Winnie: Mandela remains "quite ill," can't speak

how about an 18-wheeler salute, I’m sure there are a few truckers who would take a couple passes,, sterno up the t’ars and let her roll..

I hear ya...

Not too sure what the China comment references though. It’s sordid leaders and their future?

"So his current wife makes no statement but his corrupt murdering ex wife knows all about his condition?"

Winnie is stayin' close to where the money and the Medal is.

The real wife is undoubtedly locked out of the house on pain of being Akronized.

Winnie is no Pooh.

Leni

Shame I got it wrong. Wonder if there will be a 17-burning tire salute when she goes?

Only if they don't forget the barbed wire for her hands.

The US and South Africa have something in common. We are both doing equally well under our historic first black president.

China needs resources and oil and such.

Africa should be a snap.. ask the Brits.

Russia has pretty much gotten all its needs met already from mineral and precious metals.

Old empires collapse, new ones rise, old ones rise again too.

They all need fodder for their economies and war machines.

Castro’s pal. The comrades can commiserate.

Elsewhere in the news: Hugo Chavez is still dead.

Hugo Chavez couldn’t say much at the end either

Tojo probably didn’t either besides.... “Kowabunga!”

A fitting gift while she is still alive is to seat her in an arena with a burning tire around her neck

I know why you’re saying that, and in her case I couldn’t agree more. Fitting...

Ain’t no cold like a Ruskie cold, ‘cause a Ruskie cold keeps the dead alive!

I am actually pleasantly surprised reading the Yahoo comments, most of them seem to know the real Mandelas. The defenders have nothing except ad hominems with which to respond.

When these two are gone, South Africa will be a better place.

No. That's what they said about the Shah of Iran, Quadaffi, Murabek, Sadam, Clinton, on and on.

No. That's what they said about the:

Shah of Iran

Well, I never said it about the Shah of Iran. I thought it was idiotic of Carter to help ease the Shah out so that the Ayatolah Komenie could come back from France and take over. Carter was on his 'holier than thou' trip, and seemed to think this leader of Islam would be a great asset to world peace. Carter was a big factor in the setting up an Islamic state in Iran. Look what has happened since. Almost immediately there was the hostage crisis. Carter single-handedly caused that to happen.

The Shah was a friend of the West. He Westernized his nation, allowed women to advance. Was he perfect? No. The Middle-East is a tough place. They can't run the place identically to how we do here. Allowing Islam free reign in those nations has shown us why. The Shah was a good leader. He was ruthless when he had to be, but compared to the Ayatollah, he was far better.

The Shah came down with Cancer just after he left power. Carter, the good Christian he claimed to be, refused the Shah access to the United States to get treatment. Carter telegraphed to the world just how reliable a partner the United States would be to it's allies. Many years later, Mubarak got the same back stab too.

Quadaffi

I had been an outspoken critic of Quadaffi, however you spell it. He had been problematic for a long time. Reagan pretty much put an end to that when he laid waste to one of his compounds. Behind the scenes Quadaffi had been starting work on nuclear weapons technology. When we went into Iraq the second time, it so scared Quadaffi that he called us to surrender his program to the West. Since then he had been quiet and content to lead his own nation.

When the movement to topple him developed, I was fearful of what a domino effect could have on that region. I thought Iran was firmly in the middle of the efforts in the region. It has caused problems in a number of places, and seemed active now, almost expansionist, if not in it's own right, certainly by proxy.

For that reason I thought that Quadaffi should stay. I also that Assad should stay. These guys were problematic to be sure, but they were willing to remain relatively co-existant with the West. Shaking things up could turn out to be a very bad thing.

In the end, I was against removing him. I was dead set against giving aid to any group in Libya.

Mubarek

For all the heat he took in his own nation, Mubarek had been a friend of the West. His military was pro-western. We held exercises with them, and had a good working relationship. Once again, Mubarek probably wasn't a great leader by Western standards (as it relates to his people), but it is no easy task to keep factions at peace in these nations. Saddat had been a victim of factional violence, and was assassinated. Mubarek was able to avoid that for decades. The world could have been a lot worse off without him.

Sadam (Hussein)

You're going to find folks who disagree with me on these issues. None will probably be more strident with regard to these people, than when it relates to Saddam Hussein. I think we are far far better off without him. His people certainly are.
Mass graves are not being created. The Kurds live in peace, no longer under the threat of a gas attack on a whim. Women are better off. Girls go to school and some women now serve in the government. Women can vote.

Husbands are not being killed because the King's sons want a crack at their wives. Women are not being kept as sex slaves in the palaces. The government is elected. The people have the vote, and their representatives work on their behalf.

Is the nation as stable as the U. S., just as great a place to live? No. There is violence there. The government may have to ask us to come back in, seek our help.

Iraq is no longer a threat to it's neighbors. It is not likely to be lobbing missiles into Israel, Saudi Arabia or anywhere else. Iraq had attacked, Iran, the Kurds, ethnic groups in the southern part of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Israel.

Is Iraq better off today? Hell yes. So are it's neighbors. So are we. Lest we forget, Hussein was offering rewards to the families of terrorists who carried out acts against Israel and the U. S.

If someone says Iraq is no better today without Hussein, they're forgetting a massive amount of good.

Clinton

Clinton was a crime family members. His uncle Buddy was a Casino boss in Little Rock. It's my understanding he was affiliated with the Chicago crime families. This probably wouldn't have been so bad, but Buddy was Clinton's surroget father. Clinton's father died when he was very young. He mentored him. Bill was so close to his uncle that he name his pooch in the White House after him, affectionately. "Buddy"

In economic terms, Clinton started out his administration eratically. In 1994 the Republicans took over the House and the Senate, and lucky for Bill Clinton, they cleaned up the financial mess. They actually ran several back to back balanced budgets toward the end of his terms in office. Other than that he was a scandle a day in office. His wife and crew were beastly. I will always believe that Vince Foster was assassinated. His associate in Arkansas was killed just week before him. They had documents on
Bill and Hillary was putting the squeeze on them to hand them over. They hadn't. Both wound up dead in short order. There are upwards of fifty inconsistancies in the death of Vince Foster. Jerry Parks was gunned down gangland style. Foster was found dead in Fort Marcy Park.

Whitewater, the Foster death, Bill's endless daliances, his abuse of women, his affair with Monica, the lost documents, the Chinese Cash Donations, Clinton placing a Chinese spy in the White House and later at State (possibly wrong department, memory fades on all this), all this and more...

Yes, the nation is better off without him. That doesn't mean it isn't even worse off now. It is. The Democrats are in a death spiral and can't imagine the nation not going down with them.

on and on...

We are not better without the Shah.

It remains to be seen how the removal of Quadaffi situation will play out in the long run.

We are not better with Mubarak gone.

Everyone is better that Hussein is gone.

We were better when Clinton left office. It didn't last.

Winnie Mandella caused people to have a tire placed around their necks, filled with gasoline and set afire. Nelson was put in prison because he was arrested in a bomb making facility. He was essentially a terrorist. The media around the world glorified the guy. Imagine them glorifying Timothy McVeigh. To my knowledge Mandella never took part in something that vile, but who knows what would have happened if he hadn't been arrested.

He caused things to be shaken up in South Africa. It's no question there have been major problems since. Whites are not safe. I don't think the rank and file Africans are a lot better off, but I'm not an expert on these matters. From what I understand the nation has declined significantly since Mandella ruled. Perhaps someone will jump in and say I'm all wet, but I don't believe so. If I am wrong, I want them to.

What you find happening when Leftists advocate things have to be fixed because it's not fair for Whites to be in control, is that when Whites are replaced, the people who were supposed to benefit aren't really all that much better off. Therefore it wasn't that it was all about Whites being in control. It was the fact that the complainers were not in control. Once that happens, everything is peachy with the media and Leftists, even if the rank and file African's life has gotten significantly worse.

It's like Blacks in the U. S. Are they better off under Obama? No. The Black unemployment rate skyrockted after him coming into power. Think the media is going to play that up? LOL So goes South Africa, in my opinion.

Mandella has been out of power for quite some time now. There hasn't been a calamity due to that.