Conquer Club

Sudan is splitting into two countries!
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f ... en&q=Sudan

Apparently, they have voted, and Southern Sudan will secede come July. I'm going to look into the history of the situation. Anybody have any incite?

While I admit I am no expert on the politics of African countries, I am pretty sure the problem with Sudan in regards to the civil conflict has been due to the Europeans creating arbritary borders when they divided up Africa amongst themselves with little or no regard to the ethnic and social groups that lived in Africa at the time. Then when decolonisation occured, they just handed over power to leaders within the same borders that did not reflect the cultural make-up of the area.

Hopefully this new development with South Sudan will start to bring about stability within the area, although I worry about a resource grab and a conflict of borders -

It should be best because the previous system ignored South Sudan's problems. Now, South Sudan has to take care of its own problems.

Let the dictator shuffle game begin!!

BigBallinStalin wrote:It should be best because the previous system ignored South Sudan's problems. Now, South Sudan has to take care of its own problems.

Let the dictator shuffle game begin!!

I think that's what we should all be afraid of. Hotel Rwanda 2. (Ever see it? It's actually pretty good. Then, I like movies based on historic events.)

radiojake wrote:While I admit I am no expert on the politics of African countries, I am pretty sure the problem with Sudan in regards to the civil conflict has been due to the Europeans creating arbritary borders when they divided up Africa amongst themselves with little or no regard to the ethnic and social groups that lived in Africa at the time. Then when decolonisation occured, they just handed over power to leaders within the same borders that did not reflect the cultural make-up of the area.

Hopefully this new development with South Sudan will start to bring about stability within the area, although I worry about a resource grab and a conflict of borders -

Kind of. But Sudan, as it is right now, is basically two different countries anyway. The North is primarily Muslim and Arabic speaking while the South is not. Plus, it already has been through a couple of Civil Wars that killed about 2 million (if I remember right).

radiojake wrote:While I admit I am no expert on the politics of African countries, I am pretty sure the problem with Sudan in regards to the civil conflict has been due to the Europeans creating arbritary borders when they divided up Africa amongst themselves with little or no regard to the ethnic and social groups that lived in Africa at the time. Then when decolonisation occured, they just handed over power to leaders within the same borders that did not reflect the cultural make-up of the area.

Hopefully this new development with South Sudan will start to bring about stability within the area, although I worry about a resource grab and a conflict of borders -

For sure though it has nothing to do with Islam and a large chunk of people refusing to live under Sharia Law...

KHARTOUM — Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir said on Sunday that the country’s north will reinforce its Islamic law after a referendum expected to grant independence to the south.

“If South Sudan secedes, we’ll change the constitution. There will be no question of cultural or ethnic diversity. Sharia will be the only source of the constitution, and Arabic the only official language,” Bashir said in a speech aired on national television.

Mr_Adams wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:It should be best because the previous system ignored South Sudan's problems. Now, South Sudan has to take care of its own problems.

Let the dictator shuffle game begin!!

I think that's what we should all be afraid of. Hotel Rwanda 2. (Ever see it? It's actually pretty good. Then, I like movies based on historic events.)

It's scary, but that's how it goes sometimes.

Mr_Adams wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:It should be best because the previous system ignored South Sudan's problems. Now, South Sudan has to take care of its own problems.

Let the dictator shuffle game begin!!

I think that's what we should all be afraid of. Hotel Rwanda 2. (Ever see it? It's actually pretty good. Then, I like movies based on historic events.)

great movie, not that i want there to be inspiration for another one...

I think a lot of countries with secessionist movements are less than happy about this, just as when Kosovo gained its independence. Every time a new country is formed it just goes to show that borders and territorial claims by any nation need not mean anything. Spain, for example, might break into 3 or 4 countries if a referendum were to be held. Scotland might secede from the UK if given a chance, Belgium is just complicated, Texas should get it over with already, Russia would pretty much shatter. BTW, Palestine is asking around for support in the UN.


Maybe it will turn into a disaster, maybe it will work out unexpectedly well. Either way I support new nations being formed.

Phatscotty wrote:

radiojake wrote:While I admit I am no expert on the politics of African countries, I am pretty sure the problem with Sudan in regards to the civil conflict has been due to the Europeans creating arbritary borders when they divided up Africa amongst themselves with little or no regard to the ethnic and social groups that lived in Africa at the time. Then when decolonisation occured, they just handed over power to leaders within the same borders that did not reflect the cultural make-up of the area.

Hopefully this new development with South Sudan will start to bring about stability within the area, although I worry about a resource grab and a conflict of borders -

For sure though it has nothing to do with Islam and a large chunk of people refusing to live under Sharia Law...

your statement doesn't contradict his. There wouldn't be this problem if the borders had been drawn to reflect the cultural groupings.

the border disputes likely to happen are in the sparsely populated areas of the Sudan oil fields. Resources aren't exactly evenly distributed.

Baron Von PWN wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

radiojake wrote:While I admit I am no expert on the politics of African countries, I am pretty sure the problem with Sudan in regards to the civil conflict has been due to the Europeans creating arbritary borders when they divided up Africa amongst themselves with little or no regard to the ethnic and social groups that lived in Africa at the time. Then when decolonisation occured, they just handed over power to leaders within the same borders that did not reflect the cultural make-up of the area.

Hopefully this new development with South Sudan will start to bring about stability within the area, although I worry about a resource grab and a conflict of borders -

For sure though it has nothing to do with Islam and a large chunk of people refusing to live under Sharia Law...

your statement doesn't contradict his. There wouldn't be this problem if the borders had been drawn to reflect the cultural groupings.

cultural groupings, of when? what year?

Mr_Adams wrote:the border disputes likely to happen are in the sparsely populated areas of the Sudan oil fields. Resources aren't exactly evenly distributed.

AFAIK the oil fields are mostly in the south, and that the disputes are mostly in the border areas where there will end up being minorities on both sides of the new border.

I watched this on The Daily Show (sadly).

I think it's totally crap to split countries... it happened to be most countries with interior disputes having natural resources..

radiojake wrote:While I admit I am no expert on the politics of African countries, I am pretty sure the problem with Sudan in regards to the civil conflict has been due to the Europeans creating arbritary borders when they divided up Africa amongst themselves with little or no regard to the ethnic and social groups that lived in Africa at the time. Then when decolonisation occured, they just handed over power to leaders within the same borders that did not reflect the cultural make-up of the area.-

this is very true... but to add one more thing.. europeans did that on purpose.. obviously, a dictator will be made a president of south sudan and he will definitely share the wealth with US & europe while the people who voted division will suffer deeper shit.. exactly like iraqi people...

talking about iraq.. did you know that Kuwait (who has 100s of oil wells) was part of iraq pre-colonialism? did you know that Saddam & Iraq were primarily armed and given weapons by US & Europe to fight iran? and when saddam is not needed anymore he was used to invade Kuwait. guess who is the main beneficiary from that shit...

oh before i finish this, Eta Organization in spain tries to get the Basque independent.. they are called terrorists.. this is true though, cuz they are violent.. however, there is a similar organization (or better call it a gang of assholes) in Angola controlling a territory with about 80% of Angola's oil.. you know what? nobody calls them terrorists because some forces will be happy with potential split..

- Andrea the Charmer