Talk:Ian Smith/Archive 2005

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Apoligies for the arbitrary deletion, but I couldn't work out what either version of the sentence was supposed to mean. Maybe it could be explained on this page? DJ Clayworth 16:34, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I've now (hopefully) clarified this sentence. I couldn't see any ungrammatical about the original, but as it now stands I think it's clear.
In short, the point that was being made was that although nothing in the consistution prevented blacks from participating in the political process, this was not the case for terrorist groups. 80.255 17:08, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'm assuming that most Black political parties were considered terrorists under the white regime. This might be worth saying too. Remember that someone might be reading this with no knowledge of the situation at all. DJ Clayworth 17:25, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I think that this article should mention that Ian Smith flew shot down in Italy and escaped to France. I remember his book saying something about him making the mistake of coming back for a second strafing run on the target by which time the element of surprise had been lost. I found the following snippet using Google: "During the war he was badly injured in a Hurricane crash in 1943 from which he fully recovered, only to be shot down whilst over the Po river in Italy during June 1944. He survived the experience and fought with the Italian partisans, before being able to escape across the border to liberated France. He soon rejoined his squadron and saw active service over Germany up to the close of the war in Europe." (Tim Murphy 22 Dec 2003)

Why is there a neutrality dispute notice on this article? If nobody has posted anything by 12th April I will remove it. DJ Clayworth 13:30, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

This article was initially extremely biased in favour of the terrorist mass murderer Robert Mugabe. However, it seems much improved now, so I will not, at present, object to the removal of the dispute notice. 80.255 09:34, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't know who posted the neutrality dispute notice. At any rate, I see little point in keeping it. The first time I looked at the article, there were a few sentences that could have been considered POV (although I don't think they were intended that way, they were just badly written), but several edits by a number of contributors since have rectified that situation. I support your stated intention to remove the notice. Davidcannon 00:46, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Contents

NPOV

I re-added the notice -- the article still seems slightly slanted in favor of minority government. Tlogmer 13:54, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Please be more specific (section, whatever) or the notice will be removed again. Wizzy…☎ 14:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

POV

Does he really count as a prime minister considering that the majority of people in the country were barred from voting. He should be called something that reflects he was not elected by a majority —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheOipian (talk • contribs) .

Does he really count as a prime minister? What kind of ridiculous question is that? Yes, Ian Smith did not help the situation in Zimbabwe, and generally I think he shoulders some of the blame for the current situation. Nonetheless, he was still Prime minister.

Should we call Robert Mugabe President, or give him a better title, such as "Evil Delusional Dictator" to better represent how he represses his opposition and destroys his own nation? I think that is a great idea. Maybe I'll make that edit. Oh yeah, and while I'm at it, I'll go make other dumbass modifications to every other article on here to support my own personal opinions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.160.173.86 (talk • contribs) .

He was Prime Minister. No personal attacks, please. Wizzy…☎ 05:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


Having lived 5 years in post-Independence Zimbabwe, I agree that this article seems biased in favour of Ian Smith. For example, under Background is written the sentence:

"This was also argued on the basis that virtually all of the newly independent African states at that time had descended into chaos and one-party rule."

It is true that Smith and his supporters argued this, but it is not true that "virtually all newly Independent African states had descended into chaos and one-party rule." In fact, at the time of UDI in 1965, most newly independent African states, including the ones bordering Rhodesia, were still multi-party democracies.

Smith's Cabinet

Does anyone know who Smith's cabinet members were, and which ministries (i.e., defense, education, whatever) they presided over? Please and thank you.

See Unilateral Declaration of Independence (Rhodesia)

BScar23625 11:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

This entire passage strikes me as POV

Smith - the man

While his personal courage and principles cannot be questioned, Smith was very much a product of the confined society into which he was born. Life revolved around the cricket team, the country club, the whites only school, the RAF and the company of other gentleman farmers. Smith never escaped from or saw beyond this.
Smith and his fellow white settler politicians stubbornly resisted any meaningful move to black majority rule throughout the 60s and early 70s. When majority rule was eventually forced on Rhodesia from outside it came in the form of an abrupt capitulation to insurgent backed, black political parties. Smith saw this as "a betrayal" at the time, and has never shifted from this view. He still believes that UDI and the Bush War were both morally and tactically defensible.
In his autobiography (written in 2001), Smith uses the term "clean cut" about 40 times and "straighforward" about 20 times to describe individual Rhodesian whites. The words 'treacherous', 'devious', 'weak' and 'manipulative' are regularly used to describe Smith's contemporaries in various British, American and South African administrations.
Smith was a man of some personal integrity, but a poor judge of events.

I'd prefer to see biographies and books/articles on Smith cited rather than have wikipedia deem that Smith has "personal courage" "principles (that) cannot be questioned" etc. Homey 17:13, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

And contrary to claims of the man's personal integrity, in 1974 he refused to allow Robert Mugabe, then a prisoner of Smith's minority regime, to attend his only son's funeral.

Sure, but these things are all relative. Smith was an honest guy in the sense that he wasn't up to the kleptocratic standards of many other contemporary African leaders. I do not believe that he had a Swiss bank account or that his wife went on shopping trips to Harrods in London. As an aside, Wilson (British PM) considered him less than reliable.

BScar23625 19:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Retirement

Homey writes: this section needs to be balanced - surely someone has something uncomplimentary to say about him

Well, you cannot fault the I told you so tone to any reply .. However, he is still not worth listening to - he could try to straddle the gap between Black and White, but he chooses not to - he is still the racist. (echo: I told you so ..) Wizzy…☎ 15:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I feel it is balanced, if you read it carefully. Smith maintained a fundamentally racist approach to the bitter end. People weren't stupid and even in the late 1960s most Rhodesians knew that the game was up and it was just a question of negotiating the best possible deal. There is no doubt that Smith knew this too, and had a considerable personal following. He could have lead the white community into a credible MDC type deal and the Mugabe era could have been avoided. That point is made.

BScar23625 16:13, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

You originally titled the section "Appreciation" which implies a non-critical approach. Homey 16:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair point. I am no fan of Ian Smith. Influential elements in Rhodesian society were telling him to cut a deal, but he would not listen. He spun things out to the bitter end and in so doing caused god only knows what suffering to this day. That said, he was a charismatic guy and carried people along with him.

BScar23625 16:32, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps if Rhodesia had followed the path of Sir Garfield Todd it would have ended up more like South Africa? Perhaps the problem is that Ian Smith waited until 1979 before "cutting a deal" instead of doing it in the early 1960s? I suspect it wouldn't be too hard to find a notable person who made that point and have a quotation or two along those lines added. Homey 16:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that is the line I would take. It is not a case of a "Mr Ian Smith being carried along by events, and if he hadn't done what he did then someone else would have". He personally ensured that the inevitable was deferred until the last possible moment, by which time the most unfavourable possible outcome was assured.

BScar23625 16:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Fearless / Tiger

Great Wilson quote! any idea what Fearless and Tiger referred to ? Wizzy…☎ 10:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

The Fearless/Tiger talks were held between Wilson and Smith in the in 1966 and 1968 on RN warships at Gibraltar. Smith's main perceptions of these talks were (1) the venue was chosen to avoid the talks being held in London where Wilson would have been embarrased by demonstrations of support for Smith by the British public, and (2) Smith was warmly received and assured of support when he dined in the Petty Officers' mess on the Tiger. Smith was offered the most generous possible terms to end UDI and declined those terms almost out of hand. BScar23625 20:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
http://home.wanadoo.nl/rhodesia/tiger.htm

Exaptkiwi. You have inserted the following text in the main article :

QUOTE Smith feared that Gibbs - acting on orders from London - would not reappoint him and his government, and that the positions, and therefore the government, would be given to the Black Nationalists UNQUOTE

What is your source for this?. Wilson gave his word that majority rule would be phased in over a fixed period of time, and that was an era in which a man's word was his bond.

I do not recall Smithy making any suggestion that Wilson would "do the dirty" on anyone and I cannot find any such claim in Smithy's autobigraphy. Sorry if I am overlooking something obvious.

If you go to the curious Rhodesian website page specified above, you will find the following text concerning the Fearless talks :

QUOTE What particularly stuck in the Rhodesian gizzard was a British requirement regarding possible amendments to the entrenched clauses of the Constitution - that if such an amendment were found by the Constitutional Council to be unjustly discriminatory between the races, the Council could refer it to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which would have the final say. UNQUOTE

The thrust of this was that Wilson wanted an absolutely concrete guarantee that majority rule would be phased in over a fixed period of time and Smith would not concede this.

best wishes.Bob.BScar23625 16:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

As an Englishman born in 1948 I defy anyone of the time to believe that Wilson would keep his word for more than a week if It didn't suit him! 84.64.85.212 21:16, 3 June 2006

suicide of father

An anonymous user has added the following :

"His father commited suicide while he was 24."

That is absolute news to me. Can anyone confirm this?. Actually, if it is true, it might explain one or two things. Bob BScar23625 14:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

google cannot find it. Wikiwizzy 15:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I am prepared to believe it is true. People with a history of suicide in their background often have a reckless "live for the moment" approach to life. Witness Slobodan Milosevic, both of whose parents commited suicide. This may offer some explanation for why UDI took place and continued as long as it did. But, Smith's history has been researched by so many people that I wonder why this hasn't been picked up and given prominence?. Bob BScar23625 17:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Congrats!

I just want to say thankyou to those who wrote this article - It's exceptionally well written and (especially for an article bordering on something as controversial as race relations) mostly free from POV. Keep it up! - Gt 04:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The critical thing you have to understand about white Rhodesians is that 95% 80% of them despised “people of colour”. Their conversation was punctuated with the words “kaffir”, "munt" and “wog”. They were quite prepared to contemplate a war with black nationalists for this reason. Their expectation of the war was that it would take the form of a disorganised rabble of black tribesmen armed with spears being mown down by clean-cut white troops armed with machine guns.

The downing of the Viscount Hunyani in September 1978 caused a blinding moment of clarity to the entire white population. They realised two things. (1) Their opponent was skilled, well armed and supported by the international community, and (2) win or lose, if they fought a war then an awful lot of their own people were going to get hurt.

Believe me, Ian Smith was no hero. Just a rather silly man who didn’t understand what he was doing. Bob BScar23625 16:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, you've done a spectacular job at revealing yourself as a pointless crusading left-winger who's edits are obviously strongly biased. - Gt 00:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

It is all history now, and there is nothing really to crusade about. I was around at the time, and thought others might like to hear from my recollection of events. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 08:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

There is certainly a lesson to be learned from history here. I wasn't there, but I agree with Bob, Ian Smith is still not worth listening to. Wizzy…☎ 09:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Bias

This article, through recent 'improvements' is becoming even more and more skewed. Could some other editors with Rhodesian knowledge possible contribute? - Gt 12:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Beneaththelandslide. I am more than happy to discuss this with you. Why do you feel that the article is becoming "more and more skewed"?. Be specific. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 13:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Changes being made to the article in the form of what was presumably fact now being attributed to specific individuals and made out to simply be their own viewpoint. I lack knowledge dealing with Ian Smith, but believe that this is just an attempt to subtly adjust the article's POV - which is why I asked for "other editors with Rhodesian knowledge" to take a look. - Gt 13:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Michael. Please express yourself more clearly. What does "presumably fact now being attributed to specific individuals" mean?. Give at least one example from the main article. Bob BScar23625 14:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Michael. Go to the “Roll of Honour” link on the Rhodesia article. Note that 80% of the fatalities in the War occurred between January 1977 and December 1979. That figure does not include the cases of 18 year old guys who had their legs and genitals blown off by land mines – and who are now 50 year olds living in dire circumstances. Bearing in mind that the principle of immediate majority rule was conceded in 1976, are you sure that Smithy was such a hero?. BobBScar23625 15:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles aren't trials. - Gt 23:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Michael. Sure, but I wonder why an 18 year old christian Australian (as you describe yourself) should be a fan of such an individual? Bob BScar23625 08:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I said before this before, and excuse me if I seem at all rude - but wikipedia is not a discussion forum. I have no intention or wish to discuss this. - Gt 09:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Michael. Fair enough. But it was you that opened this Discussion item. Bob BScar23625 10:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I only glanced it at, so I may have missed key additions. For now, I see no immediate problems and plenty of valuable additions, though the depiction of the Fearless/Eagle seems incomplete (the role of the Rhodesian cabinet, for ex.), thereby placing far too emphasis on personality (the Wilson-Smith relationship appears to be correctly depicted, however). Anyway, I'll try to looks at it more closely soon. El_C 12:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

RAF Service

He served with distinction in the Royal Air Force at Pembrey, during which time he lost an eye in battle, and also suffered facial injuries Didn't Smith sustain his injuries when he crashed on take-off in Alexandria? Sorry - forgot to sign 88.105.130.31 19:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. El_C 08:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Mr Smith did not lost an eye 82.155.98.227

That was news to me, as well. Do you know whether or not his father committed suicide? BScar23625 13:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Racist?

This article is extremely biased and fails to insert critical instances of racism and biggotry committed by Ian Smith and Robert Mugabe. I'm extremely disappointed.

I am no fan of Smithy (witness my other comments above) but one cannot just dismiss him as a "racist". I am minded to make comparisons between him and segregationist US politicians Strom Thurmond and George Wallace. Both of these had colourful histories. Thurmond had a black daughter with whom he was on warm terms and Wallace started out in his career as something near to a civil-rights lawyer. At a personal level, just how racist were all these guys?.

On another matter, I have taken the liberty of removing the UDI document from the main article - where it seemed to be just decorative. It can still be found on the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (Rhodesia) page. Bob BScar23625 08:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


Picture caption

Guys, I am a little concerned about the minor edit war over the caption on the picture of Smithy "taking aim". As it was me who inserted the picture, perhaps I can decide?. I am uneasy about use of the words "lazy kaffir". Unless Michael or Andrew object, I will remove them in the next few hours. Bob BScar23625 08:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Uneasy or not, it changes the nature of the event significantly. If it was true that the waiter was called this, I think it should stay. As such, I'm changing it back, and removing the excusing word "jokingly". --Spudtater 20:39, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Alex. This is getting a little out of hand. I do not really know if anyone called the waiter a "lazy kaffir" and I doubt anyone else does after all these years. The term "lazy kaffir" is a virtual obscenity which has no bearing on the image. It was me that inserted the image and I do not want the term lazy kaffir (or similar) appearing in the caption. I will remove it shortly and I will be grateful if nobody re-inserts it. Bob BScar23625 16:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

"Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith at the Bulawayo Farmers' Fair, Easter 1964. Smith reacts to poor service in the cafeteria"

This tagline must be some sort of bad joke...

Producing documentary evidence on what passed that day is challenging. Leave it with me. Bob BScar23625 16:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Archive of pre 2006 discussion

Chaps. I have taken the liberty of moving discussion items dating from 2005 and earlier to an archive. It is easily accessed and if anyone wants to move anything from there back to the current discussion page, then they should feel free to do so. Bob BScar23625 11:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


Historical analysis

216.194.56.12. You have added some fine historical analysis to the article. I refer particularly to the manner in which you have related the life of Ian Smith to the events leading up to the creation of the Irish Free State in 1922. I had not previously perceived the similarities. However, I wonder if this analysis and a few other points you have added might not be better placed in the article on Zimbabwe?. Provided you have no objection, I will relocate them there within the next few hours. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 11:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

... over to you, Wizzy. Good luck. Bob BScar23625 17:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Scientology Connection

There is no mention of Ian Smith's connection to L. Ron Hubbard, it is mentioned in Hubbard's bio that he went to Rhodesia to hide from media attention and that he floated large sums of money into the Rhodesian economy when it was hit by UN-Sanctions. But there is no mention of this in the Ian Smith article. 00:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

A quick internet search indicates that Hubbard entered Rhodesia in March 1966 with a 3 month visa. In July 1966, the Rhodesian authorities refused to renew his visa and asked him to leave the country.BScar23625 08:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)