Fact: The majority of soldiers serving in the Rhodesian Army at the time of the bush war were black.
Fact: The ZIPRA/ZANLA "forces" never overcame the Rhodesian forces, the majority of internal engagements were short, sharp firefights, the usual result being either the complete annihilation, or dispersal of the terrorist groups involved. The external engagements, or camp attacks always resulted in overwhelming victories for the Rhodesian forces.
Fact: ZIPRA/ZANLA were both left wing organisations, with full backing from far-left Marxists states. 
Fact: ZIPRA/ZANLA "forces" deployed within Rhodesia preferred to not engage the Rhodesian armed forces, and this was also not their role, as operating in small groups of up to 20 men, without any form of air support, they could not take on the security on anything approaching equal terms. They were deployed primarily to "politicise" the rural black population (usually by terrorising those who did not fully support of their parent organisation into doing so), and to destabilise the economy as much as possible by attacking soft targets. 
Fact: Neither ZIPRA or ZANLA overcame (as you put it) the Rhodesian army. Possibly the conventionally trained ZIPRA troops who were held back in Zambia, and never committed to the bush war, could have defeated the Rhodesian forces in open battle, considering that towards the end of the war these conventionally trained troops were far better equipped than the Rhodesian forces, but as Nkomo never gave the go order, we will never know.
By the sounds of things though, you would not be happy to see anything that is not politically correct, no matter how factual