• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING NEWS: 4 Americans Abducted by Somali Pirates Have Been Killed

As usual you are just making sh** up to support your obsessive, anti-British propaganda. If you can provide a single piece of British history curriculum material that says anything like, I'll withdraw my accusation of bare-faced lying.

And this has got what to do with Somalia? Your lying is derailing, flaming and baiting.

I was only commenting on what PeteEU had to say, which was this.

"I agree. I was taught by English teachers too and the only times the US was mentioned when taking WW1, was when the mental crack the Germans got from the American entrance to the war was discussed, and of course the incompetence of some US commanders that got so many American's killed. Also the highly skilled marksmanship of US soldiers as a whole. But as the over all impact on the fighting and the war, it was always relatively small, which is as I found out later in life, was factually correct. But this is way off topic".

If you feel he is wrong then you might want to take it up with him.
 
Could please provide me with some examples of how school children in Europe are misrepresented the history of American involvement in Europe.

No problem.

"I was taught by English teachers too and the only times the US was mentioned when taking WW1, was when the mental crack the Germans got from the American entrance to the war was discussed, and of course the incompetence of some US commanders that got so many American's killed. Also the highly skilled marksmanship of US soldiers as a whole. But as the over all impact on the fighting and the war, it was always relatively small, which is as I found out later in life, was factually correct".
 
That is a mentality I see a lot these days. Like somehow Americans are above all other peoples. Like it's okay what foreigners do to each other, but when you f*ck with America you're going down. We are somehow separate from these people? We are somehow better than these people? We tend to ignore things like genocide when it happens in other countries (and when we're the ones who do it). But when 4 Americans are killed we get all worked up. Sometimes people just disgust me.

:rantoff:




Just "4 people"?


Really?


The country is a failure and needs to be invaded and occupied by an international force until it become a stable democracy. Problem is. Only the US is willing to spill blood and were tired of fighting the international communities wars.
 
Did we? How much more resources did we send against Germany?

To be fair, The US couldn't put up much of a fight against Japan in the early stages of their war, (The rest of us had been fighting since 1939) the Japanese had blown up much of the Pacific fleet, so there wasn't much available to get there with

No problem.

"I was taught by English teachers too and the only times the US was mentioned when taking WW1, was when the mental crack the Germans got from the American entrance to the war was discussed, and of course the incompetence of some US commanders that got so many American's killed. Also the highly skilled marksmanship of US soldiers as a whole. But as the over all impact on the fighting and the war, it was always relatively small, which is as I found out later in life, was factually correct".

Is this a personal anecdote? It seems unlikely.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
The topic of this thread concerns Somali pirates. This thread is not about World War II. Non-germane material should be posted in separate threads in the appropriate subforums.

Thank you.
 
To be fair, The US couldn't put up much of a fight against Japan in the early stages of their war, (The rest of us had been fighting since 1939) the Japanese had blown up much of the Pacific fleet, so there wasn't much available to get there with.

It was mostly a naval war in the beginning. And the Pacific is a big piece of water.

It took a while to build all those Liberty ships to get all our guys and stuff over to Europe too.

We are all lucky the Germans didn't keep the Soviets as their ally. It would have been a different war. One we could not have won without the Atomic bomb.
 
Moderator's Warning:
The topic of this thread concerns Somali pirates. This thread is not about World War II. Non-germane material should be posted in separate threads in the appropriate subforums.

Thank you.

We're just shooting the shiit. No harm intended.
 
There once was a rather appropriate punishment for piracy…it involved a rope, a yardarm, and the steady beat of a Marine drummer.
 
That was back in 2007 and Somalia has been run by warlords since 1991, long before George Bush was President.

I cannot believe I missed this gem.
Oh hell to the ****ing no are you trying to imply US has had no hand in Somalia prior to Bush and Clinton.
Are you kidding me? You must be a representation of an average American with absolutely no knowledge of your countries own history in other countries.

HISTORY 101: SOMALIA
Gather round people and you may just learn something new today.

Pre Colonialism:

Long story short: Somalis had no borders. We dominated EA and we were established as a trading region and we had our own rule of law and qabils (clans)
Colonalism:

Britain, French and Italian all eventually played a role in HOA. It was the French who first established a colony in Somalia in the 1860’s. The British wished to protect their trade and so the French and British had an agreement and decided to share a piece of the land (The North region)

Italy got involved in 89 and established it’s colony down South and expanded and included areas in now Kenya and Ethiopia.

So now we have:
Djibouti = French Somalia
Somaliland = British Somalia
Somalia = Italian Somalia

Long story short: Many Qaabils fought back against imperialism but the land was divided between the three European powers. The British left Somaliland alone. Italy screwed about with Somalia and the French .... well, they are still there so not much has changed

During WW2. Italy used Somali soldiers in the South to try and invade British Somalia to get control of the ports and got repealed by the Somalis in the British Army and went on to take the land from Italy until the 50’s when it became a protectorate of Italy.

Independence:

British gave Somaliland it’s independence first as a reward and partly because of the de-colonisation Britain was going under anyway. Italian Somalia got their independence.
Somaliland and Somalia became united under the banner of Greater Somalia.

So far so good? Yes.

Due to colonialation and the border drawing which ran contrary to Somali historical land. Hostilities flared between Somalia and Ethiopia until peace was restored.
1969 President was assassinated. (God rest his soul, I do wonder where Somalia would be if he hadn’t been killed. Sigh)

The death of the President left General Siad Barre in power to fill the vacuum and he promptly dissolved the national assembly/banned all parties.

US supported Ethiopia so Somalia hosted Soviet Union and was strong allies. Even allowing it bases in Somalia to counteract US bases

Until one of the war of Ogaden where US funded Somalia and Soviet Union sided with Ethiopia and the war continued till there was a peace accord in 88 US/Barre had an alliance.
It funded hundreds of millions worth of arms to Somalia for the right to use the military facilities which the Soviets actually build.

Somalia’s strategic position meant these bases were used to support US intervention and interests in Middle East.

US looked the other way to what Siad Barre was doing to his people which included massive human rights violations as it was deemed unimportant to US as it had the bases and an “ally” in the Horn and continued flooding Somalia with weapons.
During the decade of support the United States and Italy gave to Barre. Tens of thousands of civilians were massacred at the hands of Barre's Army until the civil war erupted in 1978

Those in the region of what was formally known as British Somaliland and it’s clan leaders declared independence from Italian Somalia to escape the General’s oppression

To keep a hold Siad Barre used the weapons US gave to him to try and wipe out the qabils in the North by carpet bombing it and when the SNM (Somali National Movement = Part of British Somaliland) won and declared independence.

The General tried to divert attention from his failings by using the historical divisions between Somalis and played different Somali clans against each other which led to the chaos which triggered the intervention by the United States in 1992.

US came to “give” humanitarian assistance. But was seen by many as the primary reason why the General who killed so many of his own people stayed in power for so long.

Andd well, we all know what happened next. Black Hawk Down

The billions of dollars US funded to Somalia and arms fell into the hands of militia’s who divided themselves according to territory.

And from the militia’s death came the warlords which the US has been funding, who ironically were the same people who were killing US soldiers during the intervention
The warlords kept control of certain areas of the South until they too were overthrown by the people.

And so we come to the birth of the Islamic Union Courts in 2006.

The IUC with the support of the local people overthrew the US backed warlords who were as evil as the former Dictator but they were funded to try and fight the Islamists. They lost and the ISC came to power.

They quickly established law over the land. They implemented a slightly harsh Sharia law. But it did the impossible and Somalia had law and it had order for the first time since 1991. They banned guns and the drug khat which was a favourite amongst the Men

The IUC were dominated by moderates who prevented things like stoning but allowed Sharia and were in no way in league with Al Qaeda. The IUC was portrayed as Extreme Islamists who would become a haven for Al Qaeda which was completely false.

Somalia had law. It had peace and it was on it’s way to recovery.

US did not like the idea of Islamists (no matter how moderate) having a foothold in Horn of Africa and Bush with his paranoid, disgusting self added Somalia into the “war on terror and funded Ethiopia to invade Somalia and did airstrikes in Somalia. The invasion into Somalia was not greeted well. Especially as Somalia and Ethiopia have had a horrible history filled with distrust.
Somalia had turned from qabils against each other. To a wider context by including it in the war on terror.

US was seen as funding Christian Ethiopia against Muslim Somalia (and yes, I mentioned the religions because it did matter and play a role - this was around the time where US had also invaded two other Muslim countries in the ME and Bush was seen as just targeting Muslims)

The inevitable insurgency occurred. IUC was weakened fatally and from it’s ashes came Al Shabab. Al Qaeda’s ideological cousins.

It fought and with widespread support, repealed in 08/9 the foreigners from Somalia and now Al Shabab controls much of the South and has expressed support and admiration for Al Qaeda. Now Al Qaeda does have a foothold in Horn of Africa.
Al Shabab has bombed it's neighbors who are funding AU troops. Threatens to attack Uganda and Ethiopia and the North. Puntland and Somaliland.
It has also welcomed Non African fighters to Somalia. Mainly those from Pakistan and Middle East.


Disclaimer:
I have missed much out. Seriously
This is tailored towards US history in Somalia but if you do complain, I am more than happy to expand the above text to include colonial and Muslim intervention
 
Last edited:
The country is a failure and needs to be invaded and occupied by an international force until it become a stable democracy. Problem is. Only the US is willing to spill blood and were tired of fighting the international communities wars.

Why does no one not learn from history. I give up.

Democracy cannot be forced on Somalia for the last time. Somaliland did not find democracy (the only democracy in HOA) by a invasion. Puntland did not find peace through invasion. Neither will Somalia.
Invasion is the LAST thing anyone should think about doing with Somalia. The last time a invasion happened in Somalia with the Ethiopians it gave birth to African Al Qaeda! :roll:

Leave Somalia to Somalis and it's neighbors. Somaliland has been shirking it's duty to it's people and it should step up.

US is still funding TFG and popping up an unwanted "Government". How about stop that?
 
Last edited:
Democracy cannot be forced on Somalia for the last time. Somaliland did not find democracy (the only democracy in HOA) by a invasion. Puntland did not find peace through invasion. Neither will Somalia.

Leave Somalia to Somalis and it's neighbors. Somaliland has been shirking it's duty to it's people and it should step up.

US is still funding TFG and popping up an unwanted "Government". How about stop that?

Hi Laila, could you explain your comments for those of us not fully up-to-date with the situation in the HOA? I have a few questions from your post:
  • Puntland? I've never heard this name before. Which part of Somalia is this?
  • In what way has Somaliland (that's the northern-most provinces, no?) been shirking its duty?
  • TFG? What does that stand for and why have the US been funding it?
Thanks!
 
Why does no one not learn from history. I give up.

Democracy cannot be forced on Somalia for the last time. Somaliland did not find democracy (the only democracy in HOA) by a invasion. Puntland did not find peace through invasion. Neither will Somalia.
Invasion is the LAST thing anyone should think about doing with Somalia. The last time a invasion happened in Somalia with the Ethiopians it gave birth to African Al Qaeda! :roll:

Leave Somalia to Somalis and it's neighbors. Somaliland has been shirking it's duty to it's people and it should step up.

US is still funding TFG and popping up an unwanted "Government". How about stop that?



How about we put a few destroyers off the coast and kill any somali pirate who enters waters beyond the 12 mile coast?


Piracy is not the answer, especially when it ends in murder.
 
I cannot believe I missed this gem.
Oh hell to the ****ing no are you trying to imply US has had no hand in Somalia prior to Bush and Clinton.
Are you kidding me? You must be a representation of an average American with absolutely no knowledge of your countries own history in other countries.

Somalia was, in fact, viewed as a strategic Cold War asset, first for the Soviets who abandoned Somalia for Ethiopia, and then for the U.S.
 
TFG? What does that stand for and why have the US been funding it?

TFG = "Transitional Federal Government"

In reality, the TFG is little more than a fiction. It is not viewed as legitimate by Somalia's population. It lacks capacity to exercise jurisdiction. The former country is, in practice, without a functioning central government.
 
Last edited:
I cannot believe I missed this gem.
Oh hell to the ****ing no are you trying to imply US has had no hand in Somalia prior to Bush and Clinton.
Are you kidding me? You must be a representation of an average American with absolutely no knowledge of your countries own history in other countries.

HISTORY 101: SOMALIA
Gather round people and you may just learn something new today.

Pre Colonialism:

Long story short: Somalis had no borders. We dominated EA and we were established as a trading region and we had our own rule of law and qabils (clans)
Colonalism:

Britain, French and Italian all eventually played a role in HOA. It was the French who first established a colony in Somalia in the 1860’s. The British wished to protect their trade and so the French and British had an agreement and decided to share a piece of the land (The North region)

Italy got involved in 89 and established it’s colony down South and expanded and included areas in now Kenya and Ethiopia.

So now we have:
Djibouti = French Somalia
Somaliland = British Somalia
Somalia = Italian Somalia

Long story short: Many Qaabils fought back against imperialism but the land was divided between the three European powers. The British left Somaliland alone. Italy screwed about with Somalia and the French .... well, they are still there so not much has changed

During WW2. Italy used Somali soldiers in the South to try and invade British Somalia to get control of the ports and got repealed by the Somalis in the British Army and went on to take the land from Italy until the 50’s when it became a protectorate of Italy.

Independence:

British gave Somaliland it’s independence first as a reward and partly because of the de-colonisation Britain was going under anyway. Italian Somalia got their independence.
Somaliland and Somalia became united under the banner of Greater Somalia.

So far so good? Yes.

Due to colonialation and the border drawing which ran contrary to Somali historical land. Hostilities flared between Somalia and Ethiopia until peace was restored.
1969 President was assassinated. (God rest his soul, I do wonder where Somalia would be if he hadn’t been killed. Sigh)

The death of the President left General Siad Barre in power to fill the vacuum and he promptly dissolved the national assembly/banned all parties.

US supported Ethiopia so Somalia hosted Soviet Union and was strong allies. Even allowing it bases in Somalia to counteract US bases

Until one of the war of Ogaden where US funded Somalia and Soviet Union sided with Ethiopia and the war continued till there was a peace accord in 88 US/Barre had an alliance.
It funded hundreds of millions worth of arms to Somalia for the right to use the military facilities which the Soviets actually build.

Somalia’s strategic position meant these bases were used to support US intervention and interests in Middle East.

US looked the other way to what Siad Barre was doing to his people which included massive human rights violations as it was deemed unimportant to US as it had the bases and an “ally” in the Horn and continued flooding Somalia with weapons.
During the decade of support the United States and Italy gave to Barre. Tens of thousands of civilians were massacred at the hands of Barre's Army until the civil war erupted in 1978

Those in the region of what was formally known as British Somaliland and it’s clan leaders declared independence from Italian Somalia to escape the General’s oppression

To keep a hold Siad Barre used the weapons US gave to him to try and wipe out the qabils in the North by carpet bombing it and when the SNM (Somali National Movement = Part of British Somaliland) won and declared independence.

The General tried to divert attention from his failings by using the historical divisions between Somalis and played different Somali clans against each other which led to the chaos which triggered the intervention by the United States in 1992.

US came to “give” humanitarian assistance. But was seen by many as the primary reason why the General who killed so many of his own people stayed in power for so long.

Andd well, we all know what happened next. Black Hawk Down

The billions of dollars US funded to Somalia and arms fell into the hands of militia’s who divided themselves according to territory.

And from the militia’s death came the warlords which the US has been funding, who ironically were the same people who were killing US soldiers during the intervention
The warlords kept control of certain areas of the South until they too were overthrown by the people.

And so we come to the birth of the Islamic Union Courts in 2006.

The IUC with the support of the local people overthrew the US backed warlords who were as evil as the former Dictator but they were funded to try and fight the Islamists. They lost and the ISC came to power.

They quickly established law over the land. They implemented a slightly harsh Sharia law. But it did the impossible and Somalia had law and it had order for the first time since 1991. They banned guns and the drug khat which was a favourite amongst the Men

The IUC were dominated by moderates who prevented things like stoning but allowed Sharia and were in no way in league with Al Qaeda. The IUC was portrayed as Extreme Islamists who would become a haven for Al Qaeda which was completely false.

Somalia had law. It had peace and it was on it’s way to recovery.

US did not like the idea of Islamists (no matter how moderate) having a foothold in Horn of Africa and Bush with his paranoid, disgusting self added Somalia into the “war on terror and funded Ethiopia to invade Somalia and did airstrikes in Somalia. The invasion into Somalia was not greeted well. Especially as Somalia and Ethiopia have had a horrible history filled with distrust.
Somalia had turned from qabils against each other. To a wider context by including it in the war on terror.

US was seen as funding Christian Ethiopia against Muslim Somalia (and yes, I mentioned the religions because it did matter and play a role - this was around the time where US had also invaded two other Muslim countries in the ME and Bush was seen as just targeting Muslims)

The inevitable insurgency occurred. IUC was weakened fatally and from it’s ashes came Al Shabab. Al Qaeda’s ideological cousins.

It fought and with widespread support, repealed in 08/9 the foreigners from Somalia and now Al Shabab controls much of the South and has expressed support and admiration for Al Qaeda. Now Al Qaeda does have a foothold in Horn of Africa.
Al Shabab has bombed it's neighbors who are funding AU troops. Threatens to attack Uganda and Ethiopia and the North. Puntland and Somaliland.
It has also welcomed Non African fighters to Somalia. Mainly those from Pakistan and Middle East.


Disclaimer:
I have missed much out. Seriously
This is tailored towards US history in Somalia but if you do complain, I am more than happy to expand the above text to include colonial and Muslim intervention

So i was right then.
 
TFG = "Transitional Federal Government"

In reality, the TFG is little more than a fiction. It is not viewed as legitimate by Somalia's population. It lacks capacity to exercise jurisdiction. The former country is, in practice, without a functioning central government.

Thanks for the heads up. And has the US been funding this? And if so, why, if it is 'little more than a fiction'? Please don't think I'm making a point here. I genuinely do not know the answers to these questions. I know next to nothing about this issue.
 
Thanks for the heads up. And has the US been funding this? And if so, why, if it is 'little more than a fiction'? Please don't think I'm making a point here. I genuinely do not know the answers to these questions. I know next to nothing about this issue.

The TFG was established in Djibouti and later relocated to Somalia with the expectation that it would lead to a permanent national government. It was not elected by Somalia's people. Its composition does not fully represent the country's peoples and, not surprisingly, lacks popular support. It has little ability to exercise jurisdiction. It may be surviving mainly because the UN, African Union, and U.S. have been assisting it. Without such support, it is questionable whether it would survive, especially as it has yet to gain broad-based public support.

I used the term "fiction" to note that although there is a claim of a central government, that claim is little more than rhetoric. The absence of a public mandate, lack of jurisdictional capacity, and external origins of the entity are all serious defects. In practice, there remains no functioning central government in Somalia and the barriers toward overcoming that situation remain very formidable (regional bodies, autonomous regions, clan rivalries, etc.).
 
Last edited:
The TFG was established in Djibouti and later relocated to Somalia with the expectation that it would lead to a permanent national government. It was not elected by Somalia's people. Its composition does not fully represent the country's peoples and, not surprisingly, lacks popular support. It has little ability to exercise jurisdiction. It may be surviving mainly because the UN, African Union, and U.S. have been assisting it. Without such support, it is questionable whether it would survive, especially as it has yet to gain broad-based public support.

I used the term "fiction" to note that although there is a claim of a central government, that claim is little more than rhetoric. The absence of a public mandate, lack of jurisdictional capacity, and external origins of the entity are all serious defects. In practice, there remains no functioning central government in Somalia and the barriers toward overcoming that situation remain very formidable (regional bodies, autonomous regions, clan rivalries, etc.).

Okay, many thanks. That's helpful. When was this TNG established, and when relocated to Somalia?

Perhaps there comes a time when a 'country' can no longer maintain its claim to integrity and just has to disintegrate. I think I read some Economist articles in which Somaliland could maintain some degree of cohesion and was pushing for divorce from the more Islamic, Al-Shabaab-controlled south. Djibouti, Eritrea and now southern Sudan have all recognised the dis-integrity of their former nations and have set that aside and moved on. Isn't it likely that Somaliland and Somalia separate with the former pursuing liberal democracy and the latter an Islamic republic?
 
Hi Laila, could you explain your comments for those of us not fully up-to-date with the situation in the HOA? I have a few questions from your post:
  • Puntland? I've never heard this name before. Which part of Somalia is this?
  • In what way has Somaliland (that's the northern-most provinces, no?) been shirking its duty?
  • TFG? What does that stand for and why have the US been funding it?
Thanks!

Absolutely, it'd be my pleasure :)

Puntland is a region. North of Somalia. Neighbour to Somaliland.
Unlike Somaliland, it does not wish to get independence from Somalia. It wishes to become a federal State alongside Somalia. However recently, there has been disturbances in this previous status quo (it has withdrawn from TFG and refuses to recognize it's legitimacy and wishes to replace it)

somaliland-puntland-map-300x168.gif


The lined area between Somaliland and Puntland is disputed territory.

I'm from Somaliland and I myself am guilty of the criticism I am about to place on my people.
I think we have acted selfishly.
We separated ourselves completely from Somalia after the civil war understandably so considering the former dictator of Somalia tried to wipe us out but we are blaming the South in it's entirety for what happened with only his small sub clan

Somaliland has refused to take part or help any peace talks. I think that is unforgivable.
We have turned our back on our duties in the South and have used our grievances as a shield to not do anything and instead have turned to the West for Independence by showing we can be a democracy.
If anyone can bring peace to Somalia. It is the kin and neighbor next door, not outside forces.
The same methods that was used to bring peace to Somaliland. To reconcile the Qabils and build a democracy and through months of negotiations and peaceful resolution.
Somaliland can become the perfect neutral territory to host the talks and a key negotiator in decisions.
I want Somaliland to step up. Host peace conferences. Invite all the clan leaders, including factions of Al Shabab.
Sharia law will become the basis of any new Somalia. That is a given and have it written into the constitution.
The political model any new Somalia will I think be highly decentralized federalism to accommodate our rivalries.

Our neighbors all have their own agendas in regards to Somalia. They all have a vested interest in seeing Somalia weak. Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Kenya.
I have moved from wanting Somaliland to be recognized as Independent to opposing it. It is not in the interests of all Somalis. I was only thinking very selfishly about the best interests of Somalilanders.
Only Puntland and Somaliland can benefit from true peace and if Somaliland still wants it's independence. It can find it through negotiation with a Government of Somalia rather than asking UK or US to recognize us, which will never happen due to the political complexities in the region.

TFG = Transitional Federal Government.
Many of them are relics of the Dictatorship and Warlords. Those who are hated, unrepresentative and are protected by AU and UN Soldiers.
US has been funding it due to seeing it as a means to get a Government in Somalia.
They are made up of those from a certain Qabils who are hated and unrepresentative.
AU Soldiers in Somalia is seen as a occupation and invaders of Somali territory. Somalis do not like foreigners in Somalia. Even if they are African.
 
Last edited:
Isn't it likely that Somaliland and Somalia separate with the former pursuing liberal democracy and the latter an Islamic republic?

Somaliland is on the brink of war with Puntland. So I doubt we will be recognized any time soon if we fall into anarchy ourselves.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely, it'd be my pleasure :)

Puntland is a region. North of Somalia. Neighbour to Somaliland....
...AU Soldiers in Somalia is seen as a occupation and invaders of Somali territory. Somalis do not like foreigners in Somalia. Even if they are African.

Wow! Thank you for all that. I feel very ignorant and barely capabale of asking questions, never mind offering an opinion. Nevertheless I still have a few things I don't understand.
  • Why is Somaliland on the point of war with Puntland?
  • Why isn't the idea of separate states of Somaliland, Puntland and Somalia a reasonable solution? It appears that there are major political and cultural differences between the three. Why force them all into one nation when they might be more successful as 3, or at least a 2 successful ones out of 3?
  • Why do Somalis feel so negative towards the AU? Given that they have been so incapable of creatinf a functioning state themselves, why resent those trying to help them do so?
Sorry for the ignorance.
 
Wow! Thank you for all that. I feel very ignorant and barely capabale of asking questions, never mind offering an opinion. Nevertheless I still have a few things I don't understand.
  • Why is Somaliland on the point of war with Puntland?
  • Why isn't the idea of separate states of Somaliland, Puntland and Somalia a reasonable solution? It appears that there are major political and cultural differences between the three. Why force them all into one nation when they might be more successful as 3, or at least a 2 successful ones out of 3?
  • Why do Somalis feel so negative towards the AU? Given that they have been so incapable of creatinf a functioning state themselves, why resent those trying to help them do so?
Sorry for the ignorance.

I enjoy answering questions so don't apologize :)

Recall the "disputed territory" that I highlighted previously.
That is what the war will be about.

Okay. Let me start from the beginning, bare with me because it may get confusing.

Somaliland has a majority qabil (Isaaq). Puntland has a majority as well (Darood).
SSC (Sool Sanaag Cayn) is the disputed territory.

The colonials when they divided Somalia. Made the boundaries for Somaliland and Somalia and most of East Africa. In doing so, it included SSC with Somaliland.
SSC is made up of similar Qabil members (Darood) as that of Puntland and thus does not wish to become Independent from Somalia and instead there is a significant minority who wish to succeed from Somaliland and join Somalia.
So like most of Africa. There is a problem with boundaries. Somaliland refuses to change the colonial boundaries (which is forbidden according to the AU as it would lead to succession claims all across Africa who face similar issues)

That is the backstory.

Recently SSC separatists started attacking Somaliland forces (It began as two clans arguing over a piece of land ... amazing I know) and Somaliland has fought back. Puntland has threatened Somaliland that if it continues to spill any more blood of their "kin" they will get involved to defend their qabil. Somaliland is not backing down and neither is Puntland. I think it will escalate to a war

You don't understand us Somalis.
Give us the option and we will have 20 separate Somali States. One for every clan and sub clan will have it's own "country"
I find it both funny and highly depressing :(

Puntland could be successful and Somaliland separate.
But what happens to the land disputes? Which will come up.
Especially god forbid if we are cursed even more and discover oil and gas
But I pray Somalia has no natural resources (Even tho it is likely it has large quantities of oil, gas and gems). Oh gawd, imagine the civil war over natural resources. :shock:

Don't be fooled.
AU is not there for any altruistic motive. War is business to these African countries.
They get billions from US and the West and they do a half assesed job.
They have killed civilians in Somalia and the worst thing I fear is Ugandan Soldiers in Somalia.

Look at what they did to Congo years ago. UN has found them guilty of war crimes and even went so far to call it a genocide. The crimes includes gang raping and murdering Congolese women, spreading HIV. Hell there are documented cases of them breaking into houses and raping schoolgirls who were sleeping and you want me to welcome those monsters in Somalia? Why won't they do the same to Somali women? What stops them from committing those same crimes?
Never will I accept Non Somali Soldiers in Somalia. Never
 
Last edited:
I enjoy answering questions so don't apologize :)

Recall the "disputed territory" that I highlighted previously....
...Never will I accept Non Somali Soldiers in Somalia. Never

Thanks for that, Laila. Sincerely. I so hope that Somalis can discover a Somali solution.
 
Back
Top Bottom