Somalia:truce:WHY????

[Zulkiflim]

Salaam,

this really perplexes me..

Somalia interim govermetn has been in existence together with the warlords.
the Interim goverent has the support of the UN as does the warlord have the support of the US.

And now with the Islamic courts finally bringing peace to a wartorn coutnry of 16 years,the US and UN say that this should not be.

All the while the kept quite supporting both warlord adn the itnerim govermetn to spread anarhcy and death to the somalians.

And now the west want the Islamic court who has brought peace to Somali to be forced to have meeting with a western backed goveremtn who ahd sat idle while all around them warlord sponsored by the US rules in mayhem..

[PIE]Somalia factions resume peace talks


Saturday 02 September 2006, 13:11 Makka Time, 10:11 GMT

Somalia's interim government and rival Islamists have resumed direct peace talks in Sudan, pushing for reconciliation and power-sharing to avert war.


The two sides last met in Khartoum on June 22 where they agreed to stop military campaigns and recognise each other.

But the talks stalled amid government allegations the Islamists had broken the pact against military expansion, and Islamist claims of foreign interference in Somalia.

On Saturday, diplomats and delegates gathered at a hall in Khartoum for the talks which officials said could take days.

Mohamed Mohamud Guled Gaamadheere, Somalia's new minister of public works and housing, told Reuters: "We expect [talks] to last around 10 days or so, depending on what happens."

Share power

The Arab League is leading the talks, hoping to convince both sides to share power after the Supreme Islamic Courts Council took over the capital, Mogadishu, and a swathe of southern Somalia.

Its rise has challenged the authority of the fragile Western-backed administration, which is based in the provincial town of Baidoa.

Sharif Hassan Sheikh Adan, the parliament speaker, is heading the government's delegation while the Islamist team is headed by Ibrahim Hussein Adow, who is in charge of foreign relations.

Somalia was plunged into anarchy after the 1991 ousting of Mohamed Siad Barre by commanders who then proceeded to fight over patches of the country.

[/PIE]


the Islamic shoudl be hold talk with the Un and asking them dire quesiton like why does the Us support the warlords and why are they forcing the only force that has brought peacea dn jsutice to somalia to talk toa interim goveremtn whom has sat idly whiel the somalian are opprese with western abcked weapons and money?

why must the Islamic court even talk to the western abcked interim goverement?

 

[Ghazi]

Simple the UN don't want a islamic state.

 

[Trumble]

And now with the Islamic courts finally bringing peace to a wartorn coutnry of 16 years,the US and UN say that this should not be.

They say nothing of the sort. A truce brings peace, avoiding one brings violence.

Things are more peaceful better where the Islamic Courts are in control, but they only control part of the country. You neglect to mention that the extent of that control has been spread not by "peace", but by violence. They do not have universal support, far from it.

The objective of peace talks is to stop the violence, and reach an agreement that will enable Somalia to be peaceful and ordered throughout that accomodates both islamic Courts and the interim government factions, without anybody else getting killed.

The government was "western backed" since its inception as the best means of avoiding continued anarchy. There was no "Islamic Courts" at the time. Such backing is no reason for the Islamists not to talk to the government. There is no credible evidence that the US has provided support for any of the warlords.

 

[Skillganon]

They say nothing of the sort. A truce brings peace, avoiding one brings violence.

Things are more peaceful better where the Islamic Courts are in control, but they only control part of the country. You neglect to mention that the extent of that control has been spread not by "peace", but by violence. They do not have universal support, far from it.

The objective of peace talks is to stop the violence, and reach an agreement that will enable Somalia to be peaceful and ordered throughout that accomodates both islamic Courts and the interim government factions, without anybody else getting killed.

The government was "western backed" since its inception as the best means of avoiding continued anarchy. There was no "Islamic Courts" at the time. Such backing is no reason for the Islamists not to talk to the government. There is no credible evidence that the US has provided support for any of the warlords.

That is bush crap. Somalia Has the support of 95-99% of the population for the Islamic court. The somalian in the U.K support (the ones I have spoken too) the Islamic court aswell as nearly every muslim.

The support of U.S for all those tyrantical warlords in somalia who has spread anarchy amongst the people. Like they are doing with Iraq.

 

[Trumble]

That is bush crap. Somalia Has the support of 95-99% of the population for the Islamic court. The somalian in the U.K support (the ones I have spoken too) the Islamic court aswell as nearly every muslim.

If they had 95-99% support there would be no conflict and no need for a truce. Who 'supports' them or not in the UK is pretty much irrelevant to those in Somalia, particularly if their views are formed on the basis of the same selective reality as yours.

The support of U.S for all those tyrantical warlords in somalia who has spread anarchy amongst the people. Like they are doing with Iraq.

Rubbish. Somalia had BEEN in total anarchy since 1991... you may recall that then the radical muslim support was FOR one of those "tyrannical warlords", Mohamed Farah Aideed, simply because he was in conflict with the UN and US. As I said there is no evidence that the US is doing that in either Somalia or Iraq. If you are going to keep on repeating it please be good enough to provide a credible source of such evidence. Exactly which "tyrannical warlords" are the US backing in Iraq? You are talking nonsense.

 

[Durrah]

No offense Trumble, but your totally off on this one. The ICU had the support of the people. The only reason why there was heavy fighting in certain areas was because they were fighting the warlords, not the cilvialns (although some unfortanly died in the crossfire)

Your not somali and im sorry to say dont have much knowlegde on this topic. Unlike you, most of us somalis have 90-95% of our familes back in somalia and stay in regular contact through the phone, email and visits. So you can't tell us whats going on, when your only infomation is coming from press reports!

And regardless of who is supporting the warlords (western backing or not), its makes no difference, because the warlords are dangerous, murderous thugs who should be facing the death penalty for the people they have terrioried, killed and raped!

I would not be surpised if it was the u.s, it wouldnt be the first that that the white house has finicailly supported dicatorors and murderous scumbags. Its was the U.S admin who supported Saddam, General Pinochet and many more. The French goveremnt even supplied the Husti's in Rwanda with arms, who slaughtered 1 million people or more. Why should anyone be surprised, arms trade is business and money. Theres no morality or ethics involved!

 

[Trumble]

No offense Trumble, but your totally off on this one. The ICU had the support of the people. The only reason why there was heavy fighting in certain areas was because they were fighting the warlords, not the cilvialns (although some unfortanly died in the crossfire)

None taken, but you make little sense either. I take it the warlords as individuals wouldn't have caused any problems, so who was actually doing all this "heavy fighting" for them? How do those people differ from "the people" you describe, other than the fact they supported different sides?

The fact you "wouldn't be surprised" if the Americans had "backed" some of the warlords provides no evidence that they have.

 

[Durrah]

regarding the truce, i think for the sake of our people and our countries futre, the interm goverment and ICU need to sort something out. We can't afford to have another civil war! I am slightly sceptical regarding Abduallah Yusuf, because he's a straight up criminal dressed in a suit. He's snuggled up with the Ethiopian admin for too many years and alhmdualiah some of the other ministers in the interm 'goverment' have agreed that ethopia need to keep their nose (and soliders) out of somalia.

 

[Durrah]

None taken, but you make little sense either. I take it the warlords as individuals wouldn't have caused any problems, so who was actually doing all this "heavy fighting" for them? How do those people differ from "the people" you describe, other than the fact they supported different sides?

The fact you "wouldn't be surprised" if the Americans had "backed" some of the warlords provides no evidence that they have.

I never said that the U.S was backing them, i just said that i wouldnt be surpised if they were. You need to look back in U.S history and just see the type of people that your adminstartion have supported in the past!

As for the warlords, yes there are the leaders, but the warlords are not alone, they have groups of people behind them who want to control the assets, resources and power of the country. As for them not casuing any problems? ha! You must be joking. These guys have done nothing but cause problems. I dont expect you to understand, you havent had your house or buisness looted, a family member killed or female relative raped by them. So when you do, get back to me and tell me if you still think that they're no trouble at all.

 

[habiibti]

Durrah, u got a point there.

i dont see why the US is interferring with da ICU,since almost every peace loving somali person is welcming them with open arms.the main reason for their revolution was to get rid of da blood sucking warlords,and alhamdulilah they did tht almost.

 

[Zulkiflim]

They say nothing of the sort. A truce brings peace, avoiding one brings violence.

Things are more peaceful better where the Islamic Courts are in control, but they only control part of the country. You neglect to mention that the extent of that control has been spread not by "peace", but by violence. They do not have universal support, far from it.

The objective of peace talks is to stop the violence, and reach an agreement that will enable Somalia to be peaceful and ordered throughout that accomodates both islamic Courts and the interim government factions, without anybody else getting killed.

The government was "western backed" since its inception as the best means of avoiding continued anarchy. There was no "Islamic Courts" at the time. Such backing is no reason for the Islamists not to talk to the government. There is no credible evidence that the US has provided support for any of the warlords.

Salaam,

i see so what you say is that Somalia is divided...and you do not wish to admit that the US supported the warlords..ignoring the interim goverment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/16/AR2006051601625.html

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=831732006


When you say a "truce bring peace" it trully is astounding,i mena here is an interim goverment that does not even dare to enter somali operating basically out side of somalia who has done nithing much for the Somalis,,,

And yet with the Islamic court removing the US backed warlord,and the weak itnerim goverment having no part of it,the west suddenly find that it supporting the INTERIM GOVEREMNT to deal with the Islamic courts..

as for the assertion that the Islamic court has gotten where it is at due to violece,then of course thru the violence of the US backed warlords..

the Islamic courts removed these US backed warlord who terrorize their own peope and now peace reign..but do the west want it?

And yes the western goveremnt supported the interim goverement ,how?
For 16 years nothing....
and now with peace on the horizon,these same western power who did nothin are now empowering the wesk interim goverement to negotiate wiht the Islamic Court that brought peace..

 

[Trumble]

As for them not casuing any problems? ha! You must be joking. These guys have done nothing but cause problems. I dont expect you to understand, you havent had your house or buisness looted, a family member killed or female relative raped by them. So when you do, get back to me and tell me if you still think that they're no trouble at all.

You have misunderstood me completely. I was making the point that the warlords alone could not participate in "heavy fighting"; some sort of support from elements of the Somali population was also required. I wasn't saying they are not guilty of the crimes you state - they most certainly are.

 

[Dahir]

The ICU seems a bit fishy to me, they're going to end up just like the Taliban, it starts religious, then the tribal fervor begins....:uhwhat

Honestly, you can't stop tribal wars in areas such as Somalia, simply.

A religious society only fits modern nations such as Iran, it is not fit for Somalia because as undeveloped as Somalia is, religion will be manipulated. I've seen this happen too often.

Somalia should pursue a secular society until it is mature and strong enough to choose a holier path, just my two cents.

And what's with this "ICU," why is it that the year that the interim government was put together they decided to fight back??

Just wondering, seems a bit fishy, not to mention that the "Warlord Alliance" and the ICU are from the same region, and the same ethnic/tribal make-up.

Just seems like the Warlord Alliance wised up. Then again, the ICU has been around for around a decade, so its pretty authentic, but that doesn't exclude the fact that they've got an agenda, everyone's got one, I just don't like it when people use the name of God without anyone's blessing or supervision.

 

[Durrah]

Somalia should pursue a secular society until it is mature and strong enough to choose a holier path, just my two cents.

We had a secular society under whilst under the control of:

The British
The French
The Italians
The Ethipoians
Under Siad Barre


As you can see, none of them worked and resulted in death, colonisation and perscution.

Somalia is a 99.9999% muslim country. We dont need secularism. Its because of securalism and the lack of islam, that we ended up in our condition in the first place. Nothing else but the way of islam will unite our people and leave in peace. Its through islam that we can destory the old tribal hireachy of the past and put behind the decades of clan conflict and work together as muslim and somalis!

Btw Dahir, are you somali? Its just that your name sounds somali and it says in your avatar your from Minnesota and that has the largest somali population in america.

 

[Dahir]

We had a secular society under whilst under the control of:

The British
The French
The Italians
The Ethipoians
Under Siad Barre


As you can see, none of them worked and resulted in death, colonisation and perscution.

Somalia is a 99.9999% muslim country. We dont need secularism. Its because of securalism and the lack of islam, that we ended up in our condition in the first place. Nothing else but the way of islam will unite our people and leave in peace. Its through islam that we can destory the old tribal hireachy of the past and put behind the decades of clan conflict and work together as muslim and somalis!

Btw Dahir, are you somali? Its just that your name sounds somali and it says in your avatar your from Minnesota and that has the largest somali population in america.

The largest Somali population in the US is in Ohio, I think, or could possibly be Chicago but I haven't been in Chicago for nearly a decade :?

Back to Point,

While Somalia was in Secular-mode, it had peace and prosperity, and around the 1970's Somalia should've moved to Sharia.

Look at Iran, it always had a secular society, but when the time was right, the people, with the leadership of the Ayatollahs, decided to choose the holier path. Look at Afghanistan, it was a country in shambles, very underdeveloped, and they went right into Sharia with the Taliban, and it was a disaster, not to mention the Taliban was a tribal-based group.

I just don't trust young nations with the responsibility of carrying Islamic code. Iran earned the trust, Somalia still has time to develop.

Look at it like this: Would you give your 13-year-old your car keys? No. So would you let a militant group (ICU) fight under the banner of God.

Must I mention again that the ICU is fighting for their own agenda, be it land or peace, it still shouldn't be fought using Allah's name!

:uhwhat

 

[catmando]

America hopes Somalia can get control of its government. The Horn of Africa is a important trade route and entry port of goods into that continent from Asia.

If you want an Islamic government, fine. Whatever works for you. I'm just glad America got out of Somalia. We lost 17 troops there and that was 17 too many.

 

[Durrah]

Your 17 troops were nothing compared to the thousands of women and children that you killed with your weaponary.

Its a shame that your soliders were not man enough to fight one on one, as opposed to capret boming the civlian population and firing missiles into market places and residentail areas!

 

[Skillganon]

You have misunderstood me completely. I was making the point that the warlords alone could not participate in "heavy fighting"; some sort of support from elements of the Somali population was also required. I wasn't saying they are not guilty of the crimes you state - they most certainly are.

OF course. When we mention the Warlord we don't mean 1 Person. The Warlords group of people. They are in the minority.

After the application of the Islamic Court within each tribe, to prevent these criminals, the Warlords have grouped together, and start calling themselve the goverment in the behest of the U.S, telling the world they are their to protect the people by fighting terrorism.

I am sure that is what is going in Iraq. The creation and supporting of Death Squad to spread mayhem and anarchy, to keep the people subdued in fear, make good press in the tabloid, "terrorist strikes again" , show they need to prolong their stay in Iraq.


It is all Bush Crap.

 

[AHMED_GUREY]

the US never spread anarchy in somalia

somalia's incompetent leaders spread anarchy in somalia when they toppled said barre and then turned on each other with greed

allthough anarchy has provided some plus points like the large trade network of the private sector

having a transparent government is what somalia needs

and Dahir Islam is what unites all somalis so having an Islamic state would be excellent

trumble the warlords never had the respect and support the ICU currently is enjoying in somalia they only knew how to spread fear into people and make them do things with a gun pointed at them

that's not support!

ICU hopes to avoid bloodshed by talking with this government

the ICU is supported by the somali people while the government is supported by the international community so if they can share their powers to establish a centralized government

than i support them 100%

 

[xlisax]

the Islamic shoudl be hold talk with the Un and asking them dire quesiton like why does the Us support the warlords

The bigger question is, why are the Muslims in Somalia going around killing people for watching Soccer games.