Black Hawk Down

**percy13** · 12-30-2006, 06:00

Well to me the whole mission seemed a tad naive. These Warlords had full scale armies and to go in with relatively small forces seems a bit optimistic. As long as those Warlords were allowed to retain power the country was always going to be a mess.

If the US seriously wanted to end the war they should have gone in full scale and disarmed the lot of the private armies. Then again it's a bit naive of me to think the US people would want to do such a thing.

Africa is such a mess politically.

**Marshal Murat** · 12-30-2006, 06:22

I really enjoyed the movie, it doesn't tell it exactly, but its very good.
I think if America had really worried about the situation, then they would've sent in more men to combat the private armies, but like the above poster stated
Africa is politically messy

**Warluster** · 12-30-2006, 08:05

I havent read the books but from the mvie perspective, I saw it as an sad crusade on an impossible mission...

**Julian the apostate** · 12-30-2006, 09:52

i'd agree with that, the logic of small group fighting rapid movement and heavy fire power do work brilliantly just without the firepower, cut off movement and small numbers bad things happen. Plus in all reality i don't think there was a man to take command if the warlords were taken out

**Grey_Fox** · 12-30-2006, 15:03

Originally Posted by pleasy

If the US seriously wanted to end the war they should have gone in full scale and disarmed the lot of the private armies. Then again it's a bit naive of me to think the US people would want to do such a thing.

They did, they used 20,000 Marines to force a ceasefire, and then after a few months brought them home. Then the fighting kicked off again and Task Force Ranger was sent in, with the objective of killing or capturing Aidid. As if getting one person would bring about a democracy.

**percy13** · 12-30-2006, 18:26

I didn't realise so many troops were originally used. Any idea how many UN (non-US) troops were involved?

**Grey_Fox** · 12-30-2006, 20:46

A regiment of Pakistani troops, and Malaysian APCs. The armoured column was about a mile long.

Numbers are iffy because there's been no official study done on it, at least as of 1999.

**percy13** · 12-30-2006, 22:14

Not exactly an overwhelming force then. From my limited knowledge of the campaign (mostly gleaned from the movie and what you guys have said here) it seems to have been a bit of a botch up job entirely.

**econ21** · 12-30-2006, 22:36

There was a superb TV documentary about Black Hawk Down, which included interviewing some of the Somali fighters today. It's a fascinating episode, at least viewed from a US perspective in dramatic or military terms. That's thanks to Mark Bowden's riveting work and the superb movie. I find it hard to think about those two sergeants who died trying to protect Michael Durant without a tear welling up. Or to hear Clinton's "we'll get the job done and then skedaddle" speech after without cursing his insincerity.

But those are emotional reactions. From a wider, political or historical perspective, the episode is rather disturbing and troubling. For example, the Somali casualties were apparently horrendous and unlikely they were all combatants. More fundamentally, it raises some important political/moral issues about "liberal humanitarian interventionism" that you could say are being writ large in Iraq and Afghanistan today. And Somalia still has not recovered from the collapse that led to the intervention.

As a liberal humanitarian, I am torn about the merits of the intervention. On the one hand, where armed thugs are messing up a country, it is not ridiculous to say that intervention can help. Sierra Leone is probably a good example of this. But the trick is knowing when it can help and when, as arguably with Iraq, it would just make things worse.

**ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88** · 12-30-2006, 23:43

Rather you help Africa or not, that Place is a total and utter mess, and been like that for decades. Rwanda, for instance. 800,000 people killed in how long? a month or two? and UN and them just watched (go figure). Ethopiha and Somilia in the 1980's, Darfur,etc....

we went into Mog with a small force, because the mission was only suppose to take a hour or two, but it turn into a disaeatr for both sides. If we would have just sent tanks and more armor in there, nothing would have went wrong.