BS: Mali 2013

Subject: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 04:28 AM

French combat troops take on an Islamist insurgency in Mali.
Britain supplies transport aircraft in support and offers training, US expected to provide logistic support and Germany likely to get involved.
French troops also carry out a raid against Islamists in Somalia.

All these governments say their own nation's security is threatened.

Are they all right to say that the spread of Islam is a threat to us all?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 04:43 AM

Offers training? Them Brits are sly ain't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 07:30 AM

Canada already has Special Forces operators in neighbouring Niger and has offered training to that country in the hope of containing the Islamist insurgency in Mali.

It's not lookin' good, folks.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 07:39 AM

It's not looking good for who?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 08:33 AM

I would be surprised if the US did not have special operations groups there already, as there are in Uganda/Rwanda hunting down the Lord's Revolutionary Army or whatever that bunch calls themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 10:26 AM

Some background on what's happening in Mali: Al-Qaida carves out own country in Mali

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 10:39 AM

bobad, it's not lookin' good for Canada's soldiers, who will be handed yet another dreadful, thankless and potentially impossible task in a really, seriously, unpleasant part of the world. Our Army is good, but it's teeny-weeny by power-projection standards, and I am not the only old sweat wondering how such a mission can be sustained, especially if it kicks off before we're out of Afghanistan.

Likewise, it's not lookin' good for the Canadian taxpayer, whose hard-earned simoleons will be flushed down yet another of the world's misery sinkholes.

Tracking?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 10:49 AM

bobad and Charmion: I read a few days back that Harper said we would not get involved. Has that changed?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 12:15 PM

Canada can not afford another fight?
None of us can.

Our governments seem to have decided that the cost of not fighting them now would be even higher, that we can not afford not to fight them.

The French are saying that the Islamists are much better trained and equiped than they expected.
Much of the equipment seems to have been taken from Libya (with the help of France, Britain and US.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 01:40 PM

Harper flatly refused a "direct" mission in Mali, telling the president of the African Union so right to his face during the latter's visit to Ottawa last week. The story's on the CBC website. (I would provide a blue clicky, but that's kinda awkward on an iPad.)

The Special Forces deployment to Niger was announced on Friday afternoon, just in time to catch the Saturday headlines and two days away from any discussion in the House of Commons.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 02:34 PM

Isnt it ironic? we assist the Islamists to defeat Gadaffi, watch while they distribute Col Gadaffi's arsenal to Al Qaeda sympathisers all over North Africa.....after arming them to the teeth we now propose to bomb the shit out of them.

Do we understand nothing about foreign policy. How idiotic this shambles of a govt is.

The chickens awakened by the "Arab Spring" are sure coming home to roost........Where are you Bobad and Charlie with your tin drums?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 02:51 PM

The Arab Spring...With hindsight?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 03:02 PM

Who is Charlie? I know we have a Charley Noble, but he saves his enthusiasm for things with sails.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 05:45 PM

French planes strike targets in northern Mali

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 08:32 AM

I was hoping that someone would tell us not to worry.
That Islamism is not really a threat.
That all the Western governments are making it all up to get more oil or something.
Where are the Leftielibs when you need them?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 09:15 AM

Maybe even the Leftielibs have woken up to the whiff of coffee.

That's not to say that the Western governments aren't frantic about the future of the international petroleum supply -- they are. But that doesn't make Islamism (I guess that's a word now) any less of a threat.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 09:33 AM

The so-called Islamic arseholes in Mali have been mutilating people, re-educating folks for singing and playing music. (They are as much adherents to Islam as Satan is to Christianity.) Unfortunately, the Mali troops do not have the skill or training to contain them. So others will do it. If the actions and attacks by al-Qaeda are part of an Arab Spring, Winter will be a fucking joy.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 01:14 PM

And for those playing the home version of the game, another link to a fiercely critical opinion piece about Canada messing around in northwest Africa:

How Canada helped al-Qaida in Mali by Scott Taylor, published 13 January 2013 in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 06:53 PM

It seems Canada is offering the French one week of heavy airlift (i.e. one CC-117 Globemaster) to help them deploy a task force into Mali.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: gnu
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 07:13 PM

No Hercs, Charmion? ;-)

That will only be SLIGHTLY funny (if at all) to Canuck military personnel and Canuck news readers.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 07:17 PM

It'll carry about 160,000 pounds so it's more than it may seem.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jan 13 - 11:58 PM

To make "Islamism" (or Islam) the enemy guarantees a permanent war that can be fought all over the world and never be brought to a conclusion unless everyone gets so sick and tired of it that they just can't be bothered tuning into the idea any longer. Sounds like an absolute dream for arms dealers to me. After all, we had to do something after the Fall of Communism! You can't let war just end, for God's sake! It would hurt business.

By the way, a great war against Islam has been tried before. Several times, in fact. It was called "The Crusades", among other things. They finally gave it up and found other pressing reasons to fight wars, but that doesn't mean we can't revive the old concept in the 21st century, does it? ;-)

It's a little known fact that one of the more obscure verses in the Koran even mentions "Keith A of Hertford" (translated from the Arabic words "Ke'itah al Her'tfir") as a future "mortal enemy of Allah", an arch heretic, and a "Satanic deceiver", kind of comparable to the AntiChrist in the Christian tradition. ;-) So, Keith, I think your paranoia and your deep sense of concern on this matter is quite appropriate, and I would advise that you convert your digs into a heavily armed fortress to prepare for the inevitable Islamic assault that is surely coming to your own neighborhood to wipe YOU right off the map! Watch out for swarthy men with beards, robes, typical Islamic headgear, and old well-thumbed copies of "Terrorism for Dummies" tucked in their backpacks. They are out to get YOU personally. And YOUR family. And YOUR way of life. And all you hold dear. They intend to eliminate scones, ban the eating of pork sausages, replace the Queen with the Khalif, and enforce Sharia law in places like Bath and Whining-on-Trent. They MUST be stopped!

***

Happy now? ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 03:12 AM

There are many interpretations of those verses.
Many scholoars say they refer to a serene sage of the shires, who is to come to spread wisdom among the unbelievers.

You think France is wrong to intervene?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 03:16 AM

BBC today.
The UN Security Council has unanimously backed France's military intervention in Mali to fight Islamist rebels, officials have said.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said he hoped the intervention would help restore "Mali's constitutional order and territorial integrity".

Thousands of African troops are due to join Malian and French forces to help push back the rebels' offensive.


So, not just me then.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 04:22 AM

On Channel 4 '4thought' yesterday evening, a fundamentalist British Muslim was given his 4 minutes to expound the benefits of Shariah Law for the UK. He arrogantly maintained that we were ignorant and prejudiced, and thought that Shariah meant only cutting off thieves hands and stoning women to death for adultery. He continued that it is, however, 'a beautiful thing' and would prevent all crime here and restore a tranquil, disciplined society. He continues his efforts to educate us and persuade us that we would do well to adopt 'the Shariah' for our own good. My husband (a moderate Muslim) had steam coming out of his nostrils like an enraged bull. I (for once) was totally speechless.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 05:21 AM

The UN Security Council seemed pleased with Operation Unified Protector, the 2011 NATO campaign against the regime of Muammar Ghaddafi that included the bombing of Libya. Look how that turned out.

Regular, professional Western-type armed forces have a dismal record of failure in operations against ideologically motivated insurgents. Just sayin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:37 AM

Agreed, but there seems to be a consensus that some action against the Islamists is needed.
Already it goes badly.
A French helicopter shot down and pilot killed.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Branno
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 07:57 AM

It's the next phase in the new imperial rape of Africa people, and sure as shooting the Africans haven't got over the last one yet by a long shot.

Funny (?) isn't it that a pacifist like meself should have two references to 'shoot' in one sentence... The makes and models of ALL the weapons on ALL sides have their source in the factories of ALL the usual suspects too don't they? ALL the member states of the UN Security Council...

And who can blame the 'Islamists' for being annoyed by the gross arrogance of the 'Christian' western powers? My children are sacred, yours are 'bugsplat', my 'god' (sic) is better than your 'god', nyah nyah nyah.

And then there's the oil, the OIL, don't forget THE OIL! What's OUR oil doing in them goddam furrin parts, eh!? Uppity niggers and towelheads, how DARE they!

Seriously people, isn't it time 'we the people' woke up? I shudder when I think that it may already be too late, that the righteous men with guns are destroying everything in their path, jihads and crusades feeding off each other in a flatland frenzy, mad lustful hateful arrogant bastards all of them, ALL of them!

And don't you dare justify the bullshit, you apologists, OK...
Maybe just imagine for a moment that you yourself are the stranger in a strange land, newly arrived for a look at the culture on planet Earth, perhaps with a view to inviting the human race to join a galactic milieu. Write a report, objectively, dispassionately...
Not very good is it? D-? F? Quarantine this mob?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:08 AM

Ivory Coast?
Senegal?
Nigeria?
These are all African countries and none are arms manufacturers

The Malians themselves are mostly Muslim.
All these governments support the intervention.
You would tell them what?
Accept what the Islamists impose on you, or let them kill you, but we will not help you?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:10 AM

Benin, Ghana, Niger, Senegal, Burkina Faso and Togo have also pledged troops.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:13 AM

ALL the weapons on ALL sides have their source in the factories of ALL the usual suspects too don't they? ALL the member states of the UN Security Council.

Current members include:-
Country        Regional Group        Term Began        Term Ends
Azerbaijan        Eastern European Group        2012        2013
Argentina        Latin American & Caribbean Group        2013        2014
Australia        Western European and Others Group        2013        2014
Guatemala        Latin American & Caribbean Group        2012        2013
Republic of Korea        Asia-Pacific Group        2013        2014
Morocco        African Group (Arabic Representative)        2012        2013
Pakistan        Asia-Pacific Group        2012        2013
Luxembourg        Western European and Others Group        2013        2014
Rwanda        African Group        2013        2014
Togo        African Group        2012        2013

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Branno
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:36 AM

OK Keith, correction, ALL the PERMANENT members of the UN security council. The point stands. War is profitable. The 'war on terror' is most profitable as it has no boundaries. The nation states who think to rule the world, in their arrogance and hubris are committing the worst of crimes, meanwhile self=justifying with the worst of lies.

Do you read any of this sort of thing, oh my brother?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/15/a-new-wave-of-barbarism/

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Branno
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 08:49 AM

Here's the link. I don't argee with everything anyone says mostly. I am however, interested in sane rational examination of the facts.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/15/a-new-wave-of-barbarism/

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 09:48 AM

"A French helicopter shot down and pilot killed."

That was attributed to mechanical failure in the article I read.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:02 AM

They have not given the cause of the crash, but
PARIS. – The French intervention in Mali has claimed its first victim. Lieutenant Damien Boiteux of the 4th helicopter regiment special forces, from the southern city of Pau, was killed the afternoon of Friday January 11 in a raid against a terrorist group.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:07 AM

The Independent today.
12 January Dozens of Islamists killed as Konna is retaken by Malian army. French pilot is killed after helicopter is shot down in the fighting.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:19 AM

The article I read was from Saturday, so I guess it's been updated. Thanks for the info, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Jim Knowledge
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:25 AM

I `ad that Jean Jacques from the "Le Monde" in my cab last night. `ed been doing bits about the aggro in Mali which was a change from reporting on all the French millionaires doing a runner on the strength of Francois `ollande`s tax grab.
I said, "Bonsoir J.J. It`s a bloody shame about that French chopper pilot getting shot down and killed".
`e said, " Alors, Jeem. Eet was not shot down, eet was beecos of, ow you say, a mechanical failure."
I said, "Oh, yeah, I see. I suppose a ruddy great lump of shrapnel through the rotors could be described like that!!"

Whaddam I Like??

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:38 AM

Those who decry involvement in the war against Islamism would do well to listen to the words of this man who has dedicated his life to that fight: Tarek Fatah exposes Islamism for a tyranny that it is .

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:51 AM

It IS a war against the perversions of Islam. That said, I get POed when our governments play the terrorist card at every opportunity. The US has bombed eight mostly Muslim countries in the past few years. Couple that with the fact that 40-45% of US exports are armaments, one has to ask, cui bono?

Islam is not our friend. Neither are the bankers/industrialists of the world. So kids get turned into minced meat and so it goes (thank you Kurt). It's an insanity that will lead us down a garden path as it's done so many times before.

Some reading that's worthwhile, although I do not agree with all of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:57 AM

There is a clear distinction between Islam and Islamism, on is a religion the other an ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jan 13 - 10:59 AM

I hear you, bobad. I agree, also.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Beer
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 12:08 AM

Duh!!
I am sure to look stupid here but I have to ask.

Why is it we can't go into Syria and yet France can just walk in with no objections from Russia or China? Could they have done the same thing?
Or are they in some
type of agreement.
i'm not into the political
theatre
of things and maybe i am missing a very easy answer. Please explain.
adrien

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 03:24 AM

Closer to home, why are those normally so vocal on Mid. East matters and on Western involvement in Muslim lands, so quiet about Syria and now Mali?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 04:47 AM

Have to agree with Keith, and why did we encourage "democratic" revolutions, when everyone with half a brain knew what the consequences would be?

Power has been handed to the extreme Islamists, who may be a minority, but weild massive power over a largly uneducated populace.

This is the result of a "liberal" agenda allowed to run wild....there will not always be someone else around to clear up the mess we create.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 04:54 AM

I'm very sad for Mali if fundamentalism holds sway. These fanatics ban singing, dancing, colourful clothes, art, anything in fact which brightens life. And Mali has an enormously rich culture in this respect, one of the best in the whole of Africa. I hope they don't end up swathed in black burkas/robes silently and meekly obeying their obsessive imams and losing all they have of their centuries-old traditions. My husband's tribe, the Senoufou Malinke, inhabit northern Ivory Coast and southern Mali. In spite of being moderate Muslims they all have a superb sense of culture, song, dance and art.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 08:54 AM

French forces in Mali launch ground offensive

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:06 AM

I see the usual suspects lining up to conflate being an "Islamist" (or "terrorist" with following the religion of Islam or being a bit, well, brown or bearded.

I do wonder however about the motivation of the present Islamist forces in Mali. How do they come by their interpretation of their religion?   But then again I wonder how the US fundagelical right come by theirs.


I'd really like to read the whole of the Koran to understand how it comes to mean so many thing that appear to contradict each other. But there again I did start and even the opening parts made less sense than the revelation of St John the Divine (who had plainly eaten the wrong mushrooms at the time).

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 10:36 AM

Vic Smith posted this link on another thread. I think it has a place here, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 11:02 AM

No-one here has conflated any such things Richard.
France's very Left Wing government has stated that the Islamists in Mali pose a terror threat to France, and many other governments plus UN seem to agree, but no-one here has done any conflating.

Do you think they should be left to impose there will by force on an unwilling people?
Are all those governments' and the UN's fears misplaced?
Where does our Left stand on this one?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 11:13 AM

I've always considered myself to be left-of-center, Keith. I think the Islamists AND their Imams should be provided the same treatment they dish out. They see fit to brutalize, mutilate and kill people, and it's obvious they think that treatment fitting. Fine. Here's their tickets to their god. One-way, prepaid. However, I expect someone will be along shortly to tell me that you can't fight fire with fire (which btw is bullshit because the analogy is misstated to begin with. The notion of came from the use of fire to pre-burn a probable fuel load and thus stop a fire's progress). You asked, I answered. Salaam.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 11:43 AM

Getting back to the question up-thread, about why the French feel free to march into Mali without a by-your-leave, do you suppose it might have something to do with the fact that France is a veto-wielding permanent member of the United Nations Security Council?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Jan 13 - 12:44 PM

Keith, your very opening post says "Are they all right to say that the spread of Islam is a threat to us all?"

See?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 02:40 AM

"They" being our governments.
No one here said anything against the Islamic faith.
Islamists believe they have a duty to spread Islam by any and all means.
LH joked about the imposition of Sharia in our lands, but that actually is their long term aim.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 03:08 AM

Islamists believe they have a duty to spread their version of Islam by any and all means.

Their version incorporating cruel punishments or death for anything entertaining, for adultery, for homosexuality, for educating females, ....

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 04:14 AM

BBC yesterday.

The historic city is a World Heritage site, renowned for its architecture, manuscript libraries and centuries-old shrines to Islamic saints - revered by Sufi Muslims but which the Salafi militants consider idolatrous.

Following France's intervention in Mali last week, a Timbuktu resident, who asked to remain anonymous, told BBC Africa about reaction in the city to the Islamist fighters' apparent withdrawal.

Timbuktu resident:

We are happy, we want to thank France because they did well [although there are no French troops in Timbuktu at present].

They beat men, women, children. They cut people's hands"

Now, we feel free.

[From the time the French intervention began], the Islamists began to panic.

Some left town, they went about 60km (40 miles) outside Timbuktu, and other headed towards Douentza.

The city is quiet.

They left by car [the same cars they used to get into Timbuktu].

There were many of them, but now only a few are left, and they are not strong. They are trying to hide in town.

We are now beginning to be free.

[All types of Islamists] were here, they brought chaos to Timbuktu.

We couldn't just go out if we wanted to.

They beat men, women, children. They cut people's hands. They killed people.

We were afraid.

We didn't have a choice.

They destroyed mausoleums, we were not happy about that.

But people are now able to go out.

People have freedom. People are happy. They can move about freely.

They are not under pressure.

People are smoking, people can do anything they want.

So it is important. So we want France to carry on [with the intervention].

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 07:28 AM

Like you Richard I have tried to read the Koran in an English translation. I plodded through it all and was none the wiser at the end. But I didn't see in it anything about lopping off limbs, wearing veils (only stuff about modesty and hiding a woman's 'charms' whatever that means!) or stoning people to desth. I understand it's the Haditha or remembered sayings of Mohammed which give rise to more extreme rules and punishments. And the more fundamentalist imams read into the Haditha whatever they will. Most of the ordinary adherents of Islam haven't much education except from the madrassa or Koran schools, so they're indoctrinated from day one. To my way of thinking, Islam isn't compatible with African's traditions, culture or belief systems. It seems to me to stifle and suppress their natural ebullience and joy. But I'm well aware that the same could be said for evangelical Christian inroads into other cultures through Colonialism.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 07:50 AM

Canada has sent a transport aircraft.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 07:53 AM

A C17.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 07:59 AM

Ignore my last 2 posts.
I read an old post of 999 as a new one.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 09:39 AM

I'll point out--as Charmion mentioned--that Canada has some special warfare troops in Mali. Small units I'd suspect because limited size makes it safer for the troops to hide, spot and evacuate. (I really wish the press would shut the hell up about special operations people because it simply endangers them.)

The C-17 has a load capacity of 80 short tons, so as a contribution it ain't peanuts. Also, this country has had a lengthy involvement in Afghanistan and we're sick of our kids coming home in boxes. Basically, we're tired of ill-defined missions in far-off places; tired of keeping peace where there's no peace to keep; tired of ROEs that stipulate no one can fire unless first fired upon; tired of UN and NATO bullshit and political interference by fuckheads who have too many friends to please and don't mind our kids getting maimed or killed to please them.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 09:55 AM

From where I sit, 9, you have a pretty good grasp of the sentiments in the part of the Canadian Forces that actually conducts operations.

At the operational level (that is, the middle level of command, between strategic and tactical), the Canadian Forces are currently working on getting good at fitting our task forces neatly into a multilateral mission while -- and this is the important part -- ensuring that they can maintain national autonomy within that mission.

It's more difficult, and more expensive, than it looks, and it takes plenty of practice in the gentle art of saying NO.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 10:07 AM

Thank you, Charmion. Sorry about the language. I sometimes forget ladies are present.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Branno
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 11:16 AM

It seems to be much more complicated. Anyone surprised?

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/17/malis-secret-infrastructure/

@Keith of Hertford - do you bother replying to particular points raised here? Or do you just plough on with your own agenda? As you began this thread, perhaps you could act as a more efficient moderator?

We all 'see' the surface of things. Interpretation of the depth of things is however another matter. I for one am skeptical at best of the apparent good intentions of the usual suspects, in the present situation these being the former colonial powers, somewhat dimmed from the lustre of their 19th century selves, and of course the neighbourhood bully of bullies, the 'cousins', the 'septics'as we fondly think of them downunder.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: gnu
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 06:58 PM

The news updates are not pleasant, to say the least.

As far as Canuck ROEs, there has been some question about standing down even under fire unless "orders" THEN allow. Is that even possible? I say, if someone shoots at me, I don't give two shits from Tuesday about "procedure". COULD that be the position taken by Command? or politicians? (If so, I can understand them covering their ass but I would think it would be truly demoralizing to... well, everyone who has their ass on the line!

Ahhhh... heard that from a buddy who has two kids over there right now. Oh, Afghanistan.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 07:21 PM

Keith, your very opening post says "Are they all right to say that the spread of Islam is a threat to us all?"

That is YOU asking if it is correct to condemn all of Islam.


You reveal yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Jan 13 - 07:30 PM

It is right and proper to condemn the piece of Islam that has the same perversions as fundamentalist Christians. These people are fuckin' nuts. Ya want the damned rapture? Boom. There ya go.

Not as gentle as most would like it, but I have no shrift at all for shit like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 02:45 AM


That is YOU asking if it is correct to condemn all of Islam.


No it is not Richard.
Our governments said that the establishment of an Islamist enclave in Mali had to be eliminated for our security.

Knowing that many here deny that threat I invited discussion.
Why must you people always try to personalise things and demonize people?

Branno, I have no agenda and no special knowledge.
I am just following events with interest and concern like everyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 05:37 AM

Reuters yesterday.

In a rare eyewitness account of Wednesday's dawn raid deep in the desert, a local man employed at the facility told Reuters the militants appeared to have good inside knowledge of the layout of the complex and used the language of radical Islam.

"The terrorists told us at the very start that they would not hurt Muslims but were only interested in the Christians and infidels," Abdelkader, 53, said by telephone from his home in the nearby town of In Amenas. "We will kill them, they said."

His voice choking with emotion - "I'm a lucky man," he said over the sound of children playing and a television relaying the latest news - Abdelkader described how he managed to escape along with many of the hundreds of Algerians initially detained.

He asked that his family name be withheld.

"I am still choked, and stressed," he said, adding that he feared many of his foreign colleagues may have died. "The terrorists seemed to know the base very well," he said, "Moving around, showing that they knew where they were going."

The kidnappers said they were retaliating for last week's French offensive in neighbouring Mali, and demanded that Paris call off the operation and that Algeria withdraw cooperation.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 13 - 03:59 AM

Our Prime Minister has told us that we and the West face years of war against Islamist terrorism in this region.
He says they want to destroy our way of life and kill as many as they can.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 21 Jan 13 - 07:11 AM

As Mandy Rice-Davies said "He would say that wouldn't he?"

Keith - your words: "Are they all right". Your question. Man up and face it.

So many of your posts here are tainted with prejudice.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 13 - 07:24 AM

You omitted the question mark Richard.
I was asking, not stating.

The (Labour) Shadow Home Sec was just interviewed on BBC, and he supported the government line.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Branno
Date: 21 Jan 13 - 07:30 AM

Oh Keith - really! Your Prime Minister has told you... you believe this shite?
Don't you remember the Downing St. memoranda and other lies that led to the debacle in Iraq?
Or do you believe it's because 'they' hate your freedoms?

The French foreign minister (can't recall his name, don't really care) tells 'us' that La Belle France intends to 're-colonise' North Africa.
Is it for 'freedoms', or is it perhaps for the gold, the copper, the URANIUM, and perhaps even the OIL?

This post-Libya blowback is yet another monumental fuckup by yer NATO fatheads, SNAFU of the first order, ALL sides armed (by the usual suspects) and angry, paving the way for the next rape of poor African nations by arrogant white supremacist bastards.

Just sayin...

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 13 - 07:37 AM

I did not say I believe it, but I would like a reason to dismiss it.
Labour is not contradicting.
Nor is Obama, nor any EU state.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Branno
Date: 21 Jan 13 - 03:05 PM

Other people, just sayin'... not only professional politicians.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/01/21-5

Lots of mineral wealth in the former colonies, old boy, what?
Et bien, mon vieux!
Yeah buddy, need more ammo?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Jan 13 - 11:54 AM

The "liberals" all supported the Arab Spring, what with the green shoots of democracy and all that!
Now that the strong men are dead and the area is in the power of religious zealots and an almost uneducated populace, we are in serious trouble......and the "liberals" have gone into hiding again.

All these buzz words like equality, democracy,etc, must be weighed against the behaviour of those who demand them,

Is it "equality" to hand a sword to someone who wishes to cut your head off....or is it stupidity.
Is it "equality" to bring into mainstream society a lifestyle that carries horrific sexual health figures and demands the re-definition of one of the cornerstones of human society...or is it stupidity.

The parallels are there for all to see.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 22 Jan 13 - 01:02 PM

Ake, you keep using the term Liberal. Would you please give me your working definition of the term so I understand what you are saying?

Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Mysha
Date: 22 Jan 13 - 01:46 PM

Hi,

"... All these governments say their own nation's security is threatened. Are they all right to say that the spread of Islam is a threat to us all?"

I can't tell from your examples whether people in those governments are saying anything at all about the spread of Islam. So, is this a hypothetical question?

And, BTW, who are the "us" you mention?

Bye
                                                                  Mysha

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 02:52 AM

Mysha, by us I meant people of the liberal democracies, which is virtually all of us on this forum.

Instead of the "spread of Islam" I should have said "of radical Islam," but their agenda is to spread Islam, by any means.

All our governments agree it is a threat.
Our (Labour) opposition yesterday said it was such a threat the the government should cancel planned cuts in our army.

According to Richard, I "revealed" myself by just asking if they were right!
What is Labour revealed as Richard?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Mysha
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 03:28 AM

Hi,

OK, so you're really asking:

"Are people in several governments right in saying that the spread of radical Islam is a threat to all liberal democracies?"

Well, on the one hand is the point of view that, like anything else, democracy that is not defended will eventually be lost. On the other hand is the viewpoint that, as democracy is a freedom, by its very nature it can't be enforced, regardless of the tools or arms used to do so.

How these two can be conciliated, I don't know. I would note, however, that when I grew up, there was a dictatorial system said to aim for world conquest for a belief that was for the good of the people. Approximately one in every five people still lives under such dictatorships today, yet it's been a long time since I heard about an aim for world-communism. Would other dictatorial systems fare differently?

Bye
                                                                Mysha

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 04:36 AM

If democracy means the right of the majority, by franchise, to elect leaders and impose systems of government and Law, then by definition, fundamentalist Muslims (or any other group with extreme tenets) could in theory come into power by sheer numbers of voters, (or apathy of the rest to vote in elections) The moment one makes exceptions or exclusions, the concept of true democracy is lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 05:10 AM

Democracy is more than just elections.
It requires a free media, an opposition, civil liberties, .....

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 08:27 AM

True Keith, and protection from intimidation and eradication of corruption. We're lucky here in the West to be able to enjoy all these things aren't we?.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 08:35 AM

I don't think that that is technically right. Those things are not part of democracy (not your words exactly, Keith, I know) but may (with qualifications) be desirable for a democracy the better to function.

For democracy to function there must be an informed electorate and that requires a plural press, although that press may require some regulation. I'd suggest that there might be merit in a democracy that did not have a two-party or three-party system as those have led to the "dictatorship of the majority" - and in some cases a dictatorship of something less than a majority. There is also the possibility that a view held by a majority may be simply factually wrong (like the once near universal beliefs that the earth was flat, or that the sun went round the earth) or morally wrong (like support, happily I think waning, for the death penalty).

Civil liberties are part of the Dicean concept of rule of law - which our present UK government are busily trying to reduce, or at least of which they wish to reduce the effectiveness. They may well be necessary for a democracy properly to function but are not I think an intrinsic part of democracy - and indeed our present government in many cases wishes, it seems, to reduce them. Moreover, one person's liberty impinges on that of another so some balancing is necessary. Do we not all wince when watching those TV shows about the police in action and see the coercive way that the police address those they arrest?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 09:20 AM

I think part of the problem can be found in language. We have legitimized organizations like al-Qaeda by calling them terrorists. They aren't. That is simply how we react and thus perceive them; it isn't what they are. They really are little more than psychopaths and they would be seen as such were religion and politics removed from the picture. However . . .

We love to see ourselves in The West as being free, but are we? More and more our various media are controlled by large companies with very clear and often somewhat dubious moral agendas, most of which seem to point toward world domination in some form or other, none of which bode well for humanity, imo. Our food supply is in fewer and fewer hands; our education systems use business models; our cultural values are a mockery of anything akin to culture, unless one defines culture as "I get what I want when I want it or I have a right to take it from someone else."

When the world allows sick leaders to lead sick nations, define nations how you will, it is no wonder things result as they have. Until such time as countries, philosophies, cultures treat with each other, we will always create enemies of each other because we no longer speak as equals. Equals in the sense that we all have the right to live our lives and if cooperation and interdependence are part of that life then fighting will not resolve the issues be they human, cultural or economic.

And I ain't even had my coffee yet!

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 09:30 AM

I just had my coffee and after a rereading of my last post I must admit I agree. Have a good day everyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 11:41 AM

Is it right nippy down there in the Townships, 9? You sound a bit frosty this morning.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 11:45 AM

Twenty-five below when I stepped outside to have a drag. Was wearing a jacket, sandals and shorts. How's it where you are?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,Mrr whose computer STILL R'sIP
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 04:30 PM

I watched an excellent 5-mn video, animated, that explained Mali and the French involvement on a French newspaper site the day that the French sent in ground troups, and now I can't find it. It showed how the smaller, southern part differs from the much larger, northern expanse, where the deserts are, where the Touareg are, where the French were and are and why now...

I will continue to look. If anybody else finds it first, post a link, there are enough francophones here.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Jan 13 - 09:51 PM

Seems fair to me Bruce.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 13 - 03:38 AM

al-Qaeda by calling them terrorists. They aren't
I would say they are.
They deliberately target innocent, unarmed, ordinary people.
A bomb on a train is an act of terror.
Likewise a bomb on a plane.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 13 - 07:59 AM

The Foreign Office is urging British nationals to leave the Libyan city of Benghazi immediately due to a "specific threat to Westerners".

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 24 Jan 13 - 03:20 PM

Any British national still in Benghazi after all that has been going on there for the last two years is either a mercenary or too stupid to be allowed to let go of Mummy's hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,999
Date: 24 Jan 13 - 03:43 PM

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jan 13 - 07:19 AM

"Among the celebrating crowds, many smoked cigarettes, women went unveiled and some men wore shorts to flout the severe sharia Islamic law ......."Now we can breathe freely," said Hawa Toure, 25, wearing a colorful traditional African robe banned under sharia... "We are as free as the wind today. We thank all of our friends around the world who helped us," she said.

Malians celebrate, French-led forces clear Timbuktu.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 13 - 08:13 AM

Guardian today.

Islamist insurgents retreating from the ancient Saharan city of Timbuktu have set fire to a library containing thousands of priceless ancient manuscripts, some dating back to the 13th century, in what the town's mayor described as a "devastating blow" to world heritage.

Hallé Ousmani Cissé told the Guardian that al-Qaida-allied fighters on Saturday torched two buildings where the manuscripts were being kept. They also burned down the town hall and governor's office, and shot dead a man who was celebrating the arrival of the French military.

He added: "This is terrible news. The manuscripts were a part not only of Mali's heritage but the world's heritage. By destroying them they threaten the world. We have to kill all of the rebels in the north."


The manuscripts survived for centuries in Timbuktu on the edge of the Sahara hidden in wooden trunks, boxes beneath the sand and caves. The majority are written in Arabic, with some in African languages, and one in Hebrew, and cover a diverse range of topics including astronomy, poetry, music, medicine and women's rights. The oldest dated from 1204.

Seydo Traoré, a researcher at the Ahmed Baba Institute, who fled Timbuktu last year shortly before the rebels arrived, said only a fraction of the manuscripts had been digitised.

"They cover geography, history and religion. We had one in Turkish. We don't know what it said."

Traoré told the Guardian that some rebels had been sleeping in the new institute where some of the manuscripts were kept. He said that they had also destroyed the shrines of more than 300 Sufi saints dotted around the city. "They were the masters of the place," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 13 - 08:23 AM

NY Times today.

— Residents of northern Mali's largest city poured out of their homes to celebrate the expulsion of Islamist fighters who had held their town for months, playing the music that had been forbidden under the militants' harsh interpretation of Islamic rule and dancing in the streets.


"Everyone is in the streets," a Gao resident, Ibrahim Touré, said in a telephone interview. "It is like a party. There is music. There are drums. It's freedom."

In Gao, people who had been under occupation for nearly a year by Islamist fighters flooded the streets in jubilation, weeping and shouting to welcome the Malian and French troops who arrived in force on Sunday, residents said.

Gao is the most populous city in Mali's north, and it endured months of repression under fighters aligned with Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. The city's residents were subject to strict rules and harsh punishment, including amputations for suspected thieves and public beatings or whippings for perceived violations of Islamic law.

Fatou Cissé, a Gao resident reached by telephone, said crowds were chanting "Vive la France!" and singing the Malian national anthem.

"I was out there with them," said Ms. Cissé, who said she was wearing bright wax-print fabric with short sleeves, the kind of clothing that was banned when the city was under militant control.

"My head is not covered," she said. "Girls are out of the house, and they are dancing."

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 28 Jan 13 - 09:19 AM

encouraging news from mali - but there has to be more to this. and as the guardian article says - the taliban or fundamentalists are armed largely by kidnap payments from the west. (something to think about when planning your gap year travels) if a small group of criminals can hold power and cause such mayhem and misery over a large part of the country because they have guns paid for by the west - we have to stop exporting arms anywhere. imagine what would happen if we allowed religious fundamentalists access to weapons in the uk? or the usa? oh....

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 13 - 09:21 AM

Er, I think they do have access to weapons in USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 13 - 09:23 AM

Sorry, that is what your "oh" meant, right?

Anyway, 1st hundred.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 02:50 AM

Our Left accused France of a colonialist adventure, but the view we are seeing is of liberators freeing happy, grateful Muslim people from the imperialist/colonialist yoke of the Islamofascists who sought to expand their empire and impose their hated dogma on an unwilling people by brute force, intimidation and murder.

Or am I missing something?
What does it "reveal" Richard?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 05:59 AM

It seems that the very last backgrounder I will ever write for Canadian Joint Operations Command is about Air Task Force Mali and its adventures in support of Operation Serval, which is what the French are calling their intervention in Mali.

Yesterday, I spent several hours hunting down the relevant UN Security Council resolutions and communiques of the African Union and ECOWAS. I am still struggling with the "Mission context" part of the document, the problem being to provide a coherent outline of the conflict in as few words as possible.

The more I learn about Mali and its internal conflicts, which date back to the very beginning of its existence as a soi-disant "state", the lower my heart sinks. For the record, this is the region where the French did the largest non-combatant evacuation operation in modern times, during the last Tuareg upheaval (this is the fifth since 1916), and the 2007-2008 revolt was not complicated by a simultaneous al-Qaida insurgency.

The last time I felt this level of foreboding was December 2001, when the first Canadian battle group for Kandahar was announced under Operation Apollo.

Just sayin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 12:57 PM

OK, I found that great explanatory video. It's in French but the animation is pretty transparent...

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 04:34 PM

Yup, that's the story so far.

Take a look at this Wikipedia page, too: Northern Mali conflict (2012 - present)

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 04:47 PM

So why the hand wringing, do you think it best to do nothing and let the Islamists take over?

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:29 PM

I think ECOWAS and the African Union should be doing the heavy lfting.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 06:41 PM

That's reasonable if they have the capability.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jan 13 - 07:06 PM

BTW, I'd rather see my tax dollars being spent fighting these psychopaths than paying to bring Harper's armoured car to India at the cost of a million dollars.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jan 13 - 04:18 AM

Your tax dollars have already been spent assisting "these psychopaths"

Libya, Iraq?....etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Charmion
Date: 30 Jan 13 - 07:32 AM

Bobad, it's a cinch ECOWAS and the AU won't develop any capabilities worth mentioning if they don't have to, and they won't even start as long as ex-colonial powers like France and New World do-gooders like Canada are willing to pony up.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Feb 13 - 12:24 PM

BBC
Speaking beside the French president during the rapturous Timbuktu reception, Mali's interim President Diouncounda Traore said: "It shows how much France is determined to go all the way side by side with Mali. We ask France to continue with us."


Elated Timbuktu greets Hollande
Crowds waved French flags and shouted "Vive la France! Vive Francois Hollande!" as the French leader passed them.

"If I could have one wish, it would be that the French army stays in the Sahara, that they create a base here," Moustapha Ben Essayati, a resident, told the Associated Press news agency.

Many women wore vibrantly coloured clothes and jewellery, which correspondents say was something they could not do during the past year of Islamist rule.

"The women of Timbuktu will thank Francois Hollande forever," 53-year-old Fanta Diarra Toure, one of thousands of people who gathered in the city's main square, told the AFP news agency.

"We must tell him that he has cut down the tree but still has to tear up its roots," she added, referring to the Islamist militants.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Amos
Date: 02 Feb 13 - 01:11 PM

PSychosis is an individual state, although it can easily be multiplied into huge clouds of scary nonsense.

Individual nutballs gravitate toward things that allow them to manifest their destructive impulses, and often form cliques within religious organizations because religions, generally, are happy to accept anyone who recited the pledge.

Thus, within any set of individuals labeled by a religious tag, small subsets form of nutballs acting out. They often use the vague generalizations of their religious label as a murky rationalization, but it is shallow and meretricious justifying at best. This has happened amongst Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Baptists, Marxists, Scientologists, Jews, Aryans, Sikhs, Sufis, Greek polytheists, Macedonian pagans, and probably every other clump of humans waving a religious banner.

To my mind it is stupidity incarnate to even begin to believe that the religion itself is the precipitating factor of the psychosis that generates the abuses. Insanity of this kind is bred in individuals, and insane acts are precipitated by individually insane minds. It would be delightful to me if we could just call and end to the Grande Masquerade of Granfalloons.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Feb 13 - 03:36 PM

it is stupidity incarnate to even begin to believe that the religion itself is the precipitating factor of the psychosis that generates the abuses
Agreed, and no-one here has claimed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Feb 13 - 05:43 PM

"It is right and proper to condemn the piece of Islam that has the same perversions as fundamentalist Christians. These people are fuckin' nuts. Ya want the damned rapture? Boom. There ya go.

Not as gentle as most would like it, but I have no shrift at all for shit like that."

I posted that 17 Jan 13 at 7:30 PM.

Subject: RE: BS: Mali 2013
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 13 - 07:52 PM

Amos....I doubt if you should have included Marxists in your list of "nutballs". If you are going to include political/economic ideologies i can think of several which would be more suitable for inclusion.