[BlazingArizona]

I'm very disappointed in the white farmers, too. There was little to no resistance, and no effort to flee the inevitable. What's up with that?

Seconded. I think the problem was that the farmers were still too culturally British for their own good. As such, they trusted government to do the right thing and at the same time had no concept of self-defense. American farmers would have organized, shipped in guns and mounted a defense while there was still time.

[Clive]

Population of Zimbabwe - 12.5 million

White population of Zimbabwe - 40,000 and declining

Number of white farm families 2 years ago 4,500

Number of white farm families today 3,200 and declining.

[Regulator]

The farmers who are left are the liberals who bought the b.s. about being one big happy Zimbabwean family. The Rhodesians - whites who had no illusions about a dim witted thug like Mugabe - left over the past 20 years, and mostly went to South Africa.

The land was never "taken" from anyone. The farms were carved out of land which had never been cultivated. Rhodesia was an area which had little population 100 years ago, because it requires irrigation and relatively advanced farming techniques, neither of which any tribal group knew how to do.

As "Zimbabwe" collapses, there may come a time when the Rhodesians make a comeback, but I doubt it. Even if they could muster say, 30,000 people to fight, there would still be millions of blacks, and the spectacle of whites fighting to take back their land would be too much for the Peter Jennnings of the world. Condemnation and outrage would ensue.

Note that no such condemnation and outrage are occurring now, except in a few British papers and in the netherworld of conservative internet sites.