Please enter your login details

You can also sign in with your Sowetan LIVE &
Business LIVE account details.
   Sign Up   Forgot password?

Sign in with:

 
Sat May 26 20:42:22 SAST 2012

SA 'regrets' Libya's UN vote

CAIPHUS KGOSANA | 23 June, 2011 00:2760 Comments
File picture.
Image by: AFP

South Africa's top diplomat has admitted SA voted in favour of a UN resolution authorising a no-fly zone in Libya without understanding how it would be enforced.

Foreign Affairs director-general Jerry Matjila told MPs during a briefing on international matters yesterday that South Africa was in the dark about the intensity of the bombardment that would be required to enforce a no-fly zone.

"I don't think we explored thoroughly the modalities of the how, [such as] how do you ensure no-fly zones?

"All of us were moved by the carnage we saw in Libya. We were moved by the extent of destruction of civilian life and I think truly to the [African Union] and South Africa, and correctly so, we thought now we must protect ordinary people.

"But the modalities were left, I think, unresolved conclusively and those who have the means then developed their own means to enforce the 1973 resolution," said Matjila.

UN Resolution 1973 was passed by the world governing body's Security Council shortly after Muammar Gaddafi ordered ground and air strikes to quell a popular uprising in the country he has ruled for 42 years.

The bombing campaign has since intensified, with Nato - in charge of the operation - shelling Gaddafi's compound and other targets in the capital Tripoli, which they consider to be military targets.

One of Gaddafi's sons was killed during Nato's bombing of a compound.

South Africa and other African countries have since cried foul over the Nato operation, arguing that bombing Gaddafi's compound amounted to a regime change.

Matjila said there were not enough discussions at the UN Security Council about how the resolution would actually be enforced.

He said, however, that the government and the AU would oppose any plans to send in ground troops into Libya.

Matjila added that South Africa had stopped all arms sales to Libya and had issued restrictive permits to several countries that might ship South African made weapons to Libya.

South African-made sniper rifles and ammunition recently found their way to Gaddafi's troops in contravention of an arms embargo.

Meanwhile Matjila confirmed that Swaziland, which is facing a crippling cash crunch, was seeking a substantial loan from South Africa.

Although he wouldn't confirm the figure, reports last week indicated it had asked for R10-billion.

About R2-billion would be used to pay Swaziland's domestic debt, R1.7-billion towards agriculture and R1-billion to boost the local currency elangeni, which is pegged to the rand, according to reports.

To submit comments you must first

Join the discussion & Debate

SA 'regrets' Libya's UN vote

For Commenters Consideration | Please stick to the subject matter

COMMENTS [60]

LehlohonoloGumede

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
I think you guys failed to do your work, you don't just go around endorsing things you know nothing about. Eintlik, your office is indiscipline, iresponsible and unruly. How many embarasments we never had in the past we endure since your office was appointed? See, you guys are just incompetent and an overhaul of your office is a requirement.
Avatar

Abdulhalli_Shittu

Posted 338 days ago
LehlohonoloGumede = 100% These IDIOTS should all resign! They know nothing now!!
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
"has admitted SA voted in favour of a UN resolution authorising a no-fly zone in Libya without understanding how it would be enforced."
--------------------------------------------------
Lol so what's new? Just look at the state of the country, and you will realize that these incompetents don't understand 99% of the things they get involved with, or have so much to say about. At least here is one guy who has the guts to admit it. Typical Dunning-Kruger effect...

LMFAO!
Avatar

EliJikelele

Posted 338 days ago
You are right.... their lack of research and preparation for debate are fine examples of criminal negligence.
Avatar

Maxi

Posted 338 days ago
stonearch
To be honest with you, the state of the nation is far much better than before 1994. Everyone is aware unless they are ignorant. So don't bring this nuisance in this debate.
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
Maxi
"So don't bring this nuisance in this debate."
-----------------------------------------
Lol - firstly find out what "nuisance" means!

Secondly only a delusional being would believe your statement that "everybody knows"! All I know is that the country is a cesspool of corruption from the top "leadership" down to you prostrating minions. The army is a mess. Health care is a mess. Violent crime has escalated to by far the highest in the world. We have the highest incidence of rape in the world. (By miles). Local government has broken down to the level that sewerage is running in the streets. Water supplies are completely polluted. Our power grid is in shambles. Our lack of electricity will force our growth rate further onto it's knees and cost the economy billions if not trillions in lost production over the next few years. Our judiciary is a laughing stock. Our police/law enforcement is another cesspool of corruption, thuggery and probably one of the worst and most inefficient in the world. More than 80% of murders go unsolved. Our productivity is amongst the lowest on earth. Our maths and science results are the lowest out of the 50 countries measured. More than half of our professionals have left the country. Our tax rates are growing to be amongst the highest on earth with virtually no returns for taxpayers. None of our University qualifications are acknowledged internationally because of the drops in standards. Our roads maintenance infrastructure is in shambles, and more than half has disappeared from the maintenance database. I think this probably proves enough for a start lol!

LMFAO. Nice going Maxi - I am sure "everyone" agrees you are doing a fine job lol!

AWA

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
So SA should rather have voted for Gaddafi to continue killing thousands of his people? It was never about the no-fly zone. It was about the methods used to stop the killing. Did they expect the resolution in itself would stop it? That is the AU way. In the real world you got to do something about it. Not have some meeting with Gaddafi and expect him to play ball.

What they do not understand is that with Gaddafi there is no middle road. Otherwise he would have stopped the killing long ago. They are quick to defend their friend Gaddafi when things go wrong for his family but they are also quick to forget they were justified in forming MK and fight the apartheid regime. What is the difference? You deny a people their rights for long enough you are going to get bloodshed.

I expect they now support Syrian president Al-Assad killing his own people so he can hang onto power. They will no doubt vote against any UN resolution condemning the killing of unarmed civilians in Syria and other Arab countries.

Please, wake up and stand up. At least make up your minds which side of the fence you want to be and stop jumping the fence every day.
Avatar

Schumi

Posted 338 days ago
I'm sorry AWA, but I disagree with you. How would a man in power protect himself from armed rebels? These rebels are in civilian clothes so they can easily pretend to be civilians when threatened yet be the 1st to open fire when the opportunity presents itself.
How I wish that we can open our eyes and see the real reasons for these uprising in Nrth Africa and the Arab world. These are all about the oil. The guys in power are not puppets of USA, France and Britain, so these self appointed, so called guardians of democracy want regim changes so that they can have someone who'll glady give them free access to their oil resources.

Who armed these rebels anyway?

If there were uprisings in USA, how would the Obama administration quash them?
Avatar

AaronGumede

Posted 338 days ago
Why can't the UN convene a meeting and order a resolution to bomb Syria as well? Is it not true that Al-Assad is effectively using armed forces to kill unarmed and peaceful citizen protestors? Its not about Ghadaffi been evil but the imperialists hell bent on enriching and developing themselves on Lybian oil. The truth is that they are fighting for free and at will access into Lybian oil. One wonders why can't they think beyond war and exploitation of African minerals because they claim intelligence. France and Britain are master imperialists and built their economies on exploitation of African countries and not like Japan who use her resources to succeed and don't go around bombing countries and claim rescue mission and civilization.
Avatar

Leretemonnyong

Posted 338 days ago
AWA, you dont know what the hell you talking about to start with. It was a lie that Gadafi was killing his citizen by air strikes. The Russian military intelligence exposed the lie through their Satellite images that there were never airstrikes that they were claiming. And if Nato and the US are really protecting the civilians, do they have to protect them by continuing to kill them?

They should have just called all this a No-life Zone instead.
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
AaronGumede

The West and UN entered the fray in this case because there was a unanimous call from the Arab League (not the Yoof league) for them to get involved. When the west suggested getting involved in Syria, it was turned down because there was no call from the Arab League. So tough luck, your warped argument attempting to blame the west does not withstand scrutiny...
Avatar

FerdiMo

Posted 338 days ago
You seriously need to stop subscribing to the US/Nato/West hypocritical bee-ess they keep feeding you. Why do you think they haven't showed the same "resolve" to protect civilians in Syria? Hosni Mubarak killed Egyptian protesters too. Why do you think the U.S stalled, stuttered and flip-flopped in their condemnation of that situation without even a thought of taking military action? Propaganda is not dead... doesn't mean you HAVE to lap it up.
Avatar

AaronGumede

Posted 338 days ago
@stonearch
I am not blaming the West but tell you what is their interests in Libya. We all know that they have nothing to gain Syria but much so in Libya. The only reason why there is no poverty and unemployment in Libya is that Britain and France were not effectively exploiting her because Gadhaffi was watching them, otherwise Libya could have been like Nigeria, rich with oil but taken for free to Europe by bribing government official, just like Ivory Coast's cocoa and oil. You don't find Germany in the fray because they are capable of using their resources to survive, just like Japan but France and Britain were and remained parasites who know best how to talk and exploit in Africa and deliver lower than Japan and Germany.
Avatar

Spook

Posted 338 days ago
I agree with you 100% AWA, the hand wringing brigade will of course always condemm action, the pacivists would never actaully do something to change the world for the better , they will just sit with a little checklist to try and find any sort of morality that "might" have been breached and then play that. And if there's a terrible disaster they also condemm the west because they didn't do something like for example Rwanda. Yet if they actually do something, it's also wrong, then it's just about money and the west wanting to take the oil etc etc, which actually goes without sayin because, if i'm president my job is to secure they well being of my country and ideology into the future, if you can't do that you are failing your most basic task as leader of the country, and if that involves removing unstable dictators with force so be it, i'm sorry it's strategic decision any of us would make if we happen to be in that situation.
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
Whichever motives you care to dream up - the West and UN would NOT have become involved in Libya without the support of the Arab League. Libya is simply not worth it with only 2% of world oil, and the current levels of tension in the area. This was the first time EVER that there was a unanimous request from the Arab League for help from the West, and they felt obliged to assist. If the Arab League had requested further assistance unanimously in Syria, and the West refused, you may have grounds for your allegations. But these are the FACTS. Those offering all sorts of 'reasons' can offer only speculation, and those that speculation is inspired more by ideology than logic.



Avatar

Leretemonnyong

Posted 338 days ago
You know what Spook? Your statements are regrettable as you are condoning murdering of people of other countries in the name of so called national interest without realising what a satanic idea that is. The ideas youre supporting arent common and ideal. The people who came up with such evil thought are the satanic cult of the banking and military and phamarceutical cartels called the Illuminating that have planned to take over the world's resource so as to subject ordinary people into slavery. The ideal thing for world peace is tolerance and no war. You are just wishing for anarchy and the end of the world.
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
Lol the conspiratory theorists again. I suppose you believe the 'Da Vinci Code' to be the truth too lol? This is pure fiction written for primary school entertainment man!
Avatar

bakaebakae

Posted 338 days ago
I totally disagree that UN went for Lybia because of Oil. Lybia has 2% of world reserves for God's sake. The west have good relationships with the Saudis which are much bigger than the Lybia. Italy and France were getting most of their supplies from Gadaffi cheaper anyway and they can easily get their supplies from the Saudis, UAE, Dubai, Abudabi etc easily. I personally think the oil story is being overdone now......why would the west put their economies in so much risk by disrupting supply?
Avatar

AWA

Posted 337 days ago
I will not reply as I think others have already made all the points.
I also accept that there are different points of view. After all, how are wars started.
I support everyone has the right to express their views, including myself.

Did anyone mention the long history of Gaddafi as what some call a madman?

Not that I always trust the UN, but my view is they were right in this case and I am pleased SA voted in support, even though they have second thoughts now. You cannot live in an "if only" world. We do live in a "next time" world. So next time they vote to help in other Arab countries, they can vote against it and just let the killing go on.

Regarding the oil, yes it is all about oil. That is why these dictators hang onto power in the first place. The dirty game of politics combined selfish and greedy men. At some point there will be an uprising because normal men and women want to be free.

Chirelive

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
South Africa has done what it deemed fit so save lifes. It was a catch 22 situation. Either way, South Africa would have been blamed. Gaddaffi is even prepared to die than to cede power. Power monger and a despot. He has no respect for other humans other than his own. I see no regret at all. South Africa had good motives to support the vote period.
Avatar

Zimasa77

Posted 338 days ago
Whose lives? The armed rebels? The NATO is doing really good job in the bombing of civilians............and people have to always believe the BS story of malfunctioning bombs.
Avatar

Leretemonnyong

Posted 338 days ago
Chirelive, Gadafi will die for his country and people as he knows that if would ever step down they'll be colonised by the imperialists like its happening in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan.

Mzungu

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
Libya...boss, its broken....

MisterWendal

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
A UN vote is not something every country has, and those who have it must ensure that it is used wisely. This regret by South Africa after voting indicates incompetence, and a case of not applying their mind to the matter.
Heads must roll....
Avatar

SuiGeneris

Posted 338 days ago
Preferably the head of Gaddafi !

DonnieBrasco

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
and who said that Jacob Zuma is a visionary? speaking of visionless,
where there is no vision the people perish

Bart365

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
The UN move to get Gadaffi OUT is the correct one!

He has been supressing his people for 3 decades.... about as bad as MAD BOB!
Avatar

Leretemonnyong

Posted 338 days ago
Dont lie now. The people of Libya enjoy many of the services for free that we have to pay for in many countries. Things like health, education, housing, you name it. So stop it with your chit talk.
Avatar

Maxi

Posted 338 days ago
I am no supporter of Gadaffi, but I tend to disagrre with you that Gadaffi suppressed his people. Libyand were the most happiest nation in the north. They enjoyed good life and were well taken care of than the rest of North Africa.
Avatar

Dr.Zeek

Posted 338 days ago
Leretoboingboing: please explain how Quadaffi manged to acquire all those billions stashed away around the world, eh? Or, his long and public support for terrorism, including Lockerbie, eh? Or, his use of live ammo and mass rape against his own people, eh?
I know you probably think Muammar deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Unfortunately, the rest of the world doesn't share your views.

HZK0506

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
South Africa is a member of bricks, all the bricks nation abstained from voting except of cause us which ironically happens to be an African country, after being in favor of this resolution Michelle Obama graces us with her presents any one see the connection??????

Its really sad that we only realise our error 300 deaths later.

Leretemonnyong

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
Doesnt our government have intelligence agencies that can view beyond what we read in news papers? I thougth they had. I mean, its seems like these people just read propaganda from Sunday Times and just react to it.
Avatar

SuiGeneris

Posted 338 days ago
''''Doesnt our government have intelligence agencies.......?''''

They have, but they are too busy 24/7/365 covering up the corruption and incompetance of the government cadres !
Avatar

EliJikelele

Posted 338 days ago
They certainly have zero intelligence in all government agencies....

FerdiMo

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
The mishap in not fully comprehending the extent to which the no-fly zone could be enforced was unfortunate. That said South Africa does not stand alone in nations that supported the protection of civilians but had no intention of heavy military action enforcing that cause so to a point, it's understandable and forgiveable. Should also be mentioned that NATO forces are flirting heavily with the boundaries of that UN resolution and at times breaching it.

The biggest disappointment for me has been the completely impotent role the AU has played in this saga. This was an opportunity for the AU to stand truly united against foreign intervention (especially West intervention) on sovereign African soil. They could have acted hastily and more resolutely in dealing with Gaddaffi's removal from the presidency through diplomacy and thereby validating themselves as an effective and necessary African body and also giving validation to their message of African solutions to African problems.
Avatar

Leretemonnyong

Posted 338 days ago
Why do they have to remove Gadafi? He's not a president nor a King, he's a leader.
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
The excuse that they did not know what was required to enforce a no-fly-zone is ridiculous but most likely true. Again one of those cases where a phrase has been pretentiously captured without knowing what it really means. By definition it requires force and bombing to enforce. You only had to look at a single newscast during the Bosnian episode to know what was involved. They can thank Western technology for the fact that their bombing is so devastatingly accurate that only a few lives were lost. After all, 99% of people using the phrase have no clue as to how devastating these missiles actually are. If this was 50 years ago, the idea of a no-fly-zone would be ridiculous, because at best you could hope to hit a target probably within half a kilometer. How naive can you be? Where these people get their ideas of reality from God alone knows!
Avatar

AaronGumede

Posted 338 days ago
@FerdiMo
Dont forget that the people of Libya decided that they want a democratic change and the West semnt a CIA trained terrorist to take advantage of the peaceful protests. He did not want to be part of the peaceful protest because he is unknown in Libya and instead organised a bunch of terrorists and claimed that they are rebels. We only heard of Rebels in Libya now and it is reported that they were not trained and cannot use weapons effectively.The spy is aware that the peaceful marches will not benefit their interests because the new leadership maybe someone who may not be favourable to the West. We can thus deduce that the UN resolution is a conspiracy and coverup for the WEST to attack and Libya and her citizens.The West already agreed with their spy that they will support him militarily, hence the unprovoked sudden bombing of Libya by NATO. They only needed the approval of that useful, lame and mindless bunch of fools called Arab League. They never wanted to listen to AU. Nato never shoot down any Gadaffi fighter jet since from the begining but have been bombing Gadaffi and killed his family. We have seen that spy running up and down in Europe and US.
Avatar

FerdiMo

Posted 338 days ago
@Leretemonnyong

Because Libyans were out on the streets in protest against his eternal cling to power. The Libyans should have the mandate to choose their own leader. If that happens to be Gaddafi then so be it but what they are fighting for is that process of choice that you and I enjoy. Any leader that stands against a democratic process must be removed if democratic process is the will of the people. That's just non-negotiable in my book.

@stonearch

I get your point but let's not be naive. Political leaders anywhere in the world have in the past redefined words to get around UN war resolutions, whether is Bush's redefinition of "terror" or even Obama redefining "hostilities" to bypass senate and get the green light for military action against Libya despite it contradicting the U.S War Power Act.

NATO has now created a novel definition of a no-fly zone to enforce what is virtually a War of Aggression on Libya. Make no mistake that the title "no-fly zone" was deliberately intended to mislead and smooth it's passing at the UN. Not understanding it's truest extent was daft given we have intelligence agencies but it's not inconceivable how that happened.

You're also dead wrong in stating that the Arab League is unanimous in their support for the no-fly zone. Most Arab League countries abstained and even after endorsing the no-fly zone they condemned the continued bombardment on targets unrelated to a fly zone. Amr Moussa, the Arab League secretary general has spoken out strongly against NATO's execution saying it goes against their aim of simply imposing a no-fly zone and nothing else.
Avatar

FerdiMo

Posted 338 days ago
@AaronGumede

I'm not sure about the spy conspiracy theory, sounds a little woo-woo to me but it's no secret that NATO is supporting rebel forces and working strategically with them to overthrow Gaddafi.
Avatar

stonearch

Posted 338 days ago
FerdiMo

The definition of a NFZ is clear. SA started complaining about bombing before the NFZ was even implemented! But the UN mandate was NOT purely to enforce a NFZ. It was also to take whatever steps deemed necessary to save lives from the dictatorship. Obviously that also requires force, with even more casualties. The point is that the West cannot be expected to pussyfoot around the situation indefinitely, and believe me, they won't. I am sure that they have better beans to fry. If the AU was worth an iota more than a lot of jabbering chimps, the west would not have been called upon to get involved. So in order to complete the mandate I am sure (and they have stated as much) that if they can get a potshot at the "King of Kings" (lmfao) they would do so. Nothing undeclared there either therefore.

As far as the AL is concerned, there were no dissenting votes. The request was put to the west by the AL as a block. This was the first time ever. I am not about to repeat the story all over again...
Avatar

AaronGumede

Posted 338 days ago
@FerdiMo
Its unfortunate that you never heard of it and very wrong to call names if you don't know them. That is synonimous with Europeans anyway but it is advisable to confirm and dispute things you don't know and not called them names.
Avatar

FerdiMo

Posted 338 days ago
@stonearch

If by "jabbering chimps" you mean a bunch of ineffective clowns that sit around a table resolving nothing - and I really hope you are - then I'm with you whole heartedly on that at least. They should have been ahead of this situation driving it if they were any sort of relevant.

@AaronGumede

I didn't call you or the spy conspiracy names. I stated it sounds a little woo-woo to me, meaning a little crazy and I stand by that. I'd need concrete proof of such an agent to even begin to consider the story's validiy. Harde if you too offence but you understood wrong.

Zodwa3

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
Are these people serious?! They didn't "thoroughly explore the modalities" of a no-fly zone?!! I mean, where have they been for the past couple of years - at the very least? This is a joke, right? Maybe they're pretending not to have known just to save face. Haven't they been watching how these things are carried out? This is absolutely no excuse. The went along with everybody and now they've also got blood on their hands. Amateurs!

bakaebakae

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
SA under Zuma is doomed.....the man is a chameleon....you never know were he stands on issues. Today he says this and tomorrow that......how can a department of international relations and the presidency not know what a no-fly zone means? Even i as a civilian i knew what it entails....that is why it took such a long time for the motion to be put forward for voting at the security council. It seems only SA didn't know what it entails. What a damn administration....and we say Mbeki was the worst.....the man was a billions times the current administration!

Koos

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
They were dumb to have never known what a no-fly zone involved,...In Outgoing US Defense Secretary Robert Gates' words : "Any resolution for a no-fly zone basically means an air raid and bombardment against Libyan military targets" - This, Secretary Gates, said just before the Arab League brought the resolution to the UNSC,..Our foreign affairs officials should have tuned into CNN instead of lookinf for pr0stitutes on Schoeman Street,..then they would have known,....SMFH

Courage

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
Maybe the "no-fly zone" hasn't been the most successful of military actions - but it gets the job done where NO ONE else has offered ANY tangible solution to the problem. The AU remains toothless when dealing with Gaddaffi, Gaddaffi is a lieing scoundrel when it comes to ceasefires and promises. Maybe South Africa (and the AU for that matter) should just shut up until they offer a tangible solution - and one that doesn't keep a bloodthirsty corrupt dictator in power *cough*Zim*cough*
Avatar

FerdiMo

Posted 338 days ago
Since South Africa's mediation in the Zim power sharing deal, when was the last time we read about gross injustices or human rights violations. Not saying Zim is all cosy now but it's undeniable that though not perfect, that deal reduced violence and volatility. Zim hasn't really been the news since, certainly not as frequently as it was before.

So it's a tad unfair to say no one else offered any tangible solutions. By the time French apaches dropped the first missiles in Libya everyone was caught unaware. Granted they've had time to reflect and formulate a practical solution now but even if a plan was in place, how do they engage Gaddafi while he's too busy ducking bombs? The AU should do the opposite of silence. They should rage and impose their own solution.

AaronGumede

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
We must not forget that the people of Libya decided that they want a democratic change and the West sent a CIA trained terrorist to take advantage of the peaceful protests. He did not want to be part of the peaceful protest because he is unknown in Libya and instead organised a bunch of terrorists and claimed that they are rebels. We only heard of Rebels in Libya now and it is reported that they were not trained and cannot use weapons effectively.The spy and the West are aware that the peaceful marches will not benefit their interests because the new leadership maybe someone who may not be favourable to the West, hence the quick recognition of the socalled Rebels by France and a push to accept that bunch in OPEC. We can thus deduce that the UN resolution is a conspiracy and coverup for the WEST to attack and bomb Libya and her citizens to get their oil.The West already agreed with their spy that they will support him militarily, hence the unprovoked sudden bombing of Libya by NATO. They only needed the approval of that useful, lame and mindless bunch of fools called Arab League, they never wanted to listen to AU. Nato never shoot down any Gadaffi fighter jet since from the begining but have been bombing Gadaffi and killed his family. Those who think that there is a righteous course by the West to bomb Libya must wake up, there was never a righteous course from many capitalists. They kill and maim for greed and self enrichment. We have seen that in Iraq and will see it all over the world as long as they are still controlled by the devil but claim God.
Avatar

Courage

Posted 338 days ago
Would love to see the proof of a "CIA-trained terrorist" - or any of the BS you just wrote. Interesting that you call the Arab League "a bunch of mindless fools who won't listen to the AU" - I would think that of the AU - not listening to any country with a bit of sense.

And the protests began peacefully in Libya - its only when their self-proclaimed dictator started getting a little worried and started shooting did any violence begin.
Avatar

AaronGumede

Posted 338 days ago
@Courage
Lona, you just believe what you are told and it depend who told you what you know, the US did not dispute that report but instead commended the Mid-East and Africa analyst for been honest in the interview and he raised the spy issue in the interview. Like I said, it become BS if you don't know it hence the Victoria Falls and Kaff+ir Boom. Things must be the way you know want them, names, history etc, but at the end you messed up many important things which could stengthen diversity and increase knowledge which could help us be better species.

Zimasa77

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
SA gov. must always read the fine print. This is exactly the situation poor nations always find themselves in, when accepting the foreign aid.
Nothing for MAHALA.

Geist

Posted 338 days ago
Avatar
Speak for yourself.
I hope they roast and toast him and Mugape.

augustrain

Posted 337 days ago
Avatar
Gadaffi was going to be bombed anyway. All they needed was a signature on resolution 1976 so they said to Jerry Matjilaone Please Sign Here we need SOME "Doom" for a no fly zone.

Vérité

Posted 337 days ago
Avatar
Of course they will regret it. This is their best friend for crying out loud. And usually in life you make friends who share the same interests. And may I say the ANC and Ghadaffi's regime have so much in common they may aswell tie the knot.
Some of the many things you share:
Corruption
Dictatorship
Dislike of Freedom of Speech
Dislike of Media
Power hunger
Good Window Dressing
No respect for citizens who don't share your common belief
Selfish

AfricaRevolt2011

Posted 337 days ago
Avatar
If I was Ghadaffi, I would have detained Zuma when he came to Tripoli and used him as a human shield against this Nato aggressions and killing of innocent civilians. Zuma voted for this no fly zone and it is the Lybian sons and daughters who are paying with thier own blood. If we had a foreign policy in this country, SA would be suspicious the moment Russia and Germany abstained from endorsing this resolution 1973. It is nothing but a quest for oil and Africa's mineral resources by the imperialist west. And if Zuma had to be a human shield in Lybia this country wouldn't miss him and we would'nt even realise he is not here.

correspondent

Posted 336 days ago
Avatar
Bomb the daylites out of old Towelhead, he has been in power too long..same goes for Bob Mugabi, who wastes valuable oxygen every day..send in the tomahawks..can't wait for silent Mbeki diplomacy..old showerhead probably got a few grenades from him..