Why isnt Somalia used as an example of why we cant leave Iraq?

[Dronetek]

With Islamic extremists taking over Somalia, I have to wonder why the argument isnt made that if we leave Iraq the result will be the same. It's a pretty solid argument if you ask me.

[dj_1911]

Since when do we actually learn from history? :|

[Mr. JOSHUA]

With Islamic extremists taking over Somalia, I have to wonder why the argument isnt made that if we leave Iraq the result will be the same. It's a pretty solid argument if you ask me.


Dems and Libs will undoubtedly spin that question into something more or less down the line of, WHY? Do you want invade Somalia? Or that we're picking on another (soon to be) islamic state.

[ed316]

Cause Somalia was lawless from the beginning. It's not liked they had a funtioning central government. The country was run by clans/militia. IMO

[Dronetek]

Cause Somalia was lawless from the beginning. It's not liked they had a funtioning central government. The country was run by clans/militia. IMO

Isnt that exactly where Iraq is headed?

[tsuri]

Iraq was a working state before the US occupied it. Somalia was already a failed state and it was not occupied. US Troops were there to distribute food and not to police the place.

Both cannot be compared as the US have the duty to rebuild Iraq or else the whole invasion would have been pointless.

[Dronetek]

Iraq was a working state before the US occupied it. Somalia was already a failed state and it was not occupied. US Troops were there to distribute food and not to police the place.

Both cannot be compared as the US have the duty to rebuild Iraq or else the whole invasion would have been pointless.

None of that changes that fact that Iraq WILL end up like Somalia if we leave.

[caridon]

None of that changes that fact that Iraq WILL end up like Somalia if we leave.

Nope Iraq has stronger internal ties (to parts of the country). it will probably be a 3 way civil war but not the type of lawless warlord place that somalia is.

/C

[ed316]

Isnt that exactly where Iraq is headed?


No one is gonna buy it. They will keep digging up 2003.

[David Tate]

Cause Somalia was lawless from the beginning. It's not liked they had a funtioning central government. The country was run by clans/militia. IMO

Exactly... a better comparison would be Afghanistan.

[JoaMei]

None of that changes that fact that Iraq WILL end up like Somalia if we leave.

It will for sure not end like Somalia. When the US pulls out sooner or later it will become a islamic fundamentalist state like Iran, but no anarchy like Somalia.

[apm]

honestly my opinion? why do we take care of these countries at all? or to continue the use of the somalia example, why dont we just leave countries if we realize that staying would mean too much losses or doesnt bring any advantages.
i know now these arguments again - we would create a terrorist hiderroom and so on but i highly doubt that those extremists fighting in iraq or somalia at the moment would ever be a real danger for us here. the extremist danger ironically comes from poeple who live between all of us.

but just regarding to the targets the us president and his allies set up as they started the war in iraq one could say they reached nearly everything they officially wanted to get. iraq has a democracy, saddam was forced out and jailed... no danger of the use of wmd and additionally no support of terrorists anymore...so why staying? because the allies feel responsible for doing more and finally set up the things they fought for really for eternity and not just until they leave. but once upon a time, one would stop running against a wall if he doesnt want to get a blue forehead - so the only important aim which continues to exist is the will to win. wether then really something is won is also doubtful if we are confrontated with powers like in iraq or somalia exist which want to ruin every goal that was reached. so pull out and let them stay in their mess if they absolute want to stay in...and to learn at least something from history: i´m afraid they´ll have the longer breath because the idea behind them. and this idea will die from alone like the usual development in history is and not because someone has the strongest military. thats why western countries should focus more on afghanistan and less on hopeless cases like iraq or somalia.

[MPNFL]

This notion that Iraq was a "working state" before the US invasion undercuts the realization that this civil war between was going to happen soon after Saddam's death.

the shiite uprising in the 90s was simply a glimpse of what would have come. With Saddam dead his two sons would have battled one another for power, Iraqi generals would have sided with their favorite, Udai or Qusai and then boom, civil war.

this war in Iraq has simply accelerated this eventual war.

[Ezekiel25:17]

this war in Iraq has simply accelerated this eventual war.

Agreed. It would of came sooner or later. Just sooner.

[apm]

just as i said, sometimes a progress is not stoppable. and if this happens we should forget the place where it happens, leave them in their mess and not risk unnecessary losses. that wouldnt mean to be defeated but to be sensible. the goddamn same thing goes for iraq at the moment: if the us and their allies pull out and the insurgents get the control over the country they won´t have won anything but only a nation which has stopped to exist - no profit, no better life, nothing.

[Dronetek]

This notion that Iraq was a "working state" before the US invasion undercuts the realization that this civil war between was going to happen soon after Saddam's death.

th

Yeah, no crap. Saddam newest trial is for the murder of 185 thousand Shiites.

Thats,
185,000

[Secret Squirrel]

This notion that Iraq was a "working state" before the US invasion undercuts the realization that this civil war between was going to happen soon after Saddam's death.

the shiite uprising in the 90s was simply a glimpse of what would have come. With Saddam dead his two sons would have battled one another for power, Iraqi generals would have sided with their favorite, Udai or Qusai and then boom, civil war.

this war in Iraq has simply accelerated this eventual war.

You're suggesting that a civil war would have occured between Saddam's two sons? A bit of a ridiculas notion if you ask me. If we're going to play "what ifs" then it's pretty obvious, between the two sons, that Qusay would have replaced Saddam (he also had the proper connections). Or was your post just another way of trying to justify the current situation and remove blame? Or at the very least explain away general ignorance regarding Iraq and how best to "re-model" the country?

[kosse]

Yeah, no crap. Saddam newest trial is for the murder of 185 thousand Shiites.

Thats,
185,000
So? That's ridiculously small amount compared to deeds of many dictators of the 20th century. Nobody disputed that Nazi Germany or Soviet Union were "working countries". In addition, getting Iraq in control again will cost more than that 185 000 and has already cost hundreds of thousands of people due to ridiculous sanctions of almost all life's necessities and the daily violence that's been occuring since US invasion. Iraqis survived bloody and long war against Iran and still there was no degradation like what is seen today. Saddam's Iraq was relatively stable alltough ruled with an iron fist. We finns even did construction business there in the 1980s because they had money. In the end if you want to get the country under control again you need to put another saddam in charge.

[Zathras]

I see Afghanistan as more of a problem then Iraq.

In Iraq when the US troops leave, theres a good chance the shias will take control.

yes they will be iranian sponsored and thus anti american, but they wont support sunni terrorists.

the terrorism that hit us in new york, london and madrid was all from sunni extremists.

Afghanistan however is a majority sunni country, if we was to leave then the Taleban could well be back in power and free to sponsor terrorism around the world.

We can leave iraq but must ensure that the sunnis dont take over, with a 60% shia majority and iranians backing iraqi shias then theres a good chance iraq wont fall into sunni control.

Its not that simple though, if we was to leave it would be a major propaganda victory for the extremists.

Aswell as gaining more support and respect from muslims for defeating the big satan it would show them that their war is winnable and the methods they used in iraq as successful.


As such they would seek to export this terrorism into other muslim countries and attempt to topple them.

Not a single muslim country can fall into the hands of extremists, the effects of this would eventually reach us and will cause us more problems in the future so they must be dealt with now.

[exarmyguard]

THat country needs some old school Muslim justice to cool off the rebellious people. Hack off a few hands and heads and watch the people play nice!

Then when things stabilize, then you can talk about human rights, democracy, yada, yada, yada...

[MPNFL]

You're suggesting that a civil war would have occured between Saddam's two sons? A bit of a ridiculas notion if you ask me. If we're going to play "what ifs" then it's pretty obvious, between the two sons, that Qusay would have replaced Saddam (he also had the proper connections). Or was your post just another way of trying to justify the current situation and remove blame? Or at the very least explain away general ignorance regarding Iraq and how best to "re-model" the country?


there is no way to "justify" the current situation.

Most of the killing is between shiite and sunni muslims, that much we can both agree (i think). The issue is about the greed of religious leaders in Iraq trying to grab power. I believe that this confrontation is really a proxy war between Saudia Arabia and Iran, with the Saudis aiding the sunnis and the Iranians helping the shiites.

I don't understand how its obvious that Qusay was going to obtain control of Iraq after Saddam? Do you have any evidence to suggest that without any doubt?

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Since when do we actually learn from history? :|

Apperantly never. The problem with Iraq out side of the USA supposedly not to be there in the first place is the fact the war is being waged to be used as political clout by those who want to doom the mission there to failure. In other words, it is being micromanaged from the top. Same thing happend with Somilia, except there it was the UN.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

there is no way to "justify" the current situation.

Most of the killing is between shiite and sunni muslims, that much we can both agree (i think). The issue is about the greed of religious leaders in Iraq trying to grab power. I believe that this confrontation is really a proxy war between Saudia Arabia and Iran, with the Saudis aiding the sunnis and the Iranians helping the shiites.

I don't understand how its obvious that Qusay was going to obtain control of Iraq after Saddam? Do you have any evidence to suggest that without any doubt?

It just isn't about greed. It is about control. And, it is not just bathist and shiites. It is also forgien fighters under command of Al queda. And, the spread of extremism through out the ME.

[Dronetek]

In the end if you want to get the country under control again you need to put another saddam in charge.

I find the very idea obscene.

[annihilation]

None of that changes that fact that Iraq WILL end up like Somalia if we leave.


If they dont want to work together then what are we going to do?

[apm]

simply just leave? there is only the choice to take the victory of 2003 as a succesful end of the iraq mission or to stay there and to be steady as long as the sh*t hits the fan - which also means to pay the bill that followes than. the us would not give up their credibility, it also didnt happen after vietnam.

[exarmyguard]

simply just leave? there is only the choice to take the victory of 2003 as a succesful end of the iraq mission or to stay there and to be steady as long as the sh*t hits the fan - which also means to pay the bill that followes than. the us would not give up their credibility, it also didnt happen after vietnam.

Thats just silly. Next thing you'll tell me is that oneday Bush land's a plane on an aircraft carrier and tells the world mission accomplished.

[Niels]

With Islamic extremists taking over Somalia, I have to wonder why the argument isnt made that if we leave Iraq the result will be the same. It's a pretty solid argument if you ask me.
- How do we know if Somalia would be better off these days if the US hadn't left?
- Somalia and Iraq are two different countries with different people.



We could go pessimistic too and say "Why isn't Vietnam used as an example of why we should leave/never have invaded Iraq?". I'm sure I could find a couple of similiarities between the two.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

- How do we know if Somalia would be better off these days if the US hadn't left?
- Somalia and Iraq are two different countries with different people.



We could go pessimistic too and say "Why isn't Vietnam used as an example of why we should leave/never have invaded Iraq?". I'm sure I could find a couple of similiarities between the two.

Check this out...there are simularities between Somilia, and Iraq. Except one thing...Somilia was falling apart before the US got involved. When we invaded Iraq, we literally let the preverbial hornet out of the hornets nest. And for what? There was no proven link between terrorists and (9/11), UN violations abounded a plenty, and there was plenty of cease fire violations, but Iraq did not have WMD. But to be fair, they were trying to aquire them.

Now we are in Iraq. Things are being made out to be total failure by politicians who only want to further their own aganda. The cry to bring the troops home is just that....a cry. And a stupid one at that.

If the US would pull out of Iraq now, it would be total disaster. And if there was no link before of terrorists who did 9/11, you can bet they are surely there now. Alot of the insurgent activity, although no one likes to admit it, is the US's own fault. Through ppp(poss poor planning) There was not enough forces on the ground to stabilize the country in the first place. And, not enough to begin rebuilding the country after the invasion.

Although Somilia is a different country than Iraq, the simularities are there. And what is really frightening, is that Al queda and other america is satan hate groups now reside there. We made the mess in Iraq. The mess was already made in Somilia. Al Queda set up a branch in Iraq. Al Queda has a branch in Somilia. Iraq is being micromanaged by politicians in Washing, tying our commanders hands and preventing them from making discision without some stupid commitee or some shytee permission thing. Somilia was micromanaged from Washington, and the UN. US Commanders on the ground had to follow some stupid civilian pencil pusher and the bad discisions he made, ending up killing US Servicemen. The UN tied our forces hands and would not allow support for the stranded forces involved in combat. Instead of engaging the miltias, we were made to stand by and watch, as Somilia continued its down hill slide.

Yep, the simularities are there. And yet, you think we would learn from past mistakes.....Yeah right

[apm]

Check this out...there are simularities between Somilia, and Iraq. Except one thing...Somilia was falling apart before the US got involved. When we invaded Iraq, we literally let the preverbial hornet out of the hornets nest. And for what? There was no proven link between terrorists and (9/11), UN violations abounded a plenty, and there was plenty of cease fire violations, but Iraq did not have WMD. But to be fair, they were trying to aquire them.

Now we are in Iraq. Things are being made out to be total failure by politicians who only want to further their own aganda. The cry to bring the troops home is just that....a cry. And a stupid one at that.

If the US would pull out of Iraq now, it would be total disaster. And if there was no link before of terrorists who did 9/11, you can bet they are surely there now. Alot of the insurgent activity, although no one likes to admit it, is the US's own fault. Through ppp(poss poor planning) There was not enough forces on the ground to stabilize the country in the first place. And, not enough to begin rebuilding the country after the invasion.

Although Somilia is a different country than Iraq, the simularities are there. And what is really frightening, is that Al queda and other america is satan hate groups now reside there. We made the mess in Iraq. The mess was already made in Somilia. Al Queda set up a branch in Iraq. Al Queda has a branch in Somilia. Iraq is being micromanaged by politicians in Washing, tying our commanders hands and preventing them from making discision without some stupid commitee or some shytee permission thing. Somilia was micromanaged from Washington, and the UN. US Commanders on the ground had to follow some stupid civilian pencil pusher and the bad discisions he made, ending up killing US Servicemen. The UN tied our forces hands and would not allow support for the stranded forces involved in combat. Instead of engaging the miltias, we were made to stand by and watch, as Somilia continued its down hill slide.

Yep, the simularities are there. And yet, you think we would learn from past mistakes.....Yeah right

i dont agree with all aspects you listed, but a good read, made me thinking about my own point of view.

[budgie]

Somaila is a great example of both why we shouldn't simply drop the ball and run from Iraq and also why the Bush 'stay the course' doctrine is woefully inadequate.

The country has long suffered from a whole host of problems that mere indefinite and directionless military intervention has proven to be unable to solve. Yes something should be done to prevent Iraq from falling apart the same way (although some argue that in both cases it is/was inevitable). But simply hanging around and seeking Bush's vaguely defined 'victory' is not that something.

I'd say the ISG wise old men have recommendations that if successful could be applied to similar conflicts in future. Bush has a turd on a silver plate. Which one you gonna choose?

[Secret Squirrel]

I don't understand how its obvious that Qusay was going to obtain control of Iraq after Saddam? Do you have any evidence to suggest that without any doubt?

Do you have any evidence to suggest (without any doubt) that either son would have risen to power?;)

[MPNFL]

Do you have any evidence to suggest (without any doubt) that either son would have risen to power?;)


i don't, but that's exactly the point. the two sons would have struggled with one another for power, which in turn would have abrupted in a civil war.

[Secret Squirrel]

i don't, but that's exactly the point. the two sons would have struggled with one another for power, which in turn would have abrupted in a civil war.

Can you prove this "guess"?

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Somaila is a great example of both why we shouldn't simply drop the ball and run from Iraq and also why the Bush 'stay the course' doctrine is woefully inadequate.

The country has long suffered from a whole host of problems that mere indefinite and directionless military intervention has proven to be unable to solve. Yes something should be done to prevent Iraq from falling apart the same way (although some argue that in both cases it is/was inevitable). But simply hanging around and seeking Bush's vaguely defined 'victory' is not that something.

I'd say the ISG wise old men have recommendations that if successful could be applied to similar conflicts in future. Bush has a turd on a silver plate. Which one you gonna choose?

I would choose neither. Because neither offer any real plan to help the country after we pull out, and leave them with the parting gift of the mess we made.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Somaila is a great example of both why we shouldn't simply drop the ball and run from Iraq and also why the Bush 'stay the course' doctrine is woefully inadequate.

The country has long suffered from a whole host of problems that mere indefinite and directionless military intervention has proven to be unable to solve. Yes something should be done to prevent Iraq from falling apart the same way (although some argue that in both cases it is/was inevitable). But simply hanging around and seeking Bush's vaguely defined 'victory' is not that something.

I'd say the ISG wise old men have recommendations that if successful could be applied to similar conflicts in future. Bush has a turd on a silver plate. Which one you gonna choose?

Here are some of the solutions presented by the ISG to the problems in Iraq, and my view on them.

1. Pull out of the majority of US troops: Bad idea. Iraq is not ready to defend their selves, let alone run a government.

2. Put more advisors in with Iraqi units: Not really the brightest plan. But do able. The Iraqi military, although brilliant fighters, are not militarily ready to defend the country. Their police corps are not ready to provide security. Altho great strides have been made in trying to get them ready, they still are not there yet. Corruption, desertions and huge civil rights violations make this a very viable option. But yet, the resentment within the ranks of Iraqi government are there. And, resent they do.

3. Give better weapons to the Iraqi military, and let them do it alone:Very bad idea. The weapons always seem to wind up in enemy hands, and the enemy is already to well equipped to begin with.

4. Putting more troops into the country to help stabilize: Good idea, but too late. We should have been prepared for a long and prolonged conflict in rebuilding Iraq. Putting more troops on the ground would be a good idea, but the military is already stretched to the limit, and we do not have the resources to sustain such a deplyment. But if they were to stay for a short period of time, it would help the situation.

These are my views.

[Freedom-Fries]

I see Afghanistan as more of a problem then Iraq.

In Iraq when the US troops leave, theres a good chance the shias will take control.

yes they will be iranian sponsored and thus anti american, but they wont support sunni terrorists.

the terrorism that hit us in new york, london and madrid was all from sunni extremists.

Afghanistan however is a majority sunni country, if we was to leave then the Taleban could well be back in power and free to sponsor terrorism around the world.

We can leave iraq but must ensure that the sunnis dont take over, with a 60% shia majority and iranians backing iraqi shias then theres a good chance iraq wont fall into sunni control.

Its not that simple though, if we was to leave it would be a major propaganda victory for the extremists.

Aswell as gaining more support and respect from muslims for defeating the big satan it would show them that their war is winnable and the methods they used in iraq as successful.


As such they would seek to export this terrorism into other muslim countries and attempt to topple them.

Not a single muslim country can fall into the hands of extremists, the effects of this would eventually reach us and will cause us more problems in the future so they must be dealt with now.

Iraq is a disaster but the A-stan issue is a war that can be won

[LRPV]

Iraq is a disaster but the A-stan issue is a war that can be won

Oi you...chips (or freedom fries if you a Bush apologist) have you been to Afghanistan? Like recently? Word is...a certain pommy war poet by the name of Rudyard Kipling was right.

Ante up.

[Dronetek]

Iraq is a disaster but the A-stan issue is a war that can be won

The democrats will turn on that war too. Just give it time. It's already starting to happen.

[Argyll]

Both Iraq and Afghanistan wars were initiated through good intentions,both are facing serious crisis within, and are not going to the initial plan

[annihilation]

Both Iraq and Afghanistan wars were initiated through good intentions,both are facing serious crisis within, and are not going to the initial plan

But some could say that the resources sapped in the Iraq war is what is causing the afghan war to fail. If we went into Afghan alone we would have had the troops and resources to have much better handle afghan. But we diverted much of our troops to Iraq after the initial days for that build up.

Good intentions and reality dont mix. If we went by good intentions then we should be in dafur.

[budgie]

The democrats will turn on that war too. Just give it time. It's already starting to happen.

Keep dreaming dude.

[InetWarrior]

Taking over Somalia by islamic extremists was a progress from somalian citizen point of view. Islamic rules are better than chaos with marauding militias, gangsters etc.

[Jobu]

The democrats will turn on that war too. Just give it time. It's already starting to happen.

Sad but inevitably true.

The Democrats are so invested in America's military failure they'd turn on any war at this point.

[exarmyguard]

Both Iraq and Afghanistan wars were initiated through good intentions,both are facing serious crisis within, and are not going to the initial plan

Wow. Me thinks we forget how americans were lied to, my haggis eating friend.