Since Libya French has been emboldened

^^We have no leaders awoowe , we only have alternatives to Alshabaab's raw cruelty and ruthlessness. Sadly

Gheelle, Kenya scrambled after the invasion.Look at what they did: 1) a delegation to Mogadishu, 2) a presidential envoy to Addis Ababa, and 3) a request to an emergency IGAD conference. All of those steps where to solicit support after the fact.

^^Yeah I heard that but I was told it was minor and Mahiga was able to dampen it a bit.

^^ :D I am not driven by what men do awoowe, if Sharif does as you predicted I would oppose him and call him out. I use my own analysis and experience to stake a position. I wholeheartedly think Kenya's invasion is bad for both Kenya and Somalia. It revolves around a buffer-zone mentality and with clannish agenda in mind.

Where is the link of the interview?

^^I don't think there was a written agreement. Kenyans dived head on in the complexity of Somali politics. Sharif made a good stance. Even if he was tempted in those private conversations or pledged support verbally, turning on his back is a great thing just like he did unto Alshabaab.

Duke is right the model for Tunisia is Turkiyaa. I am sure very few will argue that Turkiya's political experiment has been bad for the Turks.

Interesting development indeed.

^^I have not heard that rift yet. But it would be tragic if Abdiweli endorses Kenya's invasion and the Azania nonsense. The best way to defeat Alshabaab and piracy is to let Somalis do it by helping them develop the capacity needed.

^^ :D You are being dramatic ninyahow. I said you are supporter of Kenyan invasion. Whether that is so because of your opposition against Alshabaab or support for Azania was not clear I said. In your last post however, you seem to be motivated by a conviction that anything that harms Alshabaab is good for Somalia. There is nothing I can do about your dislike of Sharif. You seem to be angry with him hence your write up lacks objectivity. But when the man comes out and makes what I think is very difficult statement given Kenya's far reaching influence on Somali politics today, and says he opposes the on-going military activity in Jubbooyinka, I think he deserves credit. Lets hope the other Sharif and Abdiweli make the same pronouncement. What can they (or he, Sharif) do, you asked? Not much it seems. But lack of capacity to do something effectively does not necessarily preclude or disqualify him to make that stance. What are you suggesting, Profesoore ? Are you saying if he cant stop the Kenyans he shouldn't talk about it. That would be disingenuous of you.

Abtigiis;753540 wrote: I have said my stance. initially I supported, when the evidence of the sea sheninigans came up, I changed my mind. My problem here is Sharif's opportunism and flipflopping. I also don't think the issue of sovernignity is a big issue in the current context of Somalia. Therefore, AlShabab's demise is much more important than this breach of sovernigty to the extent it achieves that goal. Anyway, this is more about Sharif the person than the matter of the Kenyan aggression. Arintan Azania ee la igu shanbadayna waxaan u didi garanba maayo. Ok, I am Azania, and a strong supporter of Gandi. De si dad waa weyn in loo wada hadlo la diide, way na kaa. ^^You said a lot in the first paragraph. It suffices. You are supporter of Kenyan invasion. How so? You might ask. Answer: I read between the lines. The second paragraph is not important. Waa kaftan dhable way na kaa hadaba

By Paul Cruickshank, CNN Terrorism Analyst, and Zain Verjee http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/24/kenya%E2%80%99s-high-stakes-shabaab-offensive/ The Threat to Kenya But regional observers say the Kenyan mission carries high risks. Al Shabaab has threatened to launch retaliatory attacks in Kenya if their military operation continues. "The Kenyan public must understand that the impetuous decision by their troops to cross the border into Somalia will not be without severe repercussions," the group stated last week. Al Shabaab has an extensive presence in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, home to an estimated quarter million Somalis, and operates a network of safe houses in the Eastleigh district of the city known as "Little Mogadishu" because of its high concentration of Somalis. According to Ken Menkhaus, an expert on the terror group, Al Shabaab "has the capacity to launch terrorist attacks in Nairobi but has opted not to, because Kenya has been so important to the group for recruitment, logistics, and fundraising." Menkhaus, professor at Davidson College and author of "Somalia: State Collapse and the Threat of Terrorism told CNN: "This is a dangerous moment. What we’re seeing is a level of brinkmanship that we’ve not seen before." "But launching attacks in Kenya would be very risky for al Shabaab because a crackdown by law enforcement on Somali interests in Kenya would be devastating to the Somali business community," he says. Even so, a Kenyan assault on Kismayo would raise the stakes for al Shabaab. "Then you might see Al Shabaab lash out because that’s an existential threat to them – at that point I’d be very nervous about what might happen in Nairobi," Menkhaus told CNN. Al Shabaab’s control of Kismayo is critical to the group’s revenues. According to the UN every year the group collects an estimated $35-50 million in custom tolls and taxes on businesses in Kismaayo – and two secondary ports higher up the coast – about half its entire estimated annual income stream in Somalia in recent years. Al Shabaab needs such funds more than ever because the acute famine in central and southern Somalia has reduced its ability to tax and extort money from the local population, according to Somalia analysts. Al Shabaab attacks against Kenya could take two forms, according to Somalia analysts. The group could mount direct attacks using Somali operatives. "They could easily tear apart Nairobi," Michael Taarnby, a Danish al Shabaab expert at the University of Central Florida told CNN. The second is a reprisal attack from home-grown Kenyan Islamist militants inspired and mentored by Al Shabaab. A report issued by the UN Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea in July 2011 found that while "in the past al Shabaab’s presence in Kenya was concentrated primarily within the ethnic Somali Community, since 2009 the group has rapidly expanded its influence and membership to non-Somali Kenyan nationals." The UN Monitoring Group says that a Nairobi group called the Muslim Youth Centre, which was founded in 2008, openly supported al Shabaab and now had chapters in several Kenyan cities including Mombasa. "Members of the group openly engage in recruiting for Al-Shabaab in Kenya and facilitate travel to Somalia for individuals to train and fight for ‘jihad’ in Somalia," the report stated. "A serving MYC member independently informed the Monitoring Group that members have been returning to Kenya from Somalia since late 2010, with a view to conducting possible operations in Kenya," the UN report said. The Monitoring Group said it was investigating whether the MYC had a role in a trio of suicide bombings claimed by al Shabaab that killed 79 in Kampala, Uganda in July 2010. Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki acknowledged the threat last week – saying "Our security forces have begun operations within and outside of our borders against militants who have sought to destabilize our country." Monday's edition of the Daily Nation in Kenya reported that detectives comprising bomb experts and anti-terror officers visited parts of Nairobi in a covert operation to flush out terror suspects.

^^Well your credibility is in question. You come across conflicted at best on the issue of Kenya invasion. Whether that is due to your support of Azania or opposition to Alshabaab, it is not clear. So I am left guessing on your motivation here. Faroole is rumored to have favored Kenya's invasion. Somaliland has been praying for it. Why you rabble rouse against Sharif the only man who thus far came out against it only fuels my doubt on your Azania stance.

^Waryaa dont be reer miyi ninyahow, if you support Kenyan invasion/Azania for whatever reason say so. If you oppose it, however, I see no reason to protest Sharif's stance on this. Kenya is causing problem for her self and for Somalia. Analyst and expert are astounded by Kenya's decision. It does not matter who saw Sharif last. What matters is where he stands on this development.

I am sure he is

Thank Turkiya Che

^^ :D One can easily shoot down the first one; the second one is more plausible

Bad bad news ...Kenya a country that enjoyed relative peace and stability, where Somalis of all walks of life sought refugee is now shaken by explosions. That is because under the influence of bad counsel, Kenya invaded Somalia without regard to its sovereignty, bombarding Kismayo, one of few peaceful cities in the south.

^^Prof Abtigiis you are forgetting Sharif spent four days in Turkiya, a sister country with imperial roots and keen interest in Somalia. Politics is driven by interest so easy with your big-foot logic

^We think the order of the world is fundamentally disrupted. Naturally, some nations whose worth and value were artificially exaggerated will face sovereign default.

Tolow Abtigiis xaggee ka baxay Waryaa come out and support the president

^^Nuune, I understand. The fact he refused is itself a sign of courage. His refusal could not come worst time for Kenya, for she is a knee deep in the Somali conflict toda, her troops exposed in the Jubba forest. Honest does not factor here, for we are talking about politics in its worst form. Jacayle, you gotta practice and learn some courtesy waryaa. This thread is intended to be Secessionist concerns exclusive. It is about President's decisino to oppose Kenya's invasion.

^^Waryaa su'aalaha jooji The president opposes the invasion. The deliberation might have been lengthy or rigorous but he finally made a decision.

^^That power that be is no longer gonna be, chew on that for a second The world is facing a sovereign default, a new territory for the financial structures that sustain the power in order to BE!