Castro Posted November 20, 2007 ^^^^ I agree it was over the top. But it was timed to perfection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baashi Posted November 20, 2007 Your imagination knows no bound awoowe. Ahem you are losing the plot mzee. Better stick to the substance of the discussion or get lost buddy. Oops here is my graemlins Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seekknowledge Posted November 20, 2007 Not every thing is like Bush said "You are either with us or against us". What if both sides are terrorists? There is a third way and that is called negotiations. Even the Prophet (saw) negotiated with his enemies by signing 10 year cease fire and swallowing his pride by not perfoming the Hajj even though he was only few steps away from the Kaba. He also erased the title Messenger of Allah from the document because his enemies objected to it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Castro Posted November 20, 2007 Your imagination knows no bound awoowe. Ahem you are losing the plot mzee. Better stick to the substance of the discussion or get lost buddy. I guess your dua for self-control is yet to be accepted. Here's my big grin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
N.O.R.F Posted November 21, 2007 Originally posted by Kashafa: There's nothing 'complex' about occupation. There's nothing 'complex' about genocide. There's nothing complex about Abdullahi Yusuf and the TFG. And there is no complexity to Resistance, a time-honoured obligation of principled men and women. Hear hear yaa Kash, hear hear! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted November 21, 2007 Originally posted by Seekknowledge: Not every thing is like Bush said "You are either with us or against us". That is exactly the problem Bush told his pals to hunt every "terrorist" in Somalia and those "terrorists" have vowed to fight to last man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted November 21, 2007 Originally posted by Castro: ^^^^^ It's not the drop of a pen but the drop of the pants, he speaks. He just forgot the step that comes after that: the bending over. Let the old man be. He's overdue for a vacation. I think Baashi realises that Ethiopia is not gonna be chased of out Somalia and quit Somalia just like that.But he realises that Ethiopias can't stay in Somalia without suffering too. I agree with him on both of thouse accounts, ie Somalis have the capacity to resist Ethiopia and inflict heavy casualties on them, but they don't have the ability to force them to run from Somalia. Ethiopia can afford(in the short term) to loose a few thousand peasant soldiers. Somalis can't afford to continue to go the way we are going with all the humanatarian disasters. But I disagree with his somewhat optimistic attitude to armed African Dictators, Mullahs and warlords simply settling their differences especially in light of the current global climate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Peace Action Posted November 22, 2007 NG, Baashi is wise to reject your suggestion and remain neutral. The somali politics is like a man riding a lion. Stay on the lion and eventually die or get off and be eaten by the beast. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seekknowledge Posted November 22, 2007 GJ I think you missed the point. What I mean bush and the insurgents have the same mentality either you are with us or.............. Bush doesn't have a role model like the Prophet saw while the insurgents do. What is their excuse... refusing to negotiate for the sake of the innocent people especialy the leaders comfortably drinking their tea. Man let the poor somalis have their shaah caano in peace. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted November 22, 2007 quote:What is their excuse... refusing to negotiate Simply because the Ethiopians and T.F.G have given them one option: put down your weapons or we'll disarm you. They have declared them as terrorists and have vowed to crush them. They(resistance) have negotiated with the Ethiopians before and they told to lay down their arms, recognise the presence of Ethiopians troops and declare certain groups as terrorists. Secondly, all of the military leaders of the I.C.U are not in Eritrea as you would have us think.Negotiation is an easy word to roll of the tongue and criticise people from the safety of your home. But understand some Somalis have been given no other choice than to take arms against the Ethiopians, in other words Ethiopians are giving them no choice. Waa submit ama we will arrest or kill you. Note that I am not saying the opposition should not negotiate with the Ethiopians and T.F.G, but if you are saying thousands of Somalis will be detained, tortured and uprooted from their homes and nobody lifts a finger, then my friend this is not negotiation it is called "do as you please". Yes, the prophet saw negotiated with the Quraish and took deals which appeared disheartening to his companions, but remember that when the companions thought that they(Quraish) has killed the companion who sent to negotiate, what did they do? Did they say let us negotiate with the Quraish they might have killed our companion? No saxiib, they pledged to defend the honour of their companion and revenge him if the Quraish killed him. Had the Quraish killed the companion the treaty of hudabiyah would have been called and the Muslims would have gone to war with the Quraish. There is Hudaybiyah and there is also Uhud, Badr and Tabouk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Warmoog Posted November 25, 2007 Those of you scouring the annals of Islamic history for cop-out material would be wise to first place something like the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in context, instead of conveniently pulling it out of your back pockets like readymade fluff for arguments. Ask yourselves if the circumstances surrounding it were in any way analogous to what people in Somalia are currently experiencing. In particular, do the lessons of that historical milestone speak to the situation of, say, Muslims in the West, who, like the people of the Prophet's (saw) time, live as minorities in predominantly non-Muslim societies, or to that of Muslims in places like Somalia, who are being massacred in their own lands by the forces of invaders? The folks spearheading the resistance in Somalia believe jihad is compulsory for them and any other group of Muslims whose land has been invaded. If the Qur'aan and Sunnah say anything, anything at all, to contradict the knowledge those brave men and women are working with, the onus of pointing that out is on the 'third path' Buddhas in our midst. And for the record, the current conflict in Somali is not a 'civil war,' as Baashi craftily put it, nor is it one caused by the segmentary lineage system. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seekknowledge Posted November 25, 2007 OK we had 17 years of civil war and 1 year of invasion. What were this so called mujahidiin doing during the civil war? Was it Uhud, Badr and Tabouk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted November 25, 2007 They fought with Ethiopian forces both in the Ocaden and inside the republic of Somalia! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seekknowledge Posted November 25, 2007 Oooooh so those poor Ocaden they kicked out from mogadishu chased them to the border they thought were ethiopians? Yeah it must have been a big mistake do you think they would ever apologize like giving them back their properties? Qofyahoow, stop making excuses history is still fresh it is too early to change it try another way Israelis tried but after 60 years it is still not working Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fabregas Posted November 25, 2007 I am not making execuses for anything. It is you that is confusing Alitixaad Al Islamiya with the U.S.C. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites