Page 3 of 3
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:37 pm
by Voltage
Username1 wrote:The money and effort put into that war could have been spent on developing the
new born country and waiting until it was matured and was able to with stand a loss in any conflict. I think a civilian government would have been more caterful in going to war then a military dictatorship. For one it would have taken along time to get a united yes for war in a democracy compared to a one man dictatorship. I think one off MSB problems was that he was never intelligent enough to understand the effect of his actions and when to cut your losses.
Somalia went to war against Ethiopia in 1964 and 1977. We realized we didn't have the military capacity after '64 so of course it was only during MSB's time when we did we started thinking seriously about war again.
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:46 pm
by James Dahl
Voltage is right, at the time it was considered too risky to allow a precedent to change from the old colonial borders. This has changed since then, for instance South Sudan and Eritrea breaking away have shown that colonial borders are no longer considered sacred.
Nowadays if the same thing had occurred today the results would have been very different.
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 4:10 pm
by samadoon-waaxid
James Dahl wrote:Voltage is right, at the time it was considered too risky to allow a precedent to change from the old colonial borders.This has changed since then, for instance South Sudan and Eritrea breaking away have shown that colonial borders are no longer considered sacred.
Nowadays if the same thing had occurred today the results would have been very different.
could have been that somalia was a muslim nation fighting a christian one ? while the other two new nations(south sudan &Eriteria) were two christian nations,with one of them's indepednence being fully orchestrated in the hallways of the UN and EU?
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 4:44 pm
by James Dahl
samadoon-waaxid wrote:James Dahl wrote:Voltage is right, at the time it was considered too risky to allow a precedent to change from the old colonial borders.This has changed since then, for instance South Sudan and Eritrea breaking away have shown that colonial borders are no longer considered sacred.
Nowadays if the same thing had occurred today the results would have been very different.
could have been that somalia was a muslim nation fighting a christian one ? while the other two new nations(south sudan &Eriteria) were two christian nations,with one of them's indepednence being fully orchestrated in the hallways of the UN and EU?
Things were different then, the USA gave tons of arms to a Muslim country (Afghan Mujahideen) to fight a Christian one (Russia).
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 5:13 pm
by Murax
In hindsight the war was a absolute disaster and the reason Somalia as a State collapsed. While Somalia was a up and coming nation they were nowhere near the level of self suffiancy to be able to say F You to the worlds superpowers and go it alone. I think gradually chipping away, and pursuing diplomatic means while building a stronger Somalia would have helped.
Btw, lets be honest Somalia as it was, was big enough to home the entire Somali race and then some. I don't understand why the Somalis in NFD, Galbeed, etc. could have been slowly absorbed incorporated into the current borders. In a game of dice we sacrificed what we had just so we could get more, and we looked like ruthless agressors to the int'l community.
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 5:40 pm
by juzme123
Murax wrote:In hindsight the war was a absolute disaster and the reason Somalia as a State collapsed. While Somalia was a up and coming nation they were nowhere near the level of self suffiancy to be able to say F You to the worlds superpowers and go it alone. I think gradually chipping away, and pursuing diplomatic means while building a stronger Somalia would have helped.
Btw, lets be honest Somalia as it was, was big enough to home the entire Somali race and then some. I don't understand why the Somalis in NFD, Galbeed, etc. could have been slowly absorbed incorporated into the current borders. In a game of dice we sacrificed what we had just so we could get more, and we looked like ruthless agressors to the int'l community.
Though the NFD is a useless piece of wasteland, it might have had some natural resources i.e. in the form of minerals or oil. Plus it is Somali land so why should they give it up. Third, you can never have too much land; esp. considering that Somalia is not resource rich.
Djibouti is also Somali land. It is also a major port and if Somalia controlled that port it could have large number of operational ports which could service the east and central african countries and it could be a big if not dominant logistics centre for east africa.
The Ogaden should be obvious. Beside the irridentist motivations, With the Ogaden Somali would be much less of an upstream country to ethiopia vis a vis the Jubba and Shabelle rivers, hence giving it greater control over water use of the rivers. With the large land would also come the natural resources of the region.
So Somalia could have been a major logistics centre, mineral and agri-products exporter as well as becoming a stronger power.
But they were too ambitious and acted too hastily without the required resources/support. In the end it was Al-Qadr, it just wasn't meant to be.
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 7:43 pm
by samadoon-waaxid
James Dahl wrote:samadoon-waaxid wrote:James Dahl wrote:Voltage is right, at the time it was considered too risky to allow a precedent to change from the old colonial borders.This has changed since then, for instance South Sudan and Eritrea breaking away have shown that colonial borders are no longer considered sacred.
Nowadays if the same thing had occurred today the results would have been very different.
could have been that somalia was a muslim nation fighting a christian one ? while the other two new nations(south sudan &Eriteria) were two christian nations,with one of them's indepednence being fully orchestrated in the hallways of the UN and EU?
Things were different then, the USA gave tons of arms to a Muslim country (Afghan Mujahideen) to fight a Christian one (Russia).
calling the athiest,socialist soviets christian state is quite outlandish.but here we are talking about the west's favorite african puppy(Ethiopia)since the colonial and emperial days being under seige from an obscure poor muslim country.besides the fact that the west didnt want to allow the pandora box of territorial disputes in africa open if somalia was let to defeat ethiopia,and their committment to maintianing colonial borders.religion indeed played a role in the U.S attitude towards that war if you believe otherwise look at who was the perfect candidate to invade somalia in 2006 when an islamic threat loomed in the horizon? ethiopia was alway looked as the christian island within a sea of muslims that balanced the power in the favor of the west in the horn. history repeats itself dude.and if you deny you will be only deluding your self.
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 9:05 pm
by Babygirl-
Re: American newspaper on 1977 war (never has so small a cou
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2011 9:01 pm
by luis1
AbdiWahab252:
Have you read somali books of Gral Aidid about Ogaden War?
What he say about this war
Was this war a defeat for Somalia?
