Yeah but even before Northerners had guns and all those war equipment you mentioned they still dominated Dinkas/Nuers/Shilluk.
If you had evidence of any kind relating to this, why is it that your posts consists only of rhetoric, but not of actual evidence?
We effectively resisted the Turko-Egyptians for decades on end; we kicked the Mahdists out of Bahr el Ghazal; we also resisted the British...but we somehow couldn't handle your
cuckolded Nubian ancestors?
The British had little impact on most of the Nilotes in southern Sudan for the first several decades after the reconquest in 1899. The first two officers sent to deal with them were both killed in 1919 by the Dinka and in 1927 by the Nuer, respectively. (Ethnic Groups of Africa and the Middle East: An Encyclopedia)
There's no shame in having inferior strategy, especially when your enemies have the advantage of coming from more developed civilizations.
You’re right, there isn't any shame in it... but you actually need to prove it first. You need to prove that Nilotics were subject to domination at the hands of the Nubians.
It's not as though our sisters and daughters were
voluntarily given to invading men like tic tacs in order to obviate further military conflict; it's not as if we experienced systematic dispossession of our land through this dynamic; it's not as if we stood idly by while our place and power in our own lands was chipped away through the use of our own sisters and daughters by hostile foreign men.
I suppose fighting and dying for Arab Gulf States in their regional proxy wars in Yemen and Libya is your special way of honouring your ancient heritage.
Blue Nile and to a lesser extent Darfurians were inspired by Southern rebels but not Beja lol it's quite funny how you'd even make such a bold statement.
Ah, yes, more evidence of your ignorance on Sudanese history. I'm not surprised... you actually thought Nilotics were "hunter gatherers".
UNMIS said Kassala is the first sector where the mission has successfully completed its mandated tasks with the withdrawal of all SPLA forces - around 5,600 troops - from Eastern Sudan to the South, as called for in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed in 2005 by the Government and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army.
Source:
https://reliefweb.int/report/sudan/...orces-un-mission-leaves-kassala-eastern-sudan
It's clear that you didn't even know that we (Southerners) opened up a front in the east and established military outposts in that region. We had to withdraw 5, 600 Southern troops from the east in 2006, per the terms of the peace agreement.
You're actually trying to frame the Beja rebellion as a result of petty local conflicts instead of what it was... a regional movement with National dimensions that it established through its alliances with the SPLM/A, the NDA and Darfurian rebels. The Beja pinned their grievances onto the central government and complained of marginalisation.
The SPLA had been making gains in the east. They had joined forces with a united brigade sponsored by the NDA and they both allied with insurgents from the Beja Congress. The Beja, who are Muslim non-Arabs, consisted of four main clans. One of them was the famously warlike Hadendowa, whom the British had named the 'Fuzzy-Wuzzies' because of the distinctive Afro hairstyles, and who were famed for breaking a British square. The Beja people’s cattle had suffered severely in the drought years and some of their land had been seized by Khartoum and sold to a new class of mechanized farmers, as well as large tracts to Osama Bin Laden. The Beja insurgency had been revived in 1994. In 1999 and 2000 the combine opposition forces overwhelmed a number of army garrisons around the strategic border town of Kassala. The eastern front was now posing a major threat to the government. (Omar Al-Bashir and Africa's Longest War)
So i'm lying? Is the article I posted fake news? Are Dinka women not notorious for being cheap and loose? Clearly you've never been to Khartoum so i'll give you a sample.
Yes, you're so clearly lying. You've proven yourself to be a pathological liar.
Assuming you don't have cripplling comprehension issues, did you even bother to read that article, or are you just (predictably) hoping that third party observers will believe you that the source corroborates your lies about Nilotic women being lascivious and cheap? Please cite passages from that article that say anything to the effect that:
Nilotic women are "notorious" for engaging in prostitution.
That there is an epidemic of Nilotic women engaging in prostitution in Khartoum-Omdurman or anywhere else in the North.
Here are some passages from your own article:
I was captured in 1986, I know how long ago it was because I counted the harvests. My father was killed in the attack on our village. The man who took me away came on horseback. My hands were tied and I was made walk for seven days with the other children they had taken.
The master already had a wife but he made me become his wife as well. At first I used to cry when he forced himself on me. If I refused to sleep with him he used to beat me with a thick stick. His other wife was jealous and used to fight with me. When my daughter was born, she was named Amina and when she was old enough they made her look after the goats and go long distances to get water. My son was named Hamid".
Your entire argument hinges on pretending not to understand the difference between sexual abuse in the context of slavery and actual prostitution.
Do you not know the difference? To you it all sounds the same, doesn't it?
Prove that you are not as clueless as you appear to be; explain the difference- between the two... Or, you know, reveal that you're a sociopath.
Another passage from the article:
I hate these people, I'm very angry at what they did," Nyamada told me before walking off into the bush in search of her village. "Now I just want to find my mother. She's old now but I think I will recognise her."
Perhaps that sounds like prostitution to your Afro-Arab ears, but no else would agree.
Your women are so chaste that
refugee Syrian men boasted of their
sexual trysts with Sudanese women and how easy it was for them...
..hmm, it happened again, didn't it? At least they weren't given away to Arab men by Nubian fathers this time round.
How is it a simple fact when there are zero sources to disprove it - if anything there's evidence that Dinkas were up North in the 1800s even if their numbers rapidly declined after 1600s. Your inability to understand this simple fact is mind boggling.
More Southerners moved up North in the 1960s but they never abandoned the North 100% after the 1600s. I know denialism leads to delusion but you really can't be that delusional.
Ironically enough to any normal human being their is no logic behind your denialism other than the fact that you're being emotional and defensive. Anyways i'm proud that you're finally dropping this, enjoy your weekend.
The rules of evidence don't work like that.
If the evidence for your claims are so strong, then surely you can provide mountains of grit-edged evidence that Dinka people still resided as far North as Rufaa in 1872.
You merely provided an illustration without any texts or sources referencing the Dinka, and you expect me to just believe you that it took place in Rufaa in 1872 based on nothing but your say so?
You obviously expect people to believe claims that run counter to historical consensus without a shred of evidence. The consensus is that we left the North in the 1600s.
You have yet to produce any quote, cite any scholar, or produce anything at all in support of your claim.
You have presented nothing.
Must be lonely.
Your post is just a mealy-mouthed admission that you’ve got no evidence of Dinka people being raided in Rufaa in 1872. Claims *always* require evidence, and if you can’t provide evidence when required, then you have no case...
You are obligated to substantiate your claims. It’s called burden of proof. If you can’t meet this requirement, then all you’ve provided us with is a view that you want to believe in, but do not actually understand and so cannot explain.
Gezira State:
You
denied that the Nubae-Nobatae were the Nubians of antiquity and claimed that they were enslaved into extinction
You
denied Nubian men gave their women to Arab men
You
denied that Nubian men were dispossessed and supplanted by Arab men, so...
..You’re
projecting.
In psychological terms, projectionism is when someone projects their own noxious qualities onto someone else, and then censures the recipient for now apparently possessing those noxious qualities.
This has been me throughout this thread:
