HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: U.S. Is Not Going to War in Somalia for any Good Reasons
Date: 15 Dec 1992 21:31:47 -0500
Organization: Yale Computer Science Department
NNTP-Posting-Host: cathy.na.cs.yale.edu

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <1gkbb2INNlfd@CATHY.NA.CS.YALE.EDU> yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
>>All this stuff may legitimize the government to us, but I think the Serbians
>>will not care in the slightest whether their government is "legitimate".  I
>>mean, if they had much effect on it in the first place.
>
>Leslie Gelb (or Anthony Lewis, I forget which) seemed to believe that
>it does.  Governments in industrial states cannot support themselves
>in the long-term by military force alone.  They need popular support
>(or at least popular apathy) to maintain power.

It is extremely easy for a totalitarian nation to maintain popular apathy.
You simply don't tell people anything.  Then they don't know what they are
supposed to revolt against.  Of course you have to say _something_ to them.
Tractor production is up by 300%!  The capitalist imperialists are killing
Somalian freedom fighters!  The Bosnian offensive has been repulsed!
Serbian soldiers were raped by Bosnian women...the criminal Bosnians have
been executed!

>It was a Communist insurrection, but was that it's primary
>characteristic?  I'd argue that it was primarily a war of
>independence.  Certainly, it was not southward expansion by Communist
>China, considering the historic animosity between the two nations.

I did not call it a communist insurrection merely because the government at
the end was communist.  The insurrection itself was communist.  The
mid-level leadership was trained in communist doctrine and methods, often in
China or the USSR.  The weapons were imported from communist countries.  The
political tactics were similar to those used by the revolution in China, by
partisans in Yugoslavia, by guerrillas in Zimbabwe, and by the communist
rebellion in Zaire.  In all these places the doctrine that was spread to the
peasants was communist.  In all these places the method of spreading the
doctrine was to shoot people who expressed disagreement, or who were likely
to do so.

--
Norman Yarvin						yarvin@cs.yale.edu
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
From: pmoloney@maths.tcd.ie (Paul Moloney)
Subject: Re: Does Bush hate Xmas or What ?
Organization: Somewhere in the Twentieth Century
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:48:53 GMT

tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) writes:
>wcalderw@nmsu.EDU (CALDERWOOD) writes:

>>Why does Bush always want to do these things at christmas time?
>>What did he have a bad childhood? May be he doesn't beleave
>>in Santa.

>You mean "feed starving Somali people" right ?  Yeah, you would thought
>he would have picked Easter or Martin Luther King's birthday to begin
>something so petty.

What? Bush is feeding starving people? With _Marines_? I mean, look, 
I'm no fan of big muscular idiots trying to imitate John Wayne, but
feeding them to people really takes the biscuit.

Besides, you want to give the Somalis a well-balanced meal. With Marines, 
you'd have too much protein and not enough carbohydrates. Feed them UN 
diplomats.

P.
-- 
moorcockheathersiainbankshamandcornpizzapjorourkebluesbrothersspikeleepratchett
clive  P a u l   M o l o n e y    "I'm pretty witty and you're itty bitty    pe
james  Trinity College, Dublin     And isn't it a pity the city can't see?   vr
brownbladerunnerorsonscottcardprincewatchmenkatebushbatmanthekillingjoketolkien
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: It's Blood for Oil, again. (yeah right...)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:55:41 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <6234@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:
>From article <Bz21Dz.MtF@apollo.hp.com>, by goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman):
>>     Meanwhile, the US foreign policy appears to be driven not by 
>>     legitimate U.S. interests abroad, but by how much foreign powers 
>>     (will) have contributed to the Bush family's net worth.
>
>I can't comment on the latter (and wouldn't be surprised), but do you
>indeed consider a relief mission that may save the lives of tens of
>thousands as "illegitimate"?

    The relief mission is over, and it failed miserably I might add.

    What we have is a military intervention in Somalian internal affairs
    in order to re-establish the colonial rule there.  Boutros Ghali calls
    it "transitional authority" and, most recently, "UN protectorate".



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Follow the money."                             Other opinions are mine.
 Deep Throat                                    Disclaimer: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
From: green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green)
Subject: Defense Contractors (was Re: Somalia)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 02:14:57 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

In article <1992Dec17.042610.28892@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>>An american defense contractor with an eye on the future??  
>>that's a new one!  ;-)
>
>Hey, Grumman tried to make a bus in the '80s (even with the Reagan
>arms build-up going on).  It sucked, though.

Hey, again, just look out the window on any business day.  See all those nice
brown trucks with UPS on the side?  See all the nice red, white and blue 
trucks with the postal eagle on the side?  All made by Grumman.  I would say
that Grumman has done fairly well in the non-defense business, even if an
LLV doesn't go quite as fast as an F-14.

Clinton whines about IBM losing 25,000 jobs, but even CNN and other news
groups admit that IBM hasn't kept up with the competition.  What's he want
us to do, subsidize an unprofitable business?  It's a shame to lose the jobs,
but that's the way it works, you don't stay competitive, you lose.  I wonder
if that's why Scully is hanging on to Slick's coattails.
From: jsl+@pitt.edu (John S Lundberg)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 16 Dec 92 00:50:23 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <4228@dozo.and.nl> jos@and.nl (Jos Horsmeier) writes:
>I beg to differ here. the US is not a superpower, the US lives next to
>bankruptcy, the national debt is a humongous pile of billions of dollars.
>Things get worse and worse there. 

You're 100% right.  It's a real sewer here and no one in their right
mind would ever want to come to such an uncultured and dangerous
place.  Perhaps you should spread the word: I'd hate to see any more
people make the mistake that millions upon millions already have.
-- 
John Lundberg
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: It's Blood for Oil, again. (yeah right...)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:41:15 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1g810sINNsn3@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
>In <Bz21Dz.MtF@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com writes:
>
>> In article <1992Dec9.150336.4911@meaddata.com> andyw@meaddata.com writes:
>[lost an att. line, sorry]
>> >>    Let's face it: it is the wealthy Arab nations who are the primary 
>> >>    beneficiaries of Mr.Bush's ordering U.S. troops into Somalia.
>> >     ^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >Gee, and I thought the thousands of Somalians that will be fed instead of
>> >starving to death would be the primary beneficiaries of the US aid operation.
>> >Guess I'm just a silly uneducated American.
>> 
>>     Whether or not the Somalians will benefit from the U.S. military action
>>     remains to be seen (most of them did not benefit from the massive food 
>>     aid, did they?), but the wealthy Arab nations already are.
>
>  I'll accept that, but how do you mean?  Most of the wealthy Arab nations 
>don't have much in the way of military forces.  All of them are too busy
>worrying about their other Arab brothers on the border to spare a divison and 
>supporting troops to send to Somalia.

    The way it usually happens is that poor Arab nations supply the troops,
    and wealthy ones foot the bill.

>
>> >Its not  money that is needed to feed the Somalians, there is plenty of
>> >food in the warehouses in Mogadisu... It is politial willpower to commit
>> >troops to guard the food delivery. ...
>> 
>>     See, just six months ago people like you were calling for flooding
>>     Somalia with food as a way to help the starving people, and so we have.
>
>  Hmm, starving people == a need for food.  Does not seem an unreasonable leap
>of logic to me.

    High temperature == a need for refrigirator...

    People are starving in Somalia to the extent that they are because of a civil 
    war that has been fueled by massive food shipments from abroad.  

    Had there been no food aid, the clan leaders would have been forced to settle 
    their differences long time ago to keep the economy going, just as they 
    have been doing that for hundreds of years.

    With the food aid, the warlords' well being is no longer dependent
    on the state of the economy, for all they need is to get their hand on 
    the next food shipment and they, as well as their gunmen, are fed, armed, 
    clothed, and can drive around the city in nice, mostly Japanese, trucks.






-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Follow the money."                             Other opinions are mine.
 Deep Throat                                    Disclaimer: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lines: 9
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 10:52:10 MST
From: jensen@baloo.ee.byu.edu (Curtis Jensen)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Survival of the fittest...

Are we really HELPING these people, or are we just prolonging their
suffering and starvation?  Just GIVING these people food will
cause the somalians to do what they do best ... make MORE starving children.
Lets get the HELL out of there and let the population decrease
naturally to the point that the land can support them.  Between the
meddling of the U.S. government and the Peace Corps, I'm suprized that
this world hasnt gone completely to hell!  Somalia is not America!  We
shouldn't try to make it a little America ... and the same goes for
Egypt, Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Phillipines, Germany, etc....
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
From: green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:49:13 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

In article <1992Dec16.234025.4181@mogate.sps.mot.com> carlson@viking.sps.mot.com (Brett Carlson) writes:
>Again: **the point is**, if somalia were not strategically located,  
>the US would not be involved there.  If this is not true, then why  
>did the US not help any of the other starving African nations when  
>*they* were plagued by unstable governments and warring factions,  
>even after the cold war and before the election??  Bush *could* have  
>helped out the starving masses after desert storm, or anytime before  
>the Democratic convention...that would have allowed him to continue  
>on his wave of popularity and to divert attention from our own  
>domestic situation.....

No, the point is NOT using Somalia as a strategic base.  We just plain
flat don't need it.  Period.  We have plenty of places to use to project
power (force), and we don't need a small, starving country.  We've run
bombing missions in Eqypt (simulations) using B-52's from North Dakota.
We've got carriers all over the place.  We bombed Libya from England.
Had Bush done anything within the last year, the press would have been
over him like fleas on a dog, for playing politics.  Sad to say, the real
point of us being there is public and press pressure.  You can only look 
at 30 pound 13 year olds for so long before push comes to shove.  Quit 
looking for hidden motives, and take it at face value.

>I read this as "we shouldn't intervene when there's a problem, but we  
>have to help out when there's a problem."   there's a lot of famine  
>and genocide in the world, as there has been for many years (SE Asia,  
>many african nations, many south american nations...)  And in fact  
>the US caused a large portion of it.  

That's interesting, I've been watching African leaders from the area
for the last few days, and they place the blame on the clan leaders, not
the US.  Jesse tried that line with a leading intellectual from the area
tonight on Crossfire, and didn't get too far.

>Where do you draw the line??  We help Somalia today....we help  
>ethiopia tomorrow...we help bosnia the day after that....and the  
>sudan the day after that....meanwhile, homelessness in this nation is  
>at an all-time high.  We need to stop being the world's  
>policeman/landlord.

I've addressed that line about helping our homeless before.  They aren't
starving, and have the means to help themselves.

>An american defense contractor with an eye on the future??  
>that's a new one!  ;-)

How about Westinghouse defense systems getting into security systems?
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Somalia
From: judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:30:32 GMT
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas

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

		[stuff deleted]

>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. 
>
>
	Ain't it great!  And in case anybody is feelin sorry for
	him/herself cause they ain't got a crummy job -- well look
	at the teevee and see what problems really is!

		Judy


Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,talk.politics.misc
From: chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask)
Subject:  Reality Check (or "time to lose the righteous coloured RayBans")
Reply-To: chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask)
Organization: Me , Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 18:06:15 GMT

>
>Oh, I agree with you in fact.  I'm a cynic in this affair because
>the fact is that we're going in to clean up a mess that WE made,
>not for high-falutin' humanitarian reasons.  I don't believe we're

I'm in Pro-Us mode for a minute here, and this post was not another
Ameri-slam, I just want to point out that the US is not some troll under the 
bridge in a world of woodland faeries.  Most of the trouble spots in the
world come to one (or all) of the larger countries for assistance.  They
will typically cut throats as fast (or faster) than the big imperialist pig
countries (like the US) that they want so badly to become one of.

Every group of people in the world is looking out for their own best
interest (see alt.philosophy to argue that one), and the US is no better,
and not much worse, than anyone else.  Every screaming, indignant,
hard-done-by protester would love to get rid of those corrupt fatcats, and
takeover themselves.  Sometimes they do, and in general things don't change
a lot.

That said, the US is loaded with corruption, bad guys in power all over the
place, lunatics in charge, power influence...  The US is also more
interesting and important to watch, since it's bigger and flashier.  Let's
just keep the superiour horse's asses in the closet for now, and try to
move things in a positive direction instead of making ourselves look smart
in front of our peers.

-chris blask

"You tell me it's the institution, well you know:
		We'd all love to see your plan." -John Lennon
From: hogue@cs.arizona.edu (Justin C. Hogue)
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
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:34:01 GMT
Followup-To: alt.current-events.somalia
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

>>>Once again, the entire world turns its collective eyes towards the United
>>>States of America to solve the worlds problems.  We are the only nation
>>>who is able to do it, and has the balls to do it.  God bless the U.S. and
>>>may God bless the men and women of our armed forces.
[stuff deleted]
>	If you want to hear the answers, it's the US that created the whole
>mess in Somalia, it's that guilty concessions and possibly seeking advantage
[more stuff deleted]
WAITWAITWAIT---where the hell did you get this info?  Since when was America
the only country in the world selling weapons?  Aren't warlords doing all 
this killing?  American corporations MAY be to blame (assuming you are right
that these weapons we so obviously militiously placed there are ours) for the
weapons, but I don't see where you got that idea.  Boy, people like to blame
the good ol' US for everything.
--Jowfus
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.org.un,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
From: green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 16 Dec 92 06:45:47 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

Contrary to what good old Slade says, this is not going to be another Viet nam.
The situations are so different so as not to be even worth talking about.

1. Viet Nam was supported by massive import of weapons from Russia and China.
2. Viet Nam was a jungle environment, where the hiding places were uncountable.
3. The North Vietnamese were highly trained and organized.

1a. Somalia isn't getting massive support from anyone.
2a. Somalia is a somewhat desolate place - pretty barren.
3a. Samalia's clans are too busy fighting each other to get together to go
    after us.
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
From: harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp)
Subject: Re: Does Bush hate Xmas or What ?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 22:39:48 GMT

dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina) writes:

>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. 

The problem is that the growth of the 80s was centered primarily on
the already well-off.  The 80s were an age of gluttony which we will
probably never see again.

I agree that our economy is doing pretty well right now, at least
relative to many other countries.  We're growing, but at a very slow
rate.

>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.

Actually, the top earners have a lot of money "socked away" from the
tax breaks of the 80s.  If they don't pull a seven digit income after
taxes anymore I'm not going to shed a tear.  They won't be out on the
street, either, and they'll never starve.

>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.

Alot of people will, in fact, work for the government.  Now is a time
when we're desperately in need of a lot of civil servants.  Our police
forces are anemically under-staffed, as are our schools.  We need
programs to help keep kids off the streets and out of gangs.  Those
programs will need people to staff them.
-- 
-----------------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: dfo@tko.vtt.fi (Foxvog Douglas)
Subject: Re: Somalia an Arab country??? no! [was: It's Bl
Organization: VTT
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 08:57:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.150037.24881@spectrum.xerox.com> kirby@xerox.com writes:
>In article 4065@ousrvr.oulu.fi, dfo@tko.vtt.fi (Foxvog Douglas) writes:
>> In article <ByyuBE.2G2@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex
Goykhman) writes:
>> >    Somalia is an Arab country. a full-fledged member of the Arab League, 

>> According to the CIA World Fact Book, about 0.5% of the population of
>> Somalia is Arab (30,000 out of 6.x million).  Under Siad Barre the
>> official language was Somali, which the vast majority of the people 
>> speak.  Arabic, English and Italian are also spoken there.  If you have
>> seen any photos of the feeding centers or the population of Mogadishu
>> you would have been unable to see any Arab faces.  The people are
>> standard sub-Saharan African, i.e. black.

>Being an Arab means that you have been Arabized.  This means that you are 
>culturaly equivelent to an ethnic Arab.  It means that you speak arabic, and 
>contain a cultural heratige which is similar to that of the people on the 
>continent of Arabia.  

Therefore it does not apply to Somalia.  They are not Arabs, they do not
speak Arabic, they do not have the Arabic culture.

>This, incidently, does not mean you have the same 
>religion as other Arabs.  For example,
>Tariq Aziz the Iraqi foreign Minister is a christian Arab.  Approximately 
>half of the
>population of Israel are what are "Middle Eastern Jews" (there is a technical
>word for it, but I can't remember).  Culturaly they are Arabs.  The rest of 
>israel are "European Jews" Who mainly come from Europe and Russia.

I don't think that all Shepherdic (sp?) Jews are Arabs, certainly the
Palestinian Jews are.

>The color of your skin has nothing to do with your cultural background.  
>Much of northern africa was Arabized during the Islamic Expansion 
>following Mohamed rise to power.

Don't confuse Arab and Islamic.  The Iranians and those further east are
Islamic but not Arab.  The Islamic black areas of Africa (e.g. in
Nigeria) are not Arab either.  Most of Northern Africa is not black.
Who are the black Arabs (if any)?  It is true that the Arabic culture
spread as well as the Islamic faith and that there are links between the
two, but they are quite different.  No knowledgeable reference claims
that Somalis are Arab.  Is that what is being (IMHO falsely) implied in
this article?


>> doug foxvog     
>> dfo@tko.vtt.fi   

>goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com Alex Goykhman 

-- 
doug foxvog     
dfo@tko.vtt.fi