Siad Barre of Somalia Tito of Yugoslavia - 1976

[Classified]

The commonality between this two leaders is astronomical. Without Siad Barre, Somalia fell into civil war, chaos and bloodshed. After the death of Tito, Yugoslavia fell into civil war, bloodshed and chaos. Today, Yugoslavia is no more after many years of bloodshed and civil war. It has been divided into 7 Sovereign States. Somalia is no more and only exists on paper.

 

On the other hand, one might argue that, due to both Siad and Tito's policy and rule resulted in the destruction of both Somalia and Yugoslavia.

 

[Wiil Cusub]

Yugoslavia is settled after they accept rights to decide own historic sovereignty or Self-determination. my question is: will Somalia fellow that path or they will continue old central authority with iron hand?

[Classified]

Wiil Cusub;972275 wrote:

Yugoslavia is settled after they accept rights to decide own historic sovereignty or Self-determination. my question is: will Somalia fellow that path or they will continue old central authority with iron hand?

If you believe in such "Self-Determination" then why is that you lay claim to territories settled not by your tribe, such as parts of Sool, parts of Sanaag and parts of Togdheer along with Awdal?

[Wiil Cusub]

Classified;972276 wrote:

If you believe in such "Self-Determination" then why is that you lay claim to territories settled not by your tribe, such as parts of Sool, parts of Sanaag and parts of Togdheer along with Awdal?

SXB you didn't ask me if I believe that, but anyway I believe that Somaliland army is on ground only parts of country where its ppl want to be part of Sl why they are long time in adhi-cadeeye and not in Buuhoodle. If majority ppl of any place in Sool region doen't want SL, they can go where they want, but they cann't decide for the rest of the region.

[Classified]

^ Okay, waxaad doonaysid ku hadal. This thread is not even about mamuul beeled qabyaaledeysan. What is your in take on the outcome of the two former Republics (Somalia iyo Yugoslavia) and how when both leaders were 'no more', both Republics ceased to exist.

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

They are the same both countries were balkanized thats the legacy

[GAROODI]

Tito was a tactician who new how to play world powers to better his country: siad barres new nothing about foreign relations example being his disaster leading up to the war with Ethiopia were he lost both American and soviet support. Tito was loved by all his people: siad barre was loved only by certain sections: Tito never took part in the break up of Yugoslavia he held it together through policy and progress politics that were not ethno centric. Siad barre took part in the destruction of the somali republic in fact was the main reason for the destruction. Comparing Tito and barre is like comparing apples and oranges. Don't insult Tito warya