Kenya (catch all)

[KingJaja]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/09...0-students-in/



KingJaja, this type of attack should be a redline for any nation. I have seen little evidence that moderate responses work against animals like this.

The Nigerian Army is as brutal as they come, but we are dealing with something that might be beyond the capacity of the Nigerian Army (120,000 soldiers also managing a Niger Delta insurgency & a Middle Belt crisis).

The Sahel had great inland cities & it's economy was based on transactions between the interior & the Maghreb. Unfortunately, European trade with the coasts broke those links & even though the physical routes for trade are intact, very little trade occurs in that region.

That region is not economically productive & will never be, but it is still linked to the Maghreb & the interior. So we are dealing with a transnational problem that might only get worse with time.

It is impossible to police Nigeria's Northern borders - so these animals will have free movement through even weaker states like Niger, Chad & Cameroun - which they could destabilize large parts of in future.

I don't know how this thing will end, but it won't end soon. It will end only after all parties are exhausted.

[carl]

Two points and some questions.

First, the North American continent is getting very close to energy, fossil fuel, self sufficiency, even to the point we get to be exporters again, especially in natural gas. How might that affect our relations with Saudi Arabia?

Second, it seems the takfiri killers are embarking upon a simple religious war, kill the Christians. This is being seen in quite a few countries. How might this play out? Are they trying to provoke a reaction directed against all Muslims? That would make sense since that would give them the upper hand in the on-going struggle for leadership in the Muslim world.

Another point I just thought of. M-A is right about the Pak Army/ISI. They are the main devil. When/if they win in Afghanistan, they will be hugely encouraged as will all the takfiri killers worldwide. They will want to go on to bigger and better things. Ultimately theynwill have to be taken care of. How?

[KingJaja]

Two points and some questions.

First, the North American continent is getting very close to energy, fossil fuel, self sufficiency, even to the point we get to be exporters again, especially in natural gas. How might that affect our relations with Saudi Arabia?

Second, it seems the takfiri killers are embarking upon a simple religious war, kill the Christians. This is being seen in quite a few countries. How might this play out? Are they trying to provoke a reaction directed against all Muslims? That would make sense since that would give them the upper hand in the on-going struggle for leadership in the Muslim world.

Another point I just thought of. M-A is right about the Pak Army/ISI. They are the main devil. When/if they win in Afghanistan, they will be hugely encouraged as will all the takfiri killers worldwide. They will want to go on to bigger and better things. Ultimately theynwill have to be taken care of. How?

Sub-Saharan Africa is a bit different from the Middle East - it has a lot more Christians than Muslims & Christians tend to be located more in the wealthier, coastal cities.

If they want to provoke a reaction from Christians in Sub-Saharan Africa - eventually they'll get it, but they will regret it.

[carl]

Sub-Saharan Africa is a bit different from the Middle East - it has a lot more Christians than Muslims & Christians tend to be located more in the wealthier, coastal cities.

If they want to provoke a reaction from Christians in Sub-Saharan Africa - eventually they'll get it, but they will regret it.

From what I read, it doesn't seem that Boko Haram is inclined to being talked out of murdering people. Do you think the Nigerian Army can keep them suppressed to the extent that the people won't sort of take things into their own hands in a very big way?

[M-A Lagrange]

to read with caution:

Names of Westgate attack mastermind revealed

According to Channel 4 News in UK the alleged leader of the Nairobi shopping mall attack was born a Christian in Kenya and is a former member of the country's special forces.
The number one Westgate attacker was named as Omar or Umayr, who is believed to have been killed in this week’s siege.
Omar was a Kenyan national, born to a Christian family from Nairobi. He converted to Islam and was also a former member of Kenya’s special forces.
Umayr is understood to have left Kenya for Somalia in 2005, where he joined the Kamboni militant Islamist group. Kamboni later joined with al-Shabaab.
The report said the second man is known as Khadhab, who is a Somali national who worked in an Islamic bookshop in the Nairobi suburb of Eastleigh. He was arrested and imprisoned in Somalia, and it is alleged he was tortured by the CIA while in custody there.

http://dalsanradio.com/articles/1568...rmind-revealed

Somalia: Al-Shabab Finds Fighters Among Somali Youth in Minnesota
Nimco Ahmed, a Somali activist who works for the Minneapolis City Council, says the war and resettlement has fractured the traditional family structure.

"Most of our fathers are either not here or not in the country or dead pretty much. So not having a father figure for boys has been a struggle for us. And it is still a struggle for us," said Ahmed.

Ethiopia's invasion of Somalia in 2007 was viewed by some Somalis as a violation of Somali sovereignty even though the troops intervened at the request of the transitional Somali government and with the backing of the African Union and the U.S.

Using a mixture of religion, nationalism and what some say is deception, the Islamist militant group al-Shabab has recruited at least 20 Somali-Americans to fight against foreign troops in Somalia

.
http://allafrica.com/stories/201310010226.html

[KingJaja]

From what I read, it doesn't seem that Boko Haram is inclined to being talked out of murdering people. Do you think the Nigerian Army can keep them suppressed to the extent that the people won't sort of take things into their own hands in a very big way?

Part of the Nigerian Army strategy seems to be to empower local civilians to take on Boko Haram (hence the "Civilian Joint Task Force"). Boko Haram's most vicious recent attacks have been against these people.

I expect the army to redouble efforts, re-arm the civilians and have them take on Boko Haram again. It will be very messy.

[omarali50]

There are two different scenarios in which someone may attack a developed city in this way and while the initial hysterical-phase reaction is likely to be similar in both cases, they are not the same:
1. Some small demented group of crazied (aum whatever or suchlike) gets it into their head to do something spectacular. They kill many people, they get killed, their associates and known members get tracked down and killed or imprisoned, billions or trillions get wasted on new "Mall security" or some such, but its not really a repeatable and constant threat.
2. Some group with a real agenda, a real organization, a real ideology, attacks a developed city because their grievance with country X has reached criticality. The most likely suspect for such an act in the years to come is the jihadis. But even they cannot do this again and again. After the first attack or the third, their goose will be cooked. A sustained campaign needs a base, needs an organization, needs a pipeline of volunteers and trainers and financiers. How long before Pakistan is forced to stop any and all connection with ANY such business (or to die trying to cut them off)? I dont see how it can become a sustained and "normal" threat in advanced countries.
Its a different story for corrupt and incompetent regional powers. THEY should worry.

[Sargent]

1. Some small demented group of crazied (aum whatever or suchlike) gets it into their head to do something spectacular. They kill many people, they get killed, their associates and known members get tracked down and killed or imprisoned, billions or trillions get wasted on new "Mall security" or some such, but its not really a repeatable and constant threat.

Repeatability over the long term would likely reduce the efficacy of such attacks. But even without achieving that, constancy of threat is entirely different. That is about perceptions and expectations, fear and concern. And we're not talking about how you or anyone here will appreciate such events - rather, it's about how Joe and Jane Schumackatelli deal with it - which in the short run is not good, and in the long run actually improves. But in that first window of chaos you could see a state or society flail badly, to quite harmful effect.

2. Some group with a real agenda, a real organization, a real ideology, attacks a developed city because their grievance with country X has reached criticality. The most likely suspect for such an act in the years to come is the jihadis. But even they cannot do this again and again. After the first attack or the third, their goose will be cooked. A sustained campaign needs a base, needs an organization, needs a pipeline of volunteers and trainers and financiers. How long before Pakistan is forced to stop any and all connection with ANY such business (or to die trying to cut them off)? I dont see how it can become a sustained and "normal" threat in advanced countries.
Its a different story for corrupt and incompetent regional powers. THEY should worry.

Does one need to maintain a regular tempo for such attacks to be effective? I think you could manage one or two a year and cause real damage - again, too much frequency allows people to adapt and realize they can prevail. Anyway, I don't think we can apply all of the same rules of warfare as are required in high intensity conventional conflict. There may be more and longer temporal gaps - as the enemy copes with the issues you cite.

And even as they are identified, how much did OEF really do to eliminate AQ's threat? Or the Taliban's? So, even as we might be able to identify who is supporting such groups and where, that does not guarantee that they will be dealt with effectively.

Jill

[carl]

Part of the Nigerian Army strategy seems to be to empower local civilians to take on Boko Haram (hence the "Civilian Joint Task Force"). Boko Haram's most vicious recent attacks have been against these people.

I expect the army to redouble efforts, re-arm the civilians and have them take on Boko Haram again. It will be very messy.

That is a classic small war fighting action, arming the local civilians. How is the army going about that? Is there some kind of formally organized entity like the CIDG or RF/PFs in Vietnam, recognizing and supporting something already forming on its own like the Sons of Iraq or is it a more informal thing?

(I expect David may moves this exchange which would be fair enough.)

[JMA]

That is a classic small war fighting action, arming the local civilians. How is the army going about that? Is there some kind of formally organized entity like the CIDG or RF/PFs in Vietnam, recognizing and supporting something already forming on its own like the Sons of Iraq or is it a more informal thing?

(I expect David may moves this exchange which would be fair enough.)

Carl, this smacks of reckless desperation.

The key to any grand strategy is to make sure that whatever you do/use/implement during a 'war' it does not lead to greater polarization of groups/factions after the war.

As with anywhere - and most certainly in Africa - vigilantly 'justice' will often lead to scores being settled etc. Soon will get get out of control.

A sure indication the police and military have lost control.