Geel_jire Posted August 4, 2009 ^ There is a flaw in your argument Duke. what you propose is not a true federal system .. it is a collection of fiefdoms. under a true federals system puntland would be disbanded .. Bari, Nugaal, Mudug etc each would be it's own independent state. likewise somaliland would be disbanded awdal, waqooyi-galbeed,tog- dheer etc. would each have its own representatives. this is a government within a government a recipe for disaster .. I complete agree with your federalism idea but you must follow it through to its logical conclusion i.e each state independent of the other ... other wise all we have is clan fiefdoms. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paragon Posted August 4, 2009 And what's all the fuss about? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
General Duke Posted August 4, 2009 Al Jazeere: Adeer its great that you see the benefits of the Federal formula however in your fear of “clan fiefdoms” a silly term really, you are running towards sub clan fiefdoms which are even more ludicrous. Mudug, Nugaal, Bari on their own can not become Federal states. They are administrative districts or regions.Each is made up of Sub clans A federal state or a sub nation must be able to stand on its two feet, also must have a common interest of the population. Puntland, Somaliland have proven they can stand on their own and are supported by the majority of their population as viable entities. It would be insane to have 18 federal states in a small country like Somalia, it would defeat the purpose. Also it would not address the clan issue some are using as an excuse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted August 4, 2009 Originally posted by General Duke: ^^^Not bad but not enough. The best formula would be a weak central government that guides the states and a strong local government with all the powers to do local issues and set their own agendas. Only national defense, foreign affairs, and the federal budget should be left to the central government. Roadwork’s, healthcare and education should be left to the states. Economic development and foreign direct investment should be left to the states. 80% of local taxes should go to the state i.e. Puntland and 20% to the center i.e Mogadishu. Each Federal state shall have its members elected by its population and those who are sent to the Federal level are also elected by the states. Thus a weak central government would stop any ideas of coups and power grab and the regions would also develop faster. a central government in charge of defense, foreign affairs and the federal budget which will " guide the state"; but it is weak and only recieves only 20& of overall tax revenue. Now that is one big joke of a government. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ducaysane Posted August 4, 2009 I Completely agree with A Jazari. This Faroole guy was making a good sense when he was elected, all of the sudden he sounds more like a Riyaale. This name change is bad idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
General Duke Posted August 4, 2009 Ducaysane; adeer Faroole has made an astute move reflecting the truth on the ground. Puntland is true self governing entity which has more land than any other group in Somalia. Fabregas: The form of government is not important the benefit it gives to the population is. We don’t want dictators and monarchs we want development and social services. Ever heard of a dictator in Switzerland or India? No but I know you love the Al Saud type of government. Let make it in simple terms, we want an Arsen Wenger and not Alex Ferguson type of government we need a leader who will get the best out of a player/ citizen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted August 4, 2009 ^^ your intention is good, lakin it would be nonsensical if the central government was weak at the behest of the local regions. imagine if there was a foreign invasion or natural disaster; the central governments would be dependant on securing support from the local regions, which they could obviously use as a political bargaining tool. This is not what federalism is all about. Federalism means a strong central state( India,Germany, USA) which has a capable defense mechanism and the ability to spend on education and infrastructure. Of course it gives relative autonomy to the federal regions in certain areas, though it should never be weaker than them in any sense. All of this will not be done in your example whereby a staggering 80 percentage of tax is allocated to the local regions. Perhaps you are correct in that Somalis don't like centralized dicatorships; however, Somalis will someday have 2 reconcile, compromise and give away some of their powers to a central government, that is, if they want to join the modern world. ps. Arsene Wenger is a dicatorial freak. his influence even affects the board members. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Janagale_bi-idnilah Posted August 4, 2009 Indeed this is an interesting debate, Centralism VS Federalism has been the long awaited issue facing the emerging Republic of Somali. It was also the key factor that caused the 2 decade political deadlock within the Ruling/Elite politicians of the various regions in Somalia. That said, I am for and support a Federal System. However, the term federalism is too abstract and vague, since it doesn't really draw the line between the rights of the States and the rights of the Federal Government. And it's different from a country to a country....hence our Federal systems can be customed to satisfies the different political parties in the country..rather than a copy paste model.. The federalism I support is a weak central government and powerful states. This doesn't endanger our national security as Meiji says it... 1. in fact it stregthens our nation security...for the primary reason that it will take much consensus between states for important decision such as going to a war, or sanctioning a country, and meddling in other countries affairs...and etc...Rather than, a group of elites endangering/destroyi ng the whole country by unilateraly declaring a war, sactioning a nation and etc...."these are the failures of a centralism system. 2. It will create the much needed competition for development in rural area, regions, villages, as well as decentralizes the economy...It will allow the regions population to choose their destiny as fit,..This is a key in making our economy efficient...unlike the russian system..where the Moscow, and in that part region being quite developed, whereas the remaining of the country is underdeveloped...Par tnering with foreign nations, and attracting foreign investment should be the State's Rights...and Not Federal...and yeah offcourse, that's if we are in good relation...In that past, in Somalia, and many central systems try to force/manipulate foreign investment by either re-directing their investment to other area in the country or even at times area belonging to the government...Here is another valid concern... 3. The natural resources should be fully controlled by the Federal Government...(in terms of contracts can only be assigned by them), however that State should have some priviledges over all of the others states..1/3 of the wealth should go to the State for the much needed economic development as well as creating other economic opportunities...that said, Since some states will be wealthier than others, again it is upon the business community, and the population to pursue economic development by requesting federal assistance or attracting investors..HENCE the idea of wealth equality within the States can not be achieved. Benadir's wealth can never be equal to Bakool's wealth.. there is lots of lines that needs to be drawn here and there..but remember Somalia's was the first country in Africa where a peaceful election took place, and a smooth transtion of power. So who said we have to be like the remaining of Africa stuck with centralism, followed by coups, election fraud, misuse of power and corruption. L Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GAAROODI Posted August 4, 2009 Ok, people.... listen up brothers and sisters, i'll point out one flaw in the somali concept of federation. Firstly, when the truth is told Somalia and Somaliland were two seperate countries we united and created the Somali republic. Correct? Any sane thinking human being who knows anything about history would not argue with this. So its federation we are talking about, a federation of Somaliland and Somalia or of a newly created entity that is 8-9 years old. See Somalia and Somaliland are about 80-90 years old as countries, what gives puntland the same right as Somaliland and Somalia? Thats one question? Another question that destroys the case of federalism is the reality that Somaliland wants its borders I.E. the borders of 1960 including las anod, including las qorey. This is not excepted by other Somali's, so even the borders of a federal future state will be disputed leading to, i.e. war,further destruction and suffering for more people. So, with this realisation, some may see Somaliland as an extreme stance, but when you really think about it, total independence is the only way out of our troubles. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GAAROODI Posted August 4, 2009 And another thing, duke, stop smoking weed bro. Puntland has the least amount of land of any region other than djibouti. You control bosaso,garowe and north galkacyo and these cities are small and are all of the same clanman. Somaliland control from the very border of Djibouti: Awdal: Loa Cado, Ziella,Borame,Dilla, Bon. Saxil: Berbera,Bulaxaar,mad eera, Hargaisa: Hargaisa city, Salaxley,Baligubadle ,Gabiley,Aw barkdle, Dacar Buruq, Arabsio, Sheick Togdheer: Burco, Xaji Salax,Odweyne,Bali dig Sanag: Erigavo,maid,Xies, Las korey, Sool: las canod, Caiynabo (which is larger that las canod), Oog ETC..... you gotta smell the coffee duke, the truth will set you free saxib. Somaliland borders three nations, Djibouti,Ethiopia and Somalia. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
General Duke Posted August 4, 2009 Febregas: Arsene Wenger is a benign dictator if at all one. Janagale, made some valid points in the debate, continue adeer. The important issue here is what model can get us out of the misery and into the modern world as you said. I propose a weak central government, my ideal one might not suit everyone and thus can be fine tuned. However the premise that a central government with a charismatic leader will solve our problems is a very flaud one. A centralized government would choke the Somali people, all the masses would think about the clan the ruling group at the time as we have always done. If the masses knew that the central figure was not that grand and all powerful then their minds would focus elsewhere. Its better to have powerful states that would represent more clans than one entity ruled by one clan. The issue for natural resources and foreign investment I think is up for debate, should it all be in the remit of the central government? Thus lets propose a Fedral government with Hargaysa, Garowe as the two already existing states. Then lets add South Mudug, Galgaduud, Hiiraan Middle Shabbele as another new state. Lets now add Gedo, two Juba’s and Lower Shabbele as the fertile, bread basket state in the south. Mogadishu and Banadir as the Federal state with special status much like DC. You have Four strong states that contrast in natural resources, geographical landscape. Each viable and able to stand on their own and contributiong to the center. Thus each state would be responsible in developing its natural resources, all have abundant untapped wealth from hydrocarbons to vast mineral deposits. The southern states could develop their agricultural areas, the Northern their fisheries and livestock exports. The central government would work on defense, foreign affairs and the budget and would allocate resources for natural disasters and setting in place the Federal laws and making sure each state is meeting its potential. We don’t need ministers with BMW while the people don’t have water. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kelya_Xariif Posted August 4, 2009 GAROODI sounds you born yesterday mate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GAAROODI Posted August 4, 2009 kelya thanks for the comment, i wonder what led you to that conclusion? loooool. With a name like kelya xarif, how can you critisize someone else, if you disagree with my views, its fair but slandering for the sake of just shows your immaturity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Abwaan Posted August 4, 2009 Originally posted by Axmed Dhancadde: As part of the expose' I have started on prominent SOLers, I came to know that General Duke's real name is Maxamed Cusmaan Awliyo. He is a supporter of Ahlu-Sunna wal jamaaca. Barnaamijaka dooda ee BBC'da ee Jimcaha ayuu ka qaybqaatay last week. looooooooooool....Dh ancadde..where is that? do you have a link aan Awliyo dhegeystee.......... .............and how did your investigation to this conclusion take? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Abwaan Posted August 4, 2009 Originally posted by GAAROODI: And another thing, duke, stop smoking weed bro. Puntland has the least amount of land of any region other than djibouti. You control bosaso,garowe and north galkacyo and these cities are small and are all of the same clanman. Somaliland control from the very border of Djibouti: Awdal: Loa Cado, Ziella,Borame,Dilla, Bon. Saxil: Berbera,Bulaxaar,mad eera, Hargaisa: Hargaisa city, Salaxley,Baligubadle ,Gabiley,Aw barkdle, Dacar Buruq, Arabsio, Sheick Togdheer: Burco, Xaji Salax,Odweyne,Bali dig Sanag: Erigavo,maid,Xies, Las korey, Sool: las canod, Caiynabo (which is larger that las canod), Oog ETC..... you gotta smell the coffee duke, the truth will set you free saxib. Somaliland borders three nations, Djibouti,Ethiopia and Somalia. lol...ninba ceesaantii ceel keen miyaa xaalku, mise ninba timo xamer? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites