is that all of California may decide to secede but within California there will be large areas that do not wish to. So do they remain and independent California becomes a patchwork quilt? There is no rational answer to this conundrum for one group has their rights upheld and another theirs oppressed. Or the political map becomes seriously complex and unworkable.

I want liberated from the oppression of Dublin.

youngdan wrote:

3 times I have asked you if you want Ireland to be an independent country and you don't have the spine to say yes or no. Are you a child.

You asked once, and didn't use a question mark. But seeing as you inssist, I'll answer. I support Irish independence. Now answer my questions.
Why did no state in the world feel that Katanga deserved recognition?
Why, if they were so concerned about democracy, did they impose their rule on the Baluba?
Why was Tshombe allowed to decide on independence matters for his people but not the European leaders in Lisbon?

We were very quiet about Kosova, which I've heard described as a large NATO base.

Well at least now the discussion can continue. I am glad that you want Ireland to leave the EU.
I rarely see a state recognize a breakaway provence anyplace because if states began to fracture their own cosy positions of power and money would be endangered. I read elsewhere that 500000 people work for the state in Ireland. They depend on it for their living and would want an even larger unit if possible. Now the question is how the rest of the workers can keep paying them. The answer is they can't but this inconvenient truth will be hidden for as long as possible.
I have already said that I want the baluba to be independent.
I believe that the Katangans were of the same mind as their leader. I do not believe that Europeans are of the same mind as their leaders with regard the Lisbon treaty. The Brits are being denided a vote on the issue and labour will cease to exist after the next election as a party that can ever hope for power. Anyone that thinks Brown cares for the British people or Cowen for the Irish are seriously deluded.

Squire. Government is wastefull and the bigger it is the worse it is. Human nature is nasty and this notion of a benevolent kind leader that has our best interests at heart is what the Koreans are fed. Politics is about theft. What loot can I get at the expense of others. Everyone wants something for nothing. So I am looking forward to the the screams when the money runs out as is happening now. Rhode Island is the smallest state here and it is well able to exist. The Federal goverment should be reduced 95%. There is talk at the moment of spliting California into 2. So lets rock and roll back to reality

youngdan wrote:

Well at least now the discussion can continue. I am glad that you want Ireland to leave the EU.

Very predictable. If you want to start a debate on what 'independence' means then start another thread. I would see The Market and free trade as much bigger obstacles to independence then the EU.

youngdan wrote:

You rarely see a state recognize a breakaway provence anyplace because if states began to fracture their own cosy positions of power and money would be endangered. I read elsewhere that 500000 people work for the state in Ireland. They depend on it for their living and would want an even larger unit if possible. Now the question is how the rest of the workers can keep paying them. The answer is they can't but this inconvenient truth will be hidden for as long as possible.

And yet we all recognised Kosovo there a while back. And we used always pressure Russia about Chechya. It seems we support seccessions when it suits us. Katanga's seccession certainly suited Belgium and if your hour long video link weepy is to be believed it suited the Free world.

youngdan wrote:

I have already said that I want the baluba to be independent.

They didn't want to be independent. They wanted to be part of the Congo. You can't support Katanga's seccession and the Baluba's freedom. The two are diametrically opposed.

youngdan wrote:

I believe that the Katangans were of the same mind as their leader. I do not believe that Europeans are of the same mind as their leaders with regard the Lisbon treaty. The Brits are being denided a vote on the issue and labour will cease to exist after the next election as a party that can ever hope for power. Anyone that thinks Brown cares for the British people or Cowen for the Irish are seriously deluded.

You believe a lot of strange things if you posts are to be believed, but I don't care what you 'believe'. Can you back up your assertion that the Katangese (many of whom were Baluba) were of the same mind as their leader? At least Lisbon was passed by parlaiment in European countries. We saw how Tshombe treated the opposition in his Katanga.

youngdan wrote:

So all of a sudden the elected leader can not decide the course of action to take.

That depends on what the leader was mandated to do by his election. Tshombe was merely elected to the Congolese parliament, he decided after the election that he was seceeding from the Congo.

youngdan wrote:

when tiny burundi is doing fine beside it.

Your kidding right.

Burundi has the lowest GDP per capita in the world. It's been under constant dictatorship for the first 30 years of independence during which time at least three massacres of Hutus were conducted by the Tutsi dictators. The only democratically elected president the country had was assassinated within months and the country has been at war since 1993. 57% of children under 5 are malnourished and 68% of the population live below the poverty line.

There is no point in talking to you when you say you wish Ireland to be independent and yet you want Ireland part of the EU. The Katangans voted for their leader, what does that tell you.
You appear not to have read any of the material put up by Lestat. If you did would would see that it was the baluba that killed the nine Irish but you are making a fool of yourself by saying they were on the same side.

Lestat. Tshombe was elected by his people. After the Belgians pulled out who could have been surprised when things went to hell in a handbasket. A similiar situation after Rhodesia fell. The opposition tribe would have been a billion times better off had they formed their own country and escaped Mugagi but the Americans and Brits screwed Betheluzi who won the first election. Tshombe was doing the smart thing for his people but the Irish stuck their snout in and the balubas decided to have them for dinner. Too good for them.
Are you sure you are talking about Burundi and not Cuba. I would divide Burundi into 2 countries then as it appears that Hutis are not too fond of Tutsis.

youngdan wrote:

Lestat. Tshombe was elected by his people..

Man I'd hate to live in your idea of a democracy. To put this thing into some kind of perspective- Brian Cowen was elected by his people last year. That is, the constituents of Laois-Offaly. By your reasoning this gives him absolute right to declare Laois-Offaly an independent state in the morning without reference to the rest of the country.

youngdan wrote:

After the Belgians pulled out who could have been surprised when things went to hell in a handbasket. ..

Tshombe was a major factor in the handbasket going to hell.

youngdan wrote:

A similiar situation after Rhodesia fell. The opposition tribe would have been a billion times better off had they formed their own country and escaped Mugagi but the Americans and Brits screwed Betheluzi who won the first election. .

I can only assume you are referring to Robert Mugabe and Mangosuthu Buthelezi. That's the good news. The bad news is that Buthelezi has absolutely nothing to do with Zimbabwe. He's a South African Zulu and leader of the Inkatha Freedom Party. I think the man you're looking for is Abel Muzorewa.

youngdan wrote:

Tshombe was doing the smart thing for his people but the Irish stuck their snout in and the balubas decided to have them for dinner.

Tshombe fcuked his people over more than once and the Balubas who had the Irish for dinner thought they were killing Tshombe's mercenaries.

youngdan wrote:

as it appears that Hutis are not too fond of Tutsis.

Whatever gives you that idea. By the way they're called Hutus.

You are right I am getting these 2 confused. Do you think that the opposition parties in Zimbabwee would be better off in their own separate country. How was Tshombe responsible for violence in the other part of the country, did he invade?.
If Tshombe had no backing why was it so difficult to defeat him. What were the mercenaries, Rambos that could survive without local support.
If I am to believe your version of mistaken identity then those Balubas must be some stupid fools to mistake UN troops for mercenaries. Why don't you go back and read the material you yourself posted. You are even more lame than 905. Read the bloody account of the 9 Irish getting killed. They had been in regular contact with them and the Balubas knew exactly who they were.
Don't post material if you havn't read it because now both look like fools, especially Lestat who posted it

youngdan wrote:

There is no point in talking to you when you say you wish Ireland to be independent and yet you want Ireland part of the EU. The Katangans voted for their leader, what does that tell you.
You appear not to have read any of the material put up by Lestat. If you did would would see that it was the baluba that killed the nine Irish but you are making a fool of yourself by saying they were on the same side.

There's no point in talking to someone who can only repeat the freedom mantra over and over. You talk about independence, try being independent of your ideology.

The katangans voted for Tshombe, can you say they voted for seccession? Was he talking about seccession when he was elected? And he won by a narrow majority, which suggests he mightn't have had the full support of the people of Katanga in his little adventure. The Baluba promptly rejected his command, only to be coerced back under Katangan state control.

The Baluba who attacked the Irish were hardly carrying out a well-planned attack. It was a knee-jerk response to the numerous attacks he Baluba suffered at the hands of Tshombe's hired white army. In Elisabethville, the Baluba were protected by the UN and the Irish. There is nothing to suggest that the 'Baluba knew exactly who they were'. And are you going to suggest that the Baluba suddenly changed sides and supported the people who had been killing them, and then suddenly changed back again the following day without telling anyone?

youngdan wrote:

You are right I am getting these 2 confused. Do you think that the opposition parties in Zimbabwee would be better off in their own separate country.

No. It would be a weird world if every party that lost an election decided to set up it's own country. The opposition parties in Zimbabwe would be better off if they managed to depose ZANU-PF. Mugabe is irrelevant. He's old and will soon be dead.

youngdan wrote:

How was Tshombe responsible for violence in the other part of the country, did he invade?.

He got elected Prime Minister of the Congo and attacked those in Eastern Provinces who wanted to secede from the Congo. Which seems abit odd from a secessionist.

youngdan wrote:

If Tshombe had no backing why was it so difficult to defeat him.

He was backed by white industrialists who wanted Katanga's mineral wealth.

youngdan wrote:

What were the mercenaries, Rambos that could survive without local support.

Better armed and better trained than the natives.

youngdan wrote:

If I am to believe your version of mistaken identity then those Balubas must be some stupid fools to mistake UN troops for mercenaries.

I suppose all whitemen look the same to a Baluba.

youngdan wrote:

Why don't you go back and read the material you yourself posted. You are even more lame than 905. Read the bloody account of the 9 Irish getting killed. They had been in regular contact with them and the Balubas knew exactly who they were.
Don't post material if you havn't read it because now both look like fools, especially Lestat who posted it

Whereas you look completely intelligent when you cannot post anything that isn't factually incorrect. Chief Buthelezi running for election in Zimbabwe, Burundi doing fine. Man you're a fountain of knowledge.

905 You still must not have read the account of the 9 Irish troops getting killed as the survivor makes it clear that both sides were well known to each other.
Lestat. Are you a child as well. How is anybody going to depose Mugabi when he is killing opponents and ignoring election results. Then you come out with a childish statement that all whitemen would look the same to the baluba. Maybe they would look at the uniform and the letters UN. You too go back and read the material you posted where the survivor says they were familiar with them.