The SNM was beaten

[Sharmarkee]

Originally posted by me:

With this tread I am trying to raise 3 issues.

 

 

1. The SNM betrayed the Somali Nation and the Somali people by collaborating with the enemy of Somalia.

 

2. The SNM sacrificed and made the people of Hargeysa and Burco suffer for their own selfish gains.

 

3. The SNM was beaten by the Somali National army and this can be proven by the fact that the day that Mogadisho fell to the USC not one single village was in SNM hands.

 

The whole cult of SNM worship that surrounds the SNM is built on lies. They were not Mujaahidiins they were more like traitors.

 

They never fought for the bettering of the lives of the people of the North West they fought for gaining power.

 

They had taken a calculated cold blooded decision to sacrifice the people they want to make us believe they were trying to defend. The sole responsible for the death, destruction and the humiliation of the people of the North West are the SNM.

 

They attacked the cities with a small group of rebels that never stood a chance. They also tried to prevent people from moving out of the city, so that when the Somali National Army tried to recapture the cities there would be maximum civilian casualties.

 

They committed genocide among the Hargeysawi's that were not of the SNM clan, so that there would be reprisals when they left the cities.

 

The only bit that seems to be true in the cult of SNM worshipping is the claim that they drank their own urine. But then again you can ask yourself if the SNM was as mighty militarily as they would like us to believe why drink urine while there are wells everywhere? Oodweyne tell us please is it that tasty that you would prefer it over water?

 

You are one-sided as far as you didn't talk what created the SNM in the first place, and why a great junk of military elites of Somali national army defected to the enemy, wasn't a scorched earth policy, mass executions, rapes, and cracking whip of Afwayne's unfairness which was sending young men to their early premature deaths, was the underlining story in here!

 

I think you are not an objective writer that goes after the storylines, you need to spare us your nonsense, calayaqas, and bogus history mate.

[me]

Dear all,

 

I am very pleased with your reactions and over reactions.

 

Sharmarke: You are right I am not objective. I am looking for the confrontation, I want a debate here, and I do not want jiibis. I want everyone to voice their own opinions. We should all use our brains and come to our own conclusions.

 

Wiilka Shaydaanka thank you for the link.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

We the Somali people need to face our past we need to look at it objectively. We should not write history along clan lines. We should write it as it happened. It’s good, its bad and its ugly. We should face the truth.

 

It was not as black and white as we would like to believe. It was in all shades of grey.

 

Siyaad Barre was not a good guy, but nor was he a bad guy.

 

The SNM rebels included Somali Patriots who were motivated in overthrowing Siyaad Barre’s dictatorship and bettering the lives of all Somali’s, while others were clannish individuals who were motivated by clan chauvinism.

 

Many officers in the Somali National Army objected and protested against the heavy handedness of the army against the rebels in the towns. This bravery was punished harshly. Somali officers like Lieutenant-Colonel Ahmed Mohamed Hassan refused to bomb Somali cities. While others obeyed all orders. Who was right? Who was wrong?

 

In 1988 nothing was black and white; it was in all shades of grey. So it is sad to see the secessionist mafia run away with what happened and portray it as ‘clan-genocide’. It is sad to see how their one sided reporting on the Somali history is planting the seeds of hate in the Somalis in the North West.

 

They are brainwashing these kids. 60% of the people in North West today were born after 1980. The secessionist mafia is telling the same lie repeatedly to these young masses. They are selling hatred to the young people.

 

It is in the interest of peace and Somali coexistence that we report our history objectively.

 

 

1. The SNM betrayed the Somali Nation and the Somali people by collaborating with the enemy of Somalia.

 

Ok did the SNM collaborate with the enemy of the Somali nation while we were in a state of war? Yes they did.

 

Was doing this wrong? Yes it was it was treason.

 

2. The SNM sacrificed and made the people of Hargeysa and Burco suffer for their own selfish gains.

 

Did the SNM sacrifice the people of Hargeysa and Burco? Yes they did, you do not have to be a military genius to see that you can not hold cities as large as Hargeysa and Burco with 1500 against the third largest and strongest army in sub-Saharan Africa.

 

 

3. The SNM was beaten by the Somali National army and this can be proven by the fact that the day that Mogadisho fell to the USC not one single village was in SNM hands.

 

Was the SNM beaten? Most definitely, although they succeeded in one thing and that was that they radicalized the population of the North West.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

 

Mr. Oodweyne,

 

Thank you for confirming it. You have not denied that the SNM was beaten. You have evaded the whole subject and attacked me personally and that is enough for me. Everyone reading this topic sees that you the secessionist mafia’s ambassador on SOL is evading the question.

 

Mr. Oodweyne I ask you again. Was the SNM beaten by the Somali National Army? If not please provide the evidence.

 

I have one more question for you though, are you aware that your kind will never be able to rewrite history? And that history will be a cruel judge to your ‘lot’.

[Suldaanka]

^^If that makes you sleep better, yes the SNM was beaten by Afwayne. Happy

 

 

To Odweyne, Northerner and et al

haybtii garanwaaga meelahan ka hantatacee, give him all the space he needs... ha ka qalin daarina meel fiican ayuu kaga hayaaye.

[NGONGE]

 

I guarantee you that we have destroyed these SNM traitors. We had them circled, trapped and besieged. Believe me when I say we only let them in those cities as a tactical plan so that we may destroy them. We are about to destroy them. Rest assured that we would! They have not defeated us, it was a strategic retreat! These are mercenaries that are not supported by the majority of the population. They shall be crushed. They have been crushed. :mad:

[me]

Hey hey hey no need to get angry people.

 

Come with EVIDENCE!!!!

 

1. Was there 1 village, let alone a town that was in SNM hands the day that the USC captured Mogadisho?

 

2. Is there any neutral party that can confirm it?

 

3. Have you read the link that I have provided about the declassified documents from the US embassy in Somalia that is claiming that the refugees were returning and that the North was pacified?

 

 

So folks calm down and come with evidence don't come here with my uncle told me stories. Mr. Oodweyne the only toddler here is the one that is using personal attacks instead of sound arguments. Well balanced arguments will settle this debate. Please let me know when you learn how to participate in a constructive debate.

 

 

To the question of:

 

Originally posted by Oodweyne:

the question is, how come, I and the rest of

Somalilanders are sitting quite prettily in top of our nation calls

Somaliland Republic

Ask the USC.

[me]

Dear SOL’ers,

 

 

I believe that you can see how this debate is unfolding and how these supporters of the secessionist mafia are trying to derail this whole debate by throwing mud and that they are resorting to vicious personal attacks that are uncalled for. Please remind them that this is an open forum that is intended for open minded debates rather than myopic clan chauvinism inspired slur.

 

Oodweyne, Suldaanka, NGONGE and others I would urge you to come with evidence if you want to discredit my arguments. My arguments are sound and solid and the SNM was beaten. If you would like to claim anything other then that please provide the dear SOL public with evidence.

[RedSea]

Originally posted by General Duke:

If the SNM won the war why did they not rule Somaliland?

 

Egaal was not a member, and neither was Dahir Riyaale Kahin. So much for the warriors.

Isn't it good idea,to maybe ask before you speak and write as though you are right on the point?

 

CabdiRaxman Tuur was a member of the SNM, he was the chairman before Silanyo was,so after the Somali dictator was ousted, and Somaliland declared UNI (unilateral declaration), he was elected to lead it,thus SNM did rule Somaliland from the begining,but unlike the South,they later chose someone who knew more about politics with previous experience, so they chose Igal(aabihii Siyaasada),Tuur had different expertise,Igal was more suitable in leading Somaliland later on.Simple as that.

 

Dahir Riyale Kahin came later,much later on.

 

Mr.Me, you are claiming your arguments are sound and solid,eh? well I think if we were to put all kidding aside and deal with facts.

 

First of all, you must understand the root what causes an uprising by the people? does it happened,because one wants to gain power and overthrow an existing ruling government, no? that is called coup, and it happens rather distinct way,but as far an mass uprising by the people,it comes to an effect when there is disatisfacation, misery, oppression.Which one can argue was the reason that brought upon the existance of various soup of letters,begining with the SSDF, follow by the SNM and so forth.

 

The real reasons that brought upon the ousting of the dictator Barre is much more complex then simply say the SNM is to blame for the failture of the Somali government and killings of thousands of innocent people, which is rather absure and superficial thoughts if you ask me.

 

If that was the case,and it was indeed the SNM that caused the remaining regular army to bombard Hargeysa and Burco,then how could you explain, the ruthless acts commited by many SNA officers and their military personal in the country side including rapes(don't ask me for proof,because eye witness is the way to go)secret excussions of intellects,good political minds of certain clan, and many many more ruthless acts in the hands by the government of which you are making an excuses for.

 

Another point which you have raised,is who fought the government more the SNM or USC and which had more effect.To explain to new comer of politics, the base and heartland of the former fascist regime was in xamar, thus all its key areas and blocks were located within Xamar,including the Siyad Barre himself and his close kins in which he instlaed although they lacked the qualifications.

 

In the North, present day Somaliland, the SNA(somali national army) had 26th army division(qabta 26 aad),joined by 54th army division in Gorowe,21st army division from Dhuusomareeb,the 77th army division from Xamar itself,and 64th division from Kismayo, as well as masive draft from minority tribes in the South were all brought to the North to fight their own bretherens, although many refused and surrendered themsleves and their weaponary to the SNM.In this period there were nasty fights begining from 1984-throughout 1990.It's well documented who suffered the most in the battlefield,when we put the figures of the civilian casualties aside,the SNA was inflicted severe damage of its capabilities despite outnumbering the SNM and having more and far more fire power,Simply the SNM was using the weapons they had captured from the SNA with the exception of few provided to them by Ethiopia.Which brings me to point out that the SNM was in Ethiopia under its own interest and EThiopia was also benefiting from them,it was we both win type of scenerio, to say SNM invited or was invited by our enemy Ethiopia,you have overlooked the fact that the Somali govermnent would them no favor,therefore it's understandible why one will even become a friend of its foe, in order to rid another foe,the somali fascist regime.As it turns out,Siyad Barre was teh one who has signed that treaty with Ethiopia,so you could also be blamed for having any peace relations with your enemy,since that is the way you put it on the flip side.

 

Another point that you have missed completely was,the fact that the SNM was operating within the Northwest,with the exception of major cities such as Hargeysa, Burco, berbera, Cerigabo.So the question that should linger to one's mind should be,since the SNM was unable to operate within the country at the begining,then how did it become possible that they engage the somali fascist regime within the country,that can have one answer,the weaking of the government,weakened by the SNM themselves. Way before the USC existed,the SNM was engaged in battle with the SNA,defeated them and they were defeated in their turn,but not eridicated within the few months that Barre predicted.

 

the majority of the Somali army, with the exception of the elite Red Berets were fighting in the north,losing battle after battle,so they had gathered all their strenghth into major cities such as Hargeysa, to which the SNM had no economical and man power to engage them considering the failure of the previous attempt to do such, in which the SNM succeeded in capturing Hargeysa and Burco momentarily,but later withdrew after they couldn't withstand the fire power of the SNA. From this point on, the SNM regrouped and series of gorrilla war in the country side took effect, the losing hand that suffered the most was the SNA which weakened signifantly and later made it able for any arm groups to deal with the government at ease.A prime example of that was the USC which entered Xamar without much resistance and only faced minimum resistance from elite guard of Barre himself,the RED Berets.The fight between the USC and Red Berets took only few weeks,after which the REd berets withdrew Barre from the city into Gedo region,his tribal territory.Anyone would know this wouldn't have been possible if once one of Africa's strong nations wasn't unable to defend itself unless weakened previously.We know it couldn't have been the SSDF,because they were paid to surrender,and there were no other faction movements that existed before the USC other the mentioned SSDF and offcourse the SNM. So only remaining option is that it was no other than the SNM that dealt a heavy and one that couldn't be recovered from by the fascist government which lead to the USC to capture Xamar without extensive battles.

 

Finally, as you might know, a government doesn't simply callapse unless its headquarters,managements,and operations from their base is disrupted.The USC's takeover in Xamar sped the process which almost would have been and already there been accomplished single handly by the SNM in my believe.

 

What came later,including the ethnic cleansing by the USC is unfortunate,however although there were reported killing by the SNM in far west near Jabuti, and far east in Sanaag and some areas in Sool,they were never the same act of violence,with the USC's being quiet ruthless and noticeable. I am speaking of facts,so unless you show you the slightest idea of what you are trying to say,it's wise to just remain silent,since silence is golden, considering what you have just crippled.

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

The situation in northern Somalia was even more serious for the provisional government. The dominant SNM, whose fighters had evicted Siad Barre's forces from almost all of Woqooyi Galbeed, Togdheer, and Sanaag regions as early as October 1990, had also captured the besieged garrisons at Berbera, Burao, and Hargeysa at the end of January; they were not prepared to hand over control to the new government in Mogadishu. Like its counterparts in the south, the SNM criticized the USC's unilateral takeover of the central government, and the SNM leadership refused to participate in USC-proposed unity talks. The SNM moved to consolidate its own position by assuming responsibility for all aspects of local administration in the north. Lacking the cooperation of the SNM, the provisional government was powerless to assert its own authority in the region. The SNM's political objectives began to clarify by the end of February 1991, when the organization held a conference at which the feasibility of revoking the 1960 act of union was seriously debated.

 

In the weeks following Siad Barre's overthrow, the SNM considered its relations with the non- clans of the north to be more problematic than its relations with the provisional government. The SDA, supported primarily by the Gadabursi clan, and the relatively new United Somali Front (USF), formed by members of the Iise clan, felt apprehension at the prospect of SNM control of their areas. During February there were clashes between SNM and USF fighters in Saylac and its environs. The militarily dominant SNM, although making clear that it would not tolerate armed opposition to its rule, demonstrated flexibility in working out local power-sharing arrangements with the various clans. SNM leaders sponsored public meetings throughout the north, using the common northern resentment against the southern-based central government to help defuse interclan animosities. The SNM administration persuaded the leaders of all the north's major clans to attend a conference at Burao in April 1991, at which the region's political future was debated. Delegates to the Burao conference passed several resolutions pertaining to the future independence of the north from the south and created a standing committee, carefully balanced in terms of clan representation, to draft a constitution. The delegates also called for the formation of an interim government to rule the north until multiparty elections could be held.

 

The Central Committee of the SNM adopted most of the resolutions of the Burao conference as party policy. Although some SNM leaders opposed secession, the Central Committee moved forward with plans for an independent state, and on May 17, 1991, announced the formation of the Republic of Somaliland. The new state's border roughly paralleled those of the former colony, British Somaliland. SNM Secretary General Abdirahmaan Ahmad Ali "Tour" was named president and Hasan Iise Jaama vice president. Ali "Tour" appointed a seventeen-member cabinet to administer the state. The SNM termed the new regime an interim government having a mandate to rule pending elections scheduled for 1993. During 1991 and 1992, the interim government established the sharia as the principal law of the new republic and chose a national flag. It promised to protect an array of liberties, including freedom of the press, free elections, and the right to form political parties, and tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to win international recognition for the Republic of Somaliland as a separate country.

 

 

From: Ben.Parker@unep.no

Subject: US Department of the Army analysis of Somalia December 1993

Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:26: 1 GMT

Message-Id:

 

 

Somalia(a country study)

 

Relations with Other African States

For ten years after the ****** War, the Siad Barre government refused to renounce its public support of the Ethiopian guerrilla organization, the Western Somali Liberation Front, and provided it with clandestine military assistance to carry out raids inside Ethiopia. The Mengistu government responded in kind by providing bases, sanctuary, and military assistance to the SSDF and the SNM. Siad Barre's fear of Ethiopian military power induced him in the early 1980s to begin a process of rapprochement with Somalia's other neighbors, Kenya and the former French territory of Djibouti. Kenya had long suspected Somalia of encouraging separatist activities among the predominantly ethnic Somali population in its Northern Frontier District. Following a 1981 summit meeting with Kenyan president Daniel arap Moi in Nairobi, Siad Barre's public renunciation of any Somali territorial claims on Kenya helped dissipate mistrust.

 

Beginning in 1982, both Kenya and Djibouti, apparently encouraged by Siad Barre's stated willingness to hold direct talks with Mengistu, made diplomatic efforts to mediate between Somalia and Ethiopia. It was not until 1986, however, that Siad Barre and Mengistu finally agreed to meet. This first meeting since before the ****** War took place in the city of Djibouti and marked the beginning of a gradual rapprochement. Siad Barre's willingness to defuse the situation along the Somali-Ethiopian border stemmed from the combined pressures of escalating guerrilla activity, overt Ethiopian military threats, drought, and the destabilizing presence of hundreds of thousands of Ethiopian refugees. Siad Barre and Mengistu held a second meeting in April 1988, at which they signed a peace agreement and formally reestablished diplomatic relations. Both leaders agreed to withdraw their troops from their mutual borders and to cease support for armed dissident groups trying to overthrow the respective governments in Addis Ababa and Mogadishu.

 

The peace accord failed to provide Siad Barre respite from guerrilla activity and probably contributed to his eventual demise. Anticipating the possibility of being expelled from Ethiopia, the SNM decided to relocate within Somalia itself, a decision that drastically changed the nature of the conflict in the north. Despite the termination of Ethiopian assistance, SNM guerrillas continued to defeat Siad Barre's forces with relative ease; by August 1988 they had captured Hargeysa and other northern towns. Siad Barre responded by ordering massive aerial bombing, carried out by foreign mercenary pilots, that damaged or destroyed virtually every building in Hargeysa (see Sources of Opposition , ch. 5). The brutal attack, which resulted in thousands of civilian casualties and brought both domestic and international opprobrium upon the Siad Barre regime, failed to crush the SNM. Fighting not only intensified in the north over the next eighteen months, but also spread throughout the country, forcing an estimated 800,000 Somalis to seek refuge in Ethiopia.

 

In March 1990, Siad Barre accused Ethiopia of having violated the 1988 peace agreement by providing continued military support to the SNM. However, by this time the Mengistu government was as beleaguered as the Siad Barre regime by armed opposition movements and was not in a position to assist any Somali rebels. Soon after Siad Barre fled Mogadishu in January 1991, Mengistu followed his example by fleeing Addis Ababa as guerrilla armies closed upon the Ethiopian capital. Throughout 1991 the new provisional governments in Somalia and Ethiopia regarded each other cautiously. Both were threatened by separatist movements and both had an interest in maintaining the integrity of internationally recognized borders. As conditions in Somalia worsened on account of civil strife, the collapse of central authority, and the disruption of food production and distribution, tens of thousands of Somalis fled to Ethiopia, creating a massive refugee situation in that country by early 1992.

 

Sharing land borders with both Somalia and Ethiopia, Djibouti believed it was in the long-term interests of the Horn of Africa region if both countries remained intact. Djibouti's president, Hassan Gouled Aptidon, attempted to mediate between the provisional government and the SNM and offered his capital as a neutral meeting place. In June 1991, Djibouti served as the venue for a national reconciliation conference between the USC and several other groups.

 

With most of Djibouti's diverse population consisting of ethnic Somalis, Aptidon's concern about Somalia's future was not entirely altruistic. The Somalis of Djibouti belonged overwhelmingly to the Iise clan, traditional rival of the Isaaqs who dominated the SNM. The Djibouti Iise tended to be suspicious of the *****, believing that they discriminated against their Iise kinsmen in northern Somalia. This concern had prompted Djibouti in 1990 to assist in the formation and training of a separate Iise movement that challenged the SNM before and after the overthrow of Siad Barre. From Djibouti's perspective, a united Somalia composed of many clans afforded more protection to the Iise than a northern republic controlled by *****.

 

Kenya was concerned about the situation in southern Somalia, which continued to be unstable throughout 1991. Somali refugees, both civilian and military, had crossed the border into northern Kenya to escape the fighting. The refugees included more than fifty close associates of Siad Barre who were granted political asylum. Since the provisional government had announced its intention to try these officials, this action had the potential to provoke political problems between Kenya and Somalia. By early 1992, tens of thousands of Somalis were being sheltered in makeshift refugee camps in northern Kenya.

[Socod_badne]

The SNM didn't only fail to accomplish a single one of their goals but I trounced them resoundingly.

 

In a nutshell: I went, I saw, I conquered the mediocre SNM.

[RedSea]

Originally posted by WIIL_SHAYDAANKA:

"The original mission of the Somali National Army was to protect the nation from external aggression. I was trained to fight against an enemy force not my own people; my decision was firm to risk dying rather than bombarding civilians and their property."

-Lieutenant-Colonel Ahmed Mohamed Hassan

 

Interview with Omar Alasow

 

link

 

patriot!

I heard about him,and few people like this REAL patriot had the guts to let their true loyalty, the loyalty to defend their nation from external enemy not bombard their own people, only few like him existed,but the rest were killers yesterday, and today, they are praising Barre for being Somali hero and what not, and out calling themselves patriotic. If you want true defination of a patriot,it's he Col.Ahmed M. Hassan who was brave enough to refuse orders, and intentionally failing the mission aimed to destroy his own people,many went with it and few like him didn't, for that he should be praised.

[me]

Mr. Red Sea,

 

With this tread I am trying to discuss 3 issues namely:

 

1. The SNM betrayed the Somali Nation and the Somali people by collaborating with the enemy of Somalia.

2. The SNM sacrificed and made the people of Hargeysa and Burco suffer for their own selfish gains.

3. The SNM was beaten by the Somali National army and this can be proven by the fact that the day that Mogadisho fell to the USC not one single village was in SNM hands.

 

 

Point Nr. 1

 

Did the SNM collaborate with Ethiopia, while Somalia and Ethiopia were in a state of war?

 

My answer to that question is YES and your answer was……

 

Originally posted by Mr. Red Sea:

the SNM was using the weapons they had captured from the SNA with the exception of few provided to them by Ethiopia.Which brings me to point out that the SNM was in Ethiopia under its own interest and EThiopia was also benefiting from them,it was we both win type of scenerio

Collaborating with the enemy in a time of war is called TREASON and it is punishable by death. The Somali officers conducting the operations against the SNM were fully justified in their actions against the rebel combatants. The officers of the Somali National Army took an oath in which they swore on the holly Koran that they would defend the Somali Republic against all enemies external as well as internal. The SNM delegitimized itself the moment it collaborated with the enemy. If the SNM resisted the dictatorship legitimately and within the boundaries of the law then justice would be on its side today.

 

Point Nr.2

 

The SNM sacrificed and made the people of Hargeysa and Burco suffer for their own selfish gains.

 

Haygeysa and Burco are major towns if compared with other towns in Somalia. The number of rebels that attacked Hargeya and Burco in May 1988 is estimated at 1500. Do you think it is wise to attack towns the size of Hargeysa and Burco with 1500 men and try to hold it against the Somali National Army. Is it not foolish? Negligent to say the least? Or cold blooded calculated action intended for the radicalization of the North Western population?

 

The dead, destruction and humiliation that the people of the North West faced after May 1988 is the result of this foolish action by the SNM. If the SNM didn’t attack the towns there would be no artillery bombardment of the towns. If they didn’t attack the cities, there would be no refugee crisis in the North West. So maybe its time you started to think critically Mr. Red Sea. The SNM sacrificed the people. The civilian deaths in Hargeysa and Burco after May 1988 was a direct result from the actions of the SNM.

 

Point Nr. 3

 

The SNM was beaten by the Somali National army and this can be proven by the fact that the day that Mogadisho fell to the USC not one single village was in SNM hands.

 

You said that the SNM were operating in the North with the exception of the major towns, how about villages? which villages were in SNM hands in late 1988? 1989? 1990?

 

Yes I agree with you that the SNM was capable of hit and run attacks in the North West in 1989 and 1990 but it lacked the strength to hold fixed positions, due to the tremendous firepower of the SNA.

[me]

Mr. Red Sea,

 

No matter how much you would like it. In the army orders are not disobeyed. That’s how the whole game works, you disobey you get shot!

 

Secondly

 

Today if American Rebels attack New York, the US Army will not hesitate to bomb them to the stone age.

 

If Birmingham is captured by English rebels, the British Army will bomb the city and use all means at its disposal to recapture the city. That’s how the game is.

 

You did not expect that the Somali Army would let the rebels hold the towns did you? What did you expect that the Somali army to do?

 

All national armies are trained to defend the land against all enemies, external as well as internal. The only thing that the SNA did wrong was it heavy handedness, they should have captured and killed each and every rebel, but they should have limited the civilian casualties and collateral damage.

[RedSea]

^So you are justifying the ruthless acts commited by Barre.Weren't they brave enough to engage the SNM in hand to hand, street to street, or urban warfare with SNM,instaed of sheling the whole city, if the SNM were to be contained by the SNA in hand to hand combat,then I don't think there would have been an ariel bombardment.But only after they SNA proof to be ineffective,they chose the other alternative way, and a bad one it was.

 

killing each and every rebel was certainly the goal of everyone and definately Barre' forces would have only if they were able to, which they werent'.

 

As for your other point,no brother, things don't go as you have said,if rebels attacked New York,first an extreme planing would have to be taken to look how to minimise the civilian casualties while maximizing the rebel casualty, the Barre forces looked at neither, they simply look the city as a rebel city, which needed to be erased.How many killed,and how much damage didn't matter,the city wasn't Garbaharay ya know.

 

My dear brother I don't mean to disrepect you in any way,but time of war with Ethiopia? you should be able to know at least by that much, that the SNM was fighting a war with the Somali government,thus would use any way shape or form in order to try to defeat them.The SNM was alerady considered the "enemy" of the state by Barre and a threat to his ruthless and bloody hand grip of the Somali people.So I don't really quiet get what cooperating with the enemy thing you are talking about,things simply don't work like that.If I don't like you, I will go by everyway I can in order to try to bring you down, that also includes droping a nuclear bomb on you if I have to, that is the reality.

 

Secondly, you should know, that Siyad Barre himself was considered an enemy in Hargeysa and throughout Waqooyi galbeed,so what difference would it have made, if the SNM cooperated with his rival.During the 1977 war with Ethiopia, the Ethiopians bombarded Hargeysa,but not nearly to the same extent as "our government" did, so so much for state,I say that was a fascist government,it needed to go, and end result was the exact.

 

in 1989, one of SNM's base was located right near Hargeysa Airport, I have full vidoe evidence of that, which shows the Masalah, the outskirt or Hargeysa, the SNA were on the defensive,so they had gathered all their strengh in the main area of the city and were on the alert night and day, this much was caused by the weak SNM right?At the start, the SNM was no where to be seen,but by late 80,namely 89, the SNM was sitting on the outskirt of Hargeysa, well the SNA knew they were there,but couldn't dare,because by this time, the SNM itself had alot of firepower as well,source of donation>the SNA.

 

Thinking critically is something expected of you at this moment.The SNM did attack Hargeysa as you said with not more than few thousand men, however,does that mean, the SNA had the right to bombard the whole city? I don't think so, they could have gone after them whatever they were hiding.But in reality, the SNA' noting from its leader at the tim in hargeysa Gen.Morgan, run as far as five miles to the airport, earning the nick Abdil Bile Abdi,thereafter, they took their frustrations onto the whole city, I don't think this needs much critically thinking.Whether the SNM should have waited longer to enter Hargeysa, is certainly something we can entertain for a while,but to use that in order to justify the continuous mass killings of people by the Barre regime almost sounds like you are saying that Barre would have never been so bad.How would you then explain the Jaziirah killing of intellects, the killing and raping of innocent men and women and countless herds in Mudug regions? the problems of the Siyad Barre regime were larger than then this narrow anaylaze of yours.

[me]

So you do agree with me, the towns needed to be recaptured no matter what the cost.

 

I am very much justifying the army’s goals in recapturing the towns. I am also supporting the army’s goals in eradicating the rebels. The army was operating within the boundaries of the law. The rebels attacked the cities, they were the aggressors, and they put the civilians in harms way.

 

Imagine if a bank robber enters a bank with a gun and takes hostages, the police come and surround the building.

 

The police want to end this situation as soon as possible. They want to either arrest of kill the bank robber. The public expect the police to do its job. The public expect to be protected from the bank robbers.

 

If while trying to arrest the bank robber the police kill a hostage then it is the bank robber that is responsible. It is the bank robber that put the hostage in harms way not the police.

 

What you are arguing about is the tactic that the SNA used not the principle. The SNA was right in recapturing the cities. You disagree with the tactics though.

[me]

^^Odaygan cay un baa ka soo hadhay. War isku xishood. Sidii nin rag ah u dood ama u kaftan, sidii dhoocil yar meel walba cay ha la soo istaagin.

 

Mr. Red Sea baa la arkaa nin si fiican u doodaya, kuwiinan kale wax kabarta.

[Gabbal]

Originally posted by Oodweyne:

^^^^Waryaa******************************..

Belo, odeyga wuu isku shubmay. War meeye maamulkii? Waraabahan ************* ka celiye dhalinyarada fikradooda dhiibanaysa maaamulow.

 

[ October 17, 2006, 00:48: Message edited by: Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar ]