[StethyEntinic]

Militairy invasion, obviously.

[tLO0hFNy]

What to do.. difficult question. I don't consider Somalia a terrorist country even though it has terrorists. It has far bigger problems than that domestically.

Clans. That's one.

But will it stop? I don't think it will stop on its own. Military intervention, well, it would require huge commitments. The place needs to be taken over and the clan system needs to be demolished. Sounds like a tough thing to do, chances for success are slim to none.

We'll see how it goes in 200 years. Maybe things have changed. I doubt it.

[dremucha]

Originally posted by Lancer
Terrorist training ground, possible hiding place of Bin Laden, run by gangs on a good day, extremeist moslems on a bad one. What to do? Start by renting "Blackhawk Down." Repeat.

[xesvideo]

For now: Nothing.

Our last best chance was supporting the anti-al-Qaeda locals. We tried that. But they lost.

If we now go in militarily, we'd get our heads handed to us. The area is just too anti-U.S.

Reminder:
Following the 9/11 attacks, I pointed out that the War on Terror would be decided on how that war was perceived by the world, especially by the Islamic world. If the war is seen (as it truly is) as religious fanatics vs. civilization, we'll win in a walk. But if bin Laden is successful in portraying it as Islam vs. Christian, then we'd end up in an endless, bloody stalemate.

The Grand Diverstion:
Bin Ladin's side got its biggest boost when Bush took his eye off of al Qaeda and attacked Iraq, a nation which, up until then, had been an enemy of al Qaeda (even tho Iraq was providing financial support to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers). Now, U.S. troops are almost universally referred to in the Arab nations as "The Occupiers." And the specter of an Islam vs. Christian war looms.

We need to walk the tightrope of (a) withdrawing our combat troops out of Iraq as quickly as possible while (b) not permitted the duly elected government of Iraq to fall. This is one nasty balancing act, but not impossible.

Although al-Qaeda has now established itself in Iraq, and has some allies who want to both (a) drive the U.S. out of Iraq and (b) attack the U.S., most of the insurgents fall into three other groups whose main focus is on driving the U.S. out.

Some are Baathists who want to return to the old regime. Some are Shitte nationalists, who want the U.S. out so they can establish a fundamentalist state a la Iran. And some are Iraqi nationalists, who just want the U.S. out.

So...once U.S. combat troops are out, these last three groups will have no further interest in the U.S. Because the current Iraqi govenment represents Iraqis, and the majority of Iraqis are Shitte, the Iraqi nationalists and the Shitte nationalists will find the current Iraqi govenment to be an attractive alternative to civil war.

This will lead to a final showdown between government forces on one side and Baathists and al-Qaeda on the other. This war could well be winnable.

Then Somilia:
Only after we establish our bona fides in Iraq, by withdrawing with no oil grants to ourselves and without leaving a puppet regime, will we regain the credibility to lead a war of civilization against religious fanatics.

That's when we can start making headway in Somolia. This is a "war" we can win using blue jeans, rock & roll, MP3 players, Hollywood movies and the internet. It's a war we can win using freedom and prosperity as lures because al-Qaeda's bloodsoaked manifesto is one of hatred and poverty.

[ToifvT5S]

Originally posted by techumseh


Start by renting "Blackhawk Down." Repeat. wasn't that a jingoistic pro war movie? I never saw it but I'm surprised to see someone such as yourself advocating watching it.

[Nypbscao]

Actually, cultural war will be one way I figure.. yeah,, that's not a bad idea.

Big Boobs, BBQ, fart humour, beer, strippers, drooling over new technology and actually USING IT, entertainment.. of course our cultures are superior.

Everybody likes IPods. Or what, no one likes music? This si trivial, they want the same things, except for extremists, who want to be spanked by dominatrixes.

[bubbachew14]

Originally posted by Geronimo


wasn't that a jingoistic pro war movie? I never saw it but I'm surprised to see someone such as yourself advocating watching it. On the contrary, it was one of the better anti-war movies in recent years. A real cautionary tale, all the moreso for being a true story.

[sam]

anti-war movie? Wow, I didn't see it like that at all. However, I did like the movie, and it had great action. But anti-war movie? That's not how I saw it.

But I'd say worth seeing.....

All I need is a chopper and I'd be all over solving this somolia problem. GET SOME! GET SOME!!!

[Agitoligflise]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
But is Iraqi Nationalists + Shiite religious extremists winning really a victory as far as we're concerned? We'd probably be much better off with the Baathists in power. Sorry, I don't see those vermin being given power again. For better or worse, we've let the djinnie of democracy out of the bottle, and we're not gonna get it back in.

I've alway viewed Iraq as the Grand Diversion. Our real target is al Qaeda. If we can get our troops out of Iraq while leaving the fledgling democracy strong enough to defeat the carrion birds that surround her, that'll be victory enough there for me.

Then we can concentrate on the real victory: Going after the murderous scum who attacked us on 9/11.

[astonmartinrx371]

Isnt Burma quite bad too? I mean for many decades

Or the facty they are a vassal state of China keeps the west from messing there?

Vietnam did a great thing by getting rid of Pol Pot.

[DoterrFor]

Originally posted by Pekka
anti-war movie? Wow, I didn't see it like that at all. However, I did like the movie, and it had great action. But anti-war movie? That's not how I saw it.

But I'd say worth seeing.....
Well, it's not a traditional anti-war movie, I guess. It's the true story of an unauthorized raid against a Mogadishu warlord that went wrong. It stirred up a hornet's nest, demonstrated how violently anti-American the population really was, and led to the US retreat from the country. It was released just before the American invasion of Iraq and I suspect it was intended to be a warning to the American people about Bush's policy.

[wiweimeli]

Ethiopia couldn't sustain a war like that

[Giselle]

I don't really see why the Islamist militias would want to threaten Ethiopia. And even if they wanted to,it wouldn't happen anytime soon, since the Islamists have quite a bit of work on their hands, what with the countryside being held by plenty of warlords and all that.

Should the Islamists want to become aggressive, they'll consolidate their power before it happens anyway.

[77Dinaartickire]

Black Hawk Down could be viewed as jingoistic because for every yank like a hundred Somalis gets killed, and because all they do is portrayed is essentially positive, for a just cause, and because not much consideration is given to the other side's POV. OTOH, the troops involved were infinitely better organized, equipped and trained than the ragtag militias, and they were on a peacekeeping mission. They way I saw it was that of a bunch of soldiers trapped in a hopelessly desperate situation.

But back on-topic: Haven't we gone through this before? Several years ago Somalia was already branded as a terrorist's hotbed, until some serious research was done into it which found most allegations were baseless. Most of rumours originated out of attempts of some warlords to obtain foreign support to strengthen their position. The US would be real wise to be careful. The real risk IMO is that of a self-fulfulling prophecy, in which foreign parties get themselves involved in Somalia, causing other parties to get themselves involved as well, to the detriment of Somalia itself.

[nofkayalk]

I may have misinterpreted the movie, but it seemed to me to be a warning. I didn't know the US military had a veto over it's contents, or that others had seen it as pro-US. I thought that since the US got a bloody nose from an ill-advised military action and had to pull out of the country as a result was the point.

@Geronimo, it was unauthorized by higher authorities. The US was there at the UN's request to oversee the distribution of food aid. The local commander on the ground decided on his own authority to organize a raid to capture a local warlord.

@Darius871, BHD was released on January 18, 2002, the US attacked Iraq in March of 2003, so the movie was released a year and a bit before.

[LINETFAD]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
WHy not just blockade and isolate Somalia until it collapses? . It already has....years ago.

[RastusuadegeFrimoum]

Originally posted by techumseh
BHD was released on January 18, 2002, the US attacked Iraq in March of 2003, so the movie was released a year and a bit before. It premiered in the US one month earlier, and I'm pretty sure it was filmed before 9/11.

[DownloadMan]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
This is a "war" we can win using blue jeans, rock & roll, MP3 players, Hollywood movies and the internet. It's a war we can win using freedom and prosperity as lures because al-Qaeda's bloodsoaked manifesto is one of hatred and poverty. Lap dances,beer, and so on did little to affect another certain group right here in the US.

But more to the point, the mullahs/imams/what have you control a great deal. If their "milita" kills people who have such articles, they won't make all that much headway.

[furillo]

[lapyignipinge]

BHD was our attack, not theirs. We were trying to capture a warlord.