Idi Amin Biography Documentary

Jan 2019
53
Norway
#2
Another example of why colonialism wasn't that bad and benefited Africa for the most part. Idi Amin Dada Oumee did more harm to his people than the United Kingdom when Uganda was its protectorate, and Idi Amin's regime explains the poverty of Uganda way better than "colonialism"(remember, Uganda was just a protectorate) does.
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,584
Benin City, Nigeria
#3
Another example of why colonialism wasn't that bad and benefited Africa for the most part.
Are you serious? Idi Amin was a loyal British army officer who fought to put down multiple African rebellions against British rule, prior to his coming to power in Uganda. The man was entirely a product of colonialism and had nothing to do with indigenous African development (he even had soldiers attack the (ceremonial) king of Buganda while he was in control of the Ugandan army) and someone like Idi Amin would never have risen to the position he did in the absence of the colonial system. The fact that what you take from the case of Idi Amin is that "colonialism wasn't that bad" shows just how delusionally ignorant and extreme your arguments can get. For goodness sake, try and stick to Norwegian affairs in the future, and spare Africa your half-baked "analyses" (if they can even be called that).
 
Last edited:
Jan 2019
53
Norway
#4
Are you serious? Idi Amin was a loyal British army officer who fought to put down multiple African rebellions against British rule, prior to his coming to power in Uganda. The man was entirely a product of colonialism and had nothing to do with indigenous African development and someone like Idi Amin would never have risen to the position he did in the absence of the colonial system. The fact that what you take from the case of Idi Amin is that "colonialism wasn't that bad" shows just how delusionally ignorant and extreme your arguments can get. For goodness sake, try and stick to Norwegian affairs in the future. and spare Africa your "analyses" (if they can even be called that).
I didn't claim that Idi Amin was a product of indigenous African development. All I'm saying is that his regime has more responsibility for the poverty of Uganda than the past colonial regime.

Of course, certain African leaders had the opportunity to seize power because of their relations with colonial powers. Siad Barre for example is similar to Idi Amin in that he was a Zaptié. Bokassa was also similar to this in that he was part of the French colonial troops. Same thing is also true with many other African leaders like Eyadema, who was in the French colonial troops.

However, blaming the French or the British for what Bokassa's or Idi Amin's regime did is complete non-sense, as they weren't the one committing these monstruous acts. Those committing those acts were leaders who seized power in the context of independency, and who happened to be soldiers associated with colonialism, which is not surprising as it gave them certain resources(an army with weapons) useful in seizing power.

And by the way, Obote wasn't good either. Obote seized power from Africa’s only functioning multi-party democracy and set himself up as dictator, setting Uganda on the course for ruin when it had such great potential.

For goodness sake, try and stick to Norwegian affairs in the future
I appreciate to see ad hominems. It shows that you are too afraid of my claims to attack them, and instead attack my identity. It does nothing but empower me even more. I am interested by post-colonial African history for reason that concerns me, and I will continue to discuss and read about it that you want it or not.
 

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,202
Welsh Marches
#5
" Idi Amin was a loyal British army officer who fought to put down multiple African rebellions against British rule, prior to his coming to power in Uganda." That's not actually true, he served as a private during his early years in a unit fighting against the Mau Mau, but he never put down any rebellions against British rule in Uganda (there weren't any) as an officer, I think that the only fighting that he did was in suppressing cattle raids by the wilder members of the population.
" ...and someone like Idi Amin would never have risen to the position he did in the absence of the colonial system." Again that is misleading, unless you are suggesting that the British should not have raised him from the ranks in the first place. It was only after independence that he rose above the rank of lieutenant, to posts that he was ill-equipped to fill.
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,584
Benin City, Nigeria
#6
Those committing those acts were leaders who seized power in the context of independency, and who happened to be soldiers associated with colonialism
It's startling that you write this, but don't see the contradiction in it. "Happened" to be soldiers associated with colonialism, yet although colonialism brought him to prominence (a prominence it is far from guaranteed that he would have had otherwise), colonialism was good. . .

I didn't blame the British for what Idi Amin did, by the way. I just don't see how this man's rise is in any way disconnected from colonialism. He was literally promoted up in the colonial system for his efforts to crush rebellions against colonial rule.

And by the way, Obote wasn't good either
Nobody said Obote was good. He basically allied himself with Amin anyway.

I appreciate to see ad hominems. It shows that you are too afraid of my claims to attack them, and instead attack my identity.
No, I just decided that you are a worthless troll, and that I will not write anything extensive in countering you because I have better things to do. That is why I suggested that you stick to what you might know about (Norway). Your very first post on the forum was an utterly idiotic and false claim (the horn of Africa comment) which already indicated to me that you are a charlatan pretending to have knowledge about things you do not actually understand. You then went on to make even more foolish and false claims one of which I immediately shot down completely, which left you returning to the thread for hours desperately trying to think of a response once the falsehood that you had written had been exposed (I saw your name on the viewing list of that other thread multiple times hours after I had responded to your false claim), but you had nothing. Because your "knowledge" is half baked, at best.
 
Last edited:

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,584
Benin City, Nigeria
#7
" Idi Amin was a loyal British army officer who fought to put down multiple African rebellions against British rule, prior to his coming to power in Uganda." That's not actually true, he served as a private during his early years in a unit fighting against the Mau Mau, but he never put down any rebellions against British rule in Uganda (there weren't any) as an officer, I think that the only fighting that he did was in suppressing cattle raids by the wilder members of the population.
" ...and someone like Idi Amin would never have risen to the position he did in the absence of the colonial system." Again that is misleading, unless you are suggesting that the British should not have raised him from the ranks in the first place. It was only after independence that he rose above the rank of lieutenant, to posts that he was ill-equipped to fill.
I didn't say there were any Ugandan rebellions against British rule that he (Amin) put down, but for the record, there was a Ugandan rebellion against British rule, although it happened long before Idi Amin's time (the Lamogi rebellion was much earlier). What is misleading about saying that someone with very limited intellect and competence would not have risen to the rank of the highest position in a country's military in the absence of the particular colonial system the country was operating under? His rise from cook to lieutenant is unlikely to have happened outside of the circumstances that existed while the country was a colony, and that is what set the stage for his later promotions - he was already one of the highest ranking black African soldiers in the country before its independence. Someone whose rise through the ranks is so closely tied to the colonial system is not somehow representative of how an equivalent/comparable position would have been filled in the absence of that system. He might just have stayed a cook.
 
Jan 2019
53
Norway
#8
No, I just decided that you are a worthless troll, and that I will not write anything extensive in countering you because I have better things to do.
Troll? Interesting, you use even more ad hominems after being called out for doing this. But it does give you a good reason to not confront my claims!
.... You then went on to make even more foolish and false claims one of which I immediately shot down completely, which left you returning to the thread for hours desperately trying to think of a response once the falsehood that you had written had been exposed (I saw your name on the viewing list of that other thread multiple times hours after I had responded to your false claim), but you had nothing. Because your "knowledge" is half baked, at best.
No, I responded 45 minutes after this post. However, I'm being censored by the moderators since it was posted :
response.png
Very strange for an approval to take so much time...
In summary, in that post, I accepted that certain things that I said were incorrect(or simply ignored certain things to not fall into pointless debates), however, I pointed out a few important things about Nkrumah.
 

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,202
Welsh Marches
#9
I didn't say there were any Ugandan rebellions against British rule that he (Amin) put down, but for the record, there was a Ugandan rebellion against British rule, although it happened long before Idi Amin's time (the Lamogi rebellion was much earlier). What is misleading about saying that someone with very limited intellect and competence would not have risen to the rank of the highest position in a country's military in the absence of the particular colonial system the country was operating under? His rise from cook to lieutenant is unlikely to have happened outside of the circumstances that existed while the country was a colony, and that is what set the stage for his later promotions - he was already one of the highest ranking black African soldiers in the country before its independence. Someone whose rise through the ranks is so closely tied to the colonial system is not somehow representative of how an equivalent/comparable position would have been filled in the absence of that system. He might just have stayed a cook.
He didn't put down any rebellions at all against British rule as an officer, it was only as a private that he was involved in such fighting in Kenya, and he was not promoted to become an officer until almost ten years later. It is utterly pointless to ask how he would have progressed in other circumstances, but the fact remains that it was not the British who raise him up in the ranks far beyond his capacities. He joined the army initially as a cook, but was evidently promoted to corporal and erageant because of his qualities as a soldier in the field. I was only pointing these things out because your remarks might have misled people who didn't know anything about him, particularly the remark that he was "a loyal British army officer who fought to put down multiple African rebellions against British rule". Not that it matters greatly!
 

Ighayere

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,584
Benin City, Nigeria
#10
Troll? Interesting, you use even more ad hominems after being called out for doing this. But it does give you a good reason to not confront my claims!

No, I responded 45 minutes after this post. However, I'm being censored by the moderators since it was posted :
View attachment 14663
Very strange for an approval to take so much time...
In summary, in that post, I accepted that certain things that I said were incorrect(or simply ignored certain things to not fall into pointless debates), however, I pointed out a few important things about Nkrumah.
The entirety of the thrust of your argument was incorrect. You were literally writing nonsense. It was just laughable that you thought that Nkrumah suppressed agricultural development.

I know a lot more about the subjects that I commonly post about here than what I usually let on, and I've studied Nkrumah's administration in far greater detail than anything I have posted on this forum, so it is amusing that you think there are some "important things about Nkrumah" that you could point out when you seemed to not even comprehend when his administration really ended or began (for you to make the claim that you did about cocoa) or not even know something as simple as what the real issue with cocoa exports really was.
 

Similar History Discussions