1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/7866/the-u-s-somalia-war-part-654/

The U.S.-Somalia War, Part 654

March 3, 2008 by

Somehow I had forgotten that the U.S. has a thing going on in Somalia. “A local official told Reuters that the missile was fired by a U.S.
aircraft. ‘Two U.S missiles hit a house in Dobley early this morning.’…’We woke up with a loud and big bang and when
we came out we found our neighbor’s house completely obliterated as if
no house existed here,’ a resident of the town, Fatuma Abdullahi, told
The Associated Press….An
aid worker in Dobley said up to six people were still trapped in the
rubble by midday.”

Just another day in the life of our peaceful commercial Republic.

{ 19 comments }

David Spellman March 3, 2008 at 10:32 am

It is truly amazing to see the political gymnastics the Statists will resort to when anarchy gets a toe hold. The “official” government of Somalia had no public support and could not exercise authority, so we had to pay the Ethiopians as mercenaries to enforce order. When that doesn’t work, we have to send United States forces to do the dirty work. Somalia doesn’t even have oil or natural resources to motivate intervention. They are simply too independent for their own good.

TC Bell March 3, 2008 at 11:07 am

He may not be a libretarian nor an Austrian but Chris Floyd has written some excellent pieces on the “Forgotten Third War in the War on Tatics (Terrorism)”.

Mr. Spellman, “I Heard That!”

Byzantine March 3, 2008 at 11:10 am

Actually, the US is attacking an emerging Muslim nation-state, not an anarchy. Of course, anyone who still believes Somalia’s clan leaders (who are now getting their palms greased by the US government) were peacable anarcho-capitalists is living in a fantasy land. They are blood-and-soil warlords, pure and simple.

International Politics, best way to win, Don't Play!!! March 3, 2008 at 11:14 am

The US can send mercs into Somalia and bast em off of ships and drop bombs on these poor helpless people. BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT PART OF A DEMOCRACY!!!!

What about Iran? They are a democracy but the wrong kind. So the US can blast em.

What about China? China isn’t a democracy and Hong Kong, Maccau and Tiawan are so why not blast them? Too much US Interest? US cant blast em.

Ok so if you are mostly undemocratic and have very little interest of the US then the US can blast you. But if you are a totalitarian Commie Pinko state but send cheap stuff to the US then you don’t get blasted even if you forcefully take over former provinces? That are democratic and very much involved with the US.

I have figured this out:
Little US Interest and very poor-Blasted.
Lots of US interest and increasingly wealthy-Not Blasted.
Damn, what about Iraq? They have lots of oil and got blasted?

Politics is hard to follow?

Eric Sundwall March 3, 2008 at 11:34 am

It’s interesting to see this behavior paralleled in Columbia & Turkey. Have all the old geo-political reference points been abandoned in favor of good ‘ol Pax Americana ? Hugo’s move next . . .

Niccolo Adami March 3, 2008 at 11:59 am

Byzantine, you know so little about any other topic you speak of. Why should any of us expect this case to be any different?

Byzantine March 3, 2008 at 2:49 pm

Niccolo,

Why don’t you go to Somalia and find out for yourself? I give your skinny white hide about two minutes before it’s hacked off your bones for either or both of the following: 1) not being Muslim; 2) not being a tribesman.

Niccolo Adami March 3, 2008 at 2:54 pm

Sigh… Again, you express how oblivious you actually are to the situation in Somalia.

lester March 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm

I read an interview with the head muslim somali guy a while back. he sounded ike barry goldwater. the business community was totally behind the muslim courts. sure, some of them went a little overboard trying to ban soccer matches and stuff, but they protected people from the warlords.

we’re spreading al queda into africa. as if they needed help. like michael sheuer says bush is bin ladens indispensible ally.

vvuk1 March 3, 2008 at 10:14 pm

Byzantine is right and wrong about what he says. Lots of the journalists going to Somalia are very confused about what’s going on. In one report, a person may be a warlord in another a peaceful tribal chieftain. You’re average journalist is pretty dumb. Everyone in a country like somalia looks like a warlord when carrying an AK47.

If you’ve done any prolonged researched on Somalia, you discover these information problems. Nothing is very clear cut. What is generally clear cut is that the south including Mogadishu is the primary part of the emerging Islamic groups which are generally not supported by many of the people. When the Islamic government arose, people did not celebrate, they began the first major exodus from Somalia since the early 90′s. This is a pretty strong indicator of people’s sentiment to a radical Islamic government.

The eastern part as I understand remains anarchic. The north has organized into internationally unrecognized very limited governments.

Vedran March 3, 2008 at 10:14 pm

Byzantine is right and wrong about what he says. Lots of the journalists going to Somalia are very confused about what’s going on. In one report, a person may be a warlord in another a peaceful tribal chieftain. You’re average journalist is pretty dumb. Everyone in a country like somalia looks like a warlord when carrying an AK47.

If you’ve done any prolonged researched on Somalia, you discover these information problems. Nothing is very clear cut. What is generally clear cut is that the south including Mogadishu is the primary part of the emerging Islamic groups which are generally not supported by many of the people. When the Islamic government arose, people did not celebrate, they began the first major exodus from Somalia since the early 90′s. This is a pretty strong indicator of people’s sentiment to a radical Islamic government.

The eastern part as I understand remains anarchic. The north has organized into internationally unrecognized very limited governments.

The US isn't their brother, father or mother. March 4, 2008 at 7:54 am

I will not address the obvious issue with this stupid attack that at best it will create more terrorists than existed previously as ones with dead/injured family and friends will be mighty pissed.

I am addressing the whole concept of Neo-Con empire:
1. The US Empire isn’t their brother. We are not responsible for their well being or bad government.
2. The US Empire isn’t their father. We are not responsible for their discipline.
3. The US Empire isn’t their mother. We can’t nurture them into civilization.

Prashant March 4, 2008 at 8:04 am

Byzantine said:
[i]Actually, the US is attacking an emerging Muslim nation-state, not an anarchy. Of course, anyone who still believes Somalia’s clan leaders (who are now getting their palms greased by the US government) were peacable anarcho-capitalists is living in a fantasy land. They are blood-and-soil warlords, pure and simple.[/i]

Well friend the point of an Anarcho-Capitalist society is that its the only kind of Anarchy possible, surely anyone who expects even an Anarcho-capitalist society to be peaceful is living on a fantasy land, but that’s not the point, the point is it will be free of systematic institutional coercion.

For example, in America racism has not gone, its quite thriving in south, but the difference in pre-civil rights movement era and now is that we have eliminated institutional racism, blacks are not stopped from sitting in front of the bus, but if they choose to sit with their black friends only and white with their white friends(like what happens) then that’s a different thing.

Same goes for Anarcho-capitalist society, the govt has been eliminated, and the leftist Anarchy is not there, so its just another form of Anarcho-capitalist society.
Of course when you go to a court, the only law they follow is Shariat(rather than principle of non-initiation of aggression). But this is all because people WANT Islamic law there.

But lemme tell you one more thing about Islamic societies, when people really work they are much more realist, so we all have to wait till Somalia to get a bit more prosperous, until then the Islamism in Somalia will thrive, but since there is no state to facilitate all that, it will be keep on ousted by the people.

Prashant March 4, 2008 at 8:21 am

Byzantine said:
[i]Actually, the US is attacking an emerging Muslim nation-state, not an anarchy. Of course, anyone who still believes Somalia’s clan leaders (who are now getting their palms greased by the US government) were peacable anarcho-capitalists is living in a fantasy land. They are blood-and-soil warlords, pure and simple.[/i]

Well friend the point of an Anarcho-Capitalist society is that its the only kind of Anarchy possible, surely anyone who expects even an Anarcho-capitalist society to be peaceful is living on a fantasy land, but that’s not the point, the point is it will be free of systematic institutional coercion.

For example, in America racism has not gone, its quite thriving in south, but the difference in pre-civil rights movement era and now is that we have eliminated institutional racism, blacks are not stopped from sitting in front of the bus, but if they choose to sit with their black friends only and white with their white friends(like what happens) then that’s a different thing.

Same goes for Anarcho-capitalist society, the govt has been eliminated, and the leftist Anarchy is not there, so its just another form of Anarcho-capitalist society.
Of course when you go to a court, the only law they follow is Shariat(rather than principle of non-initiation of aggression). But this is all because people WANT Islamic law there.

But lemme tell you one more thing about Islamic societies, when people really work they are much more realist, so we all have to wait till Somalia to get a bit more prosperous, until then the Islamism in Somalia will thrive, but since there is no state to facilitate all that, it will be keep on ousted by the people.

Bill aka NO DooDahs! March 4, 2008 at 10:57 am

@ Prashant: Racial bigotry is indeed thriving in the U.S., but not only in the South. It’s everywhere, and not always directed at Negroes, but also at Asians, Arabs, Persians, Latinos, Indians, AmerIndians, and – here’s the shocker! – at Caucasions of European Descent (usually only when we visit neighborhoods predominantly populated by non-Caucasions)! You might be interested in researching the locations of some of the worst riots in the “Civil Rights” era of the U.S. – those that weren’t in the Southeastern states, places like Watts, or Detroit?

@ all: if you want to know why the U.S. is interested in Somalia, pull up a map and Google “Gulf of Aden.”

Quillan Stone March 4, 2008 at 12:59 pm

It is not really an issue whether I or we or the press understand Somalia. The issue is clearly this and this alone… Somalia is there, the American government is here, therefore, it is interventionism rearing its ugly presumptuous head again, just as it continues to do in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, South Korea, Japan, Germany, Gaza, Israel, Panama, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, Hawaii, Florida, Oregon, Kansas, Rhode Island, Utah, Texas, ETC, ETc, Etc, etc……

Prashant March 4, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Bill, my point wasn’t about racism in South, or racism against other racial or ethnic groups, my point was, it was a institutionalized racism against blacks before civil rights movement era and now, though there is no institutionalized racism, there is still racism.

But the point is, at least there is no racism by the Institution.

Same goes for an pre-ancap and ancap society.

We may still have lots of aggression in an ancap society, but at least that won’t be an institutionalized aggression of yearly robbery of people’s wealth and calling it “TAXES”.

Bill aka NO DooDahs! March 4, 2008 at 1:53 pm

I got your point initially, Prashant. Hopefully you got mine. :-)

The U.S. Empire’s interest in control of oil distribution routes could, potentially, be threatened by a hostile nation-state, with a strong conventional military (naval and air power), occupying the area currently called “Somalia.” This is because of proximity to the Gulf of Aden.

Justin Bowen March 5, 2008 at 11:50 pm

“@ all: if you want to know why the U.S. is interested in Somalia, pull up a map and Google “Gulf of Aden.”"

I would venture a guess and assume that this is the exact same reason that we have troops in Djibouti…

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: