If there was a problem that a group of nations could solve, this would be it. The Commonwealth is that group.

Extreme suffering is terrible to even think about.

The only solution the people can do is just stop working, by calling a general strike. No government can survive with absolutely no income. Of course brave people will die by the thousands, but the military can't run the entire economy. Someone (perhaps even worse) will assasinate this dictator and seize power.

I laugh at those Brits who blame the US for everything. From now on, the US should not lift a finger to help the ingrates from England. Let them and their precious dead princess rot in you-know-where.

The US has no dog in this fight, and, no, there is no strategic interest in this country. But look at the grief we get whenever we try and do something like free countries from tyranny.

Scott S., Sacramento, California USA

Stop bashing the British for something done in a different age, and look at the US imperialist expansion

George, Northampton, UK

I would happily have my country topple Mugabe's regime as long as we can install our own in place, its about time we took back some former territory.

Karl Wulfric, Hook, Staffordshire

It would be nice for the Brits to look around them, to see the devastation they have caused round the world under the auspices of civilizing other people; from the destruction of the Native Americans to the destruction of the aboriginals in Australia. With the complete destruction of the African continent, obviously with the help of other European nations by partitioning countries without taking the tribes into consideration. Need I go further, because there are just too many countries to mention? Lest I forget, the partitioning of the Indian Empire. You brits must begin to understand that you are responsible for the destruction of so many civilizations. How would you feel if someone’s was to impose their religious belief on you or you were forced to speak the invaders language? If you British, were invaded and occupied for over 300 years, Do you think ypu would be were India is today?

Tony Smith, Atlanta, USA

How did the inflation get so high in the first place? There were sanctions put in place by western powers, which do care less about the local people. Wasn't the same strategy applied to Castro, Saddam? The citizen's of the western world must be aware of what their governments are doing to other developing nations. The World Bank for example has no interest in seeing that developing countries succeed. If they do, the developing countries will no longer be subservient to them. This will ultimately change the status quo.

Tony, Atlanta, USA

Let the Zimbos sort out their own problems some say. Most posters on this forum have never set foot in Zimbabwe and to that end one must be cognoscente of the fact that Mugabe has the country and it’s people in a choke hold.
Zimbabweans neither have the resources nor the power to topple the Mugabe’s government. Why should the world care about Zimbabwe? If you neighbour was in a predicament would you help or just leave them to their demise? I encourage the world to forget about their self centered interests and think about the global society we are trying to build. If we validate the actions one bully by turning a blind eye what will stop the manifestation of others like him?
The problems of Zimbabwe, Darfur, North Korea might not be directly affecting the inhabitants of the western world right now but as the world ages our dependence on one another within the global society will increase. Gone are the days when one country can solve its own economic woes, the focus is now on global

John, Toronto, Canada

I'm a bit astonished about those clerics. Since the 60s they've been in the forefront of those making accusations against South Africa and Rhodesia. Now they are calling for an invasion by the former colonial power. I'm also a bit puzzled that there is so much outcry about what is happening in Zimbabwe, while there is virtual silence about thousands of farm murders in South Africa. It seems to be the same as with the 5th Brigade in Matabeleland. If people don't have a lobby (i.e. power) they've to suffer in silence.

Hektor, Pretoria, South Africa

I am appalled that so many who live in free societies are ready to blame the victims for their plight. You have never lived in a country where protest marching is literally a life-threatening proposition. Are you aware of the medical condition of the man who dared run against Mugabe in an election (an election that was rigged for Mugabe sure victory) and was beaten and tortured in response. The lands of white farmers were never distributed to the population, but given as gifts to Mugabe's non-farming cronies. Are readers of the Times really this ignorant of 20th century history?
It is indeed shocking that a Christian clergyman would advocate violence, and indicates just how desperate and helpless are the Zimbabwean people.

Viejita, New Mexico USA,

Mugabe commited genocide in the early 80's when he sent his notorious trained 5th Brigade into Matebeleland, and the silence was deafening..

I left Zimbabwe and my trip to the border was nothing short of terrifying. Game fencing had been erected on either side of the road from Bulawayo to Beitbridge, nothing wrong with that, BUT, why do you need groups of 3 soldiers every 500m on alternate sides of the road with sub-machine guns. To keep elephants and zebra from crossing !!!! YET despite this, people still managed to get through to the hospital, what happened to them would make Saddam look kind.

June, NSW, Australia

Some are saying that ncube's story is a diversionary tactic on the part of the Zimbabwean government. methinks that ncube callling on the Brits to reinvade Zimbabwe was a diversionary tactic. He know the net was closing in on him. He admitted openly on ZBC that he was having an affair saying he was only human-when asked about his vow of celibacy. Ncube's behaviour is disgraceful.
it's ironic that Mugabe the 'demon'called for prayers for Ncube, while the 'pious' Pious Christian called for Mugabe's death. worse still he said he would refuse the Sacred Host to Mugabe. One wonders who is the dictator.

Mona Munyikwa, castlebar, Ireland

Mugabe is committing genocide against the people of Zimbabwe and the British Government is complicit in this crime by not removing him.Once a loyal and valued member of the Commonwealth we are willing to 'delegate' the responsibility for finding a solution to African nations who have neither the power or the incentive to do no more than talk. Britain raced into Iraq and removed one tyrant and in 1982 we rushed to the South Atlantic [I was there] and liberated the Falklands from a Junta of tyrants.Africa has no value to the USA and as they appear to call the shots Africa is to be left to the rape and pilage by corrupt African governments. Mugabe and his henchmen should be removed by force by the British. If not killed in the action he must be tried and when found guilty, [for he surely will,] executed. Then rebuild that shattered country and give the people back their lives and their dignity. Britain does not have to wait for approval from the USA or the UN or anyone. We must act NOW.

A.J. Thomas, Somerset, England

As a South African all I can say is that I hang my head in shame, since our government are just on the borders of Zimbabwe, and fail to do anything substantial.

Some cleric calls to Britain to invade Zimbabwe, yet South Africa is right on the border and has the capacity to do so to help the millions in Zim who are going hungry everyday. But of course we know that won't happen because there has been a life long friendship forged through the ANC's and the Rob Mugabe regime's "freedom fight".

Well. They fought for freedom and in the process created more slaves.

And since the Mugabe regime has just spent 1.5m pounds on surveilance equipment, I can't help asking who the idiot was that supplied it to him in the first place?

And for those of you who think this man and his regime is no match for Saddam, then you've never seen this monster in action, have you?

Jules, Cape Town, South Africa

We all said we'd never let it happen again after Hitler, after Rwanda, after Ethiopa. Here we go again. We all know what's happening but nobody is willing to do anything. People in Iraq were 'rescued' from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. Do we just stand by and leave the starving and helpless people of Zimbabwe? Even Pius Ncube is willing to take up arms but the people are too weak to join him. Maybe if Clinton gets in there might be a change of policy but that will probably be too late.

Helen Heaton, Galway, Eire

"Where's the UN?" Where they always are in these situations...in the five-star hotels and posh apartments in NYC. Is anyone honestly suprised at their inaction? The call to "Save Darfur" has been ringing for years and we see where the UN has gotten that. Zimbabwe, Sudan, Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia...the results are always the same. Wait for the UN to act and by the time they agree to table the motion to consider ordering bottled spring water for the sub-committee while condemning Israel, everyone is dead.

As for the oil...if Bush, Blair and Co. have not invaded Venezuela, which likely will be heading down the same merry path as Zimbabwe into dictatorship, poverty and ruin, there is likely more to it than that.

And, frankly, since oil is a vital resource for Western society as we know it: fuel, plastics, medicines, and the lot of it, I would clearly expect our leaders to take it into account in our international policies. It would be irresponsible of them not to.

Michael, Lincoln,

May the British-Israelites and Jews repent of our sins of idolatry and immorality, then we can restore Rhodesia, South Africa and the biblical territories to proper rule.

David Ben-Ariel, Toledo, Ohio, USA

Bad as Mugabe is - and he is indeed awful and I pray for his swift demise - he is no match for Saddam in sustained savagery, terrorization of the populace, murder and mayhem at home and abroad. Anyone who thinks removing Saddam was wrong - or who feels his removal tainted because the US and UK had national interests (heaven forfend!) at stake in addition to humanitarian justice - as did President Lincoln in resisting Southern cessession - is simply engaged in shameless moral grandstanding. These are the people who insisted the US end its "illegal" war in Indo-China, and never looked back as the Communists slaughtered millions in Cambodia and Vietnam and terrorized tens of millions more in the years that followed. To the extent the West is paralyzed in the face of this crisis, the fault largely lies in the reflex anti-Americanism and "anti-war" sentiment so rampant in Britain and the rest of Europe, a sentiment that only serves the causes of dictators and the human misery they create

Ariel, New York, USA

"It is time to topple every regime in the world that deny (sic) democracy and life for its own people..."
- Matt Doyle, Quebec City, Canada

Starting with China, right, Matt?

Geoffrey Smith, Manchester, England

When will the people be ready? They have to power to remove him

unk, ny, ny

Shame on our country and the other African states for allowing the destruction by a mad man of a once beautiful and prosperous country. Please can any one tell me why this is being allowed to happen.
I am so angry with my government who entered into an illegal war with Iraq removing Saddam for questionable reasons but can sit silently allowing this to happen.

Jeannette Pomeroy, Upper Norwod, London, United Kingdom

Correct!
NO OIL!
It's kinda sad.

Craig, St. Louis, USA

I'd like to say 'we told you so', only I didn't think it would be so bad.

If "the people aren't ready yet" - when will they be? What will it take for them to be ready? How much further must they sink?

Its time to ask if they would like us back to run their country. Just think, then they wouldn't have to emigrate to the UK - could be the other way round.

Alice, Moscow,

When a Catholic Archbishop uses such language it must be the case that things are really bad. Brown - here is one country where invasion really would make a difference. Are you up for removing the troops from Iraq and sending them into Harare instead?

Martin, Hereford, England

It is time for us to do something about Mugabe, however when we ruled Zimbabwe the country was doing well. But the people of Zimbabwe wanted independence and we gave it to them, they cant pick and choose, they either want to decide their own futures or not. If they want our help then as far as I am concerned they should be a protectorate of Britian.

General-Blood, Edinburgh, Lothians

Well done, Johnny from London. Why help the down-trodden - have they ever helped us? What are you? Devil's advocate or complete idiot? If you had any guts, you might even give a real name ... I did say if.

Michael Palairet, Marciac, France

Fully agree with the Bishop.and it is crucial that action is taken to oust this evil despot Mugabe......Why are the United Nations holding back ,but I suppose that is par for the course`as far as they are concerned

Properly planned and executed it could be carried out with little bloodshed

Brouillac, Grezels, South West France

No one's going to invade because
-no oil
-in the middle of nowhere
-poor

Tim, Bath, UK

The problem is that the West's rhetoric against rhode regimes works with double standards. On one hand Nato has no issue with invading taliban Afganhistan for humanitarian reasons. But on the other, several military regimes and anti democratic forces exist in the world, such as North Korea, Burma and Zibabwe. The world is missing cohesion... and also these countries have no oil nor any strategic interest to the West's military industry.

It is time to topple every regime in the world that deny democracy and life for its own people. It is called humanitarian interference and should be applied regardless of money success fame or glamour.

matt doyle, quebec city, canada

the british military, while very good, is way too small to do the job. and who in britian wants too see the young men coming home in body bags? sometimes you just have to let people find out for themselves the proper way to live. when the citizens have had enough they will revolt. oh, a message to the guy who suggested that they form an underground movement like the french in ww2, most of the french were collaborators.

jim , netcong, new jwesey, usa

Zimbabwe is a sovereign state as iraq should be. It's up to its people to sort its own problems. If they can't be bothered? Then the situation can't be as bad as it's made out to be.

pete, york, uk

Contary to Ricky Leeds implict assertion, there is no certainty that Mugabe's demise will see him replaced by a democratic icon. It is just as likely that he will be replaced by another tyrant.

billg, Raleigh, North Carolina

Invading Zimbabwe would be the best thing to ever happen to it, and once again we would build up the infrastructure, restore law and order, and ONCE THE PEOPLE ARE READY in a couple of decades times, introduce democracry again - but with an important difference: This time the people would be allowed to vote for WHITE politicians as well as their own, which although will upset the bleeding heart liberals who cannot believe that the people want white rulers who have proven themselves, will turn ZImbabwe into the most successful African country in a few years time. Look at South Africa - the best African country now, why? because of its high white population. The facts speak for themselves.

David Woodhouse, Lowestoft,

It would be the height of hypocrisy for Mr Brown, who has dedicated at least the last 10 years of his life to "Robbing the British people and damaging the British economy" buying votes and distributing cash to New Labour supporters and donors, to assume the moral authority to judge Mr Mugabe, who has merely pursued a similar policy, albeit somewhat longer.

Paul, Parker, CO USA

Where is the UN in all this?
It seems to answer this desperate cry for help a multi-national
force should be sent in.
If you Brits feel it is right (and I think it is) JUST DO IT.

Jerry Scroggin, Phoenix, Arizona/USA

Zimbabwe is about White supremacy! The white world is moaning about Zimbabwe simply because white farmers were expelled. Only thoroughly colonised Black individuals are on the side of the racists who believe that Black people cannot and should never try building their own societies!!

John Iteshi, London,

I do not think that it is realistic to think that a European government is going to act as long as there is a functioning Zimbabwean government.

One way to proceed is this: South Africa can cut exports of electrical power to Zim. for non-payment of bills, which will bring a quick end to either the Zim. government or its unwillingness to ask for outside help. South Africa has been reluctant to cut off exports because of the immediate hardship that such a drastic action would cause. It has become apparent, however, that not acting will cause things to get even worse within Zim. and that South Africa is going to share that misery whether or not it takes the initiative.

If Archbishop Ncube were to ask South Africa to take this step, it would make it much easier for South Africa to do so.

Donald Dresser, Jackson, Tn, USA

Zimbabwe is land-locked and Britain is for the most part, a naval power. It's doubtful Zimbabwe's neighbors want a war next door so they aren't going to look favorably at Britain crossing over their airspace to land a few plane fulls of outnumbered soldiers. The US is bogged down in Iraq, the UN is useless, NATO is in Afghanistan and wouldn't be much use anyway.

Zimbabwe made its own mess; anyone with any common sense knew it was headed for disaster when the government of Rhodesia was replaced. The ethnic cleansing of the white farmers was only the capstone.

Face it, invasion isn't going to happen.

South Africa will go the way of Zimbabwe after a few years.

Leave the Africans to their own devices and stay out of wars. Concentrate on soluble problems closer to home.

flapdoodle, Portland,

It looks as if independent study is needed. Study Cecil Rhodes and his political views. Study his involvment. You can't call it a 'land reclamation scheme' if you never held the land. Some of us are happy to justify bigotry in the name of European interest, but decry justice in the name of African interest.

The history shows that the West, and by extension Britian, have already done enough 'intervention'. It is that intervention which is starving Zimbabwe's inhabitants.

But like always, instead of speaking the truth, propaganda prevails. Inferiority is cast upon people of African decent in a bid to show that without white intervention, civilisation is but a pipe-dream.

Discerning people know the story of Zimbabwe. Its the story of European involvment in Africa. Its the story of European imperialism. Imperialism at the expense of the rest of the World's people.

Eugene, Sandys,

What has happened to the UN?
It would be a disaster if Britain invaded Zimbabwe but somehing has to be done. For once the UN should wake up to a real emergency and demand that Mugabe stops killing his own people. If Mugabe ignores such a resolution then it is for the UN to assemble an international armmyto remove this nasty dictator.

Ian, Manchester, England

This is not Britain's responsibility. It is down to South Africa to deal with Mugabe, and if it continues to fail to do so Western liberals should accept that their faith that the ANC was anything more than another "liberation" movement that only liberated the local elite, was just another illusion.

Philip Cronin, Bedford,

Without European colonialism, African once again reverts to its natural state.

Josh, Newport Beach, CA

The days of imperialist meddling and racist intrigue are long gone. Britain must lift its evil sanctions which are causing immense suffering to ordinary Zimbabweans. Leave our Zimbabwe alone.

hambani khatshana, london,

It is to our shame that our leaders and clergy do nothing to help the people of Zimbabwe.
The Pope should visit Zimbabwe and speak to Mugabe and the people who are mostly Roman Catholic. Praying is not enough world leaders must take direct action now.

Annette, York, North Yorkshire

"Iraq wasn't a 'neutral' nation...."
- leroidavid, Paris, France.

It reads like something from Bush's script-writer, leroidavid.
For your information, Santorum was a pro-Bush senator who supported the President, right or wrong. The Pennsylvanian
voters kicked him out of office at the last election.
WMDs in Iraq? Where? How many? What has the Coalition done with them? Put them on public display?

Geoffrey Smith, Manchester, England

I believe that this country used to be an EXPORTER of food before the White farmers were driven from their farms. The native population wanted Africa for Africans and they achieved that goal.


You know what they say- be careful of what you ask for, you might just get it.


If they really want rid of Mugabe, just tell Bush that oil has just been discovered in that country and he will send them some marines.

John 41, Floral Park, NY

Haha, a right kick in the teeth for anti-british involvement

Peter, Portsmouth,

Britain has a direct reponsiblility to the Zimbabwean people as the past colonial power, the broker for the flawed Lancaster House Agreement and the guarantor of the rigged elections which resulted in Mugabe's seizure of power 29 years ago. How can we stand idly by and still hold our heads high? Mugabe is a rascist and tribal thug.

Arnold Ward, Weybridge, Surrey, UK

Most of the worlds attention is constantly focused on the Israel-palestinian issue which appears to dominate all un forums. Is this because it is a pressing issue compared to Darfur or Zimbabwe? The worlds leftsts cannot break ranks with their onetime darling mugabe. The zimbabwe issue has been left to south africa who wishes to retain some of mugabe's methodology for their own future use. It is my understanding that Britain originally guaranteed the zimbabwe independence agreement. So many of the worlds problems could be solved by the bombing of some parliaments and the residences of some ruling politicians, but then that isn't cricket. One has to maintain the appearance of the UN even when it is obvious the emperor wears no clothes..

bernard ross, st anns bay, jamaica

Actually it is much simpler than that, Britain & most of the Western world raped Africa generations ago. Africa holds no perceptible gain for them now. Countries like Zimbabwe are left to rot. Curiously though the indigenous people were quick enough to get rid of the white supremacists & usher the new black rule in the style of Robert Mugabe - it's taken them 30 years to realise that they mad a mistake - now they want us to break down the doors & step in to clear up the mess. Africa is a conundrum - can't fix it can't cure it - where will it end -

Ian, Birmingham, UK

Unlike Irak,Zimbabwe has no oil, so whilst millions of us in Britain would love to see our forces come to Zimbabwe's aid and kick that evil man and his cronies out , it won't happen because just like the so called United Nations our Government is impotent.
It's a pity they cannot form some kind of resistance like the French during world war two. Surely Mugabe's Forces are not that great that they cannot be eventually defeated.

S.L.Green, Colchester, UK

If you study the history of Zimbabwe, you will see that British 'intervention' has proved most costly.

As a matter of fact, the starvation which affects Zimbabwe's populace today, is a direct result of the same kind of intervention this cleric calls for. More discreet, but far more deadly.

Eugene, Sandys,

Oh for heaven's sake! This decrepit old despot recently travelled to Malaysia to watch the Grand Prix, a golden opportunity. This is Africa: While Mugabe was out of the country surely somebody could have had the gumption to organise a coup.

Let's face it, countries get the government they deserve, and outside intervention is doomed. Look at Iraq - the current anarchy proves, if nothing else, that if they hadn't had Saddam Hussein they'd have had to invent him

Richard, Bexhill, UK

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Why should any country intervene in anything anymore? I feel terrible for the people of Zimbabwe but invading would be a thankless task. So the country is just going to collapse totally and many people are going to die. Oh well. If the democratic nations of the world actually believed in human rights, they would join together and topple these odious regimes, but they won't.

Dan, Los Angeles, USA

The short answer is yes, and why not; Zimbabweans have shown us that as far as they are concerned things have not yet reached a critical level. If they had there would be rioting in the streets, civil unrest mainly concentrated in the cities, general strikes, and other forms of mass civil disobedience.
To quote Thomas Jefferson, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
It is time for Zimbabwe to refresh the tree with the blood of a tyrant. In order to do so it will also cost the blood of patriots.

John Ryan, Citrus heights, CA

Oh, good lord. Iraq was a threat (or perceived threat), Zimbabwe isn't. After all the crap the US and Britain have taken over "Imperialism" you lefties want to spill blood for Zimbabweans? Get real! Will you then let the white farmers, who could feed the people, have their farms back or would you demand that these soldiers create some utopian socialist state? Think it through and tell me why Britain should give a damn? When they left "Rhodesia" was the breadbasket of Africa. Now look at the place. . .

PJ, Vancouver,

Fully agree with the Bishop.and it is crucial that action is taken to oust this evil despot Mugabe......Why are the United Nations holding back ,but I suppose that is par for the course`as far as they are concerned

Properly planned and executed it could be carried out with little bloodshed

Brouillac, Grezels, South West France

If ever there was a strong case for regime change, surely this is it.

stuart turner, Bristol,

There are a number of areas around the globe where the population is suffering greatly. Their only hope is outside intervention. Zimbabwe is top of the list. These situations where national leaders have agendas other than the wefare of the people should come under the remit of the UN, otherwise what is the UN for? Iraq would not be the Iraq of today had the UN acted form a position if unity and strength and not left the policing to the USA. Similarly the UN should have acted to bring Mugabe down and rescue Zimbabweans. If the UN does not adopt a policing role who else is there? Similarly who can help in Darfor? This space age world needs an international police force that has respect and power and the capabilities to enforce. This has to be the UN , the question is when will the UN take up this role?

Joe Forshaw, Perth, Western Australia

The UKs armed forces are so overstreched they couldnt invade the Rose and Crown at the moment. Look on the bright side, Mugabes 83 he cant last much longer and then they can have another mad dictaor in charge.

jeff, uk, uk

I agree with the Bishop even though I am not a Roman Catholic. It is very urgent indeed that Britain should invade Zimbabwe abd remove that Robert Mugabe. There is too much suffering going on and it is inhuman to stand by and allow it to continue. There is no doubt about it, a geneocide is taking place right now in Zimbabwe and urgent military action is needed by Britain to end the terrible situation there.

Joy Butler, Wiesbaden, Germany Hessen

I have no sympathy what so ever, are these the same people that where dancing on the street when the white farmers where kicked off there land? let them sort their own problems out, it is an African problem best sorted by Africans.

michael campbell, londonderry, N Ireland

How can the west sit and watch this disaster happen?
The British were responsible for putting the Mugabe monster in power and in our true tradition of hypocrisy we now do nothing.

M J BEESLEY, Worthing, England

Another despotic monster to ged rid of and after our experience in Iraq I am sure we cannot wait to invade. I am sure the French will be able to propose some resolution at the UN which will bring Mugabe to his knees.

Alan Lewis, Bangkok, Thailand

I can't believe how cynical some of these comments, mostly along the lines of "they voted him in, let them starve to death". For a start, none of the recent elections have been in any way democratic, but simply show elections, people coerced into voting for Mugabe through violence, with a touch of rather creative counting. Secondly, how on earth can people be so unfeeling and unhumanitarian? If any of the people who said such statements were in a similar situation, they would want any assistance they could get.

Lisa, London,

Regime change was an acceptable mission objective for this Government when invading Iraq. Why is regime change not acceptable where Zimbabwe is concerned, when the evidence is much more apparent and far less spurious than that which was used to justify the Iraq war ?

Antony Brown, Batley, West Yorkshire

Intervention are you joking? The U.N. wouldn't approve.

Gerry, Memphis, USA/Tn.

how can a catholic archbishop, who should be preaching peace and love, advocate war? i wonder if ratsinger knows and if he is compliant...

massimo loi, italy,

Great Britain might respond positively to a call made by Ncube to topple down the government of Mugabe; when and if it happens this might go down well with Ncube. Personally I don`t care what way Mugabe goes. However I am worried to what call would Britain respond next time there is a new goverenment in Zimbabwe. We can not rely fon Europeans to come to Africas aid, since it is part and parcel of its problems.

Mohamed I. Farah, Uppsala, Sweden

The Archbishop would call on the UN instead of Britain if he wanted the children of Zimbabwe to be raped instead of freed. The UN is useless at best.

Justin, Albuquerque, NM

It is an African problem. Surely, if fellow African countries disapprove, they have many routes to help the people of Zimbabwe other than force. If they do not disapprove then I suggest a military operation would be very difficult

Military operations may well worsen the chaos.

The lavatorial comment about oil is tendentious. Sierra Leon was helped but it had no oil.

Is the United Nations concerned? Or not?

David Howells, Bristol, UK

take it to UN get consensus there, also go through the african assembly, see if they can do som,ething first, or lead an UN forces there, I see no reason for Britain to invade, as now there is no british subjects left there.

dr jon rose, Gt Torrington, UK

So can we take it that the likes of Roger Malstead, Steve Valandra & London Johnny are joining the armed forces and preparing to be in the'front line'? I thought not! Why should Britain go back? They didn't want us.! Why don't any of the African countries do anything? South Africa could if it wanted to!

James White, Winchester, Hampshire

This is surely a case for the UN not GB. At the moment GB is already over committed militarily in wars that it should not be involved in.

B Jones, Stoke on Trent, UK

I agree that the world, not just Britain, should be doing something about the totally avoidable disaster taking place in Zimbabwe. But what can we do after Iraq? Intervention, however legitimate and humanitarian its aims is impossible now.

And surely this ought to be the responsibility of Zimbabwe's neighbours whose leaders so lionise Mugabe? It is they who are propping up this monstrous and ridiculous regime. This is a situation that has been brewing for years with nothing done about it by those best placed to do so. If they withdrew their support the government would collapse in days.

As it is the end will come in a few months, tens or hundreds of thousands will die and the west will be expected to pick up the pieces as ever.

Paul Owen, Birmingham, Uk

To Geoffrey Smith, Manchester, England:

Iraq wasn't a "neutral" nation. Saddam Hussein's regime supported international terrorism, was linked with Al-Qaeda top leaders, and was developping programs of WMDs (WMDs have been found in Iraq, as reported to the US Senate by two senators, Rick Santorum and Peter Hoekstra, in June 2006).

If this was a "neutral" regime, then the nazi regime was "neutral" too.

Leroidavid, Paris, France

"He paid too much attention to a neutral nation, Iraq"

Right, neutral. Hussein's Iraq only repeatedly tried to shoot down British warplanes patrolling the UN-established no-fly-zones in the period 1994-2003. I mean, if all it takes to be considered a <i>hostile</i> nation is committing violent acts of war against British servicemen, we'd have to consider places like Iran hostile, too. And that would make it ever so hard to deal with them as diplomatic partners as we ask them, as friends, to stop building nuclear weapons and missiles able to attack EU capitals.

John, Birmingham, England

It is a shame that this type of destructive prolonged leadership is still a big problem in Africa. Corrupt African leaders insist on leading their countries to a downfall. Why should one man lead a country since 1980? What good will ever come out of such leadership? Africa, as a whole, needs to protect its people, resources, and fight for itself. Foreign invasion will only result in a temporary relief. African leaders should learn how to lead.

Femi Olantunji, Ohio, USA

To bad you don't have oil reserves Bishop. Then you would have to fend off the U.S., Britain, and China.

Joshua, Oxford, UK

This is a shocking story. Hard to believe the damage Mugabe has done to his country. But an assassination is probably sounder than an invasion. No doubt his successors and thugs, henchmen, etc. will be equally bad. They too should be "removed". But a war will spill the blood of the common people suffering under tyranical rule.

Ben Pam, Norfolk, CT/USA

Bush and Blair have freed 50 million people from two of the most murderous fascist regimes on earth.

They have given those people U.N-approved democracies which they are protecting from equally murderous thugs -- until they can protect themselves.

These accomplished FACTS make Bush and Blair two of the greatest liberators in human history.

Naturally, they are hated by every selfish idiot, self-righteous moron, and fascist sympathizer on the planet, who want to give those 50 million back to the thugs.

But history will know who did the freeing -- and who tried to undo it.

Tom Paine, New York, NY

Yes, hopefully, because you let everthing collapse for the white farmers who fed your country. Like it or not, this is a mess Zimbabweans have made for themselves at the expense of the African descendents of British and European people, and I see no reason why my government or armed forces should help them out of it.

Also, "I'm ready to lead the people, guns blazing...". How very Christian.

Jack, London, Great Britian

Zimbabwe wanted independence so this is nothing to do with Britain they should sort this out themselves

John, Salford, England

This would be an invasion that would actually help those who need. Forget Iraq.

Steve Valandra, Olympia, Washington, USA

President Robert Mugabe cant keep blaming Britain for the affects of his own policies. The tragedy being played out should serve as a wake up all to other African leaders. Africa needs honest civic leaders who put the welfare of the compatriots before the accumulation of wealth and power.

mr frank talk , Plymputh , uk

Why would we want to invade? arent we already commited over and above what the Military are scaled for eleswhere..... The Military Toy is straining at the seams as it is.

They wanted independance and kicked out the establishment, sort it out themselves... What comes around, goes around as they say.

If we did invade, then to be honest it should only be for 'keepers' never to be returned to local home rule, they have proved in the last 20 odd years that they are incapable of running a country without resorting to corruption and torture of their political opponents.

South Africa next??? .... well on its way it seems, what with the support given to Robert Mugabe....

We could just give more money.... Well Brown could just give them more of OUR money in 'Aid to Africa'... that's what seems to be happening anyway, nice little earner that keeps them in power eh...

Andy, Glasgow,

No one will bother to help the Zimbabweans as the country has no natural resources that are valuable to anyone else. Unfortunately, Britain gave the country to "the people" because they thought they would fare better without the "white man". All of Africa will never change until they learn to fend for themselves and stop thinking the world owes them a favour. These countries were settled by Europeans & became prosperous under them. THEY decided they wanted to run their own show, and this is the result. When they "took over" Rhodesia, they had schools, farms, industry, & prosperity; they ran it into the ground themselves by electing a moron. As the saying goes "be careful what you wish for, you may get it". Caving into the PC brigade is NOT the answer. Perhaps Colonialism once again is.

Sally, Vancouver, Canada

When Ian Smith's government warned of what was to happen if the terrorists were given Rhodesia, the political world, except for some intelligentsia such as Margaret Thatcher, cried "racism", and "they must have their freedom" even though 90% of all Rhodesia's citizenry were content and had to be brutalised into giving support by those wishing to take power with the East's communist help. Even today, many people in the West do not understand that the best way to improve the long term prosperity and security of many Third World nations is for a Western administration often formed by the ex-colonialists whose generations have settled there.

Now that the facts show that those who warned of the results of meddling in stable, well run countries were right, can we expect different attitudes from the West towards these regimes that fail to make sure that basic human rights for all its citizens are maintained, often in line with the written constitution of some countries?

Brian Deller, Marbella, Spain

I don't know if I can stop laughing long enough to type this. "Please come, make us a colony again." Looks as though blacks are better off under evil White rule than they are under their own kind. "We had the best education in Africa..." yeah, and you also had a food surplus, when it was called Rhodesia, and was run by Whites. Now that the Whites are mostly gone, Zimbabwe is just returning to its natural state; that of a typical black African nation. A 95% crop failure means a 95% population reduction. After that occurs, then Whites can return, and rebuild.

Dan, West, Virginia,

With all respect, it was British intervention itself which painted Zimbabwe into this corner. It wasn't an armed intervention; but it was just as deadly -- or worse. It was an attack on an entire nation, with the express purpose of (1) showing Africans that so long as Europeans aren't at the helm of a country's governance that country cannot survive; and (2) to dissuade any person of African decent, looking in at Zimbabwe, from believing that nationalism is a proper course to take.

British intervention -- and by extension Western World intervention -- in Zimbabwe is the same as the intervention imposed on other parts of the African World. With one exception: Zimbabwe openly removed whites from their positions of power and forced them from the country. And the response was sanctions, propoganda, and starvation.

Some of us aren't fooled. The West will do nothing to dispel its superiority complex. And the only way to ensure that is to solidify inferiority in other peoples.

Akilem, Leeds,

Zimbabwe voted for Mugabe,so Zimbabweans must sort out their own mess.
Any intervention by the West would be viewed by the rest of Africa as colonialism

Garry Hopkins, Ashford, ent

The Archbishop has found a clever way to call attention to the situation, and shame the "World Community," assuming they are capable of that sensation. Of course, Zimbabwe's own Francis Nhema chairs the UN's august Commission of Sustainable Development.

As far as independence goes, people are apt rather to adhere to their lives, first, if at all possible. I can't say I blame them.

Dan Collins, Ferrisburg, VT, USA

the british press is very silent on the part that Britiain has played in attempting to starve Zimbabwe.
Mugabe is no angel but the British government attempts to starve Zimbabwe into British dictat is nothing short of imperialism.

akram, London,

Another aspect of Blair's legacy. He paid too much attention to a neutral nation, Iraq, and neglected his own kith and kin.
Things must now be extremely bad in Zimbabwe for a Christian leader to call for his country to be invaded by a fellow member of the Commonwealth.

Geoffrey Smith, Manchester, England

Removing tyrannical rulers is a starting point on the road to failure; vacuums are created with their removal. It seems crass to say but do we really want another Iraq? Mugabe is an old man, his time on this world is going short once he is gone the country will correct itself saving thousands of lives in another botched and illconcieved invation.

Ricky W, Leeds, UK

Have we not seen this before? Remember Archbishop Luwum of Idi Amin's Uganda in 1977...

James, London,

Britain or the rest of the world won't do anything to stop this madness as they have nothing to gain in Zim, there's no oil or other natural resources like in Iraq where Bush & Blair were quick to claim that they were supposedly helping the Iraqian people, look at the chaos there now.
As a south african I'm ashamed that Mbeki has also stood by and let his buddy Mugabe destroy Zimbabwe, what hold comrade Bob must have on Mbeki must be strong indeed.

Christo, Paris, france

They dont have any oil so I guess there is nothing to gain by invading them.

armitage shanks, Bogdon,

Asking Britain to invade Zimbabwe to overthrow Mugabe is taking ten steps backwards after political independence. Is the top cleric suggesting Britain's armed intervention in Zimbabwe will be the first step in solving the current quagmire?
T

Ernest Nanor, Columbia, MD, USA

There's no way Britain would "invade" Zimbabwe, much as we'd all like to see Mugabe go. It has to be via the United Nations and Africa's other countries to intervene.

Sue Shaw, Morpeth, UK

Oh, no, it's not politically correctd to go in and save thousands from starvation, etc. The UN should but won't.
Shame!

Roger Malstead, E Wenatchee, WA, USA

This would be an invasion that would actually help those who need. Forget Iraq.

Steve Valandra, Olympia, Washington, USA

If there were no white farmers of anglo-saxon heritage in Zimbabwe and this was still happening; would anyone here in the UK care? The answer is no! Even if a reformist government were to replace Mugabe, would they return those farms back to its initial white owners? The answer is no! If there was oil in Zimbabwe, would we intervene? I would hope not, since our intervention in Iraq is only about WMD and the spread of democracy! and nothing else, apparently!
As for Zimbabwe it should be noted that its people are sovereign unto themselves; therefore they should be able to sort out Mugabe if they want to. If they stick with him, its their problem, not ours.

Johnny, London,

If you look at the people in Iraq and remember that they too were afraid to help themselves. When they received help and given a new chance at freedom they are too cowardous to help so that the countries that removed the tyrant can go home. I don't see the people in Zimbabwe as any different. Everyone wants help with freedom, food, medicine and money but would cut your throat as soon as you delivered it to them.

Dale, springfield, mo

The Archbishop is quite right. However countries like South Africa, right on the doorstep, will not intervene due to feeling that Mugabe and Co. helped them during their "struggle".
So much for the suffering masses of Africa.
A donation of cash would, of course, be welcome!!

Brian O Cinneide, Durban, South Africa

Let nature take its course. There are too many people on the planet as it is.

Alan Segal, Manchester, UK

I think it quite dispicable that this goes on and the world just watches. It's a disaster that could be avoided.

Bob, Toronto, Canada

One battalion would have the the job taken care of in 24hrs or less. Its a disgrace that nothing has been done about this...but labour loves the revolutionaries...don't expect anything to be done with that lot in power.

john, newcastle, england

What about other African leaders? M'bkei's "quiet diplomacy" is hopeless and the rest of Africa's leaders (with only a couple of honourable exceptions) are busy turning a blind eye. Mugabe only has to shout colonialism is to blame and his henchmn get appointed to anohter African thnik tank or similar. It seems most African leaders would rather see their fellow Africans starve to death than criticise Mugabe. And aren't th Chinese in there too, helping him spend the money he has stolen from his people?

hazel jackson paul, London, England

The situation in Zimbabwe is an affront to civilisation.World leaders seem to be in a state of paralysis.They only have to kick in the door,and the whole rotten structure will come falling down.Why don't they act?

Michael Rigby, Higher Wheelton, Lancs, England

I think this man needs to be briefed as to the state Britains armed forces are in at the minute, deployed over most of the middle-east cleanig up Mr Bliars mess!!!

Billy McC, Durban, S Africa

Is not a countries responsibility and right to ensure the security and safety of their citizens? if a country can not uphold this principle requirement the international abidement to sovereignty should be ignored and Britain should intervene. An entire nation of people are starving and dying whilst the government spends millions on extinguishing all forms of freedom. If we do not act we have no right to intervene in any other country under the grounds of humanitarian reasons!

lucy, qld,

Of course I am sympathetic to the plight of the Zimbabwian poeple, who couldn't be & for sure that despot Mugabe should have been removed from power years ago.
However, Britain should not consider opening up another war front as we have enough on our plates with Iraq, Afghanistan and domestic terroism.
Let someone else act as the Worlds policeman, maybe Russia or perhaps China.
We need to retreat to our island fortress and bring our boys home.
We have caused enough mayhem in the World, let someone else have a go.

Leonard, Seoul, South Korea

its simple find oil in ZIMBABWE

imacomputerbuddie, isle of cumbrae, scotland

Not a chance, not another mission impossible, not for us. Speak to the Pope, he's got all the answers about earthly suffering.

Susan, Barry, S Wales

It is pretty obvious that this criminal regime has been given a great deal of leeway by Great Britain which does not seem to have squeezed South Africa at all.

The Rand and the South African economy are susceptible to pressure, it is remarkable that a regime installed originally by Britain in Harare has gotten off so lightly in Labour demonology - in fact one might think Mugabe ran a model regime from the impotent behaviour of Great Britain and its foreign policy. I hardly think Miliband will make any impact....nor do we see the Church of England disown their regime-collaborator in Harare.....

TomTom, Leeds, England