HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re: The mess WE created.	
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 11 Dec 92 23:20:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.214239.26674@watson.ibm.com> cookinga@yukon.fishkill.ibm.com (Andy Cookingham) writes:
>I will assume that the cold war was responsible for all of the arms that
>are in Somalia.
>
>But....... Is everyone implying that the US has some sort of secret
>weapon that can cause 
>multi-year long droughts? Did we want to try it out on a small country
>(field test) before
>hitting USSR with it?
>
>Maybe it's true, I heard that in the 30's the US government tried out a
>crude version
>and created the "Dust Bowl". They must have it perfected by now.
>
>
true, you got a point there, natural disasters do strike at random, but
tell me please:  

is there a government in the US when the "Dust Bowls" happened?
if so is it a democratic government that cared deeply for its people?
did that government tried very hard to combat the Dust Bowls and
the Great Depression?  Did you ever heard of TVA, CCC, ... ...?

now imagine the US government was overthrown by armed rebellion years 
earlier before the "Dust Bowls", fragments of the army and state militias 
degenerated into armed gangs roaming the country to rob away from the farmers
whatever livestock that's left and the seeds for next years crop,
they fight each other over territory, weapons, food, with weapons
flowing from A. Hilter and J. Stalin in their competition of "controlling
the important harbors and resources in North America" and these two  
only considered "weapon for warlords" is only part of the undeclared 
global struggle of "National Socialism Verses International Communism" ...  
Won't there be a problem?   won't the people be drop dead like flies?

  
>


Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: TREHARAJ@ibm3090.bham.ac.uk
Subject: Network Etiquette
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:23:59 GMT
Organization: The University of Birmingham, United Kingdom

==============================================================================
From a recent article:

>From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
>Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaughalt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton

Would you look at how many newsgroups your using here, don't you think
this is a bit inconsiderate? If we are interested in your views on
the situation in Somalia we'll find them here.

ANDY.UK
From: scw@cirrus.seas.ucla.edu (Stephen C Woods)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Where's the Beef? (was: ANOTHER WAR!)
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:43:49 GMT
Organization: School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, UCLA

In article <8DEC199212571337@jane.uh.edu> st1xu@jane.uh.edu (Carr, Emery D.) writes:
>just acting now? because our economic interests our being threatened.
>you see, somalia's main export is livestock. in case you didn't know,
>livestock is one of our biggest industries(for more info read DIET FOR
>A NEW AMERICA). I read in a recent issue (last week i think) of the 
>CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR that because of the "warlord's" fighting, that
>[...]

What an astounding leap,  Somalia's primary export is Livestock (no mention
of what kind).  Therefore the United States is going to take over to ensure
the continued exportation of livestock (presumeably to the United States).

In the first place Somalia's primary export doesn't amount to a hill of
beans, I expect that any medium sized feedlot processes more cattle
than the entire country does (The Somalis are NOT Masai, nor are they
Watusi).  Somalia's primary livestock export is Camels, not something
is great demand in the U.S.  As far as I know the United States is a
net exporter of Beef (anyone have exact figures?)  Certanly the Dept.
of Ag would look very strongly at any meat product coming from Africa.
Somalia is, unfortunatley for it's residents, the 'hind teat' of Africa
(why do you think that it didn't get glommed onto as a colony until the
Germans came along in the late 19th Century.


Geeze, why are there so many of them, and why do they keep posting?
-- 
-----
Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASNET; 2567 BH;LA CA 90024; (310)-825-8614
UUCP: ...{ibmsupt,ncar!cepu}!ollie}!scw  Internet:scw@SEAS.UCLA.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: The "inside scoop" on Somalia
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:51:52 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1766500002@igc.apc.org> ppjc@igc.apc.org (Peninsula Peace and Justice Center) writes:
>
>(The following is the full text of an article from the
>magazine Navy Times, 12/14/92. *Reprinted without
>permission...*)
>
>U.S. INTERVENTION ALSO SERVES GEOPOLITICAL INTERESTS
>
>by William Matthews - Times staff writer
>

>  Whoever controls Somalia could control the southern
>entrance to the Red Sea and thus the Suez Canal,
>Winterford said.  And whoever controls Somalia is 200
>miles from Yemen and 400 miles from Saudi Arabia, a
>prime location from which to influence the political
>stability of the Middle East.

    After the Persian Gulf war, the U.S. influence
    in that part of the world is as strong as ever.
    We do not need Somalia to influence the political
    stability of the Middle East.

>  The chaos in Somalia was "unnerving to Saudi Arabia
>and others as well," he said.  And what makes the oil
>producers nervous makes the United States nervous.

    and makes George Bush Jr. who stands to make a fortune 
    from a no-experience-necessary oil-drilling contract off
    the coast of Bahrein even more nervous...

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Follow the money."                             Other opinions are mine.
 Deep Throat                                    Disclaimer: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: dfo@tko.vtt.fi (Foxvog Douglas)
Subject: Re: CNN / All Reporters
Organization: VTT
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 09:57:40 GMT

In article <Bz3Jr4.6CD@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> idjohnst@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca (Ian Johnston) writes:
>>> The reporters have turned this entire action into a circus show.
>>>I can't help but feel from their telecast last night that they
>>>have turned this into a 'Family war'.. Something to gather the 
>>>kids around at night, make a little popcorn and enjoy the show.
>>
>>You have it backwards.  The press was specifically encouraged to
>>cover the landing by a U.S. general before it happened.  (I doubt
>>he realized what would happen, but he did tell 'em it was OK. I
>>read his words in one of the local newspapers.)

>>Joshua Levy  (joshua@veritas.com)

>Yeah, perhaps, but it still is one big media circus there. The
>reporters still have no respect for the military. I saw on TV a
>marine telling a reporter to get behind a line. He first asked
>fairly nicely (as nice as a marine can get). The reporter simply
>ignored him. He then told the reporter in no uncertain terms that
>he WAS going to get behind the line immediately. The reporter looked
>at him and asked 'are ya going to shoot me?'. Insane.. thats all it
>is.

And the military guy obviously had no respect for the press.  Nothing
gave him the authority to order the press guy around and the press guy
knew it.  The military is there to guard the shipments and that's it.

It is insane that a guy with a gun would think that he would have the
right to order someone around just because he has that gun.

>Ian. 


-- 
doug foxvog     
dfo@tko.vtt.fi   
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.activism
From: vpcsc11@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (student)
Subject: Re: Going to Somalia
Organization: San Francisco State University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 23:11:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.220342.22564@netcom.com> harp@netcom.com writes:

>I think you mistake pride for hypocrisy.  I'm proud that my country is
>helping save the lives of the Somali victims of their civil war.  I'm
>willing to support my country if we decide to do the same in Bosnia-
>Hercegovinia.  The concepts of freedom and equality we trumpet so
>loudly have their roots in the lives of victimized innocents.  Letting
>these innocent people die would be hypocritical.  

I think you mistake propaganda for truth and confuse nationalism with
pride.

America has watched and even assisted with the slaughter of innocent people
in Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti, Nicaragua, Chile, Peru,
Ethiopia, East Timor, Malaysia, and South Africa (to name but a few).

Letting the innocent people in Somalia and Bosnia die would be morally
reprehensible but quite consistent with U.S. foreign policy of the past
few decades.

--
aaron
vpcsc11@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Thursday, 17 Dec 1992 15:29:35 EST
From: <LESBH@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Congressman Gonzales's statement of 12/16/92

Yesterday, December 16, 1992, radio station WBAI in New York City reported
on a statement by Congressman Gonzales about Somalia.  If anyone has access
to that statement in its entirety, would you please add it to the list.

Lee Steinberg
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.test,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
From: dlovely@meaddata.com (David Lovely)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 08:35:54 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <BywG9u.566@apollo.hp.com>, goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:
|> In article <1992Dec5.024143.18001@gallant.apple.com> kiddyr@gallant.apple.com (Ray Kiddy) writes:
|> 
|> >caused. The lawlessness in Somalia is a reflection of the fundamental lawlessness
|> >of American society, the lawlessness that we export abroad...
|> 
|>     One can't help but conlude that Somalia was a country of law until they
|>     began importing lawlessness from the U.S.

You are a victim of mistaken facts!

In Somalia, as well as Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, etc.  The civil wars were all
started by MARXISTS or involved MARXISTS.

So "lawlessness" did NOT come from the U.S., but from the Soviet Union and Cuba.
Why security interest would Cuba have in Angola that they would send troops there
other than to impose MARXISM?


-- 
*******************************************************************************
David P. Lovely					      BOYCOTT BARBRA STREISAND!
Mead Data Central	       Don't Blame Me.  I didn't vote for Slick Willie.
Dayton, Ohio						       Vote KEMP in 96!
		NO DISCLAIMER NEEDED (Nobody claims me anyway!)
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Who's paying?
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:27:48 GMT

murtaza@ecf.toronto.edu (MURTAZA HASAN) writes:
> 
>        Today, on "This Week with David Brinkely", Lawrence 
>Eagleburger said that one of the reasons the US was going into 
>Somalia was because the "costs" were low, which led Sam 
>Donaldson to ask whether the US was only going to help people 
>when it was cheap to do so. 

It has crossed my mind that the American, French, Canadian, etc.
troops being used as the world's most expensive security guards
are getting some kind of training benefit ... the stress level
is higher than training, 'cos you can really get killed (not by
accident) ... but it's a lot less than being dropped into a real 
shooting match.

>        I suspect that some country, probably Saudi Arabia 
>is paying for this operation. Canada has 4,200 peacekeepers
>around the world, and they cost us about $78 million a year. 
>Imagine how much the US could get for its 30,000 mercenaries. 
>Anyways, when does the US ever do anything for free? 

We Canadians are paying our peoples' salaries, food, fuel, etc. for
the UN operations ... if someone else where paying our costs, I'd not
complain!  (After all, we're only 26 Million people in Canada and it
does not cost us any less to build a mile of road.)  So why do you
think that the Saudis (e.g.) would be paying for the Americans' tab?
Without meaning to be insulting, what you've said in that paragraph is
contradictory ...  The UN Secretary-General has already gone on record
as saying that everything being done by the nations involved in the
Somalia operation (and Yugoslavia, etc.) will be contributing their
goods and services ... i.e., no mercenary credits for this year's UN
dues, etc.

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Support NAFTA
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			 Eat Mexican  (El Teddy's ad)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott)
Subject: Re: Smile-ia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 04:26:00 GMT

In article <Bz65G7.Fvw@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins) writes...
>dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina) writes:
> 
>>By the way, can someone come up with a good substitute for the :) ?
>>I hate using it--it reminds me of those damn Have a nice day buttons.
> 
>Sure.  Just add a verb in parentheses:  "Clinton will go down in
>history as one of our greatest presidents.  (wink)"

Never mind me, just passing through, truth in advertising, `ya know.'

Quotes always reminded me of =raised= "eye" brows. So I reckon a single" 
might suffice?? (And introduce a bit o' symmetry, eh".)

Yeah right.
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re:  Somalia Question
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:39:11 GMT

In article <BzCyyp.MD4@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> gtao@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Greg ) writes:
}m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
}
}>In article <1992Dec16.004429.9163@news.acns.nwu.edu> tjewald@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Timothy Ewald) writes:
}>}Recently, a student from Columbia stated that Clinton is in no danger of
}>}taking the fall if and when things start to go bad in Somolia.  Her logic was
}>}that since President George got us involved, Clinton can always point the
}>}finger at him.  I must disagree.
}
}>concur.  Remember Vietnam?
}
}I was wondering what all you people who are worried about the possibility
}of the situation in Somalia deteriorating from our standpoint are
}worried about?

Blame was the question.

}Maybe I just don't know all that much about the Somalia situation, but
}there just doesn't seem to be that much threat to US troops there.

Not to the troops, nor from Somalia.  To the US government, from the various
and sundry "blame america first" crowd evident throughout the world and
adequately represented on USENET in general and these groups in particular.

Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
From: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Subject: Re: Does Bush hate Xmas or What ?
Reply-To: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:26:17 GMT

In article <Bz3wv5.5L9@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Lost Boy) writes:
>
>I guess he knows that the economy has us all BROKE, so instead of
>worrying about getting people jobs so they can buy presents, he gives
>the whole nation an annual Christmas War.
>

...but I thought we were living in a global economy...

I thought even the media was admitting that the U.S. economy is not
doing so badly after all. The crux of the argument rests on what basis
you are measuring the strength of our economy.  Relative to the rest
of the world, we are up near the top.  Relative to how we were doing
in the 80s, we are worse off, but then again the 80s showed the
longest period of growth since the late 40s. I will admit that George
squandered what we had going about five years ago, but if we are in a
recession, tell me how raising taxes (as Bill C. has pledged to do)
will ameliorate the situation? If we are all "BROKE", then how will
giving more of it to the feds make us better off?  The top earners in
the country don't have enough to pay for all of us.

Incidentally, I do not understand how you expect the president to "get
us jobs."  Unless, of course, you think we should all work for the
government.

David 
David
dnm9@columbia.edu
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
From: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Reply-To: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:59:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec8.004845.4092@athena.cs.uga.edu> stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu (Catherine Stanton) writes:
>Ahhh the administration that holds Family Values (tm) at it's apex and
>decries anyone who is not a God-Fearing Christian once again will see
>to it that thousands of young men and women (and some older ones too)
>won't be home with their families on Christmas.  
>
>Yes America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, sticking their fingers
>in everyone else's pies.  Thankyou George Bush for once again letting your
>libido get in the way of your international affairs.  Goodbye you old crag,
>and good riddance.
>
>Cat
>
>-- 
>_______________________________________________________________________________
>    Cat Stanton
>    stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu
>_______________________________________________________________________________



Cat, the Republican Party, contrary to your misconception, is not entirely
composed of Pat Robertson's followers (or Pat Buchanan's, for that matter.)
  Although it is unfortunate that the troops will be away from their
families on Christmas (that's a God-fearing Christian holiday, I might
add,) some of us believe that oh, I don't know, ensuring that some
people don't die takes slight precedence over chestnuts roasting on an
open fire.
  What, pray tell, would you suggest as an alternative solution to
helping the Somalians? I know that this current action is not a
long-term solution (the U.S., nor anyone save the Somalians
themselves, can effect that sort of change,) but would you not prefer
them to be alive so that they might do so?

And finally, do you really think George has that much libido?  Bar
does look pretty wired most of the time--maybe you're right!
David
dnm9@columbia.edu
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
From: tjewald@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Timothy Ewald)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Summary: a Vietnam everyone can love! 
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:44:29 GMT

Recently, a student from Columbia stated that Clinton is in no danger of
taking the fall if and when things start to go bad in Somolia.  Her logic was
that since President George got us involved, Clinton can always point the
finger at him.  I must disagree.

I find the Somolian/Clinton situation very analogous to Vietnam/Johnson. 
Remember, the US started to cozy up to Saigon under Eisenhower, sent in hordes
of military advisors and aid under JFK, and then LBJ inherited the mess in
1963.  There was no quick-fix for Vietnam, just as is becoming apparent in 
Somolia.   LBJ had a delimma (similar to Bill's future delimma?): either pull
out of Vietnam, and thus take the blame for "loss", or escalate the conflict &
stave off defeat (only to eventually take the blame for a big loss).  Although
previous administrations got us involved in Southeast Asia, LBJ got handed the
mess.  And, although his pulling out in 1963 sounds great to us now in
hindsight, it no doubt would have been condemned by the American public back
then.  Keep in mind that Vietnam was a popular war in 1963, just like
Operation Sweepsweek in Somolia is now.  Whoever is in the White House
ultimately has their head on the chopping block when it comes to military
actions, whether they initiated them or not (especially popular wars
glamorized by CNN).  Pointing the finger at a former-President who is now seen
only on the golf course and on "Nightline" just isn't going to fly on
Mainstreet.  

And, keep in mind that when things start to bog down in Somolia, George
Herbert Walker Jefferson Davis Buford T. Justice Bush will be at home (in one
of his three home states, that is).  Clinton will get the blame for "screwing
up the war."  Bill will, like LBJ, have to pull out, and catch flak when the
bad guys in the jeeps re-take the streets; or we will have to escalate the war
to maintain stability.  We can't leave until some stability is brought to
Somolia or we have failed --- why save them from starving in '92 so that they
can starve again in '93?  And, bringing stability to Somolia will take months
and months.  Meanwhile, Bill gets to inherit his own Vietnam for the 90s ---
an initially popular war that will eventually get his head chopped off.  And,
on the guillotine is inscribed "Republicans '96."

The overwhelming support of Operation Get Your Mind Off the Depression in this
country, as well as on the net, proves that this conflict, which has kept the
military industrial complex viable, is truly a war that everyone can love ---
from the pro-choice, environmentally conscious, vegetarian college kid 
intellegensia, to the "talkin' proud 'bout 'merica" flagwavers. 

My two cents anyway,

				property is theft,

				slade the leveller


Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
From: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Reply-To: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:55:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.191418.29875@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> walker@superboy.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>In article <1992Dec12.000626.25331@ida.liu.se>, e91petmo@odalix.ida.liu.se (Peter /\/\odin) writes:
>|> dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina) writes:
>|> 
>|> > ...Christmas (that's a God-fearing Christian holiday...
>|> 
>|> No, Christmas has nothing to do with religion any more. It's about
>|> overdecorating, buying a lot of stuff, watching specials on TV,
>|> etc etc etc. Am I being cynical? Go figure!
>|> 
>
>It is not even a CHRISTIAN holiday.  Christmans was made to coincide
>with the pagan holiday of the winter solstice.  The pagan holiday
>involved decorating trees with candles and exchanging gifts.  This was
>all fabricated as a christian holiday by the Catholic Church to get more
>paggans to convert to christianity.
>
>Now I am an agnostic with athiest tendencies, but it seems to me that if
>GOD were to make an apperance what he would see  is a lot of christians
>celebrating a PAGAN holiday.
>
>Doug                   


Most interesting; was Christmas not celebrated until Christians
co-opted the pagan holiday?  That is, are the pagan rituals you
mention above the only part of Christmas that are pagan, with the rest
of it pre-dating the fabrication?  Is there anything about Christmas
that is originally Christian, besides the notion of celebrating the
birth of Christ?


David
dnm9@columbia.edu
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton