jujuman13
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,075
- Reaction score
- 579
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
-
Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.
This 'victory' could mean a return to anarchy (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jujuman13
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2005
- Messages
- 20,688
- Reaction score
- 7,321
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Anarchy in Somalia is preferable to an Islamist terrorist haven...at least from the perspective of US foreign policy.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 40,660
- Reaction score
- 16,073
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Its a classic catch 22.
Either you have an islamist state with some sort of peace and that may or may not have links to Al Q. Its only been claims of links, claims comming from rivial warlords and clan leaders, which dont mean its true.
Or another failed state with total anarchy, where Al Q can easily set up shop and recruit. So basicly AL Q wins no matter what, unless the warlords and clan leaders can actually start working together.
In the end its another clan war, where sides shift, loyalities change and the people suffer. The only reason the Islamists were able to take over was because of the backing of key warlords and clan leaders, a backing they now have lost for the most part.
Either you have an islamist state with some sort of peace and that may or may not have links to Al Q. Its only been claims of links, claims comming from rivial warlords and clan leaders, which dont mean its true.
Or another failed state with total anarchy, where Al Q can easily set up shop and recruit. So basicly AL Q wins no matter what, unless the warlords and clan leaders can actually start working together.
In the end its another clan war, where sides shift, loyalities change and the people suffer. The only reason the Islamists were able to take over was because of the backing of key warlords and clan leaders, a backing they now have lost for the most part.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2005
- Messages
- 20,688
- Reaction score
- 7,321
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Perhaps. However, al-Qaeda only had limited success in establishing bases in Somalia from 1991-2006 when it was an anarchy. It seems that even al-Qaeda does better under some sort of stable government.