Wikileaks: US encouraged Ethiopian invasion of Somalia

[SealLion]

Saw this release on Wikileaks.

It's a short one paragraph article. So it makes an easy and quick read.

This is a memo written from an official with the UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea in 2006 detailing a meeting with Jenday Frazer, the Bush Administration's Assistant Secretary of State for African affairs. It is interesting in that it undercuts Bush administration officials' later assertions that they did not encourage Ethiopia to invade Somalia in 2006....

and from the world fact book:

I think that this may be related, though I am uncertain considering the difference in years....above it states 2006. This quote here states 2007.
IDK...maybe it isn't. I just thought that I'd post it here to let you know that a war did occur in Somalia and Ethiopia in the mid to late 2000's.

Ethiopian forces invaded southern Somalia and routed Islamist Courts from Mogadishu in January 2007.....

LInk is here:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/so.html

Anyways....so does the US have an interest in Africa??
For sure it does.
I believe even that was discussed earlier. I just don't know which News Thread it was again.

Anyways.....The US keeps a nice garrison and army base on the Horn of Africa...a.k.a AFRICOM there for a reason.
And it's not there necessarily to help the poor and sick.
And it's not there necessarily to have military relations with more than African nations. Well, it is, but I believe that it may be there for far deeper reasons than that.
That's my opinion.

Look at the map of the scope of operations. And look carefully.

LInk is here:

United States Africa Command - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now this:

The U.S. Department of State stated of AFRICOM that:

"The U.S. military’s new command center for Africa, Africa Command (AFRICOM), will play a supportive role as Africans continue to build democratic institutions and establish good governance across the continent. AFRICOM’S foremost mission is to help Africans achieve their own security, and to support African leadership efforts.

United States Africa Command - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ya. Right.

To help establish good governance, my a$$

You don't need a military to help do that. To do something like that takes people without guns.
To use guns as a measure of security assurance and military aid isn't the right way to do it for one thing, IMHO.

The US army is there for far deeper reasons, I believe.

Most especially when the scope of operations is that large.
And that's taken into consideration what the Project for a New American Century would like to see and the fact of a very large military that has world wide influence and want's to keep it's military empire nice 'n big.


Here's the link for the Wikileaks article:

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/US_encoura...ffairs%2C_2006

[slikrapid]

United States Africa Command - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

isn't it unusual for all these commands that the usa didn't use their own land to be the 'central command', but gave that name to the middle eastern command?

United States Central Command (USCENTCOM)

And it's not there necessarily to help the poor and sick.

yeah, right, maybe by testing new vaccines & bio-weapons on them

Look at the map of the scope of operations. And look carefully.

after taking a look, what did i see...the whole fuc*ing world

AFRICOM’S foremost mission is to help Africans achieve their own security, and to support African leadership efforts.

let me quote a Faith No More song lyrics on that one:

i can help
i can help you
i can help you help yourself
....(laughter)....

Anyways....so does the US have an interest in Africa??
For sure it does.
I believe even that was discussed earlier. I just don't know which News Thread it was again

here are a few threads about it:

http://www.sb-innovation.de/showthre...threadid=15553
http://www.sb-innovation.de/showthre...threadid=16135
http://www.sb-innovation.de/showthre...threadid=16586

[shadowww]

This doesn't suprise me. Hard to remember any war where USA didn't participate directly or (secretly) indirectly. Of course they have interest in anything that will bring them profit. And every war can be profitable for 3rd party. They can for example sell guns, ammo to one side (ethiopia in this case). And this can benefit them for various reasons (not just money from guns). Destabilazing Somalia, so they can put some other, inclined to them, politician on crucial postion for example. Or to just sell Somalia some other goods as medicine maybe, or to make even more pressure on Somalian pirates which will need to try plunder other ships even more desperatly now. And USA can profit here if offers protection for any ship that passes this territoty (althro I heard Japan does that for free), or they just want them provoke more for some only to them known reason.

Nothing good can come of this for sure. Not when USA has part in it.

[SealLion]

This doesn't suprise me. Hard to remember any war where USA didn't participate directly or (secretly) indirectly. Of course they have interest in anything that will bring them profit. And every war can be profitable for 3rd party. They can for example sell guns, ammo to one side (ethiopia in this case). And this can benefit them for various reasons (not just money from guns). Destabilazing Somalia, so they can put some other, inclined to them, politician on crucial postion for example. Or to just sell Somalia some other goods as medicine maybe, or to make even more pressure on Somalian pirates which will need to try plunder other ships even more desperatly now. And USA can profit here if offers protection for any ship that passes this territoty (althro I heard Japan does that for free), or they just want them provoke more for some only to them known reason.

Nothing good can come of this for sure. Not when USA has part in it.

I agree shadowww.

Definitly wars are profitable for some of the parties involved. Most obviously for big companies that are owned by some high level poliaticians, as an example.
Didn't Dick Cheney own a company that eventually started doing business in Iraq??
I believe so.

and then there's the other business that can be started such as private security and so forth.
\
Now there's other reasons that a country with troops stationed in Africa would have interests there.
One of those reasons I am under the opinion of is 3rd party interests. Just like I make brief mention of above.
For example, suppose AFRICOM is conducting training or even relations in a part of Africa under the guise of development aid and military training of the host country.

With the example of development aid, a number of companies from the 'guest' country make developments in that region of Africa, ensuring another financial supply to that same company via their development.
YOu see what I mean??

Of course, with a large portion of the African States being not as wealthy as South Africa or other developed nations in other regions of the world, the money that is paid is pretty much anticipated for a very long time. With the additional accrual of interest, the fact that, that host African State is most likely a developing country...i.e either a third or second-world country, ensures that the country is in debt perpetually.
Who's it in debt perpetually to....??

To many organizations: Banks, that company doing business with,etc..etc..

And of course, the relationship with CENTCOM or AFRICOM will no doubt continue. A partnership of sorts.
The major winner??

The minor winner would be the African country. There would be development. That would be good.
But it's the losing part that is most unfortunate.
There's the revenue loss that occurs over a long period of time b/c of the fact that the host country is less wealthy because it's most likely an agrarian-based economy or resource based economy such as having coal or mining.

And if mining, there's a sure bet that offshore mining companies are always wanting to be involved. They'll take a very large share of the profits. The host country, probably not as much considering a contract that would be engaged in between both parties.

No doubt, there must be some Euro or North American Mining giants in Africa right now.
Coal is still valuable.