There are no facts that prove or disprove the case for international intervention. It is a matter of opinion. I will offer this for you to chew on S... when Nato intervened in Bosnia the muslims cried foul for not helping quick enough... when we intervened in Somalia muslims cry foul for helping... when we intervened in Iraq people whinged about us being too aggressive and not waiting... when we intervened in WWII people whinged we were isolationists for waiting too long... when we intervened in Haiti human rights activists bitched about going in... when we didn't intervene in Rwanda human rights groups bitched about us not going in...

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The litmus test for me on the question of international intervention is this, "If it was me, if it was my family that was on the receiving end of the bad happening in country X would I want someone to help?" The answer to that question is the answer for me... all the statistics, facts, world opinion or political correctness be damned.

Bulldogg let say this to you, you some how totally missed my point here.

I never said America shouldn't participate in peacekeeping missions which the operations in Haiti, Somalia, and Bosnia fall under. These peacekeeping missions are sanctioned by the UN and were humanitarian missions to stop warring parties from killing each other and the civilians.

NOW listend to this.... The war in Iraq was never sanctioned by the UN and was not a peacekeeping mission, most of the world's nations were telling us to not do it even some of our closest allies. We were not their to stop warring parties but to remove a legitimate government.

Before you guys jump on my back about the rights and wrongs of Saddam's regime u must know this, no matter how he was seen by ppl some as evil and some as hero, u must accept his regime as the UN recognized one even though he was dictatorship he was the legitimate government of Iraq and the UN told us dont go in their but we forcefully went in.

Now we must not disillusion ourselves in the difference between peacekeeping and unilaterally forceful occupation. Countries such as switzerland, Canada, Italy, Austria and Australia amongst many others do participate in peacekeeping missions but what I am arguing against is the unilaterally forced occupation of a sovereign nations.

What you didnt understand why the world was mad at us in each of these case u brought up is that we took long to respond to humanitarianly dire situations like Bosnia, Somalia and Haiti and failed to respond to others like Rwanda, this is why the world was mad at us in those cases........In the Iraq case the world is mad at us in how we occupied a sovereign nation without legitimate reasons and UN permission.

The world is even more mad at us in how we refused to listen to the UN and the international community about Iraq and the double standard we do in how we lecture other to listen to and follow the UN when we ignored it with the world watching. Funny ehhhhh?

You argument is a good try Bulldogg, but the situations u mentioned just helped my argument even more, those situations aren't even remotely connected and aren't the same.

The litmus test for me on the question of international intervention is this, "If it was me, if it was my family that was on the receiving end of the bad happening in country X would I want someone to help?" The answer to that question is the answer for me... all the statistics, facts, world opinion or political correctness be damned.

This isn't debate class.... btdt, good luck to you in your studies.

Back to my original reason for this post before we drifted of....Ethiopia has no right to lecture anyone on democractic values when the regime of Meles Zenawi is one of the most dictatorial regimes in Africa. The Puppet regime of Abdullahi Yusuf the so called interim president of the transitional government of Somalia, has allied itself with its cohorts in crime the Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia's regime in the current massacre of civilians in Mogadishu.

Ethiopia and Somalia have always been historic rivals in the Horn of Africa way before Eritrea came to the stage after its independence in the 1990s. Ethiopia and Somalia fought 3 large wars since 1960 and many other skirmishes. Somalia lays claims the Ogaden region which is settled by Somalis and which was part of Somalia before the the British gave it to the Ethiopian crown during British colonialization of southern Somalia.

In 1977 the same time that Haile Selassie was overthrown and replaced by the communist regime of Mengistu Haile Meriam, the Somali military invaded the Ogaden region and ended up occupying 90 percent of that region. The Soviet Union which use to be an ally of Somalia began to ally itself with Ethiopia and its Communist regime, the Americans which use to be an ally of Ethiopia's deposed Haile Selassie switched sides and allied with Somalia.

The Soviets sent an airlift of weapons and trainers to Somalia while Cuba sent over 11,000 troops and East Germany provided weapons. The Somali army was slowly pushed out of the Ogaden and eventually defeated with Soviet, East German, and Cuban help. Somalia which used Soviet weapons had its arsenal depleted and began to rely on Egypt, Iraq, and China to get parts and weapons of Eastern made hardware. When the Soviets and Cubans threatened to cross the border into Somalia after the Somali army was defeated in Ogaden Egypt, Pakistan promised to send troops to back Somalia while Italy, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, China, Sudan, and U.S. promised to send weapons and trainers and only then did the Soviets promised not cross the border.

So as you can see Ethiopia has a revenge against Somalia and in the 15 years Somalia was in Civil war Ethiopia tried its best to support opposing sides in order to make stability hard in Somalia. Ethiopia did not want Somalia to rise as a contender in the Horn of Africa anymore, thus they would have to fight on two fronts against Eritrea and Somalia and EThiopia cannot afford that, they would lose in such a scenario.

In the latest incident The Islamic courts rose to power chased out the warlords the EThiopians and the Americans were supporting. It began to establish Sharia law across southern Somalia they controlled. America saw that as a threat to secular rule and feared the spread of extremism in Somalia while Ethiopia saw a chance to ally itself with America in order to go into Somalia without the Americans stopping them under the guise of the war on terrorism.

The Ethiopia feared the Islamic courts like America did but for a different reason. The Islamic court supported Somali nationalism, began to bring peace and stability to SOmalia, and began to speal about the regaining of the Ogaden region. Ethiopia saw that as a threat to its rule of the Ogaden region thus began to support the transitional regime of Abdullahi Yusuf who was a long time ally of Ethiopia and he holds no nationalistic view of regainining the Ogaden. Abdullahi Yusuf whole goverment is made of former warlords who joined the transitional government in order to gain some power in a future SOmali goverment. These warlords all have blood in their hands.

So as you can see Ethiopia is not in Somalia to help them, but it made a opportunistic move in order to forestall any hope of Somalia regaining the Ogaden, and now the fighting is even worse since Ethiopia went in, leaving SOmalia back at square one just where Ethiopia wanted it to be.
Ethiopian troops torture and rape civilians in Somalia and indiscriminitly use artillery, infantry and gunships to fire on heavly populated Mogadishu, killings hundreds.

Ethiopia is not working in the interest of Somalia but against it.

What part of the world is peaceful and prosper under Islamic court rule?
I ask you to name one such nation.

Islamic radicalists did a bang up job of ruling in for example Afghanistan...

Ethiopia may or may not work in the Somalis best intrest, but ever stop to think to you self that they choose to engage preemptivly BEFORE they had another Afghanistan as their nextdoor neighbour?
The reality of life is a bit different from the classroom mate.

//KJ.

Nice to meet you Somalia. Uhm I apologize for probably going off-topic on this but I have a couple of questions for you: are you islamic? Are you islamist? Do you appreciate the values and the way of life of a society such as the American? Or you see them as impure, and corrupt on the moral grounds?
What aspects of an Islamic society are to be preferred, in your opinion, than the ones of a Western society?
Thank you.

KJ, I won't even give you a intelligent response because you will only fail to comprehend again, you don't know the history and animosity between Somalia and Ethiopia; therefore, it won't do much to explain because not only will you not understand you will act belligerently and use derogatory remarks like SKINNY'S ,your remark just shows me how much a racist and bigot you are. Our name is not SKINNY'S we are called Somalis. Please go educate yourself on politics and history before you come here and argue on something you have no idea of. PLEASE TAKE YOUR RACISM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

Italian Guy, it is nice meeting you to, i am glad you are more educated, polite, and politically correct person then KJ who refers to others in derogatory remarks. To answer your question am i Islamic, well i am Muslim if that is what you mean. I appreciate the democratic values of America that I don't have anything against, matter of fact I would love if my own country Somalia adhered to democracy, but what I disagree with is not democracy but the interventionistic ways of the Ethiopian and American governments. I believe in democracy that is why I disagree when America supports such dictatorial regimes as Mubarak's Egypt who has been president for 25yrs, Jordan's Hussein, and the corrupt and opperressive Saudi regime, I am against these dictatorial regimes, and in support of democracy but where i disagree with the American government is not the idea of democracy but the way it behaves in its unilatelist and forceful manner. Yes their should be democracy in these nations but i don't think forceful occupation is the way. You understand what I am getting at Italian Guy?

The Islamic courts in Somalia are nothing like the Taliban, dont believe the hype and propaganda of Fox news and CNN, The Islamic courts said that they wanted to establish relations with America and Europe and cooperate with them, but that when it came to Somalia's internal affairs that they would govern by Sharia which is Islamic law, but as far as being another Taliban not in a million years. They had relations with many European leaders and wanted to establish formal ties with Europe and America, the European leader Javier Solana met with the Islamic courts several times. They declared that they dont support terrorism and agreed to cooperate, but the Bush administration under prodding by the Ethiopians came to believe that just cause they wanted to rule in Sharia that they are terrorists.

Lastly Italian Guy, just cuz someone says that they are a Islamic person does not make them a terrorist just like someone sayin they are Christian doesnt make them extremist. Being Islamic just means you follow the Islamic culture and rules, and by sayin they want to rule in Sharia which is the Islamic laws in the Koran doesn't make them a terrorist it just means that they dont want to separate church/Mosque and state. Just like in the U.S. itself you have many strict christian conservatives who would like Christian laws applied in the U.S. Understand what I am saying Italian Guy?

Just cuz you are Islamic or Christian doesn't make you a bad person. But its a whole different matter if you commit crimes like terrorism. You can have a Muslim person who commits those crimes just as likely you can have Christians who commits those crimes. So lets not unjustly and badly portray what being Islamic means, it just means you are a follower of Islam.

FYI... when people shoot down a helicopter with my friends and brothers on board and drag their bodies through the street and then when a movie is made and when said movie is screened in Somalia the people stand and cheer I and others who lost friends and family there earned the right to call these people anything we see fit.

I sense a lot of arrogance here on part of our new member.

No one is intelligent enough here to match him and no one seems to have any valid point here becuz we havent finished our school as good as this guy did

Am I wrong?

Originally Posted by bulldogg

FYI... when people shoot down a helicopter with my friends and brothers on board and drag their bodies through the street and then when a movie is made and when said movie is screened in Somalia the people stand and cheer I and others who lost friends and family there earned the right to call these people anything we see fit.

well put

So Phoenix80, and Bulldogg so you feel that it is ok to racially degrade a whole nation of ppl by making derogatory remarks like KJ did? So you condone such bigatory remarks against a whole group of ppl who most had nothing to do with the shooting down of the helicopters? Bulldogg, Phoenix80, and KJ you 3 have showed me how racially biased you are Thank You.

Please save me the preaching because I of all ppl thought the dragging of soldiers was barbaric and inhumane, but their were 1,500 Somalis who lost their lives that day in Mogadishu when the helicopters were spraying in whole sections of the city and many civilians died. Yes the killing and dragging of the soldiers was barbaric, but what you guys seem to fail to mention is that of the 18 American soldiers who died 1,500 Somalis perished that day. So does anyone care to mention that?