Ethiopia had zero control over Galbeed until 1948
- Thread starter Zak12
- Start date
Hes litterally going on a sourceless rant, Buddy snipped and clipped the most bias and fake sources and didnt give full context either. Apprently them taking over haud meant they took over the entire ogaden, which was the size of ethiopia itsself at the time. Absolute lying scums. First off they did not get into the interior of ogaden thats a fact Because I wouldve KNOWN about it
Ridiculous claims
I find it funny how he thinks raids and attacks are proof that Ethiopia was establishing administration in galbeed.
Your own sources on page 1 show that these sporadic "Faux Tax" raids didn't really amount to much.
Do you know why? because they weren't tributes being paid , fees, incursion or tax raids at all, these were in reality Ethiopian slave peasant-conscripts that had no food, no supplies, no salaries , randomly , sporadically looting people in the vicinity out of desperation & hunger and lacked discipline.
Melenik had no control over them, neither did he send them out to collect. It confused the colonialists at first and they thought they were ''tax collections'' or ''incursions",
Last edited:
Ahhh gotcha. That part about Europeans confusing the raids as legitimate taxation helped because those texts I posted about "tributes" were from Europeans who at the time thought Ethiopians were doing tribute.
It's kinda tragic when you think about it, they were forced into conscription n mass and were given no supplies, no food or salaries to support themselves with, so they became marauding bandits looting people instead. They would do this to Ethiopian villagers but when they tried it with Somalis in Ogaden they were chased down and massacred in droves so it stopped due to the fear and loss of lives.
They operated more like a criminal bands than a real army to say the least.
In many ways it's not different to what you see today, it's bizarre to see the historical parallels. Today same thing is happening in Amhara/Oromia/Tigray regions, the govt extortion, pick pockets/robberies, roaming militias going around the rural country side plundering and looting people.
Last edited:
It goes to show that Ethiopia has yet to undergo real societal change as it still clings onto its feudal mindset. Domestically and internationally Ethiopia behaves like a medieval state only now it has more resources to do its act. I blame the fact that Ethiopia was very babied and catered too by westerners in the 19th-20th centuries. Ethiopia never saw any real struggle or opportunities to change like say Japan did which managed to shed its outdated feudal mindset and modernize and when they tried to do the empire stuff again, they were beat back and learned their lesson.
Ethiopia basically thinks it could get away with mistreating its citizens and neighbors and it feels no pressure or urge to change itself like many countries have.
They only really gained control after the 1977 war. Though if you go deep into galbeed even now you can see how Ethiopia still doesn't really have control of certain areas or regions.
Well I know of people who were fighting the Ethiopians encroaching into their territories in the 40s- 50s. Also, they did not really control anything so what was their to even fight besides when they were coming into your territory. They kept getting destroyed by the Somalis even when these other countries backed them up. It was only during the 77/78 war that the tides changed.
100% agree. That is the conclusion i have also come up with. I would say the setback was the introduction of Europeans , we can even go back as far as the Portuguese and it came back around in the 19th century. They only propped them up or as you said coddled Ethiopia for strategic and ideological reasons. But all they did was maintain a status quo by doing this and prevent re-configuration and introspection .
When Somalis conquered the Highlands they saw us as liberators for a reason , so it should tell you that starting with Portuguese introduction, successive European, western support just kept them under that feudal oppression which has continued to exist to this day
"he was either encouraged by the great hatred that the Abyssinians had for their king ... And in all the places through which he [Ahmad] passed he emancipated the inhabitants and made all free and exempt from the exactions and dues which were imposed upon them by the Prester John, with which liberty he won over the feelings of Abyssinians, not only of the common people but also of the most important lords of the Kingdom"
Last edited:
Trending
-
-
Confirmed possibility of local african cattle domestication
- Started by Midas
- Replies: 25
-
What's the obsession with black people particularly black women?
- Started by mamoosa12
- Replies: 53
