Farm Attacks

Oldfut said:
There are always 3 sides to a storey. My summary of Zim's land "reform" (farm invasion) is that the Lancaster House loot was stopped by the UK as ZANU PF (Mugabe) was diverting the money into their own pockets rather than do much reform (as now in SA with the ANC). Then with massive corruption as well as unemployment (SA style), farmers started threatening to support the MDC. Mugabe let Hitler Hunzvee (sp) and his "war veterans" loose to rape and pillage farms and farm workers, while the ZANU PF elites picked up some prime property for themselves (SA ANC style).

Then came the elections where, probably, ZANU PF lost, but fiddled the outcome with the ANC's (Mbeki) support. Cheers to Zim.
Click to expand...
Nah there is only one side, Britain broke the agreement unilaterally under Blair and Clare Short and Mugabe had no choice but to take the Land. Educate yourself.
 
KSM93 said:
Zim's mistake was rushed land Reform with no proper support structure in place to support emerging farmers. This is due to naively trusting Britain to honor the Lancaster House Agreement and not being proactive.
Click to expand...
This Einstein has never been out of its Mummy's basement. Desperately needs it's cookies and milk at 7pm..

Mumy changes its nappy every 4 hours.
Hopefully Mum will make a mistake and drop it on its head soon.
Knock some sense into the Bots pip.
KSM I will happily take you to Zim for the first time in your life.
You eat sand.
I'll eat lamb chops from SA.
Now when your nuts drop and you are brave enough let me know when.
 
Last edited:
Thugscub said:
This Einstein has never been out of its Mummy's basement. Desperately needs it's cookies and milk at 7pm..

Mumy changes its nappy every 4 hours.
Hopefully Mum will make a mistake and drop it on its head soon.
Knock some sense into the Bots pip.
KSM I will happily take you to Zim for the first time in your life.
You eat sand.
I'll eat lamb chops from SA.
Now when your nuts drop and you are brave enough let me know when.
Click to expand...
Don't be so hard on yourself, Thugscub.
 
Thugscub said:
This Einstein has never been out of its Mummy's basement. Desperately needs it's cookies and milk at 7pm..

Mumy changes its nappy every 4 hours.
Hopefully Mum will make a mistake and drop it on its head soon.
Knock some sense into the Bots pip.
KSM I will happily take you to Zim for the first time in your life.
You eat sand.
I'll eat lamb chops from SA.
Now when your nuts drop and you are brave enough let me know when.
Click to expand...
It's fascinating when your kind realize the truth, they resort to insults instead of internalizing it and accepting it.
 
KSM93 said:
It's fascinating when your kind realize the truth, they resort to insults instead of internalizing it and accepting it.
Click to expand...
And what be your kind?

You have also not yet responded as to whether or not you are a racist.
 
KSM93 said:
Nah there is only one side, Britain broke the agreement unilaterally under Blair and Clare Short and Mugabe had no choice but to take the Land. Educate yourself.
Click to expand...
Are you saying if Britain paid for the land when the whites left, then the country wouldn't be a basket case?
 
KSM93 said:
It's fascinating when your kind realize the truth, they resort to insults instead of internalizing it and accepting it.
Click to expand...
SO when are you coming to Zimbabwe?
Called you out, now you cannot answer, so yes you will get flak. If you pee like a puppy don't run with the wolves.
 
KSM93 said:
Zim's mistake was rushed land Reform with no proper support structure in place to support emerging farmers. This is due to naively trusting Britain to honor the Lancaster House Agreement and not being proactive.
Click to expand...

Wikipedia tells me this about the Lancaster House Agreement:

Land reform[edit]​

In addition to the terms cited above, Robert Mugabe and his supporters were pressured into agreeing to wait ten years before instituting land reform.[citation needed]

The three-month-long conference almost failed to reach an accord due to disagreements on land reform. Mugabe was pressured to sign, and land was the key stumbling block.[citation needed] Both the British and American governments offered to compensate white citizens for any land sold so as to aid reconciliation (the "Willing buyer, Willing seller" principle), and a fund was established to operate from 1980 to 1990.[citation needed]
....

Later developments[edit]​

In 1980 the first phase of land reform, partly funded by the United Kingdom, resettled around 70,000 landless people on more than 20,000 km2 (4,900,000 acres) of land in the new Zimbabwe.

In 1981 the British assisted in setting up a Zimbabwe conference on reconstruction and development, at which more than £630 million of international aid was pledged.

In 1997 war veterans began receiving individual personal payments of ZW$50,000 each for their service in the war, costing the nation's tax payers billions of dollars and depleting government coffers. Then some months later Robert Mugabe announced the forced acquisition of land under Section 8 would proceed, and within 24 hours the local currency had devalued more than 50% and thus began the hyperinflation and demonetisation of Zimbabwean currency and the "Flights of Whites" from the country, most never to return.

In the time since independence, the Lancaster House Agreement was modified and changed more than 27 times according to a Zimbabwe independent newspaper.

Click to expand...


So, some key words:

1. Willing buyer willing seller.
2. The UK did help with funding in the early 80s.

Now, I know that Wikipedia is not the be all and end all of sources. Do you have any info about which parts they did not honour?

Lastly, considering SAs track record with land reform and no international bodies to help pay for it, how do you think SA should do land reform? A bit more detail than a one liners please.
 
Last edited:
Barbarian Conan said:
Wikipedia tells me this about the Lancaster House Agreement:



So, some key words:

1. Willing buyer willing seller.
2. The UK did help with funding in the early 80s.

Now, I know that Wikipedia is not the be all and end all of sources. Do you have any info about which parts they did not honour?

Lastly, considering SAs track record with land reform and no international bodies to help pay for it, how do you think SA should do land reform? A bit more detail than a one liners please.
Click to expand...
On 5 November 1997, Chalker's successor, Clare Short, described the new Labour government's approach to Zimbabwean land reform. She said that the UK did not accept that Britain had a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. Notwithstanding the Lancaster House commitments, Short stated that her government was only prepared to support a programme of land reform that was part of a poverty eradication strategy. She had other questions regarding the way in which land would be acquired and compensation paid, and the transparency of the process. Her government's position was spelt out in a letter to Zimbabwe's Agriculture Minister, Kumbirai Kangai:[36]

I should make it clear that we do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. We are a new government from diverse backgrounds without links to former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and, as you know, we were colonised, not colonisers.
The letter concluded by stating that a programme of rapid land acquisition would be impossible to support, citing concern about the damage which this might do to Zimbabwe's agricultural output and its prospects of attracting investment.[36][37]

Kenneth Kaunda, former president of Zambia, responded dismissively by saying "when Tony Blair took over in 1997, I understand that some young lady in charge of colonial issues within that government simply dropped doing anything about it."[38]

On 10 June 2004, a spokesperson for the British embassy, Sophie Honey, said:[49]

The UK has not reneged on commitments (made) at Lancaster House. At Lancaster House the British Government made clear that the long-term requirements of land reform in Zimbabwe were beyond the capacity of any individual donor country.Since [Zimbabwe's] independence we have provided 44 million pounds for land reform in Zimbabwe and 500 million pounds in bilateral development assistance.The UK remains a strong advocate for effective, well managed and pro-poor land reform. Fast-track land reform has not been implemented in line with these principles and we cannot support it.

So Britain unilaterally ended the programme using a pathetic excuse and a mere 44 million was made available for Land Reform from the promised. Foreign Aid is worthless and tied to funding British Industries so no wonder they loved it. Over real reform.

On SA land reform EWC is the best format.
 
KSM93 said:
On 5 November 1997, Chalker's successor, Clare Short, described the new Labour government's approach to Zimbabwean land reform. She said that the UK did not accept that Britain had a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. Notwithstanding the Lancaster House commitments, Short stated that her government was only prepared to support a programme of land reform that was part of a poverty eradication strategy. She had other questions regarding the way in which land would be acquired and compensation paid, and the transparency of the process. Her government's position was spelt out in a letter to Zimbabwe's Agriculture Minister, Kumbirai Kangai:[36]

I should make it clear that we do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. We are a new government from diverse backgrounds without links to former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and, as you know, we were colonised, not colonisers.
The letter concluded by stating that a programme of rapid land acquisition would be impossible to support, citing concern about the damage which this might do to Zimbabwe's agricultural output and its prospects of attracting investment.[36][37]

Kenneth Kaunda, former president of Zambia, responded dismissively by saying "when Tony Blair took over in 1997, I understand that some young lady in charge of colonial issues within that government simply dropped doing anything about it."[38]

On 10 June 2004, a spokesperson for the British embassy, Sophie Honey, said:[49]

The UK has not reneged on commitments (made) at Lancaster House. At Lancaster House the British Government made clear that the long-term requirements of land reform in Zimbabwe were beyond the capacity of any individual donor country.Since [Zimbabwe's] independence we have provided 44 million pounds for land reform in Zimbabwe and 500 million pounds in bilateral development assistance.The UK remains a strong advocate for effective, well managed and pro-poor land reform. Fast-track land reform has not been implemented in line with these principles and we cannot support it.

So Britain unilaterally ended the programme using a pathetic excuse and a mere 44 million was made available for Land Reform from the promised. Foreign Aid is worthless and tied to funding British Industries so no wonder they loved it. Over real reform.
Click to expand...
Yadda yadda

Where do you really think the money would have landed up under lord mugabe?
 
Grant said:
Yadda yadda

Where do you really think the money would have landed up under lord mugabe?
Click to expand...
Your kind strikes again. Signed a contract and broke it unilaterally with a flimsy excuse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X