Today on Blogcritics
Home » US Gunship Strikes at Al Qaeda in Somalia

US Gunship Strikes at Al Qaeda in Somalia

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Although we may have been distracted by the war in Iraq, it looks like the United States is still making targeting al Qaeda a priority in the international war on terror.

Sometime Sunday an AC-130 gunship flying out of a US base in Djibouti launched an attack on suspected Al Qaeda targets in southern Somalia. Reports are that the targets were Abu Talha al-Sudani, the senior Al Qaeda leader in Somalia and an al Qaeda operative wanted in connection with the 1998 US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, either Fazul Abdullah Mohammed or Saleh Nabhan.  Whether the primary targets have been eliminated is not yet known, but sources inside Somalia are reporting as many as 250 casualties from the attack, likely mostly Islamist insurgents.

Pentagon officials report that the al Qaeda targets had been driven out of Mogadishu by Ethiopian supported troops as part of an ongoing operation to bring the war-torn country under control and subdue Islamic militants who have taken over the southern parts of the country.

Three al Qaeda operatives associated with the embassy bombings are believed to have been hiding out in Somalia for years under the protection of the al Qaeda associated militia known as the Islamic Courts Union. Al Qaeda has been very active in southern Somalia in the last six months in response to a recent call to arms from al Qaeda's second in command Aymin al Zawahiri against Ethiopian 'crusaders' attempting to bring order to the country. Al Qaeda activities in Somalia include logistical support for Somali militias, and setting up training camps and recruiting Somali muslims to participate in al Qaeda operations around the world.

As Ethiopian military units move into Somalia, US or international forces may follow to provide support and bring Somalia under control. US naval units, including the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, have moved into the area to prevent the possible escape of al Qaeda agents by sea. This is the first US engagement in Somalia since forces providing humanitarian aid were pulled out by President Clinton in 1994. As pressure on the Somali insurgents increases and more intelligence is gathered, further airstrikes like the one on Monday seem likely.

Coverage on CNN
Coverage in the Washington Post
Coverage on Fox News

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • lumpy

    looks like this was the start of an all out assault. more al qaeda targets were hit today.

  • nancy

    I wonder about our strategy: kinda like trying to swat flies w/a sledgehammer, ain’t it? They’re so small, all they do is scatter, etc. while all we’ve done is thump our chests again to prove how macho & bad we are? Typical BushCo overkill. It would be more efficient to just send in a team to poison the local waterholes. But of course less macho & noisy, which is what W is all about.

    Bush & Cheney seem to be going farther & further into unreality & fantasyland. I seriously think we ought to either impeach & prosecute both of them – thereby removing them from office before they do even more harm – or have them both declared mentally disfunctional & committed to St. Elizabeth’s padded cells for the delusional Executive – thereby removing them from office before they do even more harm.

  • SFC SKI

    Actually, gunships can do some very specific targeting.

    Africa is an ungoverned continent for the most part, corruption and incompetence make it a “free trade zone” for all type of terrorist activities. AQ and others will continue to take advantage of it if we continue to ignore it. Make no mistake, if left unchecked, Africa will become a major stronghold for all types of terrorist groups and supporters.

    Until recently, there was no single US military command responsible for keeping abreast of issues on the African continent, but there finally will be. I hope it is not too late.

    Reading the reports out of Somalia, it seems that the Islamic terrorists actually alienated themselves from the population. Next big question, will anyone other than the US try to assist the Ethiopian and Somali efforts to build up their countries, or will they all hold back, wait for the US to withdraw and let it all collapse back into anarchy? History repeats…

    Within 24 hours, someone is going to make these US attacks to look like another imperialist move, and another will ask about Darfur, but still not support the use of force.

  • ss

    I have to give to Bush credit on this one. Osama wanted Somalia, and he didn’t it get it.
    Huh.
    I guess even a blind squirrel gets a nut every once in a while.

    Which isn’t to say I’m wildly opptomistic about the Somali government’s chances for survival, relying as it has on troops from a country that has invaded Somalia before
    -I’m talking about the Ethiopians, SKI. Ethiopian empirilism. Bet you weren’t expecting that-
    Getting rid of a bad government is one thing, replacing it with something that actually works, as we’ve seen, is another.

    And this also doesn’t mean, no matter how the Prez chose to time this, that he’s winning me over on Iraq by equating the two. Creating an even more dangerous version of Somalia a little further to the north isn’t negated by doing something right in Somalia.

  • Zedd

    I would be more apt to take anyone more seriously if they didn’t use the phrase “the war on terrrrrrr”. I cant help but say it in that fake Texas accent.

    It sort of makes me smirk because it forces a barrage of all of The Decider’s famous phrases and it becomes funny.

    Okay… now let me read the article.

  • Zedd

    Dave

    I suppose the article “Why We Cant Afford to Ignore Africa” has some weight now????

  • Zedd

    SFC SKI

    “Africa is an ungoverned continent for the most part,”

    Simmer down cowboy. Don’t forget, Africans have computers too. You cant make such ridiculous statements any more. This is no longer the 1800’s. Statements liket “here are man eating pigmies and ape men who cook blondes roaming the dark continent” dont’ fly.

    Lets say its badly governed for the most part.

    You can apply to Africa the same conclusion as countries of the old Soviet Union, in terms of governance for very similar reasons.

  • SHARK

    SHARK sits by the viddy, breathlessly awaiting Bush’s speech on the new “surge” — um, I mean ESCALATION — in Iraq.

    SHARK laughs as he notes talking heads, from Left and Right, scratching their noggins while yakkin’ — ALL wondering how one President can LOSE AN ELECTION — then ask a Bi-Partisan commission, friends, opponents, and military leaders for advice — process said advice — and THEN — like a Bad Monty Python Skit — COME UP WITH SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

    SHARK likens to process to explaining to one’s child the chemistry and physics of FIRE, then giving them a choice between a candle and an incandescent bulb — and having them — after two months of “listening mode” and nation-wide consultations — to announce that they’ve decided to BURN DOWN THE HOUSE — even tho that wasn’t one of the options.

    SHARK — anticipating that the Bizarre Tragic/Hilarious National Trainwreck is about to get even more WEIRD and HILARIOUS (especially for the 150,000 unlucky Americans who are unlucky enough to be born with gigantic red-white-and-blue targets on their backs) — sits back and ponders the Bush/Casey Jones speech planned for THE NEXT NIGHT — and can’t even imagine how much worse and/or insane things might get in the next 24 hours.

    SHARK — while watching [on TV] the LARGEST FIREFIGHT in BAGHDAD since the beginning of the invasion in 03 — notes that the tragic fucking nightmare is suddenly interupted for some “BREAKING NEWS” — which appears to be…

    “US STRIKES AT AL QAEDA IN SOMALIA” —

    SHARK smiles to self, thinks that — once again — the Bush administration thinks the American People are a hypnotized, mindless, thoughtless, forgetful, immature, easily swayed, easily amused Nation of Morons.

    SHARK multi-tasks the dominant “Breaking News: story and the news “crawl” at the bottom of the screen:

    “US STRIKES AT AL QAEDA IN SOMALIA”
    “BUSH TO ANNOUNCE NEW IRAQ STRATEGY ON WEDS”

    and thinks…

    WHAT

    A

    FUCKING

    COINCIDENCE.

    !

    !

    !

    !

    !

    !

    !

    !

  • SHARK

    Zedd on Africe: “Lets say its badly governed for the most part.”

    Yeah. Okay.

    And I write short sentences.

    And Saddam Hussein ain’t feelin’ so swell today.

  • SHARK

    And Nalle, with this “article” — once again, you set the New Indoor Record for MARKETING BULLSHIT FOR BUSH on Blogcritics.

    You should be proud.

    ~Baaaaaaaaaaaa…

  • SHARK

    Aesthetic Note:

    Dave, just as we admonished “JET in Columbus” to take down that horrible cheezecake photo of him lookin’ like the love child of Arnold Swartzenegger and an Australopithecus female — I BEG YOU, FUCKING BEGGGGGGGGGG YOU to remove that photo of you looking like a Quaker Gunfighter with a corncob stuck up his ass.

    Seriously, man, it’s distracting.

    Just tryin’ to be helpful.

    xxoo
    Yer Pal in the Saddle,
    SHARK

  • sr

    Shark. Get a hobby. Your friend, sr

  • Franco

    #2 — nancy

    “I wonder about our strategy: kinda like trying to swat flies w/a sledgehammer, ain’t it? They’re so small, all they do is scatter, etc.”

    Nancy, do your even know what a AC-130 gunship is, or even why it was part of our strategy used in this attack? Based on your assertion above, which is faults, I don’t believe you do, because if you did know, you would know how it completely exposes and discredits your prejudice clearly displayed in your above statement. If you really want to know then ahead and take a set in one and watch it swating flies and how it can do so with presision even in the middle of the night. Viewer discretion is advised

    “while all we’ve done is thump our chests again to prove how macho & bad we are? Typical BushCo overkill.”

    The BushCo overkill statements (the Co part) would also mean President George W. Bush’s choice of generals in full control and command in Iraq. Who are these Generals accused by Nancy of being over kill cowboys.

    General John Philip Abizaid (Arabic: جون أبي زيد) (born April 1, 1951) is a General in the United States Army and the Commander of the United States Central Command (CENTCOM), overseeing American military operations in a 27-country region, from the Horn of Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, to South and Central Asia, covering much of the Middle East.

    Abizaid was born in Coleville, California, to a Christian Lebanese-American family, is fluent in Arabic, and is the most senior military officer of direct Arab descent.

    Education
    Abizaid’s military education includes the United States Military Academy (USMA) at West Point, New York (Class of 1973); Infantry Officer Basic and Advanced courses, Armed Forces Staff College, and a U.S. Army War College Senior Fellowship at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

    In his civilian studies, he earned a Master of Arts degree in Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University, and was an Olmsted Scholar at the University of Jordan in Amman, Jordan. Abizaid greatly impressed his teachers at Harvard University. Nadav Safran, the director of the Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies kept Abizaid’s 100-page paper on defense policy for Saudi Arabia, the only paper of a masters student he has kept, saying, “It was absolutely the best seminar paper I ever got in my 30-plus years at Harvard.”

    General John Abizaid

    General David Howell Petraeus (born November 7, 1952) is a Lieutenant General in the United States Army. On January 4, 2007, it was announced and approved by President Bush that Petraeus will be appointed to commander of Multinational Force Iraq (MNF-I). In addition to promotion from Lieutenant General to General, Petraeus will oversee all forces in Iraq and carry out the new Iraqi strategy plan

    Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne Division during the 2003 invasion of Iraq and during that unit’s occupation of Mosul into mid-2004. Petraeus has been widely lauded for his effectiveness in administering Mosul, where public order decayed rapidly in 2004 soon after the 101st left.

    In June of 2004, Petraeus was charged with the task of training the new Iraqi Army and security forces as commander of the Multi-National Security Transition Command – Iraq.

    Education
    LTG Petraeus is a 1974 graduate of the United States Military Academy. Petraeus was the General George C. Marshall Award winner as the top graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College Class of 1983. He subsequently earned MPA (Master of Public Administration) and Ph.D. degrees in international relations from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, and later served as an Assistant Professor of International Relations at the U.S. Military Academy. His Ph.D. dissertation, “The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam”, dealt with the influence of Vietnam on military thinking regarding the use of force. He also completed a fellowship at Georgetown University.

    General David Petraeus

    Nancy suggests….
    “It would be more efficient to just send in a team to poison the local waterholes. But of course less macho & noisy, which is what W is all about.”

    I will put my faith in, and what influences my outlook on the war in Iraq, upon the Generals listed above, and the soldigers under their command. Through their education both military and civilian, their training, extensive experience, and the accomplishments of these gentlemen, (oh, excuse me Nancy, over kill cowboys), over any you could or would suggest.

    “Bush & Cheney seem to be going farther & further into unreality & fantasyland. I seriously think we ought to either impeach & prosecute both of them – thereby removing them from office before they do even more harm – or have them both declared mentally disfunctional & committed to St. Elizabeth’s padded cells for the delusional Executive – thereby removing them from office before they do even more harm.”

    Our military men and women serving over in Iraq, and those who just attacked Al-Quada in Somilia do not share your sentiments, and to put it a little more direct, they detest them. While you site home, or where ever, and post exceedingly un-well thought out assertions based on prejudice for the world to see, I would like to ask you the following question.

    If our soldiers with boots on the ground, and our generals leading them do NOT what to leave because they believe they can get the Iraqis themselves to secure and bring their Iraq under the control of the new goverment, nor dose our military want to retreat on any opportunity to attack terrorest in other areas, in this case Somilia, why do you want them to leave so much when they want to stay to finish this job?

    Nancy, you have better then this……either put it out here or get back in the kitchen!

  • Zedd

    Shark

    When we oversimplify matters we miss them all together. I’d rather have a good glimps of my world than to be content with a synopsys of blurry over and understatements. Africa is complex. There are bad governments but to say that the countries are not governed at all is not only wrong but it is dumb. Its like saying that the middle east is not governed because of Afganistan (a few years back). Ignorant. But a few years back most Americans knew what Afganistan was….

    Lets just say, we don’t know much about Africa and we don’t really care to know about it. Instead of offering opinions.

    Bush was able to convince the American public to go into Iraq because most people thought “they are all alike. I’m sure there must be terrist there too”….. dumb!

    On CNN last night there was a focus on Oprah’s project. In the entire hour report, which I enjoyed, you would have NEVER know that South Africa was a highly developed country with cities that make most US cities look shabby. It would be like comming to the US and focusing only on trailer parks and saying that you had covered America. You would be accurate but your report would be extremely distorted and significantly incomplete.

  • Zedd

    I meant to say not many Americans knew what Afganistan was.

  • Zedd

    Franco

    Pull yourself together.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    And Nalle, with this “article” — once again, you set the New Indoor Record for MARKETING BULLSHIT FOR BUSH on Blogcritics.

    Shark, this is a straight news report with ZERO interpretive content compiled from four or five different mainstream media sources. Do, please, point out to me what Bush anything I’m marketing in this article.

    And BTW, talking about yourself in the third person is a key milestone on the road to madness.

    Dave

  • Zedd

    Shark

    Dave Sez: And BTW, talking about yourself in the third person is a key milestone on the road to madness.

    ummm agreed. I know that you are in kook mode but I need the lucid you back. We’ve got to hold these people accountable and nudge the thought meter up a few notches. Can you shorten the nutcase phase of the cycle? I know it exhausting to be brilliant and the mind must rest but pull yourself together man!

  • Franco

    #8 — SHARK

    SHARK plays TV quiz show special on Iraq

    Here are the results of our special guest.

    SHARK Answer: COME UP WITH SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

    Gong! Wrong…. Correct Answer is…

    There ain’t gonna be nothing different, that’s all political hype at home which will only result in putting more pressure on our troops and their infield commanders while the drools exude from the mouths of our blood thirsty butchering advisories shearing SHARK&Co. on.

    SHARK: unlucky Americans who are unlucky enough to be born with gigantic red-white-and-blue targets on their backs

    Gong! Wrong again. Correct answer is….

    These Americans don’t share your sentiment and their there.

    SHARKS: the Bush administration thinks the American People are a hypnotized, mindless, thoughtless, forgetful, immature, easily swayed, easily amused Nation of Morons.

    Gong: Wrong once again. Correct answer is:

    US Military with boots on the ground in Iraq think that the American People are a hypnotized, mindless, thoughtless, forgetful, immature, easily swayed, easily amused Nation of Morons if they think SHARK&Co expresses any of our sentiments here on the ground in Iraq.

    Please stay tuned next week for round two when SHARK answers more on what our US Military really thinks about the war.

  • Zedd

    Franco

    Even your jokes are LONG and boring.

    I’m surprised you didn’t provide links then copy an paste from some lame site to prove the validity of your joke. Sorry couldn’t resist.

  • SHARK

    Zedd: “Can you shorten the nutcase people accountable and nudge the thought meter up a few notches. Can you shorten the nutcase phase of the cycle? I know it exhausting to be brilliant and the mind must rest but pull yourself together man!”

    [cut to a CLOSE-UP of our hero — looking like a chimpanzee being offered a Zen Koan]

    [SHARK ponders the advice]

    SHARK: [aloud to self] Nah.

  • SHARK

    Nalle: “talking about yourself in the third person is a key milestone on the road to madness.”

    And writing boring, cookie-cutter “news-speak” ‘essay/marketing press releases — and monumental cut-and-paste doctoral theses from Hell — with no wit, no style, no insights, and no originality is… well…

    ~um, Dave Nalle, I’d like you to meet Franco.

    ~Mr. Franco, say hello to Dave Nalle.

  • SHARK

    Gotta run!

    My class on “The Philosophy of Bumper Stickers” is about to begin!

    xxoo
    A Gemini

  • Mohjho

    Lets see now, basically a gunship is able to completely destroy a large swath of real estate and anyone in it at the push of a button.

    They mentioned who they were trying to kill, but since a gunship is a standoff weapon, do we know who we killed? What is the body count? Were civilians killed or do we even care? Is there any accountability or do we just pin citations on our generals for shooting up a target no matter who gets killed.

    Kind of reminds me of when Clinton sent in a bunch of Cruise missiles after ben Laden and simply hoped that they hit something. Hail Mary!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    And writing boring, cookie-cutter “news-speak” ‘essay/marketing press releases — and monumental cut-and-paste doctoral theses from Hell — with no wit, no style, no insights, and no originality is… well…

    Shark, we’re trying to keep on top of important events s they happen with some basic news summary articles which folks can use as a starting point for discussions. If this is a problem for you then I suggest you skip any articles with ‘news’ as their classification.

    As for the ‘marketing’ aspects of this article I’m still waiting for you to point out what exactly it is that I’m supposed to be promoting here – other than news, that is.

    Dave

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    They mentioned who they were trying to kill, but since a gunship is a standoff weapon, do we know who we killed?

    It doesn’t stand off that far. You’ve got visual targetting options.

    What is the body count?

    As the article says, 250 give or take.

    Were civilians killed

    My guess is that al Qaeda will say we killed civilians and the military will say we killed al Qaeda trainees, and both will have some truth on their side.

    or do we even care?

    A nonsensical question. Of course we care. But we also have to consider things like the deterrent value. If civilians realize that it’s dangerous to provide a haven to terrorists then they might stop doing it, making our lives a lot easier.

    Is there any accountability or do we just pin citations on our generals for shooting up a target no matter who gets killed.

    Why do you start from the assumption that we hit the wrong people or killed innocents? It seems to me that starting from that perspective before we know all the facts is characteristic of an extreme level of bias.

    Kind of reminds me of when Clinton sent in a bunch of Cruise missiles after ben Laden and simply hoped that they hit something. Hail Mary!

    Cruise missiles fired from hundreds of miles away are far less accurate and certainly not as versatile as an actual manned gunship.

    Dave

  • SonnyD

    #23 Shark: A Gemini? Nah, don’t believe it!

  • http://mrbounce.blogspot.com/ Melita Teale

    Dave: Why do you start from the assumption that we hit the wrong people or killed innocents?

    Because “you” have a crappy track record in terms of hitting the wrong people and killing innocents in Somalia. And now your country is backing an invasion carried out by one of Somalia’s neighbours that has a FUCKING HIDEOUS record in terms of killing civilians and innocents.

    In view of the US record in Somalia, civilians there have probably already realized that it’s dangerous to provide a haven to “terrorists”. But apparently they didn’t stop doing it.

    Have you asked yourself why? Have you prepared for the impact of throwing the baby out with the bathwater to get at those “terrorists” when it comes to the role the Islamic Courts played for the people of Somalia? Or are you already preparing to blame the bloody shitstorm that’s about to happen there on a Democratic Congress who’ll underfund reconstruction efforts?

    Also, the question of target accuracy with gunships or any kind of remote bombardment is moot when “you” have a history of trusting bad intelligence in the region (and elsewhere), and when the intelligence in this case came from Somalian and Ethiopian sources whose interest isn’t in stamping out Al Quaeda and its ideology, but in Somalia’s continued slide into chaos.

    I’ll point out I’m saying “you” because you said “we.” This ridiculous manoeuvre was an executive decision that the people of America shouldn’t be blamed for and shouldn’t have to pay for, literally or figuratively – but probably will.

  • ss

    Mohijo:
    Kind of reminds me of when Clinton sent in a bunch of Cruise missiles after ben Laden and simply hoped that they hit something. Hail Mary!
    Dave:
    Cruise missiles fired from hundreds of miles away are far less accurate and certainly not as versatile as an actual manned gunship.

    In both cases it probably depends on knowing if the target is actually at the location.

  • Franco

    ##28 — Melita Teale

    Wherever terrorests are, civilian will be killed. Those are the facts.

    Terrorists barter in terrorism PERIOD. By its very nature and at its very core it exploits and prostitutes civilians though terrorism. This exploitation in terror of civilians holds no rules or rational with terrorests. To all terrorests, civilians are nothing more that a means to an end. Terrorests dress just like civilians. They either exploit civilians as cover and protection (which is terrorism), and or they kill civilians themselves willfully and often in the most barbaric methods imaginable in efforts to advance their rationale through this terror.

    The military armed forces of the greater western world all wear clearly identifiable uniforms and markings and take great pains in their training and real war time engagements to save, assist, and protect civilians. That is the very nature and at the very core of their mindset. Even with this mindset, western military forces will not prevent civilians from being killed.

    However, in sheer contrast to western military mindset concerning the care for civilians, terrorests make it standard military practice of exploiting civilians in all aspects to their militant agendas. Additionally, most terrorests have subscribed and regressed to a barbaric from of Islam where respect for civilians, their civil rights, and their protection in these nations is measurably lower then western cultures. Adding terrorism to this and it makes it the worst possible situation for civilians anywhere in the world.

    When taking into account these two distinctively different respect of lack of respect for civilians, why then dose the US and Coalition forces (military armed forces of the greater western world) and especially the United States get all the negative press concerning civilian casualties? I live that open for discussion/debate.

  • Emry

    Remember My Lai.

  • Emry

    Remember Dresden.

  • Emry

    Remember Hiroshima.

  • Emry

    Remember Nagasaki.

  • Emry

    Remember the Nazis.

  • Emry

    Remember to get the picture, Franco.

  • Franco

    #31 — Emry

    OK, you dispute my assertions about western military vs terrorists and who civilian suffer under the most which I gave opinion on in my post #30.

    You bring up some good points and worth discussing. Let’s take your counter assertions one at a time

    “Remember My Lai.

    Emry, what exactly is your point here?. Are you asserting that My Lai represents an example of standard US Military strategy concerning civilians, as I assert is dones not, and assert that it applies to the terrorests we fight today?

    My Lai was a war crime committed in the March 1968 in the massacre of Vietnamese civilians by U.S. soldiers that generated worldwide outrage. I agree that this was a war crime committed against civilians by US forces.

    So far you are not being clear on this assertion. Please help me understand how your point on My Lai discredits what I posted in #30.

  • Emry

    Franco, western powers and their armed forces are governed by Christian boy scouts and girl scouts who would never ever terrorize anybody unless it was for their own good. Really!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I realize you’re trying to be sarcastic, Emry, but your last comment was closer to the truth than you realize. I guarantee the crew of that gunship and the people who ordered it into action care a hell of a lot more about what happens to Somali civilians than anyone in al Qaeda does.

    Dave

  • http://mrbounce.blogspot.com/ Melita Teale

    Dave, that’s a false dichotomy and you know it. Al Qaeda and the Islamic Courts are not the same thing. I understand why you suggest they are, and I don’t sympathize.

    Franco, I’m not so confident you understand your dichotomy is false. You’ve heard the ‘terrorist’ word and ran with it like a dog to a dinner bell, which would be funny if people in Somalia didn’t have to pay for the knee-jerk tub-thumping of people like you.

    Look: the information the American government has about about ‘terrorists’ in Somalia is almost definitely false. Once the Ethiopian military moved in in force, the Islamists scattered. And no ‘terrorist’ or guerrilla or whatever you want to call it worth his salt is going to make some bold fucking last stand against any organized military, especially when the United States has been supporting the military and trash-talking the group.

    Especially not in a situation where they can count on some sympathy from a population that helped put the Islamic Courts in power in a desperate fucking bid for some stability – not the most self-serving bid, but a bold one considering the mess Somalia has been for so long, and considering how ‘terrorized’ it’s been by the non-uniformed militia groups the Islamic courts fought so hard to bring down and the United States has sporadically supported with arms and money.

    I’ll take lectures on military strategy, Franco, but not from someone as Pavlovian as you.

  • Nancy

    Yeah – what Melita (#40) said. And I still maintain using the weapons Bush did on Somalia is swatting flies w/a sledgehammer. BTW, Franco ol’ neocon warhorse, I served in the CG for some years, so I’m familiar with the boats, yes. And you? Did YOU ever serve anywhere militarily – except out of your armchair? Don’t automatically relegate gals to the kitchen, you macho shithead.

  • Bliffle

    Looks like GWB is trying to shift attention back to AQ and OBL to gain some legitimacy after the Iraq fiasco.

  • Emry

    No offence, Dave, but a guarantee from you doesn’t instill confidence. I hope Franco isn’t expecting me to read more of his stuff. I’m distracted by the war in Iraq and the task of sorting out how many civilians have been killed by nice people in uniforms and the hired help.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I hope you’ll spare some thought to how many innocents Saddam would have killed in the same time period had we not invaded Iraq, but I doubt that you will.

    Dave

  • Emry

    Should I try to guess the number of innocents who would have been murdered by Saddam’s uniformed killers, or are they to viewed as collateral damage?

  • Martin Lav

    Dave ol boy,

    Glad to see you kept an article short and sweet for a change. In a hurry?

    I believe Bliffle sums up SHARKS original point in post #10 rather well with:

    “Looks like GWB is trying to shift attention back to AQ and OBL to gain some legitimacy after the Iraq fiasco.”

    For you to wonder:
    “As for the ‘marketing’ aspects of this article I’m still waiting for you to point out what exactly it is that I’m supposed to be promoting here – other than news, that is.”

    SHARK like most of us on here can see through your disguise no matter what Knott’s Berry Farm costume you wear.

  • Alec

    This news story is most likely a CIA disinformation campaign, a desperate attempt by the Bush Administration to show that the US is “serious” about its supposed war on terror in places other than Iraq. The most recent AP story notes the following: “Ethiopian and U.S. forces were in pursuit of three top al-Qaida suspects Thursday, with a senior U.S. official confirming that none of them were killed in a U.S. airstrike and were believed to still be in Somalia.”

    Also, the assertion that “As Ethiopian military units move into Somalia, US or international forces may follow to provide support and bring Somalia under control” is absurd. The Islamic Courts were a deal with the devil. Somalia had distintegrated as a coherent national political entity, and the Islamic Courts, much like the Taliban in Afghanistan, promised to bring order and relief from the Somali warlords who had turned pockets of Somalia into their personal fiefdoms. Unfortunately, and typically, the Islamic Courts degenerated into fundamentalist tyrants and genocidal thugs.

    Ethiopia has emphasized that they will not be involved in nation building, so if elected Somali leaders cannot restore order, another descent into chaos may be inevitable. Somalia’s problems are much deeper than the alleged presence of Al Queda. I suspect that someone told Bush that if he sent gunships into Somalia, he could show that he was tougher than Clinton and erase the stain of “Blackhawk Down.” But apart from this, the search for Al Queda in Somalia is a pathetic sideshow that is irrelevant to the larger problems in this area of Africa.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Alec, your comment is truly ridiculous. Are the reports of civilian casualties coming from Somalis in the region CIA disinformation too?

    Dave

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    Reports from on the ground?

    OK..here’s one that says the U.S. missed their targets and killed more civilians than initially reported.

  • Nancy

    This whole Somalian snipe hunt was organized to try to give Georgie Boy somewhere he could maybe have a small success to wave around. Per the usual BushCo style, it was rampant overkill. Literally, it seems.

  • Martin Lav

    “Wag the Dog”
    Nalle you are a puppet to the regime

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Exactly, D’oh. That’s similar to the reports I saw from Somalia. The point is that it’s not a fiction or some sort of disinformation campaign. The attacks have taken place and some targets appear to have been hit. At the very least some al Queda training camps and some of their allies seem to have been hit.

    Just another stop for war on terror express.

    Dave

  • STM

    Dave wrote: “The attacks have taken place and some targets appear to have been hit. At the very least some al Queda training camps and some of their allies seem to have been hit.”

    Bloody good. The US has every right to attack these idiots and to protect its interests – most importantly, its own people. In fact, it would be remiss of the US not to do it. No point having a war on terror without having a war on terror.

    No one should be silly enough to believe that if we all just stand there with handbags and bunches of flowers these guys are going to be nice to us.

    We shouldn’t, and they won’t.

  • STM

    And a timely reminder from those who know: from a book I am reading at the moment, a great quote by British Army officer and SAS commander and Iraq veteran Tim Collins, of the Royal Irish Regiment, who wrote in his book Rules of Engagement: “Terrorists … want it both ways: they kill without mercy but when they are confronted, they want to be shown the mercy they would not dream of showing their own victims.”

    No one should show them any.

  • Franco

    #53 — STM

    “Bloody good. The US has every right to attack these idiots and to protect its interests – most importantly, its own people. In fact, it would be remiss of the US not to do it. No point having a war on terror without having a war on terror.

    Thank you,

  • Mohjho

    “A nonsensical question. Of course we care.”

    No Dave, I don’t think you do care, as long as we look tough and act decisively, you are happy and results mean nothing. This administration has proven itself time and again as incompetent. What do you get when you mix incompetence with a gunship in some third world nation? Compassionate Conservatism creating even more terrorists that want to kill us along with some fine soundbites on Fox news.

    Now maybe this strike was a well placed surgical operation that created a positive impact on our struggle to defend ourselves. You seem to have absolute certainty of this. I do not.

    It seems that our war on terror is taking on the look of Israel’s anti terror tactics; get some intelligence of a targeted person, and blow the hell out of the area. Works so well for them.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Moj, you make the mistake of thinking that when I say ‘we’ I’m speaking for the administration. I have no idea how they feel about anything, but I was speaking for sensible Americans who care, but temper their caring with a dollop of common sense.

    Dave

  • ProfEssays

    I am all for land invasion in Somalia. It will make it easy to track down terrorists.

  • STM

    “Should I try to guess the number of innocents who would have been murdered by Saddam’s uniformed killers, or are they to viewed as collateral damage?”

    How’d you end up on this thread Emry … thought it was about a computer game??