Mali Civil War and the Western Intervention

[BruceVC]

Sup All

 

 

Most of you are probably saying " Whats a Mali ?"

 

Its an ex-French colony in Western Africa that is going to be in the headlines a lot. Its also the country where the famous city of Timbuktu is, the legendary destination of ancient scholarly pursuits. The country is very impoverished and hasn't really accomplished much in the last 50 years, one of Africa's almost failed states for a variety of reasons.

 

Anyway there has been a Civil War there for the last year between Al-Qaeda backed militants and the current govgovernment, the current government was losing this war and until recently the rebels were on there way to conquer the capital city Bamako. The Mali government has been asking for international assistance and due to the desultory response from the African Union, how surprising, the French have sent troops and are using there air force to slow down the advancing Islamic fundamentalist rebels. The UK will also be assisting with logistical support. And the USA has offered to help.

 

http://world.time.com/2013/01/11/the-crisis-in-mali-will-french-intervention-stop-the-islamist-advance/

 

Now why should you care, if the Islamic rebels win Al-Qaeda will undoubtedly another base to operate from in Africa and the entire region of West Africa could become destabilized and prone to be influenced from there interpretation of Sharia law. We dont want another pre 9/11 Afghanistan in Africa.

 

So keep your eyes on this conflict and well done for France for getting involved.

[Malcador]

Hm, weren't these some of the nice folks they armed in Libya ?

[Valsuelm]

Al-Qaeda = Boogiemen

[AGX-17]

Not to mention that they've taken to destroying the ancient architectural and cultural heritage of Timbuktu.

 

Sup All

 

 

Most of you are probably saying " Whats a Mali ?"

 

Its an ex-French colony in Western Africa that is going to be in the headlines a lot. Its also the country where the famous city of Timbuktu is, the legendary destination of ancient scholarly pursuits. The country is very impoverished and hasn't really accomplished much in the last 50 years, one of Africa's almost failed states for a variety of reasons.

 

Anyway there has been a Civil War there for the last year between Al-Qaeda backed militants and the current govgovernment, the current government was losing this war and until recently the rebels were on there way to conquer the capital city Bamako. The Mali government has been asking for international assistance and due to the desultory response from the African Union, how surprising, the French have sent troops and are using there air force to slow down the advancing Islamic fundamentalist rebels. The UK will also be assisting with logistical support. And the USA has offered to help.

 

http://world.time.co...lamist-advance/

 

Now why should you care, if the Islamic rebels win Al-Qaeda will undoubtedly another base to operate from in Africa and the entire region of West Africa could become destabilized and prone to be influenced from there interpretation of Sharia law. We dont want another pre 9/11 Afghanistan in Africa.

 

So keep your eyes on this conflict and well done for France for getting involved.

 

It bears mentioning that this all started because of a military coup in Mali which overthrew the government, and the coup leaders believed that they were preventing this from happening by overthrowing the civilian government. Instead, they created the opportunity for Islamists to take over the country's north.

 

Al-Qaeda = Boogiemen

 

To you sitting safe in the first world, yes. Not to the people whose towns they've occupied, not to the people they've killed, not to the people they've disfigured, mutilated and amputated.

Edited January 15, 2013 by AGX-17

[Valsuelm]

Not to mention that they've taken to destroying the ancient architectural and cultural heritage of Timbuktu.

 

It bears mentioning that this all started because of a military coup in Mali which overthrew the government, and the coup leaders believed that they were preventing this from happening by overthrowing the civilian government. Instead, they created the opportunity for Islamists to take over the country's north.

 

To you sitting safe in the first world, yes. Not to the people whose towns they've occupied, not to the people they've killed, not to the people they've disfigured, mutilated and amputated.

 

You make a lot of noise slurping up that propaganda.

 

No doubt people are being killed. No doubt it's horrible. However, the boogiemen aren't doing the killing. Just how many times are you going to buy the same BS story? Or are you young. I'll forgive you if you aren't old enough to remember the same story ~12 years ago right before 9/11.

 

And I don't overestimate how safe it is here in the 'first world' as so many of those that live here such as yourself do. The boogiemen will be back here someday, or rather evil folks will be that are advertized as such.

 

The world is not as it is advertized, not even remotely.

[BruceVC]

Hm, weren't these some of the nice folks they armed in Libya ?

 

Well after the Libyan conflict the pro-Gaddafi forces, many of whom were black mercenaries fled Libya, as they would have been killed. They looted many armories and took those weapons south to countries in West Africa. So thats the link, the West didn't arm these militants but there intervention in Libya caused Gaddafi to hire them to fight against the anti-gaddafi forces supported by the West.

Not to mention that they've taken to destroying the ancient architectural and cultural heritage of Timbuktu.

 

It bears mentioning that this all started because of a military coup in Mali which overthrew the government, and the coup leaders believed that they were preventing this from happening by overthrowing the civilian government. Instead, they created the opportunity for Islamists to take over the country's north.

 

To you sitting safe in the first world, yes. Not to the people whose towns they've occupied, not to the people they've killed, not to the people they've disfigured, mutilated and amputated.

 

You make a lot of noise slurping up that propaganda.

 

No doubt people are being killed. No doubt it's horrible. However, the boogiemen aren't doing the killing. Just how many times are you going to buy the same BS story? Or are you young. I'll forgive you if you aren't old enough to remember the same story ~12 years ago right before 9/11.

 

And I don't overestimate how safe it is here in the 'first world' as so many of those that live here such as yourself do. The boogiemen will be back here someday, or rather evil folks will be that are advertized as such.

 

The world is not as it is advertized, not even remotely.

 

Valsuelm I can understand your skepticism, you are probably thinking "why should the West intervene in some god forsaken corrupt African country". Why is it our fight?

 

But there are legitimate reasons to prevent these extremists from winning in Mali. Apart from what AGX mentioned these groups practice a very orthodox and brutal form of Islam and Al-Qaeda is supporting them. Al-Qaeda is constantly looking for countries to train and operate in. There bases in counties like Yemen, Afghanistan, Sudan and Somalia have been weakened and disrupted. If they win in Mali they will have a safe haven to thrive and operate in with impunity. I don't believe this is something the West should allow, we saw what the result was in Afghanistan when Al-Qaeda was left to there own devices.

Edited January 15, 2013 by BruceVC

[obyknven]

1. France IRL control huge part of Africa.

http://www.projectpa...al-enslavement/

 

2. Mali is the third largest gold producing country in Africa, behind South Africa and Ghana. Gold Mining industry completely controlled by foreign companies.

http://www.mining.co...g-ground-67386/

 

3. Local try to free the country from foreign owners and West ( especially France ) begin intervention to defend own colonial interest. As expected, Western media spreading pro-war propaganda and demonized rebels ( Al-Qaeda , terrorism, blah-blah).

 

[Zoraptor]

The Tuaregs got a lot of their weapons from Gaddafi, but they're also (generally) moderate and separatist- hence them trying to set up the Republic of Azawadd in the north and not continue on to Bamoko/ the rest of the country. The extremists were a significant element of the anti Gaddafi groups, recruited from and previously active in the greater Sahal region, and did end up getting a lot of weapons from Libya post collapse as well as the usual source for weapons and funding for sunni islamic extremists, the KSA/ Qatar etc. Shame for the Tuaregs as like a lot of minorities they have been the victims of Arbitrary Colonial Line Drawing that lumped them in to (a) country(ies) that is not their choice, and the one time they get a realistic chance at self determination their revolt gets co-opted by a bunch of largely foreign extremists who not only start trashing the locale but end up drawing in western intervention.

 

Blaming the tuaregs is basically just trying to blame Gaddafi for the problem, when the problem actually comes from completely the other side.

[HoonDing]

Reminds me of that old B-movie.

 

[obyknven]

Reminds me this

Tuaregs looks like Freemens from Dune. They are cool people.

 

http://www.brentstir...ebels-niger.php

Edited January 15, 2013 by obyknven

[Malcador]

That SVD is remarkably clean looking.

[WDeranged]

After so many years of this I can't help but get sceptical when meaningless phrases such as "with links to", "associated with" and "backed by" are repeated ad nauseum when referring to any brown skinned fighters that need tarring with the Al Qaeda brush. Sure there are bad people and they probably do need beating down but I resent being sold the myth of a Cobra like global network of highly organised cave dwellers.

Edited January 15, 2013 by WDeranged

[BruceVC]

After so many years of this I can't help but get sceptical when meaningless phrases such as "with links to", "associated with" and "backed by" are repeated ad nauseum when referring to any brown skinned fighters that need tarring with the Al Qaeda brush. Sure there are bad people and they probably do need beating down but I resent being sold the myth of a Cobra like global network of highly organised cave dwellers.

]

 

But thats the thing Al-Qaeda has evolved years ago from the original "cave dwellers" association .

 

There structure is scattered and nebulous but it operates in several countries throughout the world. They seem to have there biggest support base in countries that have a high level of poverty and lack established governments . They consider anyone who doesn't follow there archaic interpretation of Islam as the enemy, and this means many Muslim countries are targeted. I am not suggesting they are a threat like the Nazi's were or any established country but they are real and definitely pose a threat to almost all Western countries, there eternal enemies.

Edited January 15, 2013 by BruceVC

[JFSOCC]

Personally I was rather upset that they destroyed cultural heritage sites of old muslim tombs because "Blasphemy!" the tombs were idolatry.

There they were at one of the most spiritual places in the world, where real theology was practised, where great ideas (whether for good or bad I leave to you) were inspired. and they ****ing destroyed it. poof. gone from history the oldest korans in north africa, burned, gone the beautifully constructed tombs, bulldozed.

 

why? because they didn't practice their religion "the right way"

 

So I'm biased. The cultural anthropologist in me is upset.

[WDeranged]

I am not suggesting they are a threat like the Nazi's were or any established country but they are real and definitely pose a threat to almost all Western countries, there eternal enemies.

 

This would be the crux of the matter for me, they're sold to us as the apocalypse made flesh, the single biggest reason that we need to exchange liberties for constant vigilance, the world was on the brink of nuclear annihilation for the better part of a century and the powers that be still couldn't get away with these stunts.

 

I'm certainly not a pacifist, I do believe there can be a "just war" and I know that violence is sometimes necessary but I demand truthful reasons if I'm going to go along with it, the waters are so muddy with propaganda and agenda that I don't believe any of us can think clearly on this matter.

[obyknven]

After so many years of this I can't help but get sceptical when meaningless phrases such as "with links to", "associated with" and "backed by" are repeated ad nauseum when referring to any brown skinned fighters that need tarring with the Al Qaeda brush. Sure there are bad people and they probably do need beating down but I resent being sold the myth of a Cobra like global network of highly organised cave dwellers.

]

 

But thats the thing Al-Qaeda has evolved years ago from the original "cave dwellers" association .

 

There structure is scattered and nebulous but it operates in several countries throughout the world. They seem to have there biggest support base in countries that have a high level of poverty and lack established governments . They consider anyone who doesn't follow there archaic interpretation of Islam as the enemy, and this means many Muslim countries are targeted. I am not suggesting they are a threat like the Nazi's were or any established country but they are real and definitely pose a threat to almost all Western countries, there eternal enemies.

 

Lol! Cncept of Al-Qaeda copypasted from Brotherhood of Nod (C&C). Skyscrapers attack, secret network of bad guys, megalomaniacal plans and periodically ressurecting evil leader - all this from western fantasies about ideal enemy. It's obviously media product of western mind - for western mind. Because this we can say - Al-Qaeda ... never... exists. Never.

 

If you want see how looks like Eastern resistance - watch at FATAH, PKK, Hesbollah, Hamas, Afghan Northern Alliance, Taliban - they are completely different from this.

Edited January 15, 2013 by obyknven

[BruceVC]

After so many years of this I can't help but get sceptical when meaningless phrases such as "with links to", "associated with" and "backed by" are repeated ad nauseum when referring to any brown skinned fighters that need tarring with the Al Qaeda brush. Sure there are bad people and they probably do need beating down but I resent being sold the myth of a Cobra like global network of highly organised cave dwellers.

]

 

But thats the thing Al-Qaeda has evolved years ago from the original "cave dwellers" association .

 

There structure is scattered and nebulous but it operates in several countries throughout the world. They seem to have there biggest support base in countries that have a high level of poverty and lack established governments . They consider anyone who doesn't follow there archaic interpretation of Islam as the enemy, and this means many Muslim countries are targeted. I am not suggesting they are a threat like the Nazi's were or any established country but they are real and definitely pose a threat to almost all Western countries, there eternal enemies.

 

 

Lol! Cncept of Al-Qaeda copypasted from Brotherhood of Nod (C&C). Skyscrapers attack, secret network of bad guys, megalomaniacal plans and periodically ressurecting evil leader - all this from western fantasies about ideal enemy. It's obviously media product of western mind - for western mind. Even because this we can say - Al-Qaeda ... never... exists. Never.

 

If you want see how looks like Eastern resistance - watch at FATAH, PKK, Hesbollah, Hamas, Afghan Northern Alliance, Taliban - they are completely different from this.

 

You can't seriously be suggesting that you don't think that Al-Qaeda is real as a known and established terrorist organization ?

[JFSOCC]

You can't seriously be suggesting that you don't think that Al-Qaeda is real as a known and established terrorist organization ?

I think he legitimately tries to point out that Al-Qaeda is a broad term used for many organisations which are autonomous from Al-Queda leadership.

"Al-Qaeda linked" doesn't say much. It's just a convenient term for us to put it into context

Edit: it's like saying "Anonymous hacked the playstation network"

Who is in Anonymous? any-one who claims to be. And what some do for anonymous might not involve much more than a fraction of its "members"

All you need is a Guy Fawkes mask and an internet connection.

Edited January 15, 2013 by JFSOCC

[obyknven]

You can't seriously be suggesting that you don't think that Al-Qaeda is real as a known and established terrorist organization ?

Terrorists world organization looks like yet another "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" conspiracy.

http://en.wikipedia...._Elders_of_Zion

 

Humans are egoists, their interest very local. It's almost impossible motivate them to fight not for yourself, but for interest's of peoples from other side of Earth. Even Bolsheviks ( who want World Revolution ), stop war after defeating counterrevolution and just awaiting when other nations free yourself too. Red Army just don't want fight more, especially because all know, how ruined everything in homeland after civil war. Peoples always want stop fight as soon as possible and begin restoration of ruined economy,property etc. Because this all resistance movements have local ( and even tribal ) character.

[BruceVC]

You can't seriously be suggesting that you don't think that Al-Qaeda is real as a known and established terrorist organization ?

I think he legitimately tries to point out that Al-Qaeda is a broad term used for many organisations which are autonomous from Al-Queda leadership.

"Al-Qaeda linked" doesn't say much. It's just a convenient term for us to put it into context

Edit: it's like saying "Anonymous hacked the playstation network"

Who is in Anonymous? any-one who claims to be. And what some do for anonymous might not involve much more than a fraction of its "members"

All you need is a Guy Fawkes mask and an internet connection.

 

Maybe but I don't think he is saying that, I believe he is saying that Al-Qaeda never really existed and is a product of the West in order to achieve certain political and military aims. Its what certain conspiracy theorists believe

[Meshugger]

Personally I was rather upset that they destroyed cultural heritage sites of old muslim tombs because "Blasphemy!" the tombs were idolatry.

There they were at one of the most spiritual places in the world, where real theology was practised, where great ideas (whether for good or bad I leave to you) were inspired. and they ****ing destroyed it. poof. gone from history the oldest korans in north africa, burned, gone the beautifully constructed tombs, bulldozed.

 

why? because they didn't practice their religion "the right way"

 

So I'm biased. The cultural anthropologist in me is upset.

 

Pretty much, i hope that France gets the balls for a total annihalation of those barbarians. Or rather capture each one of them and force them to slave labour and restore every single artifact while being forced to listen to Slayer - "Reign in Blood" in every waking hour. **** them and **** every piece of **** that support them.

 

Luckily enough, i am not the one calling the shots here. Destroying cultural heritage really rubs me the wrong way.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Meshugger

[Malcador]

Well, that might get the message across but that'll be bad PR.

[pmp10]

Personally I was rather upset that they destroyed cultural heritage sites of old muslim tombs because "Blasphemy!" the tombs were idolatry.

There they were at one of the most spiritual places in the world, where real theology was practised, where great ideas (whether for good or bad I leave to you) were inspired. and they ****ing destroyed it. poof. gone from history the oldest korans in north africa, burned, gone the beautifully constructed tombs, bulldozed.

 

why? because they didn't practice their religion "the right way"

 

So I'm biased. The cultural anthropologist in me is upset.

 

Pretty much, i hope that France gets the balls for a total annihalation of those barbarians. Or rather capture each one of them and force them to slave labour and restore every single artifact while being forced to listen to Slayer - "Reign in Blood" in every waking hour. **** them and **** every piece of **** that support them.

 

Luckily enough, i am not the one calling the shots here. Destroying cultural heritage really rubs me the wrong way.

You know - us westerners are not really it position to call others Barbarians over such practices.

There has been plenty of destroying cultural heritage throughout our history.

[BruceVC]

Personally I was rather upset that they destroyed cultural heritage sites of old muslim tombs because "Blasphemy!" the tombs were idolatry.

There they were at one of the most spiritual places in the world, where real theology was practised, where great ideas (whether for good or bad I leave to you) were inspired. and they ****ing destroyed it. poof. gone from history the oldest korans in north africa, burned, gone the beautifully constructed tombs, bulldozed.

 

why? because they didn't practice their religion "the right way"

 

So I'm biased. The cultural anthropologist in me is upset.

 

Pretty much, i hope that France gets the balls for a total annihalation of those barbarians. Or rather capture each one of them and force them to slave labour and restore every single artifact while being forced to listen to Slayer - "Reign in Blood" in every waking hour. **** them and **** every piece of **** that support them.

 

Luckily enough, i am not the one calling the shots here. Destroying cultural heritage really rubs me the wrong way.

You know - us westerners are not really it position to call others Barbarians over such practices.

There has been plenty of destroying cultural heritage throughout our history.

I disagree that we can't get upset by there vandalism and call them barbarians, how do you think the Muslim community would have felt if the Americans had desecrated and destroyed Islamic mosques or religious sites in Iraq or Afghanistan?

[pmp10]

Personally I was rather upset that they destroyed cultural heritage sites of old muslim tombs because "Blasphemy!" the tombs were idolatry.

There they were at one of the most spiritual places in the world, where real theology was practised, where great ideas (whether for good or bad I leave to you) were inspired. and they ****ing destroyed it. poof. gone from history the oldest korans in north africa, burned, gone the beautifully constructed tombs, bulldozed.

 

why? because they didn't practice their religion "the right way"

 

So I'm biased. The cultural anthropologist in me is upset.

 

Pretty much, i hope that France gets the balls for a total annihalation of those barbarians. Or rather capture each one of them and force them to slave labour and restore every single artifact while being forced to listen to Slayer - "Reign in Blood" in every waking hour. **** them and **** every piece of **** that support them.

 

Luckily enough, i am not the one calling the shots here. Destroying cultural heritage really rubs me the wrong way.

You know - us westerners are not really it position to call others Barbarians over such practices.

There has been plenty of destroying cultural heritage throughout our history.

I disagree that we can't get upset by there vandalism and call them barbarians, how do you think the Muslim community would have felt if the Americans had desecrated and destroyed Islamic mosques or religious sites in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Except it wouldn't be done by believers of the same religion.

In the end those sites are muslim and if muslims feel that they are blasphemous it's their call to make.