Political Crossfire Forums

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

Quote: "Most Somalis will tell you that they prefer small effective government. Because we have seen what a strong central government can do".
~anonymous Somalian

Americans know all too well, what a "strong central government can do".

If Somalia begins to succeed it's way through this, then the U.S., UN, or EU will more than likely do their best to (destroy) it. Terrorist phantoms perhaps. I see this as the number one excuse, for foreign intervention. If they want to give (aid) to Somalia, they can do it without an invasion, and (zero) strings attached.

If people begin to see Somalia succeeding (without) a centralized government, well, they might just begin to second guess the role of their government in their lives.

As it stands now, many here, already are.

It will get (worse) before it gets better, and they should be allowed to succeed, no matter how long it takes. Something such as this, will not come easy, and much sacrifice will be necessary in the beginning.

If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first. I say "invade", because it (will) be an invasion, an installed system of (rule), and nothing more. I don't care what excuses are given, that's reality.

Quote: That which governs best, governs least. The traditional American philosophy teaches that decentralization of governmental power, to the maximum practicable extent, is essential to the security of Man's God-given, unalienable rights.
~Thomas Jefferson

Raydardy · Joined: 04 Nov 2005 Posts: 336 Location: Los Angeles

EugenicHegemony wrote:
If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first.

And if Somalia succeeds, you heard it HERE first.

Somalia proper (not Puntland or Somaliland) has been without a government for 14 years. During that time, they've developed the most sophisticated cellular and Internet networks on the continent. People from all over the area go to Somalia to take advantage of their tax-free market. Warlords are slowly losing their grip on power as private citizens and businesses opt more and more for private security. The warlords are getting desperate, evidenced by their most recent (13th) attempt to institute a central government.

They're not doing too shabby as far as African countries go, especially considering they were at the very bottom of the heap while Siad Barre ran the place. You certainly won't see any planned famines or orchestrated massacres while they have no government.

The one element working against Somalia's growth is the fact the old regime owed the IMF and the World Bank billions of dollars. They still plan to collect on this, giving them a perverse incentive to aid the warlords in their centralization efforts.

If Somalia can keep from instituting a government, they'll be running Africa within two decades.

Nico · Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 9862

EugenicHegemony wrote:
If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first. I say "invade", because it (will) be an invasion, an installed system of (rule), and nothing more. I don't care what excuses are given, that's reality.

Before any nation invades any other, they would have to see a cost/ benefit payoff in doing so. Where would there be one in going into Somalia?

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

Nico wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote:
If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first. I say "invade", because it (will) be an invasion, an installed system of (rule), and nothing more. I don't care what excuses are given, that's reality.

Before any nation invades any other, they would have to see a cost/ benefit payoff in doing so. Where would there be one in going into Somalia?

Did ya miss this?

Quote: If people begin to see Somalia succeeding (without) a centralized government, well, they might just begin to second guess the role of their government in their lives.

Good post Raydardy. When I said "you heard it here first", I was referring to terrorist phantoms materializing, and becoming a threat in Somalia. Of course, it would be complete bullshyt. I just found that site yesterday, and spoke about this exact topic. Bullshyt, such as this...
http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/BG1526.cfm

Raydardy wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote:
If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first.

And if Somalia succeeds, you heard it HERE first.

Somalia proper (not Puntland or Somaliland) has been without a government for 14 years. During that time, they've developed the most sophisticated cellular and Internet networks on the continent. People from all over the area go to Somalia to take advantage of their tax-free market. Warlords are slowly losing their grip on power as private citizens and businesses opt more and more for private security. The warlords are getting desperate, evidenced by their most recent (13th) attempt to institute a central government.

They're not doing too shabby as far as African countries go, especially considering they were at the very bottom of the heap while Siad Barre ran the place. You certainly won't see any planned famines or orchestrated massacres while they have no government.

The one element working against Somalia's growth is the fact the old regime owed the IMF and the World Bank billions of dollars. They still plan to collect on this, giving them a perverse incentive to aid the warlords in their centralization efforts.

If Somalia can keep from instituting a government, they'll be running Africa within two decades.

Quote: The one element working against Somalia's growth is the fact the old regime owed the IMF and the World Bank billions of dollars. They still plan to collect on this, giving them a perverse incentive to aid the warlords in their centralization efforts.

That pisses me off. FuKc the IMF, and international murdering banking cartels, and FuKc this traitorous government for prostituting out our enlisted kids, for them. I love fractionary banking. :twisted:

Let's end off on a positive note. :wink:

Quote: Somalia proper (not Puntland or Somaliland) has been without a government for 14 years. During that time, they've developed the most sophisticated cellular and Internet networks on the continent. People from all over the area go to Somalia to take advantage of their tax-free market. Warlords are slowly losing their grip on power as private citizens and businesses opt more and more for private security. The warlords are getting desperate, evidenced by their most recent (13th) attempt to institute a central government.

They're not doing too shabby as far as African countries go, especially considering they were at the very bottom of the heap while Siad Barre ran the place. You certainly won't see any planned famines or orchestrated massacres while they have no government.

If Somalia can keep from instituting a government, they'll be running Africa within two decades.

Nico · Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 9862

EugenicHegemony wrote: Nico wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote:
If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first. I say "invade", because it (will) be an invasion, an installed system of (rule), and nothing more. I don't care what excuses are given, that's reality.

Before any nation invades any other, they would have to see a cost/ benefit payoff in doing so. Where would there be one in going into Somalia?

Did ya miss this?

Quote: If people begin to see Somalia succeeding (without) a centralized government, well, they might just begin to second guess the role of their government in their lives.

It's an interesting propopsition but I can't see a country being invaded for something that ethereal when there are major troop commitments in other countries. If you were to throw in financial incentives or strategic positioning incentives it would be more appealing for an outside interest IMO.
Somalia also has the 'vietnam' aura. Somewhere where things go worse than expected for newcomers.
I'm not writing off the posibility of foreign power interest in Somalia, but I can't see the rewards being that great for going there, and now would seem a bad time.

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

Nico wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote: Nico wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote:
If the U.S. government, UN, or EU invade, you heard it here first. I say "invade", because it (will) be an invasion, an installed system of (rule), and nothing more. I don't care what excuses are given, that's reality.

Before any nation invades any other, they would have to see a cost/ benefit payoff in doing so. Where would there be one in going into Somalia?

Did ya miss this?

Quote: If people begin to see Somalia succeeding (without) a centralized government, well, they might just begin to second guess the role of their government in their lives.

It's an interesting propopsition but I can't see a country being invaded for something that ethereal when there are major troop commitments in other countries. If you were to throw in financial incentives or strategic positioning incentives it would be more appealing for an outside interest IMO.
Somalia also has the 'vietnam' aura. Somewhere where things go worse than expected for newcomers.
I'm not writing off the posibility of foreign power interest in Somalia, but I can't see the rewards being that great for going there, and now would seem a bad time.

I'm not going to bother drawing conclusions to vietnam. If the blatant all out imperialism starts again, then you can draw that conclusion. This traitorous government, have their hands busy with Central Asia, and the Middle East, as far as imperialism goes. If anything, the "war lords" will be doing their bidding.

I'm a realist, my friend. I know exactly how they work, and I just want to draw as much attention to it, before these relativist's start their lie machine. It's already begun.

Bullshyt, such as this...
http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/BG1526.cfm

Did you miss the part about the warlords trying to enforce a centralized government? The U.S government are the biggest "war lords" around. Or are they just another tool? I happen to love the fact, they profess a "war on drugs", and they in fact, drug lords. I love the way they want to fight a "war on terror", when they are in fact, the bringer's of said terror. I'm not going to debate this as I know what's going on, and am well aware of our collective situation.

bob.appleyard · Joined: 15 Oct 2005 Posts: 7403 Location: Manchestar, innit

The threat of a good example remains. Isn't there a gov't in waiting in Kenya, though (like that means anything, if they can't get into Mogadishu)?

It doesn't sound like there's any particular economic interest in Somalia from outside Africa, so it's unlikely that this lack of central control would be seen as much of a threat, but if some kind of successful order comes out of the region, the great powers will come sniffing again.

Somalia has been the subject of many imperial adventures, what we are seeing now is the recovery from the fallout of the last one. No reason to suppose there won't be others.

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

bob.appleyard wrote: The threat of a good example remains. Isn't there a gov't in waiting in Kenya, though (like that means anything, if they can't get into Mogadishu)?

It doesn't sound like there's any particular economic interest in Somalia from outside Africa, so it's unlikely that this lack of central control would be seen as much of a threat, but if some kind of successful order comes out of the region, the great powers will come sniffing again.

Somalia has been the subject of many imperial adventures, what we are seeing now is the recovery from the fallout of the last one. No reason to suppose there won't be others.

Quote: if some kind of successful order comes out of the region, the great powers will come sniffing again.

Exactly

They're already planting the seed of terrorist lies. Who knows?

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

Quote: Isn't there a gov't in waiting in Kenya, though (like that means anything, if they can't get into Mogadishu)?

The BBC has been cheering them on.....

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

Quote: The lawlessness of Somalia has attracted an al-Qa'ida presence. Their numbers, and the threat they pose, are hotly disputed. But the United States has taken advantage of the anarchy here to abduct, and sometimes even assassinate, those it suspects of terrorism.
Source:SBS-Australia

I knew these pieces of sh!t would do this. Glad I made a thread on this. We need to nip this in the bud.

The U.S. government are the real terrorists, and I have always known this.

Bullsh!t terrorist phantoms will be the way they take Somalia. This government of ours will not allow a Decentralized system to succeed. They must be exposed for the terrorists they are. Somalia must be able to succeed on it's own.

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

jeremy wrote:
"he talks about the evil warlords, never mind that they're financed by the US".

Correction: Financed by the U.S. governmental corporatist's. Not by the American populace or the civilian's in this country as a whole.

The Good Doctor · Joined: 07 Jan 2006 Posts: 342

All Horn of Africa countries are starving. In light of this, Somalia's actually doing REALLY well.

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

The Good Doctor wrote: All Horn of Africa countries are starving. In light of this, Somalia's actually doing REALLY well.

Yes, that's true.

The_Right_Honourable · Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 682 Location: UK (mostly)

EugenicHegemony wrote: Quote: The lawlessness of Somalia has attracted an al-Qa'ida presence. Their numbers, and the threat they pose, are hotly disputed. But the United States has taken advantage of the anarchy here to abduct, and sometimes even assassinate, those it suspects of terrorism.
Source:SBS-Australia

I knew these pieces of sh!t would do this. Glad I made a thread on this. We need to nip this in the bud.

The U.S. government are the real terrorists, and I have always known this.

Bullsh!t terrorist phantoms will be the way they take Somalia. This government of ours will not allow a Decentralized system to succeed. They must be exposed for the terrorists they are. Somalia must be able to succeed on it's own.

Do you live in a fantasy world? The US has done some awful things. Murdering civilians in Korea and Vietnam. Funding and supporting terrorists in Nicuagua and Afghanistan. But it has always tried to do GOOD! The US just doesnt understand the outside world, you dont seem to understand America. And thats just as dangerous.

You need some centralised government. An army, police force, health service, transport, law. But powerful and effective local gov is vital.

They have that in the US you know? Those 'state' thingies.

And you call yourself a realist? Jesus fookin Christ!

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

The_Right_Honourable wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote: Quote: The lawlessness of Somalia has attracted an al-Qa'ida presence. Their numbers, and the threat they pose, are hotly disputed. But the United States has taken advantage of the anarchy here to abduct, and sometimes even assassinate, those it suspects of terrorism.
Source:SBS-Australia

I knew these pieces of sh!t would do this. Glad I made a thread on this. We need to nip this in the bud.

The U.S. government are the real terrorists, and I have always known this.

Bullsh!t terrorist phantoms will be the way they take Somalia. This government of ours will not allow a Decentralized system to succeed. They must be exposed for the terrorists they are. Somalia must be able to succeed on it's own.

Do you live in a fantasy world? The US has done some awful things. Murdering civilians in Korea and Vietnam. Funding and supporting terrorists in Nicuagua and Afghanistan. But it has always tried to do GOOD! The US just doesnt understand the outside world, you dont seem to understand America. And thats just as dangerous.

You need some centralised government. An army, police force, health service, transport, law. But powerful and effective local gov is vital.

They have that in the US you know? Those 'state' thingies.

And you call yourself a realist? Jesus fookin Christ! You don't try to do good; you either do it or you don't. Funding, and actually being War Lords, ain't good.

I like your: because I say so stance.

See ya

The Good Doctor · Joined: 07 Jan 2006 Posts: 342

It's a popular myth that order, prosperity, and a free market require a central government. Somalia's success has disproven this myth. Unfortunately, the international community has not been paying attention. They'll pay closer attention when Somalia, the first 21st century nation, proves to be just as much an international trendsetter as the US was 200 years ago.

The_Right_Honourable · Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 682 Location: UK (mostly)

EugenicHegemony wrote: The_Right_Honourable wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote: Quote: The lawlessness of Somalia has attracted an al-Qa'ida presence. Their numbers, and the threat they pose, are hotly disputed. But the United States has taken advantage of the anarchy here to abduct, and sometimes even assassinate, those it suspects of terrorism.
Source:SBS-Australia

I knew these pieces of sh!t would do this. Glad I made a thread on this. We need to nip this in the bud.

The U.S. government are the real terrorists, and I have always known this.

Bullsh!t terrorist phantoms will be the way they take Somalia. This government of ours will not allow a Decentralized system to succeed. They must be exposed for the terrorists they are. Somalia must be able to succeed on it's own.

Do you live in a fantasy world? The US has done some awful things. Murdering civilians in Korea and Vietnam. Funding and supporting terrorists in Nicuagua and Afghanistan. But it has always tried to do GOOD! The US just doesnt understand the outside world, you dont seem to understand America. And thats just as dangerous.

You need some centralised government. An army, police force, health service, transport, law. But powerful and effective local gov is vital.

They have that in the US you know? Those 'state' thingies.

And you call yourself a realist? Jesus fookin Christ! You don't try to do good; you either do it or you don't. Funding, and actually being War Lords, ain't good.

I like your: because I say so stance.

See ya

Thats rubbish. People make mistakes. If you really believe that America doesnt make mistakes you a fool. Look at Bush!

War Lords are bad? What the hell are you talking about? But you have to deal with the 'reality' of the situation, if they are in power you deal with them!

Because i say so? What are you talking about. I stated 'facts', if you want to ignore them. Fine.

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

The_Right_Honourable wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote: The_Right_Honourable wrote: EugenicHegemony wrote: Quote: The lawlessness of Somalia has attracted an al-Qa'ida presence. Their numbers, and the threat they pose, are hotly disputed. But the United States has taken advantage of the anarchy here to abduct, and sometimes even assassinate, those it suspects of terrorism.
Source:SBS-Australia

I knew these pieces of sh!t would do this. Glad I made a thread on this. We need to nip this in the bud.

The U.S. government are the real terrorists, and I have always known this.

Bullsh!t terrorist phantoms will be the way they take Somalia. This government of ours will not allow a Decentralized system to succeed. They must be exposed for the terrorists they are. Somalia must be able to succeed on it's own.

Do you live in a fantasy world? The US has done some awful things. Murdering civilians in Korea and Vietnam. Funding and supporting terrorists in Nicuagua and Afghanistan. But it has always tried to do GOOD! The US just doesnt understand the outside world, you dont seem to understand America. And thats just as dangerous.

You need some centralised government. An army, police force, health service, transport, law. But powerful and effective local gov is vital.

They have that in the US you know? Those 'state' thingies.

And you call yourself a realist? Jesus fookin Christ! You don't try to do good; you either do it or you don't. Funding, and actually being War Lords, ain't good.

I like your: because I say so stance.

See ya

1---Thats rubbish. People make mistakes. If you really believe that America doesnt make mistakes you a fool. Look at Bush!

2---War Lords are bad? What the hell are you talking about? But you have to deal with the 'reality' of the situation, if they are in power you deal with them!

3---Because i say so? What are you talking about. I stated 'facts', if you want to ignore them. Fine.

1) It's not a mistake when it's deliberate and intentional.

2) First of all, the U.S. government are War Lords. When you say "deal with them": If you mean kill them or remove them from power, then you're right. It's not the job of the U.S. government to do that or intervene in any way. It's also absurd for the U.S. government to support foreign War Lords in any way. It just so happens to be U.S. governmental policy to work with: terrorists; guerrillas; war lords; dictators, and anyone else who's friendly to their longterm or current interests.

3) You've stated no fact, and only your opinion. Central government is not necessary, and that is no opinion. Somalia is succeeding and will do so as long as your terrorist government and their allies stay the hell away from it.

The Good Doctor wrote: It's a popular myth that order, prosperity, and a free market require a central government. Somalia's success has disproven this myth. Unfortunately, the international community has not been paying attention. They'll pay closer attention when Somalia, the first 21st century nation, proves to be just as much an international trendsetter as the US was 200 years ago.

Look at the early Pennsylvanian colony as they lasted, and were successful for 4 years straight.

23KIA · Joined: 19 Feb 2006 Posts: 56 Location: Right Behind You

It will be tough for any country such as Somalia to succeed with the oppresive debt hanging over it. Add to this the humanitarian crisis developing due to issues such as HIV and poor food distribution and they are faced with a serious fight.

EugenicHegemony · Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 4658

23KIA wrote: It will be tough for any country such as Somalia to succeed with the oppresive debt hanging over it. Add to this the humanitarian crisis developing due to issues such as HIV and poor food distribution and they are faced with a serious fight.

Why did you choose 'no'? A struggle = failure?

There's almost a million people in the U.S. with HIV and only around 40,000 in Somalia who have it.

It would be doing much better if the U.S. government, and their allies weren't funding and aiding the War Lords in that region. Somalia will still succeed nonetheless And you're right, the IMF are terrorist scum....