Theshed
|
| posted on 7/12/13 at 10:06 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ken555
He was a terrorist.
Remember, the difference between "freedom fighter" and "terrorists" is purely in the eye of the beholder.
He just happened to be a terrorist who was on the right side of the fight.
Is a terrorist on "the right side of the fight" not a freedom fighter? If the targeting directly or indirectly of civilians is terrorism
then presumably Churchill's decision to bomb civilian centers amounted to terrorism as did Truman's decision to fire bomb and later nuke
Japanese cities. Surely those decisions were far more extreme than anything done by the ANC? Noting your location I would ask whether Robbie the
Bruce, Wallace or the Bonnie Prince are generally referred to as terrorists?
What the young black African above is politely pointing out to you is: who are you to judge the proper reaction to an oppressive regime which dictated
where a black could live, walk, work and who they could sleep with? I know where I would stand and did stand. I supported the armed struggle morally
and by donations to the dedicated individuals sleeping for years on the steps of the SA Embassy.
|
|
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 8/12/13 at 06:02 PM |
|
|
Well said you last two. I think some people labour the terrorist aspect because they want to hold a contrary opinion.
Beware! Bourettes is binfectious.
|
|
|
brum_gustavo
|
| posted on 8/12/13 at 06:47 PM |
|
|
Whatever opinion one might have about Mandela, this thread only confirms how important he was. Yet, if he was such a terrorist, once in power after 27
years in jail, it would semm natural for hiw to make south african whites go through the same suffering apartheid did to black people, yet, he
struggled to bring peace and mutual understanding, and the fact that, unlike most political leaders of Africa or elsewhere, he stepped down after his
first term as president (instead of using his popularity to stay in power for a second term, as in most democracies, or until his death like so
manyothers)
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 9/12/13 at 10:42 PM |
|
|
I think perhaps if those who choose to damage Mandela's reputation took the time to find out exactly what he did and didn't do and did
and the policies advocated and didn't advocate they would realise theier argument simply vanishes on closer examination.
Apartheid is such an evil concept and the freedom to protest was put down with such extreme measures that the ANC's [I] " terrorism
" [/I] was justiied.
Sharpville Massacre BBC Link
There are plenty of good sources on Mandela on the web why not find out for yourself.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
Scuzzle
|
| posted on 9/12/13 at 11:22 PM |
|
|
Mandella admits to his part in the numerous killings of civilian women and children in his autobiography, he does say he's sorry about it
though.
|
|
|
carpmart
|
| posted on 9/12/13 at 11:38 PM |
|
|
There is no clear unequivocal position here on either side. Mandela clearly did 'stuff' which even he believes he shouldn't have
done. Sure he made a huge difference to SA over te years, but to hold him in such untainted and high esteem as some do, I find difficult personally to
do. Unsurprisingly i personally find apartheid abhorrent too, but I really do get frustrated that both sides of the Mandela camp have such views as
they do. Should he be revered in the way he is by many right now, no he shouldn't. Should he be vilified in the way he is by the other camp, no
he shouldn't.
As I said in my first post, I feel ambivalent to Mandela.
You only live once - make the most of it!
Radical Clubsport, Kwaker motor
'94 MX5 MK1, 1.8
F10 M5 - 600bhp Daily Hack 
Range Rover Sport - Wife's Car
Mercedes A class - Son's Car
|
|
|
