You're trying to convince your fragile ego that everything is okay, but it's clearly not working. When you cry abut being personally attacked on a messageboard you just let the world know how weak you are. You still somehow can't see it, though.Behold. Still no refute from the account only used to attack and never to add anything to a topic. lol...you are one sad puppy.
Its ok though snowflake. I have no issues replying to you so you get some attention because I am capable of doing two things in the same reply...like how I am now going to point out that all of my original on topic points stand un-refuted because of you inept you are to do refute them.
So was I. Same for France and Canada. I guess colonialism wasn't all that bad after all. Now, if there was oil in Rwanda, I'm sure American troops would have been involved.
I don't think most Germans believed that at the time. Hitler and the Nazis made it propaganda. What Germans wanted, and Hitler delivered, was getting Germany out of a great depression, give Germans a sense of pride after the humiliation of WWI, and make Germany a world power again. Had Hitler stopped after invading Austria and Northern Czechoslovakia, he would have been considered a hero and Germany would have thrived. No World War. But the Nazis failed at world domination, specially with Hitler as a military strategist. How stupid do you have to be to attack and try to take over the Soviet Union?
LOL. Exec's don't have feelings, they have P&L statements.
Well, isn't that what happened after the American Civil War with the Ku Klux Klan? Those Southern boys weren't very bright either -- hence, the 'redneck' mentality.
The First and Second Congo wars as well as the fall of Mobuto Sese Seko were, in large part, caused by the Rwandan Genocide. The First and Second Congo war led to millions of deaths and the effects of those wars are still widely felt today. The wars also had dozens of other countries involved, mostly from Southern and Eastern Africa, which has led to people calling the the Great African War or African World War, among other titles. It's one of the few documented cases where there was large-scale transcontinental mobilization in Africa among various nations similar to Asia, North America and Europe. Regardless of the name, it's well documented that the spillover of the atrocities from Rwanda into Zaire plunged the government into collapse and created turmoil all around central Africa. Assuming any genocide is insignificant because of a lack of catastrophic bloodshed, in itself, is a short sighted view on the events themselves. Africa changed a lot, not exactly for the better, since the genocide and the legacy of the Rwandan genocide is felt to this day. The death toll may be, relatively, small but the scars are ever present.Yes, I read your post. It does not mean I agree with what you are saying. There is no 'African World War', you are referring to war in the Democratic Republic of Congo which I already listed on post #56.
Regarding Rwanda. This was an excellent documentary on the subject. Basically how the UN did not do shit to stop the slaughter. "Shake Hands with the Devil", 2005.
"In 1994, one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century unfolds when nearly 800,000 men, women and children are murdered amid civil unrest in Rwanda. This documentary tells the story of Roméo Dallaire, a Canadian general who is in charge of the United Nations' unsuccessful peacekeeping mission in the country prior to the killings. Returning to the nation for the first time in ten years, Dallaire recalls his painful memories of the event and wonders if he might have been able to stop it."
Isn't that just like the SJW/Woke culture today? They agree en masse, no variations. 100% compliance, low IQ sheep
The radio shtick is just the perps mocking victims. They didn't literally wait for the radio to tell them, listening the actual broadcasts, it's clear that most of the people that partook in the murders were waiting for the right signal/moment, the genocide was brewing, they wanted it to happen. They took out the president, stockpiled machetes and other weapons and waited for the right moment to strike.
Are there any successful 'black nations' in Africa?
If there were no European intervention, these people would still be butchering each other without the world knowing about. They probably were butchering each other long before the Europeans arrived. Hell they butcher each other on a daily basis without any white man's involvement. I mean, no white man told Mandela's wife to put tires around people and set them on fire.
Faking being shocked is what internet losers do. This is how they communicate. As if their reaction to anything matters, or could in any way settle a dispute. You're lost.
While I agree.... I feel like the US chose to not get involved individually because of one thing that had happened the year prior:
Early 90s were a shit storm.
Yeah, the NATO mission was after Rwanda.
