I just love opinion pieces like this one from the Boston Globe, aka New York Times Lite.
Somalia has been, as they say, a country without a government for almost two decades and now it looks like we are about to see another chapter in the civil war. What they are arguing for in this article though is incorrect. The Council of Somali Islamic Courts, which supports Al-Qaeda, controls sections of southern Somalia and is threatening to topple the recognized interim government that Ethiopia and the US supports. The Boston Globe wants the US and the UN to negotiate with the CSIC to see if they are willing to share power with the interim government as a way of ending the conflict. Right, share power with the people who are losing; why should the CSIC do that since theya re winning? Who will enforce that the CSIC abides by this power sharing deal? The UN? The Boston Globe writers really want to make me laugh since they are opposing a deployment of a UN peacekeeping force to Somalia to act as a buffer between the two forces so for the sake of consistency they should not turn around and demand a peacekeeper force to save their own misguided idea, but I am sure they will. This essay is not worth the paper it is written on.
4 comments:
Hmmm, didn't realize people were still reading those rags.
Remind me... when was the last time the UN ever negotiated a successful end to a civil war?
Well read the rags just to see what passes for thinking. And to know thine enemy.
UN solving a civil war? Hhhmmm. As far as I know, never.
As much as msm is disparaged by us new media types, it's important to keep tabs on what's being reported in the dinosaur print. Even if it's nothing more than as watchdogs.
I'd say I still rely on MSM for much of my news, because there are things that they do well. It's just that I now have a more discerning and skeptical eye, as to what's bias and spin, and what the straight facts might be.
Post a Comment