HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rday@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E Day)
Subject: Re: Going to Somalia
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:42:43 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.171127.26293@spectrum.xerox.com> kirby@xerox.com writes:
> [stuff deleted]
>One more point.  Somolia is no longer a country (in the western sense...Of
>course the nation-state was invented by the west, so it is reasonable to
>assume that definition) therefore noone is being invaded.  A better way to
>express the action might be to say that order is being established in a region
>of the world where thousands of people have the potential to die from
>starvation because of a lack of order.  This isn't US vs. THEM.  There is no
>THEM.

Let me see, we have no central government, and atleast two factions fighting 
over control of the country. This sounds like a civil war to me.

So, this could been seen as a forein power(the UN forces) invading a
sovereign country that is going through a civil war. Then it would be US vs.
THEM & THEM.
-- 
If the price that I must pay to obtain my *  Robert E. Day/Syr Otto von    *
freedom, is to acknowledge that the Gov-  *  Schwartzkatz, Shire Mugmort   *
ernmet was granted the power to infringe  *  Barony Middle Marches,        *
on them, then I am not free. Paul Anderson*  Middle Kingdom                *
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: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 14:26:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.084722.25103@math.ucla.edu> getachew@yosemite.math.ucla.edu (getachew hagos) writes:
}Why are African wild animals does not starve to death? 

They are.

}And more important they dont have those moron leaders that
}kill its own people for their egoist interest and power.

Look at who has been killing whom in Somalia.

}I, on the other hand agree with the US gov't
}on accepting the fact that they were part of the problem out there and 

Whom where, when?

}that the US being the policeman of the entire world, nor the fact that the 
}US is the only nation that can do this.

Fine.  By demonstration, who else?

Are you ever right about anything?


Xref: sparky alt.current-events.somalia:410 alt.activism:19510
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.activism
Subject: Re: Going to Somalia
Date: 11 Dec 92 01:14:53 GMT
Organization: Memes-R-Us
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:

>jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:

>>yarvin@cs (Norman Yarvin) writes:

>>>If I were the praying type, I would prefer to pray that anyone who shoots at
>>>our troops will meet a quick death, so as to be a good example to all the
>>>other meatballs thinking of trying the same thing.

>>It is comments like this that make it dangerous for U.S. citizens to
>>travel around the world.

>No, what makes it dangerous for U.S. citizens to travel around the world is
>terrorism.  Done by terrorists.  The terrorists are usually armed and
>financed by governments hostile to us.  For instance the Communist Bloc used
>to be a heavy supporter of terrorists.

And what _motivates_ them, dear boy ?


>>  I just wish the hatred and violence would be
>>targeted at the right target, ie. people like you, instead of any
>>random U.S. citizen.  Perhaps if enough of people like you were
>>killed, the rest would start doing something about the reasons.

>Enough of us have been killed so that the rest _have_ started doing something
>about the reasons.  Units dedicated to counterterrorist operations are a
>relatively new part of our military.

I think it's this 'us' business, as if we were different, as if our needs
should always have priority, as if being an American placed one at the right
hand of God. Which is directly contraventional to the concepts of freedom
and equality we trumpet so loudly ... which makes 'us' look like hypocrites.

Which is reasonable. Many of us _are_ hypocrites.


>Norman Yarvin						yarvin@cs.yale.edu
> "We are here to do counterterrorism.  Do you know what counterterrorism is?
>  It is fucking doing it to them before they fucking do it to us."
>	-- Richard Marcinko, founding speech to SEAL Team 6

Note the repressed sexuality in this statement. Real civilized, eh ?


-- richard


-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: somalia
Keywords: no reply
Date: 20 Dec 92 00:38:37 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1992Dec18.172658.9903@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

|>  For those of you that realize this, let's hear from you!!
|>Don't let these gratuitous right-wing ideologues dominate
|>the net the way they dominate the mass media!!!!!

|I'm a right-wing ideologue?

I am, and proud of it.  ;*)

BTW, when did Sam Donaldson become a right winger.
Does that mean he is now a relative of Deborah Winger?

-- 
Mob rule doesn't become any prettier, just because the mob start to call itself
a government.
It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: It's Blood for Oil, again. (yeah right...)
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:36:26 GMT

In article <Bz9uvt.Lrs@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:
}In article <1geg0hINNbms@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
}>In <Bz4D4t.JHE@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com writes:
}>>     The relief mission is over, and it failed miserably I might add.

Wonder why he said something so far from the truth?

}>  It has in fact barely gotten started.  No one but the most starry-eyed
}>expected 1800 marines to pacify the whole country.
}
}    If the relief mission (food aid) was successful, there would be no
}    need for military intervention.

"could have been successful".  But since they couldn't even try, now the
help is being protected.


Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier)
Subject: Re: The "inside scoop" on Somalia
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 05:56:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.211432.27484@cis.ohio-state.edu> pugh@tortoise.cis.ohio-state.edu (Tom Pugh) writes:
>	I agree....I think that the United States is a great place
>(as far as places to live go), but I also think we have much more than
>we really deserve.  According to an article I read, the GNP per capita in
>Somalia is about $119 (or was a couple of years ago), whereas ours is about
>$20,000.  Something is seriously wrong with that.  People in foreign countries
>have as much right to life, liberty, and property that we do, if not more.
>Sending food and military to help the effort is the least we can do...
>
They have as much right to obtain life, liberty, property, and happiness as
we do.  They DO NOT, however, have the right to be provided with any of these.
These things are earned, not given simply because they are lacking in one
place and abundant somewhere else.  



-- 
Douglas C. Meier		|  I have a trig midterm tomorrow and I'm
Northwestern University, ACNS 	|  being chased by Guido the killer pimp.
This University is too Commie-	|  -Miles, from "Risky Business"
Lib Pinko to have these views.	|  dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Xref: sparky alt.current-events.somalia:685 alt.politics.org.un:202 alt.president.clinton:1210 talk.politics.misc:64964 alt.politics.bush:14799
From: yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 20 Dec 1992 12:18:42 -0500
Organization: Yale Computer Science Department
NNTP-Posting-Host: cathy.na.cs.yale.edu

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>The UN contingent that will be deployed in Somalia will be stronger than
>the 100 Pakistani there before the Marines landed.  The US commitment
>has spurred other nations to chip in about 13K - 22K troops.  I don't
>expect all of them to stay there, but what will remain should be
>considerably more powerful than the warlords.

No.  In any conflict with "peacekeepers" the warlords would have the
advantage of surprise, which is worth ... well, it's worth a lot.

The only question would be whether they knew how to take advantage of it.

And you still seem to think we will disarm the warlords.  Explicit
government statements to the contrary notwithstanding.  Even the fact that we
discovered a cache of weapons belonging to Aideed or one of the others, and
then withdrew without confiscating them, does not seem to have enlightened
you.

>Because Bush is an asshole, to put it bluntly.  The Kurds were killed
>in part because of an exercise in realpolitik ("balance of power" and
>all that)

The Kurds were killed because we did not care to make Iraq into a colony.
Would you rather we had?


--
Norman Yarvin						yarvin@cs.yale.edu
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp)
Subject: Re: CNN / All Reporters
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:33:57 GMT

idjohnst@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca (Ian Johnston) writes:

>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.

Well, there seems to be a bit more respect for the job the marines
have to do, now.  Today a CNN cameraman immediately complied when a
marine told him to move.  The cameraman was doing the normal
walk-backwards-and-shoot thing (I'm amazed, being a photographer
myself, that more people aren't injured doing that!) when the marine
told him he was blocking his view and therefore interfering with his
patrol assignment.  From memory the marine said something like,
"Please move out of the way so I can do my job," in a polite-but-firm
tone that tends to get results -- especially when you're brandishing
an M16. ;)

Of course, the warning shots fired Thursday probably helped to
convince the news crews that they might become innocent bystander
statistics if they're in the way... ;)
-- 
-----------------Greg-Harp----------------harp@netcom.com------------------
  "I think I've reached that point / Where every word that you write /
  Of every blood dark sea / And every soul black night / And every dream
  you dream me in / And every perfect free from sin / And burning eyes /
  And hearts on fire / Are just the same old song" -- The Cure
From: jsl+@pitt.edu (John S Lundberg)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: somalia
Keywords: no reply
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:56:24 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Dec14.222021.20433@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu> awells@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Andrew V. Wells) writes:
>...the military occupation of Somalia.

Technically this description is apt, I suppose.  Our military is
in Somalia.  BUT there's a world of difference between our "occupation"
of Somalia and, say, the German occupation of <you choose> during
WW II.

>(4)  I read recently that US troops in Somalia have been
>ordered to "shoot at anything they want to."  

Bushwah.  *Where* did you supposedly read this? 

>conflict. And even if more fighting doesn't take
>place, the presence of a large foreign army certainly
>increases tensions to an extreme degree. All of
>this makes it even MORE difficult to distribute
>food. 

You are evidently ignorant of even the most basic facts
of the situation in Somalia.  
-- 
John Lundberg
From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: U.S. Is Not Going to War in Somalia for any Good Reasons
Date: 18 Dec 1992 18:33:10 GMT
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: uhad2.admin.uh.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <1992Dec18.171453.9192@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu writes:

> In article <85540@ut-emx.uucp> wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester) writes:
> >In article <1giamlINN1b9@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
> >]
> >]  The difference between Serbia and Vietnam is that the Serbs have no super-
> >]power to back them up like the VC did.  Once the equipment and factories in
> 
> Actually, look at what the Yugoslav resistance did to the Nazis, even
> though the Nazis would have used tactics we would not even consider.

  True enough, I suppose (I'm not as familiar with the work of the partisans),
but would not they have had the support of the local population?  I think in
Bosnia, the UN would have more local support than did the US in Vietnam -- just
a guess.

  In any event *IF* (big if) the US/UN chose to intervene, the battle should be
as "set piece" as can be arranged.  The goal is not to conquer Serbia, but in-
sure Bosnia's independence, and to prevent further Serbian adventures in the
Balkans, which could lead to Turkey-Greece conflict; not a Good Thing.  To
insure the balnce of power/terror in the region, if you will.  This could be
accomplished via smashing up a good bit of Serbian hardware and munitions
factories.

  Maybe Panic will win the election and Mislovic (sp) will step down peacably,
and peace will prevail (yeah, yeah, I can dream, can't I?).

> >SHHHHHH!!!!! Don't break the progressive's hearts by telling them that 
> >Vietnam is *not* proof that the People(tm) can stand alone against a world
> >superpower!! It's Politically Incorrect to imply that!  :)
> 
> Er, the Vietnamese had superpower support (and I can't really think of
> a successful insurgency that didn't have a Great Power patron), more
> from the Soviet Union than China.  Ho Chi Minh's regime was extremely
> good at soliciting help.

  Well, that's what Patrick is basically saying in his little joke.  It does
seem to get overlooked by the Trendy Left [tm] (whom I dislike about as much as
the Trendy Right [tm]) that the VC and NVNA had more than a little help in
defeating the Imperialists...


semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mike Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.activism
From: harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp)
Subject: Re: Going to Somalia
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 00:15:41 GMT

vpcsc11@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (student) writes:

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

You only think this because you've read more into what I wrote than
was originally there.  See below.

>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).

I don't recall listing any of these in the U.S. actions that I
support/supported.  Herein lies your misinterpretation of what I
wrote.

You can dwell on these actions all you want.  Hell, the U.S.
government sat idly by up until 130 years ago while people owned
slaves.  I'm not proud of that, but I don't have to run around
apologizing for my ancestors all the time, either.  In fact, _some_ of
my ancestors were here thousands of years ago.  I don't hold a grudge
with the current government because its predecessors were responsible
for all but wiping out the Cherokees.

>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.

So you're saying that because the U.S. hasn't run to the aid of
helpless people in the past -- and in fact has admittedly helped to
create some of those helpless people -- that we shouldn't do so now?
Strange reasoning...
-- 
-----------------Greg-Harp----------------harp@netcom.com------------------
  "I think I've reached that point / Where every word that you write /
  Of every blood dark sea / And every soul black night / And every dream
  you dream me in / And every perfect free from sin / And burning eyes /
  And hearts on fire / Are just the same old song" -- The Cure
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: U.S. Is Not Going to War in Somalia for any Good Reasons
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:59:47 GMT

In article <1gt2hrINN53r@transfer.stratus.com> dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.171453.9192@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>> In article <85540@ut-emx.uucp> wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester) writes:
>
>> >SHHHHHH!!!!! Don't break the progressive's hearts by telling them that 
>> >Vietnam is *not* proof that the People(tm) can stand alone against a world
>> >superpower!! It's Politically Incorrect to imply that!  :)
>> 
>> Er, the Vietnamese had superpower support (and I can't really think of
>> a successful insurgency that didn't have a Great Power patron), more
>> from the Soviet Union than China.  Ho Chi Minh's regime was extremely
>> good at soliciting help.
>
>I'm confused.  Isn't that what Patrick was saying?

Yeah, I'm just pointing out that my profressive heart never believed
this.  Perhaps my sense of humor and whimsy is trickling away in my
old age.




--
The insane fear of socialism throws the bourgeois headlong into the
arms of despotism.
			-- Tocqueville, 1852
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: U.S. Is Not Going to War in Somalia for any Good Reasons
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:14:53 GMT

In article <85540@ut-emx.uucp> wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester) writes:
>In article <1giamlINN1b9@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
>]
>]  The difference between Serbia and Vietnam is that the Serbs have no super-
>]power to back them up like the VC did.  Once the equipment and factories in

Actually, look at what the Yugoslav resistance did to the Nazis, even
though the Nazis would have used tactics we would not even consider.

>
>SHHHHHH!!!!! Don't break the progressive's hearts by telling them that 
>Vietnam is *not* proof that the People(tm) can stand alone against a world
>superpower!! It's Politically Incorrect to imply that!  :)

Er, the Vietnamese had superpower support (and I can't really think of
a successful insurgency that didn't have a Great Power patron), more
from the Soviet Union than China.  Ho Chi Minh's regime was extremely
good at soliciting help.


--
The insane fear of socialism throws the bourgeois headlong into the
arms of despotism.
			-- Tocqueville, 1852
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: CNN / All Reporters
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 04:39:06 GMT

In article <8919@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> scw@cirrus.seas.ucla.edu (Stephen C Woods) writes:
>In article <wkmpph-131292125700@norie_sato.isc.rit.edu> wkmpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (W. Keith McManus) writes:
>>The military  knew the press was [...] the military had used some
>>public service officers to organize the coverage bothsides would not
>>have had to go through looking so stupid.   
>
>The problem with that idea is that some yammerhead would claim that
>
>     "The MILITARY is manipluating the press again".

Ah, but someone's put forth a reasonably plausible theory: the press
were invited to witness the Marines coming ashore so they'd get into
the way.  It looks like the press made a nuisance of themselves
without any apparent Pentagon manipulation, and the military will have
a pretext with which to censor the press for our next war.  The
military has been superb in handling the press and manipulating
perceptions.  I recommend you look at John MacArthur's _Second Front_
for more info.





--
The insane fear of socialism throws the bourgeois headlong into the
arms of despotism.
			-- Tocqueville, 1852
From: jsl+@pitt.edu (John S Lundberg)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 16 Dec 92 01:44:27 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Dec16.004429.9163@news.acns.nwu.edu> tjewald@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Timothy Ewald) writes:
>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.  

There are always going to be some similarities between any given two
foreign policy issues.  However, in this case, there are vastly more
dissimilarities than there are similarities.  Starting with the most
important: we got involved in Vietnam because of larger geopolitical
concerns, i.e., concern about a rippling wave of communism sweaping
through Southeast Asia.  We saw Vietnam in terms of a bipolar world.
That world is now dead (or mortally wounded, at least) and the policy
we are pursuing in Somalia is limited to nothing more than humanitarian
concern, at least so far as I can tell from any source available to
me.  We're not, I don't think, trying to pursue a larger policy in
Somalia.

I'm willing to give the effort the benefit of the doubt.  The human
tragedy of Somalia is so compelling that we *have* to do something.
What better use for military force than to attempt to save the lives
of starving children?  Maybe we can't save them all but we can at 
least save some...or we can try.

For years I've seen pictures of misery from places like Biafra,
Bangladesh and now Somalia.  Apart from a few donations, I've never
done anything about it and sit comfortable here in the US.  I'm not
willing to succumb to a too easy cynicism and paranoia, not with
the difference between those dying people and what I take for granted.
-- 
John Lundberg
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re:  The mess WE created.	
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:43:40 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.

ASS/U/ME.

}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?

Of course.  We are also importing qat, forcing the locals to use it, and 
are in charge of the street gangs that are charging "protection" to the
aid workers, and the port manager (who is REALLY griping about his missing kickbacks)
works for the US NAvy.