How do we deal with Pirate attacks?

Whatever......Keep believing your own propoganda. The vaunted UIC got their bluff called and their butts handed to them by Ethiopia and then wonder of wonders called fror a Jihad and began getting aid from Non-Somali fighters.
 
I am done arguing with you 03USMC anyone one with any logic, reason, and intellect can understand my statements and understand my premise. You keep making diversions every time I disprove any of your points and punch holes in your statements. Please do some research, fact checking and keep an open mind instead of spewing your neo-con cliches and propaganda. Don't try to argue with me about a subject I know a great deal of more than you do, until you do some serious research and can come with ammo and firepower to back up your statements.
 
Or could it simply be that anyone one who doesn't heap praise upon and come to the realization that the UIC (A jihadist organization rooted in the biggest clan) is the answer. Then you don't care to hear from them?
 
I don't need you to agree with me, all I am saying is if you are going to make claims at least use logic, reason, and intellect to see what I am saying, understand it and come up with a fact based, intellectual, and propaganda-bias free rebuttal
 
United Somalia, I actually understand what you mean but lost territory is lost territory. Somalia is not alone in this aspect and instead of trying to grab more land, it's more important that you square away your own country first, then actually a lot of those folks in the "occupied" or "conquered" territories will try to find their way to join the rest of your country. Perhaps not the territory, but the people will in a way "come back" if you will.
If you try to take that territory from Ethiopia and expect them not to retaliate, you are badly mistaken.
There are regions in Manchuria which actually belonged to Korea but was sold out by one of the three Korean Kingdoms who negotiated it away in order to unify the country. No other party recognized such deal but it was simply accepted as reality because they knew if any action was taken to retake that land, the Chinese would come rolling in and destroy everything that the Koreans had. Life goes on. Nowadays, ethnic Koreans in those Chinese territories come to Korea to work (only to get discriminated against and go back to China but that's a different subject). That Kingdom in question is not regarded highly in Korean history not only for that action but for their general corruption and incompetence as well.
So in that sense, you are not alone.
This is what I see... let's say for the sake of argument the Islamic Courts was the ideal solution for Somalia. They came to power, stabilized things and then got their country involved in an unwinnable war right from the start. That's hardly smart policy.
Also, I don't think you can claim that they stopped all piracy. By the nature of those countries which are large and very difficult to police, it simply is impossible. Even Indonesia and Malaysia have far more effective governments than Somalia ever had and even they can't completely get rid of the piracy issue in their waters. Same goes to the Philippines too I guess.

EDIT: And yes, I don't have much doubt that they helped bring in many of these fanatical fighters to get rid of the Ethiopians, only to lose control of them and end up fighting them. Sounds like the typical story of Somalia really.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
United Somalia, I actually understand what you mean but lost territory is lost territory. Somalia is not alone in this aspect and instead of trying to grab more land, it's more important that you square away your own country first, then actually a lot of those folks in the "occupied" or "conquered" territories will try to find their way to join the rest of your country. Perhaps not the territory, but the people will in a way "come back" if you will.
If you try to take that territory from Ethiopia and expect them not to retaliate, you are badly mistaken.
There are regions in Manchuria which actually belonged to Korea but was sold out by one of the three Korean Kingdoms who negotiated it away in order to unify the country. No other party recognized such deal but it was simply accepted as reality because they knew if any action was taken to retake that land, the Chinese would come rolling in and destroy everything that the Koreans had. Life goes on. Nowadays, ethnic Koreans in those Chinese territories come to Korea to work (only to get discriminated against and go back to China but that's a different subject). That Kingdom in question is not regarded highly in Korean history not only for that action but for their general corruption and incompetence as well.
So in that sense, you are not alone.
This is what I see... let's say for the sake of argument the Islamic Courts was the ideal solution for Somalia. They came to power, stabilized things and then got their country involved in an unwinnable war right from the start. That's hardly smart policy.
Also, I don't think you can claim that they stopped all piracy. By the nature of those countries which are large and very difficult to police, it simply is impossible. Even Indonesia and Malaysia have far more effective governments than Somalia ever had and even they can't completely get rid of the piracy issue in their waters. Same goes to the Philippines too I guess.

EDIT: And yes, I don't have much doubt that they helped bring in many of these fanatical fighters to get rid of the Ethiopians, only to lose control of them and end up fighting them. Sounds like the typical story of Somalia really.
Click to expand...

redneck, I agree with you on the part of lost territory and how you should focus on cleaning up your country instead of focusing your attention on less relevant and non-pending issues. But I will say this also The Islamic Courts are not and will never be the best solution as far as government in the constitutional democratic sense but they have been the most effective at reigning in Somalia's many factions, warlords, and pirates; hence why I say let them clean up the problem in Somalia and stabilize it.

I will also say this the UIC never started a unwinnable war against neither Ethiopia nor America, they were the ones that were attacked. They were attacked because America feared they were extremists which is now proven wrong and Ethiopia wanted to make sure a dominant government doesn't rise again in Somalia due to our history of rivalry in East Africa. Ethiopia benefits from Somalia not having a strong central government they rather have Somalia remain defragmented; hence, why they invaded and overthrew the UIC. Ethiopia and Somalia have fought many major wars throughout their history and Ethiopia does not want a strong Somalia on the flank while they are locked in a stalemate with Eritrea to the North.

So UIC weren't overthrown because they attacked or started a unwinnable war but because US assumed they were extremist due to mainly and only their name Union of Islamic Courts and Ethiopia found an opportunity to stop a long time rival Somalia from rising again. The UIC never called on these "jihadists" they have so far refrained from showing any extremism and hosting any extremist entities.

The UIC were more effective than Phillipines and Indonesia because they used Sharia law and also used heavy handed tactics against the pirates, they arrested and destroyed all their shore bases and executed all those that resisted or had blood on their hands. If you don't believe me look up the statistics of the ship hijackings before the UIC were overthrown and you will see what I mean they, they destroyed the pirates through excessive force, fear, and threats of executions.
 
"If you don't believe me look up the statistics of the ship hijackings before the UIC were overthrown and you will see what I mean they, they destroyed the pirates through excessive force, fear, and threats of executions."

Sounds an awful lot like the Taliban doesn't it?
 
UnitedSomalia said:
If you don't believe me look up the statistics of the ship hijackings before the UIC were overthrown and you will see what I mean they, they destroyed the pirates through excessive force, fear, and threats of executions.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why this doesn't work now. I'm fairly sure getting shot in the head by SEALs is an equivalent outcome to getting killed by the neighborhood fundamentalists. Dead = dead, correct?

There are other aspects of Islamic law which are distasteful in modern society, for example, attitudes towards women. We don't follow Leviticus or Hammurabi's Code in our current justice systems and we're not reduced to anarchy. :roll:

Africa is unique in that it did not have the period of territorial wars that Europe, Asia, and the Americas went through in the past few centuries - colonization by said countries prevented that. I think we should ignore Africa completely (save, perhaps, the few countries that are doing reasonably well - South Africa, for example) and let them work things out on their own. Bloody civil war? Intercede? No. We all went through such things, and we have our own problems to worry about. If you attack our shipping, watch your back, but otherwise, leave us out of it. :-?
 
Actually c/Commander, it's not really the same as getting killed by SEALs. Because they kill in pretty God awful ways and sometimes let you live, but take half your arm off. Among others. I'm sure the family of the perpetrators will also face stiff penalties, something that isn't a factor in dealing with the US.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
"If you don't believe me look up the statistics of the ship hijackings before the UIC were overthrown and you will see what I mean they, they destroyed the pirates through excessive force, fear, and threats of executions."

Sounds an awful lot like the Taliban doesn't it?
Click to expand...

But they have not shown the extremism of the Taliban nor perpetrated the heinous acts the Taliban did. They only applied these tactics to the pirates and warlords not the civilians; hence, why the UIC is so popular amongst Somalis and supported by the average Somali on the street. Matter of fact the UIC came into existence due to the support and financing of the Somali civilians in Somalia and in the diaspora who were tired of the killing and destruction, they paid and raised a militia and hired former Somali army officers to lead it and picked Islamic Sheikhs to oversee them thus the UIC was born. Therefore, its nothing like the Taliban, it is a popular group raised by the Somali people themselves.
 
UnitedSomalia said:
Therefore, its nothing like the Taliban, it is a popular group raised by the Somali people themselves.
Click to expand...

What you've said makes it exactly like the Taliban, which originally came to power (if I understand the history correctly) based off of popular support for anybody who would put an end to certain factions of the Mujahideen, who were causing havoc and mayhem within the country.
 
c/Commander said:
What you've said makes it exactly like the Taliban, which originally came to power (if I understand the history correctly) based off of popular support for anybody who would put an end to certain factions of the Mujahideen, who were causing havoc and mayhem within the country.
Click to expand...

But the questions are:
1) Have they acted like the Taliban? NO!
2) Have the killed civilians indiscriminately? NO!
3) Have they supported extremism? No.
4) Have they hosted foreign extremists? NO!
5) Have they even resorted to extremism even after the were overthrown?NO!
6) Have they committed any terrorist act? NO!

But they have cooperated, they have joined the peace process, they have one of their own as the president now, and they are helping in the fight against extremist groups such as Al Shabab.

So tell me, how you arrived at the deduction that they are similar to the Taliban and that they are extremist? Except having a name that according to Western Media sounds scary such as Union of Islamic Courts.
 
UnitedSomalia said:
But the questions are:
1) Have they acted like the Taliban? NO!
2) Have the killed civilians indiscriminately? NO!
3) Have they supported extremism? No.
4) Have they hosted foreign extremists? NO!
5) Have they even resorted to extremism even after the were overthrown?NO!
6) Have they committed any terrorist act? NO!

But they have cooperated, they have joined the peace process, they have one of their own as the president now, and they are helping in the fight against extremist groups such as Al Shabab.

So tell me, how you arrived at the deduction that they are similar to the Taliban and that they are extremist? Except having a name that according to Western Media sounds scary such as Union of Islamic Courts.
Click to expand...

1.) Yes, and I just gave you an example. "Acted like the Taliban" is very vague anyway.
2.) Perhaps not, but they were only in power as such for around six months (I'm not talking about being a major influence, I mean the period when there was a real government).
3.) Yes. There are reports of the courts punishing people for the types of music they listen to and movies they watch.
4.) Yes. There are further reports of aid given to the UIC from entities such as Hezbollah. There have also been instances where the UIC has sent support (in the form of personnel) to Hezbollah as a means of support.
5.) Yes. There have been reports of suicide bombings (rare, but reported nonetheless) by the UIC. Since this is somewhat of a rare strategy among African Muslims, the theory is that they were carried out by foreign extremist groups in support of the UIC.
6.) See above.

Extremist groups fight amongst themselves all the time. The fact that they are fighting Al Shabab does not mean that they are not themselves extremists. I am willing to believe that they are not, in fact, extremists. However, you'll forgive me if their record (and history with other conflicts) is against them.
 
Who cares what they have or have not done inside the borders of Somalia?
The moment armed men set out to sea, sink them.
No if,s or but,s about it, they are not armed for selfdefence against fish..

I have mates who are currently in harms way hunting pirates.
They could be put to better use somewhere else.
Thus solve the piracy issue once and for all and move out and draw fire.
A show of force are only effective when that part are backed up by the will to use it.
 
c/Commander said:
1.) Yes, and I just gave you an example. "Acted like the Taliban" is very vague anyway.
2.) Perhaps not, but they were only in power as such for around six months (I'm not talking about being a major influence, I mean the period when there was a real government).
3.) Yes. There are reports of the courts punishing people for the types of music they listen to and movies they watch.
4.) Yes. There are further reports of aid given to the UIC from entities such as Hezbollah. There have also been instances where the UIC has sent support (in the form of personnel) to Hezbollah as a means of support.
5.) Yes. There have been reports of suicide bombings (rare, but reported nonetheless) by the UIC. Since this is somewhat of a rare strategy among African Muslims, the theory is that they were carried out by foreign extremist groups in support of the UIC.
6.) See above.

Extremist groups fight amongst themselves all the time. The fact that they are fighting Al Shabab does not mean that they are not themselves extremists. I am willing to believe that they are not, in fact, extremists. However, you'll forgive me if their record (and history with other conflicts) is against them.
Click to expand...

I don't like UIC, matter of fact I think they will be a bad choice as a form of government in the long run, they are not a constitutional democracy, I favor having a constitutional democracy if we could but all I am saying is give credit where its due instead of just aiming to throw dirt at anything that sounds Islamic. So my point is if they are the only hope of stabilizing Somalia right now we should have let them do it, I know its not the best choice but you make do with what you got and all we got in the form of effective control against the pirates and warlords is the UIC

1) Well it maybe very vague but if you are going to make a comparison at least have your facts together.
2) Elaborate on your number 2 statement
3) Yes punishing people which is why I said we should not have them as a form of government in the long run, but I also said they never indiscriminately killed civilians or executed them. The harsh tactics I spoke were used against those that were warlords and pirates.
4) Show me this prove that Hezbollah gave aid to the UIC, I have heard of those rumors, and they were discredited the moment they came out. First of all Hezbollah never sent trainers or weapons to UIC, they have no relations with the UIC the State department, UN and the EU commissioner who visited the UIC disproved that theory. The UIC has sent no personel to fight for Hezbollah, their were never any casualties reported and never any Somali fighters seen anywhere in Lebanon, this again is another false rumor with no basis in facts that was spread by entities with an agenda.
5) These few car bombings in Somalia you speak of were the works of Al Shabab who I have said early though Somali doesn't adhere to the Somali traditions of Sunni Muslim and instead follow the teachings of the Saudi form of Sunni which is the Wahhabism.
 
Don't put armed men in power if you don't want them to stay there. They won't give it up, and you'll end up with another civil war.
 
You are right c/Commander, but we have no alternative even though I don't like the UIC, I feel they are the best chance we have of getting rid of these pirates and warlords and stabilize Somalia. So in desperate times call for desperate measures and you make do with what you have and that is the UIC to do the clean up job and once they finish then we can come to terms with them about elections and a unity government.
 
Has any other faction with a more democratic base come forward and offered to help against the pirates? This would, as you said, be a better alternative.
 
No because no other more democratic group has the military capability, the fighters and the financial support the UIC has. And also many of the groups either work with the warlords themselves or the pirates and are basically freelancing their muscle to whichever group will pay the most to them for protection so they are basically mercenaries and don't care about Somalia stabilizing because they see the instability as the life line they thrive on and profit from.

Also one of the major problems in Somalia as was in Iraq is that when the Somali National Army disintegrated many former Soviet-British-Italian and in some case even American and Chinese trained Somali officers and soldiers became mercenaries and offered their expertise and allegiances to any warlord groups or pirates that would pay them the highest price, they see no point in joining the new army that the Transitional government is creating because the Transitional government can't even offered to pay them a regular paycheck let a lone match what these warlords and pirates are offering them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top