Why are you opposed to Somaliland recognition?

[The_Patriot]

Somaliland
weydhushey

[Basra-]

Vo

That is not fair. First of all, the cival war in america was between--eleven southern states and the union states. Abraham was anti slavery, and the confederacy was pro slavery. The southern states sesssionism was due to perverse reason--'slavery'. But Somaliland sessionsism--if u would call them that--is due to ---the right to refuse to become savages like the south.

[Walaashiis]

Because:

1- it is the seed of a new war.
2- weakens the Muslim/Somali position in the Horn
3-it does not make much sense considering that they have been through no more no less what the other Somalis endured.
4-it irritates me to learn some gaalo speak on behalf of my fellow Somalis.

the least goes on...

But a little insignifant white guy feels some Somalis should be eridicated from Somaliland while him and his Somali gacalo ( some beautiful Somali gilr)
should damaashaad in guryosamo

[Voltage]

Vo

That is not fair. First of all, the cival war in america was between--eleven southern states and the union states. Abraham was anti slavery, and the confederacy was pro slavery. The southern states sesssionism was due to perverse reason--'slavery'. But Somaliland sessionsism--if u would call them that--is due to ---the right to refuse to become savages like the south.

It was due to Khat. So the rebellions are similar in both began because of perverse reasons.

[Basra-]

[quote="Voltage"][quote="Basra-"]Vo

That is not fair. First of all, the cival war in america was between--eleven southern states and the union states. Abraham was anti slavery, and the confederacy was pro slavery. The southern states sesssionism was due to perverse reason--'slavery'. But Somaliland sessionsism--if u would call them that--is due to ---the right to refuse to become savages like the south. [/quote]

It was due to Khat. So the rebellions are similar in both began because of perverse reasons. [/quote]







No Vo dear, i refuse your well planned point. Had the somaliland separated in the last few years, meaning after the al shabaab coming to 'existance', then i would have said yes---khat must have a perverse reason to the separation. But no--somaliland separated long time ago--during the high ruling days of the moryaans--aideed and co---today the moryaans are a figment of somalia historical imagination. After them came the tfg, then abdulaahi yusuf, and then al shabaab, then the pirates, then the ethiopians, and finally the al shabaab again. While somaliland has consistently remained---S.o.m.a.l.i.l.a.n.d


Ironically---despite the changes of power southern somalia went through--with all the colorful names ---none of them had a name of 'somali' attached to them. Only somaliland---has a name remotely close to somalia--who is more patriotic of somalia do ya think?

[Voltage]

The territorial integrity of the nation must be protected at all costs. How can a people who share the same ethnicity, language, and religion of the us simply declare themselves independent of the rest? This is not something that can be accepted. What’s to stop every other tribal regions from following suit, after minor grievances against the federal government? If we set this precedent, pretty soon the entire nation may disintegrate. Somaliland is an illegitimate entity, recognized by not one single organization or country in the entire world. How can any self respecting Somali person encourage the disintegration of the country? That's like a person chopping of his own limb. Unacceptable.

I used to think like that but reoriented my thinking to think outside the box. First many people who speak same language and religion have different states from Arabic nations to English speaking nations of the Christian religion. Secondly, Somalis are already divided and if the Somali success in Kenya, Djibouti, etc is to go by with the failure of the Somali majority Somalia the old colonial era irredentist movement about Somali unity does not really hold water. Djibouti should say independent, Somalis should stay part of Kenya, Ogaden should reconcile with Ethiopia until Ethiopia fractures internally, Somaliland should be removed from Somalia, and Somalia should be made peaceful and function as the lead and father Somali state in the Horn without collusion in politics and internal state of affairs by Hargeisa opinion. Imagine a Somaliland that is still part of Somalia that seeks to continue to delegitimize Siad Barre government's legacy? Reer Mogadishu have already turned around and are rethinking their distorted opinions about the past. With Somaliland removed, it would be that much easier to enshrine Siad Barre as the best Somali to have ever lived and have his legacy celebrated by the Father Somali nation of the Horn.

[Oxidant]

I used to think like that but reoriented my thinking to think outside the box. First many people who speak same language and religion have different states from Arabic nations to English speaking nations of the Christian religion. Secondly, Somalis are already divided and if the Somali success in Kenya, Djibouti, etc is to go by with the failure of the Somali majority Somalia the old colonial era irredentist movement about Somali unity does not really hold water. Djibouti should say independent, Somalis should stay part of Kenya, Ogaden should reconcile with Ethiopia until Ethiopia fractures internally, Somaliland should be removed from Somalia, and Somalia should be made peaceful and function as the lead and father Somali state in the Horn without collusion in politics and internal state of affairs by Hargeisa opinion. Imagine a Somaliland that is still part of Somalia that seeks to continue to delegitimize Siad Barre government's legacy? Reer Mogadishu have already turned around and are rethinking their distorted opinions about the past. With Somaliland removed, it would be that much easier to enshrine Siad Barre as the best Somali to have ever lived and have his legacy celebrated by the Father Somali nation of the Horn.

This argument makes no sense; we are not talking about Greater Somalia, but Somalia itself. Just because Issaqs have a different view on Barre doesn’t automatically the right to secede. MJ don’t have a popular opinion on Barre yet are still with Somalia. Dervish people have a positive view on Barre yet the secessionist camp wants to force them to be a part of their land.

It doesn't add up

[Basra-]

"With Somaliland removed, it would be that much easier to enshrine Siad Barre as the best Somali to have ever lived and have his legacy celebrated by the Father Somali nation of the Horn."



Voloooooooooooooooooooooool



I feel like writing an essay of 500 words where i do nothing but praise and 'enshrined' siyaad baare. Do u think it is likely to give u orgasmic noise?

[The_Emperior5]

walahi voltage wa khatar wuxu rabba inu Koonfurianska ka dhadhicyo oo u yidha Siyaad bare waa Aabihi Somalia taarikhda sida ku galo new history instead of ina cabdilla xassan taalo loga sameyo xammar Siyad bare looga sameyo in the future , i dont think My good friends Abdiwahaab and twisted Logic inay waxa ka qaadanayan

laakin voltage waxad idinku isla jeceshihin waanu idin la jecelnahay waxanu anagu isla jecelnahay na nala jeclada thats the way forward

[eyes-only]

Because Somalia is currently in a fragile state and it would be criminal to allow infringement on the territorial integrity of our nation.

I also believe it would be in the best interest of Somaliland or whatever it wants to call itself to be an autonomous federal region/state within Somalia. At the end of the day, a centralised system will never work again in Somalia and we are all better off sticking together in a federalised system than splitting apart along tribal lines. There is nothing to say that granting 'Somaliland' recognition will not lead to other regions or tribes going the same root or a war breaking out in Somaliland...thus leading to further unending conflict and the demise of Somalia.

[union]

----

[Coeus]

The territorial integrity of the nation must be protected at all costs. How can a people who share the same ethnicity, language, and religion of the us simply declare themselves independent of the rest? This is not something that can be accepted. What’s to stop every other tribal regions from following suit, after minor grievances against the federal government? If we set this precedent, pretty soon the entire nation may disintegrate. Somaliland is an illegitimate entity, recognized by not one single organization or country in the entire world. How can any self respecting Somali person encourage the disintegration of the country? That's like a person chopping of his own limb. Unacceptable.

[Voltage]

No Vo dear, i refuse your well planned point. Had the somaliland separated in the last few years, meaning after the al shabaab coming to 'existance', then i would have said yes---khat must have a perverse reason to the separation. But no--somaliland separated long time ago--during the high ruling days of the moryaans--aideed and co---today the moryaans are a figment of somalia historical imagination. After them came the tfg, then abdulaahi yusuf, and then al shabaab, then the pirates, then the ethiopians, and finally the al shabaab again. While somaliland has consistently remained---S.o.m.a.l.i.l.a.n.d


Ironically---despite the changes of power southern somalia went through--with all the colorful names ---none of them had a name of 'somali' attached to them. Only somaliland---has a name remotely close to somalia--who is more patriotic of somalia do ya think?

I am afraid you are mistaken Lady Basra. SNM rebellion began in 1982 when Siad Barre sought to tax Khat. During that time the Isaaq in the north comprised most of the Somali migrants in the Gulf Arabia but when they came back to Somalia, would use most of the money on Khat...essentially denying the government revenue while chanelling all the productivity of the Somali citizens there straight into Ethiopia's economy (khat grew in Ethiopia and was taxed by the Ethiopian government) supporting it. Abdiwahab's uncle who was Finance Minister at that time, Abdullahi Addow, advised Siad to start taxing Khat and when he did, the Khat barons grew incensed. When Siad Barre stopped by Hargeisa after returning from a meeting in Djibouti with Aptidoon, the khat barons had little children stone the president's envoy which led to reactionary guards opening fire. This was the beginning of the SNM rebellion and essentially of post-colonial Somaliland.

You can read about this too in Rukia Oomaar's Human Rights Watch book A Government at War its Own People which examined the SNM rebellion and the Somali State's reaction. Rukia Oomaar is Habar Awal, Isaaq and the sister of Rage Oomaar.

[Voltage]

This argument makes no sense; we are not talking about Greater Somalia, but Somalia itself. Just because Issaqs have a different view on Barre doesn’t automatically the right to secede. MJ don’t have a popular opinion on Barre yet are still with Somalia. Dervish people have a positive view on Barre yet the secessionist camp wants to force them to be a part of their land.

It doesn't add up

I was joking about Somaliland being removed is favorable because of Barre reason. I did it because I know some of the Somaliland supporters like Cali Gaab would go "aha!".

[The_Emperior5]

Wrong SNM started in 1981 jedda saudi arabia in feb 1981 by Muj Axmed jimcaale first chairman but officially announced in london 1981 april six, it had nothing to do with qad