Talk:Somali Civil War (2006-present)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Combatants
Removed Ethiopia and Eritrea from the infobox, they haven't engaged in fighting. Yet. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not officially, perhaps. This article [1] cites a confidential UN report that states "The United Nations warned in a confidential report Oct. 26 that thousands of Ethiopian and Eritrean troops are in Somalia backing opposing sides, raising the risk of a regional war. " Although this doesn't mean they are involved in fighting is this enough to include them as protagonists? AndrewRT - Talk 15:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- No. UNIFIL was not a protagonist in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, neither the Lebanese Army, for example. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- They shouldn't be listed as combatants, but information about their influence/involvement should be part of the article expansion. See also the WashPost article. -Fsotrain09 04:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I think they should be on the infobox because although they are not direct participants, they're supporters of either side. Eritrea has supplied weaponry to the ICU. So why not include them ? MiguelNS
[edit] Maps & NPOV
Great maps, thanks for putting them together. That's what I love about wikipedia - adding the factual detail that just gets missed when you follow current affairs in the commercial media.
One concern, however. The Somali Civil War is a purely internal affair involving only the territory of Somalia. Is it right to also include other territory that is part of Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti on this map? It could be considered partial to pan-Somali nationalism to include this in the map, and hence contrary to WP:NPOV. AndrewRT - Talk 15:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think Ingoman's reason for this was that those territories are mainly populated by Somalis, and thus likely to be involved in the conflict rather strongly. They also provide opportunity to show foreign (especially Ethiopian) troop movements on the map more easily. I think it's harmless, especially as the borders between the countries are very clearly drawn. —Nightstallion (?) 15:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
This seems to me the area of a possible regional conflict. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
They areas of Kenya,Ethiopia and Djibouti are Somali populated territory. During the scramble for Africa The French Took Dijabouti the British and the Italians took the rest. The British had full control of the area after WW2. So they decided to give Ogaden region to Ethiopia (breaking treaties signed with Somalis) and they Gave the south eastern Part of Somalia to Kenya (against a referendum which a 60+ majority voted to stay in Somalia). Now most Somalis want those places back but the TFG doesn't because it's supporters are those countries who don't want to give up their those areas . 87.194.51.4 09:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Regional War and ICU
First of all I'd like to congratulate Ingoman and theFEARgod for their great work on this article. The maps are so very detailed. Thanks a lot for your efforts guys!
I just have a few suggestions:
1 - If Ethiopia and Eritrea eventually intervene I'd like to coin the conflict as the "Horn War".
It should not be regarded as a Ethio-Eritrean war because it involves Somalia, and it should be not fall under the category of Somali civil war because what will be at stake will be the regional balance of power;
2 - Should we continue to adress the SICC (Supreme Islamic Courts Council) as ICU (Islamic Courts Union)?
I ask only because it's easier to say and identify ICU.
What do you guys think?
- The SICC is the ICU "senate", the way the Shura Council is the "house" of the ICU. The proper name is still the Islamic Courts Union. As to the regional war, I agree on your choice of name. --Ingoman 16:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes I would opt for 2006-200X Horn of Africa War--TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Abudwaq
I was under the impression this town was already under ICU control, seeing as it wasn't under Puntland's control and I thought all the warlords were driven out of Galgadud months ago. However the ICU just captured it a few days ago from Ethiopian forces, meaning it was under Ethiopian control up to that point. That means all my maps are wrong... :( I have found information[2] that Abdi Qebdiid bunkered down in Abudwaq sometime in August with Ethiopian support, so I will go with that. --Ingoman 18:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Alright so I didn't have all the information, my maps will be updated to include the new state of Galmudug that was created on the 14th of August in south Galkayo and Abudwaq.
[edit] Talib 72
I cannot wait until the ICU captures all of Somalia and gets rid of those damn warlords. And why is the US supporting warlords. I thought they were spreading democracy in the world. It seems that the US is not spreading democratic ideology. It is more like anti communist, religious ideology. The will support brutal dictators such as Saddam or the puppet dictators in South America, just as long as they are not commies or good pious religious leaders. By the way I love the beautifal and detailed maps. Best article I have ever read. I like opening all the images on different windows. That way I can click from one window to the next and watch the green grow.
- I was under the impression the actual warlords have long ago lost, and the various branches of the provisional government are pretty much all that's left in the south? In the north, I don't think Puntland has anything to do with the warlords... Homestarmy 03:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- see my changes on the first four maps --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- I like it, we should do that for all the maps. --Ingoman 15:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- see my changes on the first four maps --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Just how involved are Eritrea and Ethiopia?
That's a tough question really. The ICU has attacked Ethiopian convoys, and the Ethiopians have taken part in all the TNG's offensives. I think you could include Ethiopia as a combatant.--Ingoman 22:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
noone?
[edit] Edit
Just changed a sentence in the opening paragraph of the orgins to read "This combination of brains, money and fighting power has proven to be very powerful." I felt it just sounds much better.70.51.86.204 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.51.86.204 (talk) 06:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] This period has ended
...with the Ethiopian attacks on ICU. See Afghan Civil War campaignbox for similar context. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- now we have two ongoing phases, that is silly. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] bias
"While no definitive proof has materialized on either side, it is true that the suicide attack can only benefit Ethiopia, who has been trying to convince the world that the ICU is backed by al-Qa'ida."
Saying who the attack can only benifit is opinion, and a biased one, and in any case not at all appropriate for an encyclopedia. At the very least it needs a drastic rewording before it can be inlcluded. I removed that whole sentance. Harley peters 04:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)