Somalia

150 Killed in U.S. Airstrike in Somalia, Officials Cite 'Imminent Threat' to U.S. Troops in the Country

Reportedly the largest counter-terrorism strike in U.S. history.

|

State

The United States launched airstrikes, using both drones and manned aircraft, on an alleged Al-Shabaab training camp in Somalia, killing 150 people, according to a spokesperson for the U.S. military, who also said the group posed an "imminent threat" to both U.S. and African Union troops stationed in Somalia.

The Department of Defense acknowledged one (1) U.S. military service member in Somalia as of June 30, 2015, the most recent date for which data is available. In 2014, Reuters reported that 120 U.S. troops were in Somalia, with military advisors having operated there since 2007.

There have been at least 19 drone strikes in Somalia since 2007, all under the Obama administration, for a total casualty count, excluding the most recent strike, of somewhere between 188 and 276.

There have been four major Al-Shabaab terrorist attacks in 2016, two in the Somali capital of Mogadishu, one in Baidoa, and another in a Kenyan base in Somalia. Involvement by the Somali or Kenyan governments has not been mentioned by U.S. officials.

The military says they believe there were no civilian casualties, but, according to the Washington Post, are "still assessing the situation."

Advertisement

NEXT: Michael Bloomberg Officially Not Running for President

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’ll give it a 20% chance that it was a wedding or birthday party.

    1. Another 20% that it was a children’s hospital.

    2. 10% it was a Bat Mitzvah.

      1. YOU’RE ALL WRONG =

        It was an Amway recruitment meeting

        1. Well, in that case, I guess it was a good hit.

          1. Speaking of which, I could use a good hit right about now.

            1. *slap*

        2. All your commissions belong to us!

  2. So we’really back in Somalia now? Not even bothering with the whole dictator shtick, just bombing whoever?

    War is indeed peace, comrades.

    1. Dude.

      Someone’s gotta build the roads and protect the libertarian community.

    2. We have to take out that libertarian paradise.

  3. Obviously we need more defense spending if 150 people, 300 goats, 12 camels and a latrine trench in a country with basically zero transport posed an imminent threat to us.

    1. Dude, have you ever seen goats when they get really mad!? You don’t want them coming over here, do you?

      1. Stick a couple on my lawn so I don’t have to mow anymore

        1. What about a Bloomberg lawn gnome instead?

          1. Maybe for target practice*

            *not a threat

      2. The goat we owned as kids mostly just stuck its head through fences to reach weeds and then bleated until one or the other of us came outside to unstick it.

        1. The geese, though… those were an unholy terror.

            1. In a town near me there’s a parking area near the river and as soon as you get out of your car they start running at you.

              There’s also a stand of pellet dispensers and the fucking geese will start pecking at them, obviously wanting you to feed them.

              1. When I was in high school, my parents built a new home near a little pond with 4 of those big domestic white fuckers. They used to chase my little brother.

                One day I watched one attack a stationary bulldozer. Put its head down and ran, full speed, beak first into it, multiple times.

                And they shit, well, like geese.

                Nasty bastards.

                1. There’s a reason that Ford Prefect, normally an animal lover, from Hitchhikers’ Guide to the Galaxy would go out of his way to eat pat

                2. #justiceforlucy

                  1. DON’T TWEET ABOUT LUCY!

    2. Imminent and existential threat.

    3. Listen mister, there were 50 American “advisors” (and some African Union soldiers too, not that we care so much about them) in harms way, and you damn well better believe we have their back. We’re going to make this country better, if we have to destroy every last town, road… and uh, wait, let me get back to you on that.

    4. The reason there were so few is because “boots on the ground” isn’t popular with Americans. Many people think fewer is safer, but generally it’s not.

      1. By that I mean it should be zero or some force capable of security. 50 is just asking for trouble because any local gang can put together a comparable force.

    5. Westgate Mall, 21 Sept 2013.
      Garissa University 2 April 2015

      Al Shabaab is not your friend.

      Kill Them All.

      1. Just to be clear, those places are in Kenya, which borders Somalia.

        1. But they did the attacks, and plenty more.

          1. I have no problem with the idea that Al Shabaab are bad, evil, no-good, despicable, and deserving of death. I have some problem trusting our government when it announces that the people it killed in any situation were in fact Al Shabaab, but am willing tentatively to accept it. However, I strongly dispute our responsibility, or even right, to go about the world killing bad guys. Now the goats on the other hand…

  4. The special operators in Somalia had to pay for the bombs and the fuel. This was a big victory for MasterCard.

    1. Priceless.

  5. So they were all combatants? When the Pentagon twists the meaning by assuming those in the area of killed combatants are all combatants it can get hard to parse the language.

    1. They were either combatants or knew a combatant or were in the general vicinity of a combatant or would have grown up to be a combatant . No need for all that parsing.

      1. Exactly whom would they have been combatting had we not been there?

        I must assume they’d have driven on the ROADZ to their nearest naval base, boarded one of their aircraft carriers, steamed to the east coast of the US, been inserted by helicopter to take over the White House and thus the entire country.

        Whew. Close call.

        1. Yeah. That *would* have been a shame.

  6. With this bombing we have achieved a long term victory in Somalia. This is a total game changer in the War on Terror. Victory is imminent.

    1. . . . U.S. military, who . . . said the group posed an “imminent threat”

      Victory is imminent.

      *squints suspiciously*

      Comrade, I am beginning to doubt your devotion to the Homeland.

  7. “…according to a spokesperson for the U.S. military….”

    Link, Ed?

  8. OT – We’re gonna need a bigger trigger warning.

    This book and review came out in 2014, but I’m just reading the book now.

    To have some idea of why the reviewer is getting the vapors, here’s a quote from pp. 143-44:

    “Here’s what America likes to tell Americans: Everyone is equal; feel good about yourself; live in the moment. Meanwhile, America’s successful groups tell their members something different: You are capable of great things because of the group to which you belong; but you, individually, are not good enough; so you you need to control yourself, resist temptation, and prove yourself.”

    1. This is the first sentence of that book review =

      “More than two centuries ago, our Founding Fathers declared that all humans are born with the same inherent potential.”

      Saying that mankind is “created equal” SAYS NOTHING about ‘inherent potential’.

      It was written as a rejection of the premise of Aristocracy = that one’s could inherit class-status by mere birth rather than by accomplishment.

      There is absolutely nothing suggesting people *inherently* posses equal potential simply because they are considered equal under the law. Even Rawls accepted the idea that there was no eliminating *all* difference of relative advantage.

      How retarded do you have to be to fuck up something so monumentally in a single sentence?

      1. Then you’re going to love the review in the Atlantic:

        “Americans allow their kids to attend slumber parties and major in art history, not because they’re overindulgent, but because they know that with equal amounts of *both* focus and passion, their children will grow up to live comfortably?and comparatively worry-free.”

        1. What does that even mean?

          1. In context, she seems to be suggesting that “In America, you can’t really FAIL that hard”…

            i.e. Parents of American kids are indulgent because, unlike the children of the migrant fruit-picker, they’re not going to be reduced to a life of begging for pennies if they only get accepted into Western Washington University instead of Rice.

            1. Ah.

              I would love to have dinner with these people. Just to see with my own two eyes.

  9. Four major attacks. 3 were terroristic i.e public places like restaurants. The fourth was a military post which is NOT a terrorist attack.

    1. Yeah, that always gets me.

      Terrorism should mean deliberate attacks on civilian targets.

      But now it basically means any attack, even if it’s against military or paramilitary targets.

      1. There is no hard definition of terrorism.

        It sometimes defined by the organization that does it (e.g. “non-state actors that are acting on behalf of some ideological cause)

        its sometimes defined by the means organizations employ (e.g. indiscriminate bombings)

        its sometimes defined by the targets (e.g. civilians, foreigners, etc)

        There remains some distinction between rival groups that are recognized as representing “recognized” competing legitimate political interests (e.g. a proper “civil war”) ….versus “terrorism”, where an ideological minority attempts to simply kill people indiscriminately until they are granted recognition out of fear.

        But its all still pretty messy. it depends on the context. In the case of Al Shabab? I don’t feel like I’ve had enough a grip on Somali politics to say… but they DID run the country for a short while not so long ago. Or rather, they were the “muscle” for the “Islamic Courts Union”… which was itself a recognized political entity. Once that fractured, they’ve never seemed to be anything more than killers intent on carving out their own haven in the country.

        and engaged in some

        1. There may not be a hard definition, but if my addled memory serves, terrorist attacks were almost always perpetrated against civilian targets. The Iraq war put an end to that, when the USG and the media and then Americans in general got lazy and called any attack in Iraq terrorism.

          Iraq, after all, did perpetrate 9/11. Ask anybody.

          1. “if my addled memory serves, terrorist attacks were almost always perpetrated against civilian targets.”

            no

            The ’83 Lebanon Barracks bombings, ’96 Khobar towers bombings, 2000 USS Cole bombing attack, etc. were all always understood from the beginning to be “terrorist attacks” because they were perpetrated by shadowy, non-state actors with no clear affiliation to any legitimate party to any ongoing recognized conflict. They were all against explicitly military targets, and it never made them any less ‘terroristy’.

            the former was (more or less) done by Hezbollah(Iran), and the latter 2 “Al Qaeda v1.0”

            Lebanon sort of set the mold – because the perpetrator was mainly “iran”, who itself was only proxy-fighting in some limited way in the Lebanese civil war. They didn’t kill lots of American troops because they thought it would have some key strategic effect in the outcome of that conflict – they did it because *they could*, and because it would hurt the US. One might suggest that it was *less* terroristish because at least some State was ultimately behind it… but the fact that it was intentionally kept so shadowy and unknown is exactly what made it ‘terrorism’ instead of a direct act of war.

            1. But are not the U.S. ‘drone’ wars in places like Yemen and Somalia some sort of proxy war? Yes, I realize that the U.S. is a righteous nation fighting Evil, but seriously, I think the press should be offering much more nuanced coverage than they have been.

              1. “are not the U.S. ‘drone’ wars in places like Yemen and Somalia some sort of proxy war?”

                If what you mean are actual use of drones, those aren’t “proxies” = that’s “Direct Action”.

                and our involvement in both places hasn’t just been drone wars (that sounds so star-wars-prequels)….both places have been hotspots we’ve had our dicks in for a decade+.

                And the pentagon will do press conferences explaining our interests there, divulging actual assets devoted to those places, while keeping other things “confidential” but still acknowledging their presence. That sort of relative-transparency is part of what makes the US blowing people up overseas slightly-less creepy than just paying some local thugs to do it for us (like Iran via Hezbollah)

                I’m not sure what your question is – or whether you’re trying to suggest that “US role is the same as terrorism, if so”….?

                I don’t think US policy in either place is either good or smart or remotely ethical. Both are more or less cases of the US trying to prop up countries that are complete disasters under the pretense that “if they don’t” they’ll become “SAFE HAVENS” for Al Q et al. Basically, Mini-Afghanistans. But if you’re looking for “terrorism-equivalence”.. i don’t think so really.

                1. I’m simply saying that it’s a slippery slope.

  10. It just isn’t even funny to say “we have always been at war in Somalia”.

    1. Well, if they didn’t want to get kilt, they would have come here and helped in the progressive fight against the evil white menace.

    2. Among those killed were Hakim al-Duluth, Rahim al-Bemidji, Mustafa al-Pequot Lakes, and Abdul “Ole” al-Blackduck.

      1. The hell with the names. Just tell me if the second highest ranking guy was killed.

        1. That was Jafar al-Wobegon.

          1. “Well, it’s been a quiet week in Lake Wobegon. Over at the mosque, Sheikh Yamouni Makir was on his computer, arranging to wire funds to ISIS through a dummy corporation. Sheikh Makir was pleased with his work that week. He had mobilized his congregation, and the Wobegon City Council had denied the zoning petition of the guy who wanted to set up a barbecue restaurant. Insensitive to the sensitivities of Muslim immigrants, Makir argued. Pastor Quisling of St. Olaf’s Lutheran Church had agreed, said that allowing a barbecue joint would not be welcoming to the new residents.

            “Rabbi Roth had been prepared to support the barbecue restaurant. He had prepared a statement that he would leave the Gentiles alone to indulge their own dietary preferences. But Rabbi Roth had gone missing soon before the Town Council meeting. Some people said he’d run away with Maureen Quigley, the librarian. Maureen Quigley had disappeared around the same time as Rabbi Roth. She had certainly been acting strangely lately, obsessed with the history of some of the charities Sheikh Makir supported. People agreed that Maureen had been under stress because of her impending elopement, which was probably why the day before she disappeared, she had complained to Lurline Gustavson, a teacher who dropped by the library to prepare some class materials, that someone had been nosing around the Quigley residence spying on the house…”

            1. Nice.

            2. Above average.

        2. Compared to a terrorist group’s #2, the drummer for Spinal Tap has lifetime job security.

          1. But come to think of it, a terror group’s #2 has lifetime job security as well.

      2. All the terrorists were well above average.

        1. Note to self: Read ahead before commenting.

  11. OT: Attention San Francisco area Reasonoids! I am gathering emails for a local get-together. Email me at my handle at gmail.com to be added to the list.

  12. I bet I could come up with a way to reduce the threat to American troops in Somalia without killing anyone.

    1. Better body armor? Tanks?

      Come on, man, don’t leave us in suspense!

      /sarc

      1. Stop kidding around. It’s sharks with laser beams he’s talking about!

        1. Due to an unfortunate typo it turns out that it was sharts with laser beams that were deployed.

          1. That stinks. 🙁

            1. But accurate.

  13. I understand Somalia is lovely in April.

    1. Does sand look different depending on what time of year it is?

      1. Look, everyone knows you have to harvest the sand at just the right time. Too early and it’s sour, too late and it will spoil.

        1. and if it is glowing and or bouncing it is too late

          1. If it’s glowing the chiggers are probably dead though.

    2. I understand Somalia is lovely in April.

      Also, Somalis love April, because it’s Opening Day for the Pirates.

      1. Favorite comment of all time.

      2. Fantastic!

        *standing ovation of considerable length*

  14. The FBI heard from their contact in Minnetonka that al-Shabaab was involved in human trafficking. It was part of an international sex trafficking ring.

    1. You mean this?
      https://reason.com/blog/2016/03…..that-wasnt

      it was a “wide-reaching sex-trafficking operation” run by Somali Muslim gangs who forced “girls as young as 12” to sell sex in Minnesota and Tennessee. In reality, the operation?which led to charges against 30 individuals, sex-trafficking convictions for three, and an eight year legal battle?was a fiction crafted by two troubled teenagers, a member of the FBI’s human-trafficking task force, and an array of overzealous officials. An opinion released this week by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals shows that federal prosecuters had no evidence whatsoever to support their “child sex trafficking conspiracy” case outside the seriously flawed testimony of two teenagers, one of whom had “been diagnosed as insane and was off her medication.”
      ……
      But Jane Doe 2’s story was likely completely fabricated, with help from a police officer who was also a member of an FBI human-trafficking task force. The officer was later caught lying to the grand jury and lying during a detention hearing, while Doe and the state’s other primary witness were, according to the court, almost entirely “unworthy of belief.”

      1. Always believe the victim!*

        *Unless they’re blaming Bill Clinton, then the accusation is a politically motivated hit.

      2. two troubled teenagers, a member of the FBI’s human-trafficking task force, and an array of overzealous officials

        Nice band name.

  15. Great, just when they were starting to build some roadz, you had to blow the place up again.

  16. The war on terrorism is the perfect war because it has no end. And we have to have troops in Somalia in order to bomb terrorists who are threatening our troops in Somalia.

    That the American public seems to swallow this rationale hook, line, and sinker is why Rand Paul pulled in a mighty 3% of the vote.

    1. There are troops in America! What happens if they’re under threat?

      1. Then it’s workplace violence. Pay attention!

      2. Jade Helm for real?

  17. “The military says they believe there were no civilian casualties”

    Yeah, I’m certain the people in Somalia exercise great care to make sure no ‘civilians’ are anywhere close to ‘terrorists’, just in case Obo is feeling frisky.

  18. I did not know we had troops in Somalia.

    1. And the troops that are there don’t know they’re in Somalia, either.

      1. “Can we open our eyes now, Sarge?”

        “No, it would spoil the surprise. Keep marching”

        “We’re in Nevada, aren’t we? I can feel sand under my boots.”

      2. That was the plot of Delta Farce, starring America’s funniest comic Larry the Cable Guy.

        1. Didn’t see it, but I have to admit to taking a liking to Larry.
          At first, I thought the hill-billy riff was all he had until I caught him in some improv gig. My GOODNESS, that man it quick on his feet!
          He’ll toss ’em out and leave ’em laying there in a stream for you to pick up one at a time. And If you miss the first one, you’ll have a hell of a time catching up…
          That first one is funnier *after* he lands the third or forth.

  19. Does anyone know if it’s possible to get medical marijuana from another state? My mother in law has cancer but she lives in KY, closest legal place appears to be Illinois. It looks like you can’t get it, but I was hoping there’s a loophole.

    1. You might just have to buy some pot from your dealer and give it to her. If she’s in pain, why fuck around and waste time looking for out of state medical mj? Be a take charge kind if guy.

      1. I’m not from there and I don’t have a dealer. I think that she would be more comfortable with the legal stuff even if I had both. You may think that’s stupid, but she’s probably got six months so I’m not really trying to make her a libertarian in the meantime, just to maybe make her more comfortable.

        1. I’m sure I can find somebody, but that was my first plan if it was easy.

          1. hang out at any working class bar for a few weeks. make friends.

        2. Well I hate to say this but high doses of cannabis oil may cure her cancer.

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm…..MC3165955/

          Also look up “Rick Simpson oil” on YouTube. There are recipes if you want to make your own. And testimonials.

          1. Uh, may, could, perhaps,….
            Do you really think a pharm company wouldn’t jump on CANCER CURE! in a New York minute? Do you think there’s some conspiracy to hide it?
            Your tin-foil hat is on special, aisle 6!

            1. The pharm companies have a reason for supporting “Drug Free America”. I leave it to you to divine their intentions.

              So no – I don’t think they will jump on a cancer cure that can be supplied by growing a plant. Too easy to circumvent.

              And there has been a problem with their efforts to make use of cannabinoids in their medicines. They tried. And their cancer cure didn’t work. It seems all those mixed up cannabinoids found in plants works better than one or two extracted or synthesized compounds.

              It is a whole different kind of medicine. Look up “cannabis entourage effect” to learn more.

            2. And you are not going to get more than a “maybe” until human trials are allowed. That has to happen Federally. I expect that such a change will be delayed as long as possible. 2017 would be the earliest and 2021 is more likely.

              In any case the article explains how the endocannabinoid system fights some cancers. There is reason to believe, based on anecdotes, that cannabis has a similar effect when the body’s defenses are no longer sufficient.

            3. And once human trials are allowed it can take up to 5 or more years to get them completed and results published.

              1. It’s one thing to spout your usual ignorant bullshit. Marijuana may help with nausea or pain, but it is *not* going to cure cancer. Do you think that oncologists don’t have friends and family members who get cancer? Are they so deep in the conspiracy that they’ll torture and let their loved ones die for their corrupt cause? You are a truly vile person.

                1. Oncologist in India (IIRC) are asking the government to use cannabis.

                  Indian Oncologists Want Cannabis Legalized To Fight Cancer

                  I can give you the names of a number of American oncologists.

                  Donald I. Abrams, MD – is one head of a hospital oncology dept.

                  I got an e-mail yesterday from a friend who is using CBD oil against pancreatic cancer. It is working.

                  There is a whole underground involved in this. Look around the www.

          2. I’ll look into it, thanks.

            1. Deeply honored to be of service.

    2. Bad news: No. Good news: there is plenty of good marijuana in KY.

      1. Louisville Sweet, Derby Gold, You Won’t be Feelin’ Blue Grass just to name a few.

        1. This just showed up on my facebook. Bee some sweet weed

          1. Talk about a good buzz!

    3. Yeah. I’m sure you know someone who smokes, if you don’t smoke, so work it out to get a good strain for her.

    4. Sadly MMJ from another state is simply as illegal as non-MMJ from a local dealer – even if the state your mother is in doesn’t prohibit MMJ.

      Every state that does allow it has no provision to recognize MMJ certifications (for users or suppliers) from other states and for those that don’t allow it it is simply marijuana posession (or even distribution) even if you have an out-of-state supplier or user permit/ID.

      And of course its still a federal felony, compounded by transporting the marijuana across state lines.

  20. The ancient wraith slips away
    unperturbed under the tempest of missiles
    into the shadows of conquest
    that line forever
    the dreams of the anointed.

    1. Good Evening, A C!

      Quite nice, um, pseudo-haiku. This seems to be a new epoch for you.

  21. Whenever I hear “Al Shabaab”, I think “El Kabong”.

    KA-BONG!

    1. “*I’ll* do the thinnin’ around here, Robba Looey!”

    1. And Moscow, Beijing, Pyongyang, not to mention London, Paris, Berlin, Rome, Tokyo, New Delhi and that sharp kid down the street never got hold of the secret stuff the hag had laid out for all to see on her ‘oh-so-carefully’ secured server.

    2. After his extradition to the US, Lehel will return to Romania to serve out his sentences there.

      That will not happen in this century, though.

  22. What is up with the reason cruise to Somalia?

    1. Naming it the Suicide Express wasn’t the best marketing scheme.

      1. You’d have thought the chance to hear Steve Forbes speak would have made up for that.

  23. Once again our benevolent Nobel Peace Prize winning Commander-in-Chief spreads love and understanding to all the people on earth.

  24. OT
    SF has a ‘homeless problem’, certainly in some measure from folks with mental ‘issues’. But, AFAICT, we have that problem in much larger measure because the city government pays people to be ‘homeless’ in SF; you are not required to, say, look for work to qualify for ‘homeless’ benies, which means (to no one’s surprise) we have a LOT of (fuck it) bums here.
    So it’s not enough that the government pays them to be here, some concern-troll twit has now set up a crowd-funded organization to, I’m sure, encourage the bums to stay here, rather than where the donor lives.
    Hell, *I’d* donate to a nice Palo Alto bum-paying service; Palo Alto needs more bums!
    Anyhow, the comments must leave her wondering ‘where is the luv?’

    “Rose Broome uses crowdfunding to offer hope to homeless”
    […]
    “Rose Broome is a techno-nerd. Proudly so. She also agonizes emotionally about the homeless. Proudly so.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/visionsf…..857696.php

    1. Rose Broome sounds like a type of colon cleanser.

      1. I’ll bet Crusty would…

        1. Crusty wood…

    2. The bum situation in SF is indeed horrendous. It is as bad as it has ever been right now. 250 million a year buys a great import of homeless.

    3. The article implies she apparently thinks that no one else is helping out these folks. She might not be aware that San Francisco currently spends $150 million per year on homeless, homeless services, etc — or about enough to buy every one of the homeless a $200K place to live each year.

      But hey, a bit of crowdfunding and some new dentures later, she’s the Visionary of the Year. Finally, someone is trying to help these people.

      1. “But hey, a bit of crowdfunding and some new dentures later, she’s the Visionary of the Year. Finally, someone is trying to help these people.”

        A “Peace Prize” perhaps? Maybe a “Goldman”, since the bums have such a small carbon footprint, and Goldman doesn’t have to live anywhere near them?
        Or maybe just a “I got my name in the paper” prize, given that her salary isn’t shown there, is it?
        I repeat: I’ll be happy to donate to a fund for the bums in Palo Alto, the hub of the tech industry, which seems to have no bums at all. Wonder why?

      2. San Francisco currently spends $150 million per year on homeless, homeless services, etc — or about enough to buy every one of the homeless a $200K place to live each year

        $150 million / $200K = 750. It is my understanding that at last count, there were some 6,000 homeless in SF.

        They’re promising to raise the monies spent on the problem to $242 million; that comes to roughly $40K per (counted) homeless. A nice chunk of dough, but not enough for outright buying of real estate for all homeless.

        Of course it is understood that most of those hundreds of millions of dollars are for the city bureaucracy and allied “non-profit” NGOs: the homeless gets overpriced “services”, not real estate.

        1. “the homeless gets overpriced “services”, not real estate.”
          (picture of oh-so-concerned woman personally delivering box lunches to bum relaxing in tents)
          Yes, I think you have it!

        2. $150 million / $200K = 750

          Damn, and my phone has a calculator and everything. Serves me right for figuring on the fly.

          But you are right, most of that money goes for the best social workers money can buy.

    1. “libertarian free market superstition” – That phrase seems to keep popping up.

    2. My parents are horrified at the thought of a Trump presidency. They say things like “Trump is going to round up all the Muslims and put them in camps.” For all his bombastic remarks, Trump will not attack innocent Muslim countries. Ironically enough, he may be the best thing for moderate average Muslims. He isn’t our enemy, he is the enemy of the globalist Wahhabi cult that has propagated mass violence and murder through out the world.

      1. Uh.

        Unfortunately no one – not anyone in this or previous administrations, certainly not Trump know or *care* about the differences.

        The reason we’re in the ME right now has little to do with ‘terrorism’ or ‘wahhabism’ or ‘muslim extremism’. All those are simply excuses for people who want more power to cover up their actions. Fighting ‘terrorism’ and being ‘tough on terror’ sell and the people who sell it best get promoted up the ladder.

        The only time any of those people ever act ethically is when the action that gets them more money/power just happens to coincide with the ethical thing to do.

        1. That was a Muslim quoted in the Guardian article. He thinks wahhabism is a problem. Maybe he knows something.

          1. Maybe he does – I’m not saying Wahhabism isn’t a problem. But if that’s from *him – well he doesn’t know why we’re in the ME and he certainly doesn’t know Trump.

            ‘Innocent Muslim country’? Yeah, that’s completely irrelevant when an election is on the line.

            1. Most important election ever.

    3. A Reason commenter

      As if the article before this wasn’t clear = trump is not a candidate. He’s a sideshow that is interesting mainly because other candidates are self-consciously boring because its ‘safer’ at this stage. And meanwhile trump is free to gore (pun intended) the media in ways that reveal the superficiality of political ‘news’. He exposes the gap between political bullshit and reality.

      I like trump for this alone – not who he is, which is a boorish clown – but for now he makes the media shit itself with apoplexy that despite their denouncements, he’s only grown in popularity.

      1. And was i wrong?

        1. Spot on. But by replying you gave my game away. Damn Jedi. 😉

  25. A shrill trumpet-call had pierced the air. It was the bulletin! Victory! It always meant victory when a trumpet- call preceded the news. A sort of electric drill ran through the cafe. Even the waiters had started and pricked up their ears.
    The trumpet-call had let loose an enormous volume of noise. Already an excited voice was gabbling from the telescreen, but even as it started it was almost drowned by a roar of cheering from outside. The news had run round the streets like magic. He could hear just enough of what was issuing from the telescreen to realize that it had all happened, as he had foreseen; a vast seaborne armada had secretly assembled a sudden blow in the enemy’s rear, the white arrow tearing across the tail of the black. Fragments of triumphant phrases pushed themselves through the din: ‘Vast strategic manoeuvre ? perfect coordination? utter rout ? half a million prisoners ? complete demoralization ? control of the whole of Africa ? bring the war within measurable distance of its end victory ? greatest victory in human history ? victory, victory, victory!

  26. I had no idea Obama asked Congress to declare war on Somalia.

  27. “Defendant, why did you kill that man?”

    “I had to, your honor! After I broke into his house, he threatened me! I had no choice but to kill him in self-defense.”

  28. I don’t remember Obama being president in 2007. Am I missing something?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.