Somalia-New War on Terror Front?

[Marshal Murat]

I want to ask a couple thinks
-Is this a war on Islamic radicals that is localized, or a War on Terror?
-Is the use of Ethiopian soldiers good or bad?
-Does this constitute a victory on the War against Terror, or something completely unrelated?

[Yun Dog]

Ok I will start out with a disclaimer that Im not an expert in Eastern Africa. But to my knowledge heres the upshot.

Islamic equal terrorist

So the Islamic council (in Somalia) are not terrorists as far as I know of.

Somalia has been involved in numerous wars both internal and with their neighbors including Ethiopia

It was being run by competing warlords who were taking all the foreign aide etc.

The UN and the USA sent troops to attempt to stop this and set up law and order - as far as I know they failed

the country has been in anarchy since

the UN propped up a puppet government - which basically was the legitimisation of the warlords and militias

some sections of the country began to turn to Islamic clerics to administer and bring law and order to their regions - Of course they also did this against the wishes of the millitias and started a civil war. If a country in complete anarchy can have such a thing

The Islamics took on the warlords and started winning taking Mogadishu against the UNs(USA) wishes. Ethiopia like the jackal was lurking around the fringes and seeing the opportunity to 1) settle an old score with the Somalis and 2) conduct a UN sanctioned annexation of Somalia - sent its army to push out the clerics and reinstate the pro ethiopian puppet regime basically making Somalia the vassal of Ethiopia.

This has nothing to do with the war on terror, the UN or the USA, this is all about local east african blood politics and power grabbing. I was watching that Geldof in Africa thing and basically he said that the Somalia only exists on a UN piece of paper and in Africa no one acknowledges its existence. And there is a county inside it called Somaliland which is not even acknowledged by anyone except the people living there.

And while we there the "War on Terror" is a nonsense excuse for one country to invade another - the only terrorist are the ones being created there every day - prepare to reap what you sow.

[Xiahou]

I want to ask a couple thinks
-Is this a war on Islamic radicals that is localized, or a War on Terror?
-Is the use of Ethiopian soldiers good or bad?
-Does this constitute a victory on the War against Terror, or something completely unrelated?
1)Likely both.
2)Good.
3)It's a victory for a peaceful, stable Somalia and it denies (for now at least) Al Qaeda and the like a potential new haven ala Afghanitan under the Taliban.

[mercian billman]

For more reading on the subject I'd reccomend H. John Pooles, Terrorist Trail. The introduction provides details on the recent past and current events going on in Somalia. Basically Somalia is important because of it's location on the Red Sea, cargo ships sailing from Europe to Asia or vice versa use the Red Sea and are very susceptible to the piracy which goes on in the area. Somalia provides a route for terrorist that wish to move between the Middle East and Africa. Because of the lack of infrastructure and law and order Somalia provides a good transit area. Also due to the lack of the above mentioned Somalia can also be used as an area to train terrorist. I'm just summarizing the introduction and the rest of the book does not deal with Somalia, but I highly reccomend you read the book.

[Tribesman]

1)Likely both.

And a hell of a lot more besides .

2)Good.

how on earth can Ethiopias involvement considering the history between the states and conflict within Ethiopia itself be anything like good , do i need to remind you that many of the warlords that are now being backed are the very same warlords who bought you that film about a helicopter going down .

3)It's a victory for a peaceful, stable Somalia and it denies (for now at least) Al Qaeda and the like a potential new haven ala Afghanitan under the Taliban.
Didn't the collection of groups now being kicked out bring peace , stability , law and order to areas under its control ? Something that had been absent for decades .


Mercian , Isn't the problem with what you summarise that Pooles wrote , that Somali based Piracy has declined severely since the courts took over , and the lack of law and order was in the main a pre courts thing .

So , when was the book written ?

[Xiahou]

[how on earth can Ethiopias involvement considering the history between the states and conflict within Ethiopia itself be anything like goodThat's easy, because the Ethiopian military stomped the Talibanesque Islamic Courts into a hasty retreat.


3)It's a victory for a peaceful, stable Somalia and it denies (for now at least) Al Qaeda and the like a potential new haven ala Afghanitan under the Taliban.
Didn't the collection of groups now being kicked out bring peace , stability , law and order to areas under its control ? Something that had been absent for decades .Yes, it was wonderful- you should've gone and lived there. :dizzy2:

[Sir Moody]

i think people are starting to confuse Islamic law with terrorism - the guys who are being kicked out in favour of war lords who a law unto themselves were ironically a massive improvement to the local area - they provided a economically stable and lawful state and were actually targeting the pirates the world has been becoming worried about - now the warlords will take over again and law will fly out the window...

islam /= bad or Terrorism people

[Marshal Murat]

I think that Ethiopian involvement is Good just because they don't want to stay.
Call me naive, but the Ethiopians may withdraw BEFORE the Somali's want them to.

I don't see why the Islamic courts isn't fostering a terrorist training ground?
I think on the whole it is good just because it has brought stability to a critical region in the world.

Can anyone give me some really good links on the region and the current events concerning the situation?

[Pannonian]

I think that Ethiopian involvement is Good just because they don't want to stay.
Call me naive, but the Ethiopians may withdraw BEFORE the Somali's want them to.

I don't see why the Islamic courts isn't fostering a terrorist training ground?
I think on the whole it is good just because it has brought stability to a critical region in the world.

Can anyone give me some really good links on the region and the current events concerning the situation?
The Islamic courts were rather popular because they brought order and stability to Mogadishu and any other areas they took over. They were financed by Somali businessmen who felt that lawlessness didn't produce a good environment to do business in. Once they took over, a monopoly on organised violence was one of the first things they imposed, and probably the most popular. Other things included taking over the civil infrastructure (traffic cops, etc.) and enforcing business-related laws.

Basically, the official Somali government wasn't functioning as a state, so the Somalis turned to the Islamic courts, who could do the job better. Remember, whatever one might think about the Islamic courts, they were indigenous, while the Ethiopeans are a foreign army.

[Tribesman]

That's easy, because the Ethiopian military stomped the Talibanesque Islamic Courts into a hasty retreat.

Oh look a post devoid of thought .
Would you care to try and think of a multitude of examples where stomping people into a hasty retreat has turned out into a real bloody mess for the ones doing the stomping ?:idea2:
Or is that beyond your comprehension .


Yes, it was wonderful- you should've gone and lived there.
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
So predictable , and so pathetic .
I thought you would have worn out that response over the continuing fiaso that was the Iraq invasion .
But hey spouting nonsense is easier than thinking for some people isn't it :thumbsdown:



Mercian , just as a thought , that author you mention .
He has a pretty consistant view when it comes to the mighty military stomping the opposition into a hasty retreat through overwhelming firepower doesn't he .
Does he agree with poster #3 that it is 2)Good.
:no: especially when the stompers have little or no local or regional support (not to mention a hell of a lot of local/regional hostility) .
Or does he think that such approaches are not very good at all , in fact pretty bad and counterproductive ?:yes:

[Ser Clegane]

Please keep this civil.

[Kralizec]

The Islamic courts were rather popular because they brought order and stability to Mogadishu and any other areas they took over. They were financed by Somali businessmen who felt that lawlessness didn't produce a good environment to do business in. Once they took over, a monopoly on organised violence was one of the first things they imposed, and probably the most popular. Other things included taking over the civil infrastructure (traffic cops, etc.) and enforcing business-related laws.

Basically, the official Somali government wasn't functioning as a state, so the Somalis turned to the Islamic courts, who could do the job better. Remember, whatever one might think about the Islamic courts, they were indigenous, while the Ethiopeans are a foreign army.

True. I distinctly remember reading that some USA libertarians in fact supported the Union of islamic courts, because there were no taxes under their regime :inquisitive:

[Dâriûsh]

Yes, it was wonderful- you should've gone and lived there. :dizzy2:

No, it was not. I would not want to live in ICU Somalia any more than I would like to live in Warlord Somalia.

But at least in ICU Somalia, your chances of a fair trial (unless you’re a woman, of course) were better than during warlord rule. But with the nearly-freely-elected-warlord-president returned to, well, not power, but rather returned to the fray, I fear that all the little clan warlords can crawl out of their holes and get back in the game of unending clan warfare.

And I don’t think the comparison to Talibanism is entirely fair. The ICU seemed to be better regulated and less strict and short-sighted.

It all depends on what is preferable of course, a life in a society under Islamic law, or life under shifting warlord rule, where kinsmen of the local despots can kill, steal, and rape with impunity.

[Kagemusha]

To put it simply.Its a mess. For the Somalian people,they have only bad and worse options. A corrupted puppet goverment backed by Ethiopians or Muslim extrimists who want Sharia laws in the country.What a nice set of choices. Ofcourse if there is somekind of comfort it is that the ordinary people are not asked what they want so all they have left is the role of victim.:thumbsdown:

[Tribesman]

I fear that all the little clan warlords can crawl out of their holes and get back in the game of unending clan warfare.

Well it appears that it may be happening already , with the removal of the courts law , especially their disarmament programs . The price of weaponry in mogadishu is reportedly skyrocketing as clan militias seek to rearm .
Oh well , its got to be 2)Good. hasn't it :shrug:

[Slyspy]

Somalis will want stability and the rule of law. This is provided by their own home grown Islamic courts (though we may not like it). They are likely not to be happy with what is essentially a foreign occupation and a puppet government of former warlords turned kleptocrats.

Let them have their Islamic state if it brings peace, stability and economic improvement.

[Kralizec]

Somalis will want stability and the rule of law. This is provided by their own home grown Islamic courts (though we may not like it). They are likely not to be happy with what is essentially a foreign occupation and a puppet government of former warlords turned kleptocrats.

Let them have their Islamic state if it brings peace, stability and economic improvement.

I can understand this sentiment, but what about the Ethiopians? Should they just have sit idly by while a militant theocracy forms on their borders, that may later want to annex part of Ethiopia?

[Pannonian]

I can understand this sentiment, but what about the Ethiopians? Should they just have sit idly by while a militant theocracy forms on their borders, that may later want to annex part of Ethiopia?
Have the UIC tried to annex part of Ethiopia? AFAICS, the only people who've invaded another country are the Ethiopians, not the UIC Somalis. It's generally frowned upon to send your military into another country without a present or imminent threat.

[Tribesman]

Ok hold on to your hats , here come a ......link:laugh4:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200701020632.html
Just an opinion piece , but it does touch on one aspect of what Kralizic mentions .
If you explore the site you will find lots of different pieces from lots of different neighbouring countries media giving their take on the situation .

Some people may find that taking a wider view and thinking about the current situation and background rather than just going for the "Islamic=bad so anything else must be good" approach .~;)

[Dâriûsh]

Have the UIC tried to annex part of Ethiopia? AFAICS, the only people who've invaded another country are the Ethiopians, not the UIC Somalis. It's generally frowned upon to send your military into another country without a present or imminent threat. The ICU anger towards Ethiopia is worthy of mention. Hassan Aweys and other officials declared Jihad™ on them only God knows how many times. This was, I guess, largely because of the Ethiopian interference in Baidoa, but there has been a general mistrust since the war in 1977.

I do not know the official ICU stance on Ogaden, a part of Ethiopia inhabited by Somalis, but I assume the Ethiopians were worried that the ICU would eventually want to aid the local Somali rebels.

[Fragony]

Maybe it is incredibly selfish of me, but a Somali front does take the heat of us westies, much easier for the beards to ackomplish things there, and the Ethiopans are less burdened by having to do it nice and fluffy. Can't blaim the (mostly christian) Ethiopians for invading them when taking the islamist behaviour in Darfur into consideration.

[Marshal Murat]

I've seen reported that
1.Ethiopians have pushed the Islamic Courts armies from the get-go, have destroyed the armies, and have sent the IC armies high-tailed for Kenya.
2.Uganda and Nigeria(?) have started to call up peace-keeper forces to bring stabilization to Somalia
3.Many are selling their AK-47s

Now, the last point is refuted in this article, but the region WANTS a peaceful, stable Somalia. Now if that was guaranteed with the IC, why launch this whole PR compaign and actually invade Somalia? Ethiopia is clearly to blame for the actual invasion, since the Christians and Islamic Court never really got along. I really feel that a puppet government in Somalia that isn't so radical is better than a Islamic Courts that could have Islamic terrorist links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6226449.stm
Kenyans close their borders:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6227083.stm
Worrying about Islamic terrorists:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6212321.stm

Now that I know a little bit more (no thanks to you!?)
Ethiopia is smart enough to pull out before terrorists hit, but what about the peacekeepers and these warlords.

Not many warlords are mentioned in this article, so why is everyone so assured that warlords will appear.
While history provides a clear amount of information on the subject, why can't this time be different?

[Geoffrey S]

While I abhor the islamist side of the UIC, they did provide a level of stability long missed in Somalia, and one that I don't see returning any time soon under a warlord-dominated government propped up by a foreign force.

Faith appears to be the only thing that could be capable of uniting the country, but that does create the risk of yet another terrorist training area. Though lets face it, if the Ethiopeans decide to stay too long it will become exactly that anyway.

[Tribesman]

Not many warlords are mentioned in this article, so why is everyone so assured that warlords will appear.

Would you like a clue ?
One very prominent warlord is mentioned , he wears a suit and has the word "president" in front of his name nowadays .:book:



Can't blaim the (mostly christian) Ethiopians for invading them when taking the islamist behaviour in Darfur into consideration.
And you cannot take the rebellion in Dharfur which the Islamic government is putting down brutally without considering that that rebellion started when attempting to repeat the "Christianist" behaviour in the south that got them such a beneficial result (well apart from the scorched earth policy that followed Khartoumns withdrawl) , and I suppose the eastern Sudanese rebellion which for some strange reason isn't in the news much must be considered as well , especially considering Ethiopias involvement there.

But hey who needs to consider anything at all when they can just heap everything in one neat pile and say "look at the Islamists , its all them it is" .

If you want to say you are taking things into consideration frag , then it might be an idea to actually take them into consideration instead of just throwing it in there .

[Samurai Waki]

I guess all I really care about for Somalia is that one day they actually have a coherent government, that establishes order and justice. They can only go up from the bottom of the pit.

[PanzerJaeger]

Excellent. A victory against our enemy that we did not even have to fight for.

Too bad for the Somalis though.

[Tribesman]

Excellent. A victory against our enemy that we did not even have to fight for.


How is it a victory ?
Apart from some initially heavy fighting around the government held town there has beeen little else , a gentle drive into the towns and villages .

The so called enemy has just melted back into the population .
To use a post-ceasefire pre-ceasefire statement by a certain beardy terrorist bollox from over our way .
"they havn't gone away you know" .:shrug:

[Marshal Murat]

So can you explain the refugees to the Kenyan border and the lack of terrorist and reprisal attacks?

[mercian billman]

Mercian , Isn't the problem with what you summarise that Pooles wrote , that Somali based Piracy has declined severely since the courts took over , and the lack of law and order was in the main a pre courts thing .

So , when was the book written ?

The book was published Sept. 2006, the UIC was formed in 1999 and gained control of Mogadishu in June 2006. I doubt that the UIC coming to power was responsible for anything, lets face it they were only in power for a few months before the Ethiopians came into the picture.

[QUOTE=Tribesman]
Mercian , just as a thought , that author you mention .
He has a pretty consistant view when it comes to the mighty military stomping the opposition into a hasty retreat through overwhelming firepower doesn't he .
Does he agree with poster #3 that it is 2)Good.
especially when the stompers have little or no local or regional support (not to mention a hell of a lot of local/regional hostility) .
Or does he think that such approaches are not very good at all , in fact pretty bad and counterproductive ?[QUOTE=Tribesman]

Poole's assertation is that in order for the US to defeat terrorism in the Middle East, we must stop the flow of terrorist coming from Africa. In order to accomplish that the US, must involve itself in Africa, politically, militarily, and economically. This cannot be accomplished by dropping smart bombs on Mogadishu, in order to accomplish this mission local security forces must be trained to protect their towns and cities while outnumbered by enemy forces and to track down terrorist. This is not possible unless US trainers are capable of teaching this. Basically the point of the book is that the US must change the way it fights in order to defeat islamic terrorism.

My view on it is that while it would be good to incorporate "eastern" tactics and methods into our current doctrine, the author places to much emphasis on them.

[PanzerJaeger]

How is it a victory ?
Apart from some initially heavy fighting around the government held town there has beeen little else , a gentle drive into the towns and villages .

Did I claim a martial victory?

An area of the globe that for a brief period had a taliban-esce "government", now does not. Thats a victory for the Western World.

However, for the somalis - much like the afghanis - the stability brought by the ICU is now gone, and they will suffer a little bit more because of it. (The males at least, not much has changed for the women and children.)

Its too bad, but it is in America's and the rest of the Western World's best interest to have Somalia run by warlords that fight amongst themselves instead of clerics that harbor and train terrorists. (As long as we keep our blackhawks out of there... )

Thus, a victory. :yes:

[mercian billman]

Did I claim a martial victory?

An area of the globe that for a brief period had a taliban-esce "government", now does not. Thats a victory for the Western World.

However, for the somalis - much like the afghanis - the stability brought by the ICU is now gone, and they will suffer a little bit more because of it. (The males at least, not much has changed for the women and children.)

Its too bad, but it is in America's and the rest of the Western World's best interest to have Somalia run by warlords that fight amongst themselves instead of clerics that harbor and train terrorists. (As long as we keep our blackhawks out of there... )

Thus, a victory. :yes:

This is not a victory, all we've done is reset the clock, the same situation will emerge shortly where Somalis will demand stability and that stability will be provided by another "islamic" group. It's not in the western worlds best interest to have Somalia run by warlords, thats just a very lazy solution. No wonder they hate us.

It's our best interest to have Somalia governed by a democratic government that doesn't support terrorism.

[Yun Dog]

Its too bad, but it is in America's and the rest of the Western World's best interest to have Somalia run by warlords that fight amongst themselves instead of clerics that harbor and train terrorists. (As long as we keep our blackhawks out of there... )

Thus, a victory. :yes:

There you have it. Your right its in the Wests interest to keep Somalia poor and starving, and the rest of Africa too. Better they die of stravation than live as supporters of the infidel / sarcasm.

If they are such a taliban-ecs threat then why didnt the USA invade - Oh yeh I forgot they already tried and got their ass kicked by 5 blokes in the back of a pickup with a home made gun and some whacking sticks :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: Of coarse it wasnt the Islamics in charge back then was it.

And as far as this terrorists everywhere thing that the government and the western media is ramming down our throats - Sorry but its all fabrication and lies. Reds under the bed - now its terrorists holding the teddy (with an AK pointed at teddys head).

The Islamics brought law and order and suppressed the warloards (something the west failed to do in over a decade) - in my book thats victory to the Islamics and to have the warlords now reinstated - thats a defeat for the human race.

And for those thinking that this is the end of the Islamics - The wests economic policies have resulted in prolonged poverty for most of the African continent - Mosques are springing up all over the place in countries that were traditional christian - I give it 10 years before most of the northern and even some of the southern parts of Africa convert to Allah, because following the western God has given then nothing but starvation and disease, at least the middle east is happy to trade with them.

edit and to the OP: why did you pose the questions if you already had preconceived answers - did you just want justification that all the lies youve been told were real??

[Tribesman]

OK fair enough Panzer . However......

Its too bad, but it is in America's and the rest of the Western World's best interest to have Somalia run by warlords that fight amongst themselves instead of clerics that harbor and train terrorists.
Isn't that exactly what happened in Afghnaistan giving the rise to the Taliban which then had to be kicked out but are now coming back , isn't it exactly what happened in Somalia last time .
Once the locals get completely fed up with the bickering (to put it mildly)warlords and the foriegn interventions there is every probability that they unite under religeous groups , some of whom happen to be completely nuts .

What complicates this even more in Somalia is that many of the warlord clans make cross border territorial claims which means the warlords fighting affects 5 other nations , and four of those nations or factions within them also make claims on parts of Somalia .
Leaving it as a mess of fighting warlords is exactly what is not in the Wests best interests , since it is in those situations that terrorists find safe harbour and training .



I doubt that the UIC coming to power was responsible for anything, lets face it they were only in power for a few months before the Ethiopians came into the picture.

Yep and lets face it Ethiopia coming into the picture has more to do with its own Somali clans trouble and its problems with Eritrea than anything to do with the Islamic courts . And Eritreas involvement is mainly to piss off the Ethiopians over the demarkation deadlock from Algiers .

[mercian billman]

Fair enough it seems you know more about the situation than I do, I'm not an expert on the subject and my only real opinion is that neither the warlords nor the UIC are an ideal solution for Somalia and the world.

But the UIC is prefferable to the warlords because they did seem like a semi- reasonable group that could negotiated with, rather than a dozen warlords all with their own demands.

[PanzerJaeger]

It's our best interest to have Somalia governed by a democratic government that doesn't support terrorism.

In an ideal world. However, we can all see the results of trying to install a democratic government in that area of the world. I contend that it is better to have the warlords back, then an islamic theocracy. Its certainly not perfect.. far from it.


Tribesman:

Isn't that exactly what happened in Afghnaistan giving the rise to the Taliban which then had to be kicked out but are now coming back , isn't it exactly what happened in Somalia last time .
Once the locals get completely fed up with the bickering (to put it mildly)warlords and the foriegn interventions there is every probability that they unite under religeous groups , some of whom happen to be completely nuts .

You are completely right. We will have to deal with this situation sooner or later down the road. However, for right now, I say its a good thing for us - sadly not for the somalis - that we dont have to deal with an islamic theocracy in that area of the world right now.

As I said, this is far from perfect, but at this stage of the game you take your victories where you can find them. :shrug:


Yunus Dogus:


There you have it. Your right its in the Wests interest to keep Somalia poor and starving, and the rest of Africa too. Better they die of stravation than live as supporters of the infidel / sarcasm.

Sadly, that is my opinion. America and the West cannot make every country better, and sometimes we do have to look out for ourselves. (In this case it was not even the west's doing that took out the ICU)

The rest of your wonderful post will be addressed after dinner. :shame:

[Slyspy]

Of course one might like to point out that Somalia can hardly be demonised as a source of terrorism when Pakistan is much better equipped and better positioned to fulfill that role. But then one is a chaotic, dirt poor country with no real government and certainly no means of projecting its "power" futher than its equally pathetic neighbours and yet which has already severely embarassed the US. The other is a relatively well off former democracy turned mititary regime with modern armed forces and nuclear capability which is somehow our ally in the war terror.

[Tribesman]

But the UIC is prefferable to the warlords because they did seem like a semi- reasonable group that could negotiated with, rather than a dozen warlords all with their own demands.
A mistake that was made was the total rejection of any dealings with the UIC . It is a broadbased grouping , many sections of which are perfectly reasonable and business orientated .
Of course there are some very nasty elements within the grouping that would have to be dealt with in a very different manner .
But the thing is, the Transitional government also has some very reasonable elements in it , but during its set up the more nasty elements rose to the fore, in fact they blocked its formation through the threat of violence unless they were installed as top dogs .
Handing the power in the transitional government to the North western and ethiopian backed clans meant that the government had little or no backing from the rest of the country . Installing them through force over the rest of the clans now isn't going to gain them any more backing . Its just setting it up for another bloodbath .



So can you explain the refugees to the Kenyan border and the lack of terrorist and reprisal attacks?
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Marshal Murat]

Its not that I had preconcieved notions, there were some I'll admit. Evidently some were more flawed then others.
I don't want justification for these opinions, I want everyone to contribute and then pull a "rabbit out of the hat", in the sense that everything will coalesce into an object that I can understand.

Also, I think Black Hawk Down wasn't really a U.S. Military fault, it was the Government that sent them there.
(I don't think anyone cares if they beat the US any more)

Again, what about the BBC post about Kenyans flying Somali refugees back to Somalia? Did they decide one day
"Hey lets round them all up and shippen northeast?" Sounds very unlikely.

[Xiahou]

Oh look a post devoid of thought .I try to respond in kind. :wink:
The rest of your post was blatant trolling and personal attacks, so moving on...


In an ideal world. However, we can all see the results of trying to install a democratic government in that area of the world. I contend that it is better to have the warlords back, then an islamic theocracy. Its certainly not perfect.. far from it.
There it is in a nutshell. An Ethiopian backed regime is far preferable to an Islamic fundamentalist government where you can be punished for having an "inappropriate" haircut and women are beaten for letting their veils fall off. Also, with the Taliban as an example, fundamentalist Islamic regimes seem to have a propensity for sheltering and fostering terrorist groups.


You are completely right. We will have to deal with this situation sooner or later down the road. However, for right now, I say its a good thing for us - sadly not for the somalis - that we dont have to deal with an islamic theocracy in that area of the world right now.I think it's far from clear that we (the US) will eventually have to deal with Somalia- it's far better if Ethiopia and neighboring countries can clean up their own backyards than having us try to do it. They generally have a bigger interest in what's going on in and around their borders and have better knowledge of social and political considerations. A lesser benefit is that they won't suffer under the same media microscope that the US inevitably does in everything that it undertakes.

[Yun Dog]

There it is in a nutshell. An Ethiopian backed regime is far preferable to an Islamic fundamentalist government

preferable for who though?? the Somalis, Oh I thought it was the Somalis country we were referring to not the 121st province of the US empire /sarcasm



where you can be punished for having an "inappropriate" haircut and women are beaten for letting their veils fall off. Also, with the Taliban as an example, fundamentalist Islamic regimes seem to have a propensity for sheltering and fostering terrorist groups. [\QUOTE]


I hear that they eat babies too - hello brainwashing - yes I believe everything FOX news tells me / sarcasm

[QUOTE=Xiahou]I think it's far from clear that we (the US) will eventually have to deal with Somalia- it's far better if Ethiopia and neighboring countries can clean up their own backyards than having us try to do it. They generally have a bigger interest in what's going on in and around their borders and have better knowledge of social and political considerations. A lesser benefit is that they won't suffer under the same media microscope that the US inevitably does in everything that it undertakes.

why's that so they can commit atrocies without those nosey reporters telling everyone?? - yeh someone always spoils the party by release embarressing photos of prisoners being tortured - gosh darn it!! / sarcasm

[Tribesman]

Again, what about the BBC post about Kenyans flying Somali refugees back to Somalia? Did they decide one day
"Hey lets round them all up and shippen northeast?" Sounds very unlikely.

That probably has more to do with Kenyas experiences when the SNF were kicked out by the United front and used Kenya to reform rearm and strike back, though they have their own clan problems in the Northernfrontier district and a history of trouble with both the SDM and SPF from Somalia.


The rest of your post was blatant trolling and personal attacks, so moving on...

Errrrr.....nope the post was direct commentary on what you wrote , if you don't want it to be called badly thought out rubbish then think before you write .:idea2:

[Xiahou]

I hear that they eat babies too - hello brainwashing - yes I believe everything FOX news tells me / sarcasmOf course, I must've been confused- the Islamic Courts weren't trying to impose sharia law at all- nope...
When troops entered Jowhar on Wednesday, an independent radio station began blasting Western music, which the Islamists had banned.

That was an indication of resentment of the strict form of Islam imposed by extremists in the Islamic movement, even as some Somalis have welcomed the order the movement has brought.

Similar mixed sentiment may be found in Mogadishu.

In Mogadishu, taxi driver Hussein Mudde said he hopes his livelihood will improve if the government pushes into the capital.

"Since the Islamic courts have taken control, people are walking instead of hiring a taxi," he said. "They don't have money because the Islamic courts closed the cinemas and music halls. Poets and artists and performers have been jobless."http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/africa/12/27/somalia.ethiopia.ap/index.html

[PanzerJaeger]

If they are such a taliban-ecs threat then why didnt the USA invade - Oh yeh I forgot they already tried and got their ass kicked by 5 blokes in the back of a pickup with a home made gun and some whacking sticks Of coarse it wasnt the Islamics in charge back then was it.

Id like to address this statement as it strikes me not only as completely devoid of facts but also as extremely ironic.

You seem to fancy yourself a champion of the poor and downtrodden. However, you seem to have overlooked quite a bit in regards to the situation in Somalia.

America was actually in Somalia (under the auspices of the UN) to help the starving africans in that country - something I would think you would support, not mock. Quite the invasion. ~:rolleyes:

And in fact America did not get her "a$$" kicked. In fact, the incident was so small in scale that it is completely ignorant to make any kind of broad assumption such as the one you made.

Clinton - for better or worse - made the decision that the liability in losing American troops in attempts to help the starving somalis was not worth it and pulled out.

So, both your assertion that America invaded Somalia and your assertion that America was beaten in Somalia are completely incorrect. For you to attempt to paint that situation in such a way suggests that you care more about attacking the US and less about fighting for the disenfranchised.

Suddenly your high horse has disintegrated into a pathetic attempt at america-bashing. :thumbsdown:

I suggest you save such rhetoric for threads about the Iraq war, where at least it doesnt make you look completely unintelligent. (No personal offence intended. :bow:)

[Yun Dog]

Just so you are not completely misguided - please let me clarify things




You seem to fancy yourself a champion of the poor and downtrodden. However, you seem to have overlooked quite a bit in regards to the situation in Somalia.

erm no

in fact Id be one of those doing the treading

I could care less about the starving millions - I care only for myself and those dear to me

I simply find the 'false' caring society exhibits bemusing - its like people watching the news - Oh those poor people - do they change their lives - not usually - meanwhile there country is indirectly to blame (along with others) for those people being in that situation

blow em away with a machine gun and give em a bandaid

the only bit I consider to effect me will be all the angry people with nothing to lose coming out of those regions in a few years and blowing themselves and others up. Because one of those others may be me.



And in fact America did not get her "a$$" kicked. In fact, the incident was so small in scale that it is completely ignorant to make any kind of broad assumption such as the one you made.

and of coarse that statement was completely serious :clown: - So you really believe 5 guys in a pick up with whacking sticks defeated the US - ahem - ooooo k
:oops:

its about as valid as the islamic = terrorist analogies the some others are making in this thread - so seeing as people were talking nonesense - I feel its fair game

and the rest - well you mentioned high horses

Taking me to task about a facetious statement like that - :clown:

edit: I find it very ironic that all thse guys are applauding the fact that the ethiopians just reinstated the very guys Clinton sent men over there to kill - dont you? - how the wheel turns eh!

[Dâriûsh]

Let's keep it civil, please.

[Redleg]

edit: I find it very ironic that all thse guys are applauding the fact that the ethiopians just reinstated the very guys Clinton sent men over there to kill - dont you? - how the wheel turns eh!

Revision of history is a dangerous thing, especially when a few of us know what the mission actually was and who actually sent United States forces to Somilia.


The United Nations intervention in Somalia (code-named Operation Restore Hope) was a United Nations–sanctioned United States military operation from 3 December 1992 to 4 May 1993. The operation planned to avert a growing humanitarian disaster in the increasingly lawless Republic of Somalia, which was suffering from severe famine, general chaos, and domination by a number of warlords following the collapse of Siad Barre's military government. Ambassador Robert Oakley was appointed head of this operation by President Bush.

After President Clinton was inaugurated in January 1993, in supporting the UN, he decided to reduce the number of US troops, which were to be replaced by UN troops, and to hand over the lead to the UN. By June 1993, only 1,800 US troops remained.

Edit: A far better analysis then some that I have seen in this thread so far.

http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_Somalia_0104,00.html

[Marshal Murat]

the radical youth wing of the Union of Islamic Courts - remain in Mogadishu and are planning guerrilla-style attacks.-BBC 'Fragile Peace'

Okay so how does this NOT sound like the beginnings of a terrorist organization. The same sorta thing occured in Afghanistan where the 'mujaheddin' were men with RPG's, AK's and guerrilla style tactics.

Also, how about the Kenyan bombings? Surely not terrorists, just some accidental mixture of chemicals at the wrong place, wrong time sorta thing.

Civil please.

[Yun Dog]

I dont see any reason for this to be uncivil, I have nothing personal invested in it, nor does too many others on here Id suggest.

Guerilla tactics have and will continued to be employed by armies, warlords, dudes with sticks, to win wars against numerically and arms superior foes. erm French resistance, north vietnamese, the bore war (both sides). As far as I know its a tactic of warfare - not an ideology.

Looking at this and the previous article you posted - what was plain to me was what was not said - and what was not said in those articles was anything about links to or evidence of terrorism.

I would suggest that other than hysterical arm waving and generalisations theres nothing to say that the Islamic courts are anything other than another faction in this dispute with no further sinister overtones required.

The only thing we are doing by declaring everyone we dont agree with as terrorists is to empower and validate and the real terrorists - and thats something we dont want to do. The terrorists must be loving this whole Islamics are terrorists and invading of countries in the WAR on Terror - we are doing more than they couldve hoped for as far as giving the world the impression that they are way more powerful and influential than they really are. How many terrorist have we actually killed - and please dont include people fighting to protect their country from foreign invaders.

and back to the keeping civil - well I wasnt or wont be the person to make erroneous personal assumptions and analyses of the character of members of this board , as has been done to me in this thread by some others. [edit] its beneath me as are those that employ such tactics.

[Slyspy]

I do think it amusing that some people believe that Ethiopia has both the will and the ability to bring peace, prosperity and above all effective government to another country when they can't even achieve those at home.

[Xiahou]

I do think it amusing that some people believe that Ethiopia has both the will and the ability to bring peace, prosperity and above all effective government to another country when they can't even achieve those at home.Somalia could only dream of the kind of peace and stability Ethiopia has. However many flaws Ethiopia has, it's 10x better than the situation in Somalia.

[Tribesman]

Somalia could only dream of the kind of peace and stability Ethiopia has.However many flaws Ethiopia has, it's 10x better than the situation in Somalia.
What you mean like the decades old strife in Ogaden , the massing of troops and tanks onthe Eastern border due to its refusal to settle for the UN border agreement it signed up to , its terrorist support in Sudan , its long running territorial claims against Kenya , a nice history of civil war , international war and brutal dictatorship .
Yep its a real dreamboat if you compare it to an absolute basket case like Somalia , but if you are talking actual peace and stability then you must be talking about a different Ethiopia .

[Dâriûsh]

US launches air strike in Somalia. (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/068C7A74-4D2A-4E6F-8546-B6E062C1AFC2.htm)



"Absolutely a lot of people were killed. So many dead people were lying in the area, but we do not know who is who, but the raid was a success," Dinari said.

[yesdachi]

US launches air strike in Somalia. (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/068C7A74-4D2A-4E6F-8546-B6E062C1AFC2.htm)
I was just reading about this in an AP article, it leans a little to the left (big surprise) but it offers some decent info. Nailing Fazul is good but I don’t think anyone likes us being there.


The main target was Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, who allegedly planned the 1998 attacks on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that killed 225 people.

U.S. Launches Airstrike in Somalia
By MOHAMED OLAD HASSAN, Associated Press Writer

MOGADISHU, Somalia - A U.S. airstrike hit targets in southern Somalia where Islamic militants were believed to be sheltering suspects in the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies, Somali officials and witnesses said Tuesday. Many people were reported killed.

Monday's attack was the first overt military action by the U.S. in Somalia since the 1990s and the legacy of a botched intervention _ known as "Black Hawk Down" _ that left 18 U.S. servicemen dead.

Helicopter gunships launched new attacks Tuesday near the scene of the U.S. airstrike, although it was not clear if they were American or Ethiopian aircraft, and it was not known if there were any casualties.

Two helicopters "fired several rockets toward the road that leads to the Kenyan border," said Ali Seed Yusuf, a resident of the town of Afmadow in southern Somalia.

The aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower arrived off Somalia's coast and launched intelligence-gathering missions over Somalia, the military said. Three other U.S. warships are conducting anti-terror operations off the Somali coast.

U.S. warships have been seeking to capture al-Qaida members thought to be fleeing Somalia after Ethiopia invaded Dec. 24 in support of the government and drove the Islamic militia out of the capital and toward the Kenyan border.

The White House would not confirm the attack, nor would the Pentagon.

But a U.S. government official said at least one AC-130 gunship was used. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the operation's sensitivity.

AC-130 gunships have elaborate sensors that can go after targets day or night. They are operated by the Special Operations Command and have been used heavily against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The airstrike occurred Monday evening after the suspects were seen hiding on a remote island on the southern tip of Somalia, close to the Kenyan border, Somali officials said. The island and a site 155 miles north were hit.

The main target was Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, who allegedly planned the 1998 attacks on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that killed 225 people.

He is also suspected of planning the car bombing of a beach resort in Kenya and the near simultaneous attempt to shoot down an Israeli airliner in 2002. Ten Kenyans and three Israelis were killed in the blast at the hotel, 12 miles north of Mombasa. The missiles missed the airliner.

Fazul, 32, joined al-Qaida in Afghanistan and trained there with Osama bin Laden, according to the transcript of an FBI interrogation of a known associate. He came to Kenya in the mid-1990s, married a local woman, became a citizen and started teaching at a religious school near Lamu, just 60 miles south of Ras Kamboni, Somalia, where one of the airstrikes took place Monday.

Largely isolated, the coast north of Lamu is predominantly Muslim and many residents are of Arab descent. Boats from Lamu often visit Somalia and the Persian Gulf, making the Kenya-Somalia border area ideal for him to escape.

President Abdullahi Yusuf told journalists in the capital, Mogadishu, that the U.S. "has a right to bombard terrorist suspects who attacked its embassies." Deputy Prime Minister Hussein Aideed told The Associated Press the U.S. had "our full support for the attacks."

But others in the capital said the attacks would only increase anti-American sentiment in the largely Muslim country.

"U.S. involvement in the fighting in our country is completely wrong," said Sahro Ahmed, a 37-year-old mother of five.

Already, many people in predominantly Muslim Somalia had resented the presence of troops from neighboring Ethiopia, which has a large Christian population and has fought two brutal wars with Somalia, most recently in 1977.

The U.S. Central Command reassigned the Eisenhower to Somalia last week from its mission supporting NATO-led forces in Afghanistan, said U.S. Navy spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Charlie Brown in Bahrain, where the Navy's Fifth Fleet is based.

"Eisenhower aircraft have flown intelligence-gathering missions over Somalia," Brown told The Associated Press.

The spokesman said the Eisenhower was the only U.S. aircraft carrier in the region. The vessel is carrying approximately 60 aircraft, including four fighter jet squadrons, he said.

Ethiopia forces had invaded Somalia to prevent an Islamic movement from ousting the weak, internationally recognized government from its lone stronghold in the west of the country. The U.S. and Ethiopia both accuse the Islamic group of harboring extremists, among them al-Qaida suspects.

Ethiopian troops, tanks and warplanes took just 10 days to drive the Islamic group from the capital, Mogadishu, and other key towns.

Ethiopian and Somali troops had over the last days cornered the main Islamic force in Ras Kamboni, a town on Badmadow island, with U.S. warships patrolling off shore and the Kenyan military guarding the border to watch for fleeing militants.

Witnesses said at least four civilians were killed in another attack 30 miles east of Afmadow town, including a small boy. The claims could not be independently verified.

"My 4-year-old boy was killed in the strike," Mohamed Mahmud Burale told the AP by telephone. "We also heard 14 massive explosions."

The AC-130 is armed with 40 mm guns that fire 120 rounds per minute and a 105 mm cannon, normally a field artillery weapon. The gunships were designed primarily for battlefield use to place saturated fire on massed troops.

"We don't know how many people were killed in the attack but we understand there were a lot of casualties," government spokesman Abdirahman Dinari said. "Most were Islamic fighters."

U.S. officials said after the Sept. 11 attacks that extremists with ties to al-Qaida operated a training camp at Ras Kamboni and al-Qaida members are believed to have visited it.

Leaders of the Islamic movement have vowed from their hideouts to launch an Iraq-style guerrilla war in Somalia, and al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden's deputy has called on militants to carry out suicide attacks on the Ethiopian troops.

Somalia has not had an effective central government since clan-based warlords toppled dictator Mohamed Siad Barre in 1991 and then turned on each other, sinking the Horn of Africa nation of 7 million people into chaos.

A U.N. peacekeeping force, including U.S. troops, arrived in 1992, but the experiment in nation-building ended the next year when fighters loyal to clan leader Mohamed Farah Aideed shot down a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter and battled American troops, killing 18 servicemen.

At least 13 attempts at government have failed since then. The current government was established in 2004 with U.N. backing.

___

Associated Press writers Mohamed Sheik Nor and Salad Duhul in Mogadishu and Chris Tomlinson in Nairobi, Kenya, contributed to this report.

[Sjakihata]

A U.S. airstrike hit targets in southern Somalia where Islamic militants were believed to be sheltering suspects in the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies, Somali officials and witnesses said Tuesday. Many people were reported killed.

Same old idiotic foreign policy. I think he is a terrorist. I suspect him of bombing our embassy. All right, that's enough evidence, let's bomb him his family and any innocent civilians who happens to be near by.

How dare the US to call itself democratic? Laughable and despicable.

[naut]

I did a report (some cursèd 20 pages) on Somalia and its UN situation and a bit of background to it's current situation, that by no means gives me better insight than others but I would like to share.


Somalia has been involved in numerous wars both internal and with their neighbors including Ethiopia
Correct, the most violent of which have been internal, where the nation attempted to break into to separate entities at one point to stem the violence that is errant in Mogadishu.


It was being run by competing warlords who were taking all the foreign aide etc.
Yes. Competing Warlords is very accurate.


The UN and the USA sent troops to attempt to stop this and set up law and order - as far as I know they failed
Actually the UN arrived on the scene, with 1) too small a force and 2) with little knowledge of the situation. Thus with the small force and lack of ability the Warlords had no respect for them, and easily ignoring their attempts as peace keepers.
That is when a US Task Force was called in, they were actually highly successful (to my shocked surprise I must say). They had power, the Warlords respect power and the US soldiers demanded respect. The Warlords listened and ceased fighting, progress was made, aid sent, local police set up, funds given, etc.
However, the situation fell apart whence the US Task Force was to pull out and the UN take their place. The UN once again did not have the man power nor the funds to keep the peace or give significant aid. The Warlords exploited this weakness and

the country has been in anarchy since
In general terms yes.


the UN propped up a puppet government - which basically was the legitimisation of the warlords and militias
Sadly it is so.


some sections of the country began to turn to Islamic clerics to administer and bring law and order to their regions - Of course they also did this against the wishes of the millitias and started a civil war. If a country in complete anarchy can have such a thing

The Islamics took on the warlords and started winning taking Mogadishu against the UNs(USA) wishes. Ethiopia like the jackal was lurking around the fringes and seeing the opportunity to 1) settle an old score with the Somalis and 2) conduct a UN sanctioned annexation of Somalia - sent its army to push out the clerics and reinstate the pro ethiopian puppet regime basically making Somalia the vassal of Ethiopia.

This has nothing to do with the war on terror, the UN or the USA, this is all about local east african blood politics and power grabbing. I was watching that Geldof in Africa thing and basically he said that the Somalia only exists on a UN piece of paper and in Africa no one acknowledges its existence. And there is a county inside it called Somaliland which is not even acknowledged by anyone except the people living there.

And while we there the "War on Terror" is a nonsense excuse for one country to invade another - the only terrorist are the ones being created there every day - prepare to reap what you sow.

It almost feels as if the US government is attempting to finish all those petty foreign events they have been involved in before. :shrug:

[Marshal Murat]

Yes, so lets see, who else?

North Korea, Russia, I don't know about China, Vietnam, um... who else?

[Ice]

Some people need to chill with the personal attacks here. So much hate in this thread.



How dare the US to call itself democratic? Laughable and despicable.

...Our leaders are a elected maybe? I don't see how this has to do with being "democratic".

[PanzerJaeger]

How dare the US to call itself democratic? Laughable and despicable.

One of the major reasons the current government was elected* was to bomb the ____ out of these types of people. :laugh4:

*through the democratic process :yes:

[Sjakihata]

I get it. To Americans democratic means elections. How sophisticated... :dizzy2:

[Banquo's Ghost]

I get it. To Americans democratic means elections. How sophisticated... :dizzy2:

This is close to the edge of acceptability. It is unhelpful to try and characterise a country like the United States in such broad-brush terms, and the second sentence is unfortunately expressed.

Please let's get back to the topic at hand. Criticism is fine - veiled insults are not.

:bow:

[Sjakihata]

Fair. I generalize and I was warned for it as well. A friendly reminder.

What is this then:


bomb the ____ out of these types of people.:laugh4:


It is a generalization and an intentional provocative statement. He is laughing in my face and a 'these types of people's' face.

[PanzerJaeger]

EDIT: To remove unwarranted observation. Please don't fan the flames. BG

Call us heartless, call us warmongers, call us the great satin, but undemocratic? That begs the question: do you understand democracy?

One of the major issues the Bush administration ran on was hunting down terrorists that threaten America and destroying them and their supporters. So essentially, the government is fulfilling its democratic obligations to the populace that supported it by attacking AQ where ever possible. :yes:

PS.


It is a generalization and an intentional provocative statement. He is laughing in my face and a 'these types of people's' face.

I will always laugh at terrorists and their supporters when they are rightfully smeared all over the concrete. :laugh4: .......... :laugh4:

[Tribesman]

One of the major issues the Bush administration ran on was hunting down terrorists that threaten America and destroying them and their supporters. So essentially, the government is fulfilling its democratic obligations to the populace that supported it by attacking AQ where ever possible.

Yes well ........

I will always laugh at terrorists and their supporters when they are rightfully smeared all over the concrete. ..........
time to stop laughing Panzer , despite the earlier claims made by the heroic terrorist hunters , they screwed up on the intelligence ....yet again .
So they smeared people all over the ground , but not the people they thought they were aiming at , and not the people they earlier said they had hit .:thumbsdown:
Yet another ballsup which will feed the flames of exremism . Congratulations .

[Sjakihata]

EDIT: To remove unwarranted observation. Please don't fan the flames. BG

Call us heartless, call us warmongers, call us the great satin, but undemocratic? That begs the question: do you understand democracy?

One of the major issues the Bush administration ran on was hunting down terrorists that threaten America and destroying them and their supporters. So essentially, the government is fulfilling its democratic obligations to the populace that supported it by attacking AQ where ever possible. :yes:

PS.



I will always laugh at terrorists and their supporters when they are rightfully smeared all over the concrete. :laugh4: .......... :laugh4:


Having known your posting style and this post in particular tells me two things. You are clueless to what democratic values are and that you have no idea about terrorism. I shall refrain from debating with you, a prime example of western civilization at its ugliest.

:thumbsdown:

[Pannonian]

Having known your posting style and this post in particular tells me two things. You are clueless to what democratic values are and that you have no idea about terrorism. I shall refrain from debating with you, a prime example of western civilization at its ugliest.

:thumbsdown:
I must defend Panzer by saying he's a credit to his family - everything his folks stood for is encapsulated in him.

[rory_20_uk]

I must defend Panzer by saying he's a credit to his family - everything his folks stood for is encapsulated in him.

Hmmm... This (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1382822#post1382822) for some reason comes to mind...

Does PJ understand democracy. It's not like there's a country in a world that has pure democracy in the first place!

Secondly, since there is widespread dissatisfaction against Bush and his war on terror, I'd argue that he's not even doing what his people want.

Thirdly, since they didn't even kill the right people, then the premise that the people want this is mute. :wall:

~:smoking:

[Slyspy]

EDIT: To remove unwarranted observation. Please don't fan the flames. BG

Call us heartless, call us warmongers, call us the great satin, but undemocratic? That begs the question: do you understand democracy?

One of the major issues the Bush administration ran on was hunting down terrorists that threaten America and destroying them and their supporters. So essentially, the government is fulfilling its democratic obligations to the populace that supported it by attacking AQ where ever possible. :yes:

PS.



I will always laugh at terrorists and their supporters when they are rightfully smeared all over the concrete. :laugh4: .......... :laugh4:

How I wish, in the light of this last statement, that Britain had had both the power and the balls to obliterate Boston not so many years ago.

[Pannonian]

How I wish, in the light of this last statement, that Britain had had both the power and the balls to obliterate Boston not so many years ago.
You're looking at the wrong country. As recently as WW2 PJ's family was in Germany.

[Slyspy]

And you are taking the wrong reference. I'm talking about the war on terror, not the war against National Socialism.

[Pannonian]

And you are taking the wrong reference. I'm talking about the war on terror, not the war against National Socialism.
Sorry. I misunderstood.

[Slyspy]

No problem, happy to clarify it for you.

[PanzerJaeger]

Yes well ........

time to stop laughing Panzer , despite the earlier claims made by the heroic terrorist hunters , they screwed up on the intelligence ....yet again .
So they smeared people all over the ground , but not the people they thought they were aiming at , and not the people they earlier said they had hit .:thumbsdown:
Yet another ballsup which will feed the flames of exremism . Congratulations .

Now thats not entirely true and you know it Tribesy.

The US official, who refused to be named, however said that Somalis with close ties to al-Qaeda had been killed. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6251077.stm)


Having known your posting style and this post in particular tells me two things. You are clueless to what democratic values are and that you have no idea about terrorism. I shall refrain from debating with you, a prime example of western civilization at its ugliest.

No need to get your panties in a twist. Its not my fault you dont understand the definition of democracy and why said definition made your previous comment less than intelligible. I can only recommend a dictionary and a smile. ~:)

[Banquo's Ghost]

Now thats not entirely true and you know it Tribesy.

The US official, who refused to be named, however said that Somalis with close ties to al-Qaeda had been killed. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6251077.stm)

Unlike the people the action was aimed at - who did get away - these are the usual, tiresome and unamed "chaps with close ties to al-Qaeda." Like Saddam Hussein, perhaps.

And in case of accusations of BBC bias (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article2145150.ece).

Interesting to read that John Negroponte is now telling us that al-Qaeda is rebuilding strongly in Pakistan. Now that we can believe. So why isn't Pakistan a smoking ruin full of wailing widows?

Saudi Arabia - known source of funds and terrorists for al-Qaeda - friend.
Pakistan - known refuge of bin Laden, the Taleban and hotbed of jihadism - friend.
Iraq - secular state that clamped down on al-Qaeda and jihadists - smoking ruin. Now of course, brimming with al-Qaeda and jihadists, and therefore friend.

I know I'm not bright, but am I missing something?

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Same old idiotic foreign policy. I think he is a terrorist. I suspect him of bombing our embassy. All right, that's enough evidence, let's bomb him his family and any innocent civilians who happens to be near by.

How dare the US to call itself democratic? Laughable and despicable.

What would you like to call the US? The Country that goes around killing people for no reason? I guess you and others (you know who you are) proably would eh?:no:




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16591262/

FYI

[Tribesman]

Now thats not entirely true and you know it Tribesy.
Errrrrrrrrr.......lets see shall we
time to stop laughing Panzer , despite the earlier claims made by the heroic terrorist hunters , they screwed up on the intelligence ....yet again .
.....true
So they smeared people all over the ground , but not the people they thought they were aiming at ....true
and not the people they earlier said they had hit .....true
Yet another ballsup which will feed the flames of exremism .....ah I see your point now , that last bit is debatable since it is only an opinion based on reason .