What more can be done for Somalia?

[rov1100]

With Cameron sounding like a clone of the ex president Bush what can be done for this god forsaken country that doesn't require more cash being thrown at it or putting boots on the ground?

[ichkeria]

I think the main point of the concern is MI5's that Somalia will become a breeding ground for extremism. The piracy etc. are just sideshows.
On the one hand intervention - of whatever sort - is fraught with dangers and complications, but the consequences of burying our head in the sand may be equally if not more dangerous.

[emmie]

ichkeria, no they aren't, but seeing the pirates kidnap goods, ships, people at will, and no one seemingly to stop them, administered their own punishment. It wouldn't happen here, but they have no such scruples, and neither do the pirates who kidnap innocents and hold them to ransom, so time to up the game.

[ichkeria]

"It is an unfortunate and perhaps inconvenient fact that not all nations and their inhabitants conduct themselves in a way that we in the UK find generally acceptable"

is what New Judge said. That applies to many countries including I'm sorry to say Russia. And while I don't believe it's an acceptable excuse for intervening in Somalia, if you start using the tactics of the criminals you lose any moral authority in that regard to start with. The law of "the end justifies the means" is no defence, especially in a situation like that. And they can't possibly be sure that they will never have the same problem again.

[New Judge]

There are “breeding grounds for extremism” all across the globe, ichkeria. We cannot hope to control them all, nor indeed any of them. The country that is the biggest breeding ground of all – and the greatest threat in terms of terrorism to the UK – is Pakistan. Yet countless thousands of people travel between Pakistan and the UK every year. The vast majority of them have no intention of causing any trouble, but a small number have. Nobody in the UK knows what these people get up to during their visits to Pakistan but they are allowed free rein to spend time there and then to return here to plan and do what they will. There is no talk of sending “military missions” there as there would be absolutely no point. And so it should be with Somalia.

If the authorities have any fears about the threat to the UK posed by “breeding grounds for terrorism” they will not be overcome by sending men in big boots to Somalia. We don’t have the resources and we should not even contemplate it. If we were serious about mitigating such threats the most effective way to do so is to keep the inhabitants of those countries from setting foot here. When we begin to do that I’ll believe the threat is being taken seriously. Meanwhile I’ll keep an eye out for any pigs that might be flying over my house tonight.

[ichkeria]

I didn't say I was in favour of sending a "military mission" to Somalia New Judge. I was, however, highlighting what seemed to be the main concern - that seemed to have been lost in the previous points. There's going to be a conference by the sound of it with various options being considered. I'd be amazed if any sort of military option turned out to be the favoured one, certainly of the "invasion" variety.
That article doesn't strike me as Independent journalism at its best I have to say. Too shot through with opinion and speculation as far as I can see.

[rov1100]

So the general consensus is that we should leave well alone. If this is a snapshot of how the British public feel it makes you wonder why Cameron is so keen to get involved. We have learnt nothing from Iraq or Afghanistan and the Arab Spring is coming apart at the seams.

Why don't our leaders not listen to what the general public is telling them or is he more influenced by Mitchell who seems to be living on a different planet?

[trt]

Even if we gave Somalia a 100 Billion a year it would still be the same place of violence and unrest in 10 years time.

Just bomb the place and have done with it!!!!

[Craftypig]

I hear nuclear bombs are pretty effective....

[237SJ]

Somalia has nothing "we" need so I can`t see why the UK would intervene in their problems (just as we haven`t intervened in Zimbabwe). As far as the threat of terrorism is concerned, Yemen is the place to watch (particularly in aviation terrorism).

[New Judge]

Sorry, ichkeria, I did not mean to imply that invasion was your favoured option, but can see that that interpretation could have been made from my answer.

[ichkeria]

My main point is that we have intelligence services who identify threats to our security: we need to at least not ignore those threats, even if we end up doing nothing about them in the end.
That's why I think the article is a poor one: the writer alows himself to speculate on Cameron's possible motives for "action" and implies that the only option will be some sort of military intervention, possibly buoyed by "success" in Libya.

[Carakeel]

I really think it is time the wealthier African countries helped to sort out those that in trouble. I do not support British intervention, be it money or troops, going into places like Somalia. We have no business there! It is time we sorted out our own probems with the money the UK tax payers hand over and stop this money leaving the country! The leaders of the African nations and the Arab nations will never take responsability for their own people, their own economies or their own countries while the UK and American governments keep interfering and plowing money into these countries, making the rich there even richer and the poor even poorer! Even though we are bombarded with dreadful pictures in the tabloids etc of the situations in these countries ... it has to stop! If we don't stop funding them, they won't ever start taking responsability to help themselves!

[askyourgran]

Well said carakeel.

[ichkeria]

The point - in amongst the rubbish in the article - is that Somalia may be a threat to Britain. It doesn't seem to have got through to some people that the world is shrinking in terms of the affects that events in one country can have on another. It's not "what can be done for Somalia" full stop, but "What can be done for Somalia" to prevent trouble elsewhere. In that sense it's self interest, and therefore unrealistic to expect others to do it for us.
It may be that the answer is "nothing" but as previously observed, if you are aware of warnings then you need to take notice of them. Otherwise why bother having people whose job it is to warn you?

[starone]

There is a little Somalia just up the road from where I live. They are busily making it into a big Somalia by the size of some of the families, so I wouldn't worry too much about the actual country. Lots of them are coming over here to live.

[New Judge]

Precisely.

They have no business here and it is a foolish nation that allows in its midst large numbers of people from a country it perceives as a threat.

[rov1100]

///There is a little Somalia just up the road from where I live. They are busily making it into a big Somalia by the size of some of the families, so I wouldn't worry too much about the actual country. Lots of them are coming over here to live///.

Quite Starbucks! It was one of the reasons Andrew Mitchell stated on the radio yesterday the reason to get involved. But I believe the converse is true.

By getting more involved they seem to flock here as witnessed with our participation in Iraq and Afghanistan where numbers trebled.

[beso]

Done for them? Or done to them?

While the country was in anarchy without anyone to protect their resources other nations came in and wiped out their fisheries with barbaric "take it all" attitudes that destroyed the ability of the seas to support life.

The destruction was completed with the dumping of all kinds of industrial waste in the seas. Then the tsunami deposited a considerabvle amount of this toxic waste onto the shores.

Little wonder they have taken to hijacking ships loaded with the spoils of wealth that pass through the region.