War in Africa

[KennyR]

It could come from the pen of a bad cliche-ridden fictional war author. But it's real.

In Central African wars, you can expect to have child soldiers, HIV spread by mass rape, mutilation of dead or living, captured female children sold off as prostitutes, mysticism around the severed genitals and drained blood of enemies, ritual cannibalism, on-the-spot massacres of thousands of people... And worse. And all with the power of modern weapons. Just check recent news items on it.

My question is: why are the Africans so "uncivilised" when it comes to conflict? Well, that's not the right word, but you know what I mean. War is always hell but War in Africa is much more brutal and raw than any wars the Europeans have ever fought. Even the atrocities of the Germans, Russians and Japanese have only the advantage of a larger scale. I can't understand it. Why are there no ethical boundaries in Central Africa that even atheist communists and nihilistic Nazis dared to cross? What makes these people so bestial? Did religious morality actually have a positive effect on Western (and oriental) civilisation that still lasts even today? Discuss.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

It looks too much like medievil Western Europe.
Rome was retreating, a new religion coming up.
Child armies, plague and other severe diseases, mass rape, famine, etc. etc. .
The difference is, that in Africa, 2 instead of 1 religions are coming up. Probably, over a few decennia, whole africa looks like Sudan.
Morality, of course, comes with civil rest.


But if there are more moralities than one...

[whabang]

Africa is the cradle of humanity, humanity is bestialic no matter if we like it or not. This means that Africa is the home of beastiality? :)

[KennyR]

speelgoedmannetje wrote:
It looks too much like medievil Western Europe.
Rome was retreating, a new religion coming up.
Child armies, plague and other severe diseases, mass rape, famine, etc. etc. .

But at that time it still wasn't the norm to cut the genitals from a vanquished foe, eat his liver, and rape his baby daughter. Not even the Mongols or the Celts - both called barbarians - resorted to such.

As for the religious question, you'd probably find that most of Central Africa is solidly animist. They have tribal beliefs and have integrated Christianity or Islam into them, picking or choosing what parts they like. Just like everyone else, actually...

So maybe its these very primitive tribal beliefs and customs are to blame. You never know.

[whabang]

Yep! I hate to say it, but central Africa just never caught up with the rest of us. I belive that there is a lot of tension between the different tribes. Problem is that many of the warring tribes were forced togerther under european rule.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

KennyR wrote:

But at that time it still wasn't the norm to cut the genitals from a vanquished foe, eat his liver, and rape his baby daughter. Not even the Mongols or the Celts - both called barbarians - resorted to such.
.You'll be surprised how f*cked up the medievil ages were.
For instance, the frisians dug their foe in the sands of the shore, to let him drown with the upcoming tide. That's app. 6 hours of dying.
Cannibalism wasn't rare either. Particularly during the crusades, the dead were eaten.
And superstition wasn't in the least rare back then, though I do not have an example of it in the Western Europe.

And the Monguls set a camel on fire and let it run through a city, so the city would burn down.

[T_Bone]

I think it's because of their age. Kids are f*cking cruel.

[sumner7]

1-2-3-4 - We don't want no bloody war
5-6-7-8 - Stop the war, stop the hate!

:ranting:

[KennyR]

speel wrote:
Cannibalism wasn't rare either. Particularly during the crusades, the dead were eaten.

Yeah, but out of need, not to scare the enemy!

The crusades were cruel, but both sides still had a moral standard to look up to. It wasn't much, but it still was a limitation.

As T_Bone says, the real reason why African wars are so cruel is probably because most of the people fighting are kids. A kid can use an AK47 (sort of). A kid can't wear armour, ride a horse, and use a sword. And even if they could they couldn't afford it. :-P

[Speelgoedmannetje]

May I point out that there were enough kid armies in the medievil times? There was even a kid crusade, and these kids ended up as slaves in the Middle East.

And about cruelty, for instance, the inquisition was truly barbaric.

[KennyR]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
May I point out that there were enough kid armies in the medievil times? There was even a kid crusade, and these kids ended up as slaves in the Middle East.

There were no kid armies. True, you could fight at 14, but in those days that didn't really make you a kid. You couldn't fight at 12, because for one you didn't have the size or strength. An AK-47 doesn't need a lot of strength.

And about cruelty, for instance, the inquisition was truly barbaric.

Torture, burning. I don't see where the sexual torture and cutting off the hands, feet and lips of living people and leaving them alive comes in.

Trust me, I know history: and Africa is the most extreme of battleplaces.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

KennyR wrote:

There were no kid armies. True, you could fight at 14, but in those days that didn't really make you a kid. You couldn't fight at 12.There WERE kid armies, a 14 yo wasn't considered a child. A kid could as well use a spear. But these armies were indeed usually slaughtered.


Torture, burning. I don't see where the sexual torture and cutting off the hands, feet and lips of living people and leaving them alive comes in.
That happened in the medieval times. For instance, the 'fake pope' wich was cutted off nose, eyes, ears, tongue, etc while he was ALIVE. and was sitting backwards (still alive) tied on a monkey and was send to Rome.
And how about Iwan, the Russian tyrant, wich did more or less the same to his victims. Or Vlad the impaler (and I am not gonna tell you how that impaling was done, for it is too gruesome).


You have a 'romantic' idea about medieval times I think.

[KennyR]

Speel, you're still not getting it, are you?

No matter how cruel and violent something is, you can always make it worse - just add sexual violence.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

KennyR wrote:
Speel, you're still not getting it, are you?

No matter how cruel and violent something is, you can always make it worse - just add sexual violence.Don't you think the church cleaned up these from the past?
Believe me, it happened, including the sexual violence, or should I rather say, especially.

-edit- (btw that impaling, the victim got a blunt stake in his arse, wich slowly found it's way through the body and did not neccaserily got out of the body through the mouth.)

[BADHead]

why not send some of there relations back to africa from Britain theres plenty of them !

[Speelgoedmannetje]

BADHead wrote:
why not send some of there relations back to africa from Britain theres plenty of them !you imply that there (Africa) are relations wich are also in England wich can be send back to africa, while a relation is "an abstraction belonging to or characteristic of two entities or parts together" wich is not something that you can send as is without manipulating the entity wich inherits that particular entity.

so

:-?

[KennyR]

why not send some of there relations back to africa from Britain theres plenty of them !

I'd rather send all the chavs, neds, BNP voters and charvers. At least blacks might actually work in their lives. :)

[T_Bone]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

BADHead wrote:
why not send some of there relations back to africa from Britain theres plenty of them !you imply that there (Africa) are relations wich are also in England wich can be send back to africa, while a relation is "an abstraction belonging to or characteristic of two entities or parts together" wich is not something that you can send as is without manipulating the entity wich inherits that particular entity.

so

:-?

hah?

[Speelgoedmannetje]

You cannot send an relation. You can only make, destroy or alter a relation. A relation is defined in an entity, so in fact you alter an entity.
With '1-n' relations, wich states 1 entity has a relationship with more entities, this implies that that particular entity inherits the relation. This is of course different with 1-1 relations, where the relationship is inherited by both relationships.

A relationship is not something on it's own.

So my question is:
Define the particular instruction 'send'

[BADHead]

@ Kennyr
I work,and work and live among them so dont give me any crap !

[Wolfe]

Question: Can someone tell me when Africa wasn't at war with it self somewhere in the last 25 years? :-?

They've been cutting up people, castrating etc. for decades. No one really pays much attention to Africa because it doesn't really change.

To effect a real change would call for drastic measures. Most likely war because they don't know any better. A forced peace. No rules, no morals = no hope. Africa will remain as it is. :-o

However, given the spread of aids and all the killing eventually they will die off anyway. :-(

[Speelgoedmannetje]

Wolfe wrote:
Africa will remain as it is. :-o No, it changes. I do not see an end to these viciousnesses in Africa yet, but over 50 years I think most of Africa is changed into a theocracy. With less, but more organised wars.