04-22-2009, 11:39 PM
"The UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, has warned against sending a UN peacekeeping force to Somalia. He said a UN force should remain the UN's goal, but that deploying now could worsen the country's conflict."
UN head against new Somalia force
Am I the only one that thinks this is upside down thinking? It's much better to let the Somali's rape and kill one another for another decade, then peacekeeping will not lead to conflict. Mostly, because the dozen or so people left will be much easier to police.
He goes on to say, "The insertion of international security forces in Somalia remains a divisive and politicized issue with the potential to exacerbate the conflict." Is that because the UN's reputation is crap, or is it because Islamicists associate the UN with western nations?
UN head against new Somalia force
Am I the only one that thinks this is upside down thinking? It's much better to let the Somali's rape and kill one another for another decade, then peacekeeping will not lead to conflict. Mostly, because the dozen or so people left will be much easier to police.
He goes on to say, "The insertion of international security forces in Somalia remains a divisive and politicized issue with the potential to exacerbate the conflict." Is that because the UN's reputation is crap, or is it because Islamicists associate the UN with western nations?
”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.
![[Image: yVR5oE.png]](http://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/329/yVR5oE.png)
![[Image: VKQ0KLG.png]](http://i.imgur.com/VKQ0KLG.png)