U.N. Food Agency Suspends Aid to Southern Somalia

[xiinfaniin]

Khayr was wrong, but the little aggrieved one is out of line as usual.

 

Alshabaab is doing this for political reasons just like Aydid used to do, and the outcome will sadly be similar.

[Khayr]

Originally posted by ElPunto:

^Leave the food at the front door eh? Isn't that how 500,000 people starved to death in 1991-1992? The idea that a starving man can dictate terms for those feeding him is ludicrous. And to dress that up as a question of sovereignty is even worse.

How so? If there are conditions to be met and they are not willing to respect those conditions. It is simple - adhere to the rules and you are welcome.

 

There was no mention of me saying "leave the food at the door". El Punto (can't remember your previous names) and Xin need to get their facts right and move emotion out of the way.

 

As to Layzie G, taas cuuqdaad bee qaabta.

[Khayr]

Originally posted by ElPunto:

^Leave the food at the front door eh? Isn't that how 500,000 people starved to death in 1991-1992? The idea that a starving man can dictate terms for those feeding him is ludicrous. And to dress that up as a question of sovereignty is even worse.

How so? If there are conditions to be met and they are not willing to respect those conditions. It is simple - adhere to the rules and you are welcome.

 

There was no mention of me saying "leave the food at the door". El Punto (can't remember your previous names) and Xin need to get their facts right and move emotion out of the way.

 

As to Layzie G, taas cuuqdaad bee qaabta.

[Khayr]

Originally posted by ElPunto:

^Leave the food at the front door eh? Isn't that how 500,000 people starved to death in 1991-1992? The idea that a starving man can dictate terms for those feeding him is ludicrous. And to dress that up as a question of sovereignty is even worse.

How so? If there are conditions to be met and they are not willing to respect those conditions. It is simple - adhere to the rules and you are welcome.

 

There was no mention of me saying "leave the food at the door". El Punto (can't remember your previous names) and Xin need to get their facts right and move emotion out of the way.

 

As to Layzie G, taas cuuqdaad bee qaabta.

[ElPunto]

^Adeer you said - 'Leave the food at the front door and it will be distributed.' It's the last line of your post on page 1 of this thread. I don't know how you missed that. This is what happened in 91/92 in Somalia and warlords and their henchman appropriated the food and sold it on the common market while tens of thousands starved to death. This is in the public record.

 

A starving man usually doesn't set conditions for those alleviating his starvation - that is if he is rationale and has his own welfare at heart. You've heard the saying - beggars can't be choosers no? I'm afraid this is a simple matter of common sense.

 

Additionally - what has brought about this changing set of conditions? Shabaab has had control of these areas for years but now new rules have to be introduced. Why - is there any reason they have purported to make that you can enlighten me with? What have they said that convinces you they have a good reason to impose new conditions on these aid agencies? Why are you so convinced they're right?

 

Perhaps the article below can shed some light on why Shabaab has introduced these new rules.

[ElPunto]

^Adeer you said - 'Leave the food at the front door and it will be distributed.' It's the last line of your post on page 1 of this thread. I don't know how you missed that. This is what happened in 91/92 in Somalia and warlords and their henchman appropriated the food and sold it on the common market while tens of thousands starved to death. This is in the public record.

 

A starving man usually doesn't set conditions for those alleviating his starvation - that is if he is rationale and has his own welfare at heart. You've heard the saying - beggars can't be choosers no? I'm afraid this is a simple matter of common sense.

 

Additionally - what has brought about this changing set of conditions? Shabaab has had control of these areas for years but now new rules have to be introduced. Why - is there any reason they have purported to make that you can enlighten me with? What have they said that convinces you they have a good reason to impose new conditions on these aid agencies? Why are you so convinced they're right?

 

Perhaps the article below can shed some light on why Shabaab has introduced these new rules.

[ElPunto]

^Adeer you said - 'Leave the food at the front door and it will be distributed.' It's the last line of your post on page 1 of this thread. I don't know how you missed that. This is what happened in 91/92 in Somalia and warlords and their henchman appropriated the food and sold it on the common market while tens of thousands starved to death. This is in the public record.

 

A starving man usually doesn't set conditions for those alleviating his starvation - that is if he is rationale and has his own welfare at heart. You've heard the saying - beggars can't be choosers no? I'm afraid this is a simple matter of common sense.

 

Additionally - what has brought about this changing set of conditions? Shabaab has had control of these areas for years but now new rules have to be introduced. Why - is there any reason they have purported to make that you can enlighten me with? What have they said that convinces you they have a good reason to impose new conditions on these aid agencies? Why are you so convinced they're right?

 

Perhaps the article below can shed some light on why Shabaab has introduced these new rules.

[ElPunto]

The withdrawal was greeted with jubilation in the al-Shabaab stronghold in the southern port of Kismayo. "It is our great pleasure to see WFP and the other spy agencies suspend their involvement," Sheikh Ibrahim Garweyn, head of public affairs, told Reuters. "We will never allow them to come here again. We have great land and we can grow our own crops."

 

Contrary to the Sheikh's upbeat assessment, the lawless country which has been without a functioning central government since 1991 has not historically been able to feed itself. After nearly two decades of constant conflict even a good harvest meets less than a third of the country's food needs. An epic drought has struck the region and left nearly half the population in need of food aid. This has meant WFP feeding an estimated 2.6 million people countrywide.

 

Analysts have linked the attempt to blackmail WFP to a critical funding shortage in the Islamic insurgency. The network of young fighters has built its formidable force on the back of a reliable monthly pay cheque of $300 which has proven to be a powerful recruitment device. However, in recent weeks Somali sources say that word has gone out to regional Shabaab commanders that they must pay their own way, leading to a surge in extortion from businesses and aid groups.

 

Article

[ElPunto]

The withdrawal was greeted with jubilation in the al-Shabaab stronghold in the southern port of Kismayo. "It is our great pleasure to see WFP and the other spy agencies suspend their involvement," Sheikh Ibrahim Garweyn, head of public affairs, told Reuters. "We will never allow them to come here again. We have great land and we can grow our own crops."

 

Contrary to the Sheikh's upbeat assessment, the lawless country which has been without a functioning central government since 1991 has not historically been able to feed itself. After nearly two decades of constant conflict even a good harvest meets less than a third of the country's food needs. An epic drought has struck the region and left nearly half the population in need of food aid. This has meant WFP feeding an estimated 2.6 million people countrywide.

 

Analysts have linked the attempt to blackmail WFP to a critical funding shortage in the Islamic insurgency. The network of young fighters has built its formidable force on the back of a reliable monthly pay cheque of $300 which has proven to be a powerful recruitment device. However, in recent weeks Somali sources say that word has gone out to regional Shabaab commanders that they must pay their own way, leading to a surge in extortion from businesses and aid groups.

 

Article

[ElPunto]

The withdrawal was greeted with jubilation in the al-Shabaab stronghold in the southern port of Kismayo. "It is our great pleasure to see WFP and the other spy agencies suspend their involvement," Sheikh Ibrahim Garweyn, head of public affairs, told Reuters. "We will never allow them to come here again. We have great land and we can grow our own crops."

 

Contrary to the Sheikh's upbeat assessment, the lawless country which has been without a functioning central government since 1991 has not historically been able to feed itself. After nearly two decades of constant conflict even a good harvest meets less than a third of the country's food needs. An epic drought has struck the region and left nearly half the population in need of food aid. This has meant WFP feeding an estimated 2.6 million people countrywide.

 

Analysts have linked the attempt to blackmail WFP to a critical funding shortage in the Islamic insurgency. The network of young fighters has built its formidable force on the back of a reliable monthly pay cheque of $300 which has proven to be a powerful recruitment device. However, in recent weeks Somali sources say that word has gone out to regional Shabaab commanders that they must pay their own way, leading to a surge in extortion from businesses and aid groups.

 

Article

[Khayr]

A starving man usually doesn't set conditions for those alleviating his starvation - that is if he is rationale and has his own welfare at heart. You've heard the saying - beggars can't be choosers no? I'm afraid this is a simple matter of common sense.

True but does that mean that I come in, give you food and take your family with (as pay in lieu)? After all, beggars can't be choosers.

 

What the boyz are doing might not be wise at such a heightened momment but I can't blame them - the world's after them (for what - association with an infamous gang?)

[Khayr]

A starving man usually doesn't set conditions for those alleviating his starvation - that is if he is rationale and has his own welfare at heart. You've heard the saying - beggars can't be choosers no? I'm afraid this is a simple matter of common sense.

True but does that mean that I come in, give you food and take your family with (as pay in lieu)? After all, beggars can't be choosers.

 

What the boyz are doing might not be wise at such a heightened momment but I can't blame them - the world's after them (for what - association with an infamous gang?)

[Khayr]

A starving man usually doesn't set conditions for those alleviating his starvation - that is if he is rationale and has his own welfare at heart. You've heard the saying - beggars can't be choosers no? I'm afraid this is a simple matter of common sense.

True but does that mean that I come in, give you food and take your family with (as pay in lieu)? After all, beggars can't be choosers.

 

What the boyz are doing might not be wise at such a heightened momment but I can't blame them - the world's after them (for what - association with an infamous gang?)

[Khayr]

If you a preventing people because you are a "highway robber" then that is dhulum/wrong doing. However, if it is for valid reasons and proection then it is a different case.

[Khayr]

If you a preventing people because you are a "highway robber" then that is dhulum/wrong doing. However, if it is for valid reasons and proection then it is a different case.