MpachaNo video’s or books then?
MpachaI have another question, whilst the first Vickers Vimy Replica flight had much coverage(Books, video etc.) I’ve yet to see anything on the second flight to Cape Town? Does anyone know of any??
MpachaDefinitely the Mirage 😉
MpachaQuestion
I asked this before on the other thread but will try again!
Is anyone able to tie up the registrations in Peru (FAP) service of the ex-SAAF Canberra’s and maybe tell us a bit about there time/future in Peru?
many thanks,
MpachaHow would you know, may i ask?
I worked with MOD mapping and this was taught as the “correct” method! However with a “free” supply, some tend to cut out the piece required ! 😮 !
MpachaLibya obtained 16 F1 AD’s from Jan ’78 until April ’78
6 F1 BD’s from April ’78 until Oct ’79
16 F1 ED’s from Oct’78 until Oct’79
They are based at Okba ibn Nafa and whilst I’m not sure on numbers, they remain operational. The pilots tend to be a mixed bag of South Africans, French and Pakistani. They were used to attack Chad in the late 1980’s.
Libya remains a possible buyer of the ex-SAAF Mirages and possibly even recieves spares from South Africa.
MpachaMpacha,
I have already sufficiently explained where my opinion comes from and why I hold it. Clearly my opinion bothers you for some reason or another but if you want to convince me (or others for that matter) you’re going to have to do more than just say “absurd” repeatedly in several posts. Well, you’ve certainly failed to convince me that you are even knowledgable on the subject (past what you read in mass media) let alone knowledgabe enough to prove my friend wrong.
You have proven that you are incapable of supporting your argument!
MpachaI suspect that the words ‘academic’ or history professor’ mean very little to you which is a shame. As for being unbiased – objectivity isn’t really acheivable in almost any human sciences subject and history is no exception. I’m certain that “people in South Africa” are as subjective as a “person in Angola” – however, acheiving the post of history professor is not an easy one in London Universities unless you are able to maintain high professional and academic standards. Again, in the face of a lack of convincing counter arguments, I’ll stick with my friend’s opinions on this matter.
The point is that you are clearly not a history professor and it is you who is making absurb statements which you are clearly not capable of supporting. I put it to you that you are unable to produce evidence of these SA Government documents, on the policy of spreading Apartheid, because it is a figment of your imagination.
[/QUOTE]Clearly you disagree with my points – it would be nice if you could convince me that your disagreement has some value – otherwise whats the point of posting on a forum?[/QUOTE]
The point of my posting was to see if you could support such a wild statement. Obviously you can not.
[/QUOTE]You have to be kidding me. Are you suggesting here that your arguments are based on what the ‘world’s media’ do or do not report? I’m afraid that I would consider it laughable if this is indeed the case.[/QUOTE]
I’m suggesting that if someone in Angola could obtain sensitive South African documentation and just happens to frequent London pubs with said documents, then it is more than likely that the media would have obtained access to such information by now. What is laughable is that you expect us to believe such rubbish. Are you suggesting that only you and your “friend” have access to South African documentation? Care to share these “top secret” dates that you have?
Put up or shut up !
MpachaSo the fact that while my knowledge was gained in a London pub you aren’t preturbed that it was gained from a gentleman who not only lived in Angola for the greater part of his life but also lectures on African history? I’m afraid that I remain more impressed by his credentials than yours (not to mention the fact that he actually did talk about dates and and people and cited SA policy documents also). My impression of your ability to convince me (or lack thereof) remains the same.
Yes, I am preturbed at how a person in Angola knows more about South Africa than people in South Africa or how he can hold an unbiased view of the Apartheid regime? I say again, you don’t deal in facts so why should I bother trying to convince you? Present the dates and the “SA policy documents” that the worlds media appear to have missed?
Buy another round mate, you’ll feel better after a few more………. :diablo: :rolleyes:
MpachaMpacha,
EDIT: As far as I am aware SA had both covert and overt dealings in the affairs in every country it bordered (same source as before). Are you denying that SA got involved in the conflict in Angola?
NB, it is worth noting that expansionism does not always involve the invasion of other countries and the annexation of their territory – just look at US dealings in Latin America.
.
SA never got involved in the Angolan affair with the intention of spreading apartheid within Angola. SA got involved in order to support the Americans and in return she hoped for increased American support. Later South Africa supported UNITA in return for UNITA turning against SWAPO who was invading Namibia from Southern Angola. Each time, South Africa was “invited” to the “party”. South Africa was fighting for survival and not trying to impose her policies onto other countries.
Now that you choose no longer to include annexation of other countries, were is the comparision between Nazi Germany and Japan fit in again?
You have yet to show which country South Africa spread it’s apartheid to?
I suggest before you tarnish a group of people, you actually get out of a pub and do some research. The intentions of the Apartheid regime were totally different to that of WWII Germany and Japan. The Apartheid regime sought ways of gaining support for her policies within SA and never wished to “spread Apartheid” to other countries. The white Afrikaner feared for his survival and if you look at Africa’s past, who can blame them? I’m not condoning their actions, but as I said, Africa is a complex situation which can not be compared to other parts of the world!
MpachaMpacha,
You’re not being particularly clear in making your point. First you say that SA was capable of invading any of these smaller African countries but didn’t and thats the proof that they didn’t have expansionist policies and then you say that SA couldn’t possibly invade anywhere because they didn’t have the resources and thats the reason that they couldn’t possibly have expansionist policies. Its very confusing and makes it difficult understand what point you’re actually making.
Now I’ve explained where my opinion on SA’s expansionism comes from and I am very interested to hear your counter arguments but they have been completely confusing and you haven’t offered up any proof either. Under the circumstances you’ll forgive me (I’m sure) for not being convinced by your point/points.
I’ll just add that you’re completely right in saying that I know very little about affairs in the south of Africa and it isn’t my area of interest at all. On the other hand, you don’t seem particularly knowledgable either – certainly not authoritative enough to be convincing to me.
Maybe my intial point was a little confusing. South Africa did not have the means to occupy countries such as Angola, but she could occupy a land-locked tiny country like Lesotho. The fact that SA didn’t shows that she did not have the intention! Rhodesia was willing to accept South Africa’s terms for her continued support. This would be perfect for expansionism but SA chose to pull the plug on Rhodesia.
The fact remains that I have given you examples as to why this did not happen. You have yet to produce a single shred of evidence of any South African policy to “spread Apartheid” or even to mention one country that the South African “Apartheid regime” invaded and occupied. Since you don’t deal in “facts”, it is not surprising that you are not convinced. At least my knowledge was gained on the ground in Africa and not in some London pub ! :diablo:
MpachaBut Japan had the resources to take over much of the pacific and a significant chunk of the asia continent?
The Japanese invaded countries to capture resources?
How could lack of resources be a barrier to what basically equates to pinching the resources of others?
Japan had the “numbers”. South Africa had a small army and a small white population. How do you pinch white people if they don’t exist?? What is the point of a “white only” area if no whites exist and how do you enforce it? Germany and Japan had huge armies with modern weapons. They had the means to defy the world. South Africa in comparision had a tiny army and was desperate to be accepted again in the world community, hence prior to Mandela many aspects of Apartheid were removed. South Africa knew it was not workable, so why export it? If South Africa wished to “spread” Apartheid, then why did she effectively pull the plug on Rhodesia?
GarryB and Ink to prove me wrong, just name one country that the “Apartheid Government” invaded and set up “whites only” area’s? :confused:
Mpacha“discussing the very danger of South African expansionism”
Where is the proof, facts of this fantasy of yours? Which countries did South Africa occupy? How did Botswana, Swaziland, Lesotho, Mozambique escape this “expansionism”? Superior armed forces or was it the Cubans again? Suggest you discuss this outside of a pub when you are sober! :diablo: Such action by South Africa would have led to direct UN intervention.
“I’m confused now, remind me, whose ignorance is showing?”
Yours in neon lights…….. I said “smaller countries”. In order to “spread Apartheid” into countries that had no white population to speak of, SA would have to move large groups of white people into these countries. South Africa simply did not have the resources. Common sense mate! :rolleyes:
MpachaBristow Helicopters
MpachaDoes anyone have any details on the ex-SAAF Canberra’s service history whilst with the Peruvian Air Force?
Sign In
