Isaaq genocide narrative

[Idilinaa]

By the late eighties Siad had prayed to Jesus to become a US puppet and had their blessing, from the horses mouth:


The US Ambassador to Somalia, Frank Crigler:

"The US was already identified with the government, it didn't pick sides it was with the government"

US-proxy regime.

The government was losely allied with the US, because the Soviet picked side with Ethiopia. So it was mutually strategic for both.

Being allied and forging an alliance is not the same as a proxy. Learn what an actual proxy is

What Are Proxy Militias?

Proxy militias, often understood as going extinct after the Cold War, are alive and well, getting their funding from government sponsors.

spheresofinfluence.ca

The term “proxy” refers to an individual or group that acts on behalf of another. Thus, a proxy conflict is a “war in which a state attempts to increase its power or influence without taking part in the action, as by providing arms or finance to one of the participants.

The government it didn't act in behalf of the US, it acted to defend itself and the country from foreign backed proxy militias.

What an Alliance is:

1. Allied and Receiving Support:​

• Alliance:In an alliance, two or more parties (countries, groups, organizations, etc.) come together to achieve mutual goals, often through formal agreements or treaties. Alliances are based on a shared interest or common objectives, but each party retains its sovereignty and decision-making power.
  • Example: NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is a military alliance where member states agree to mutual defense and other collaborative actions, but each member maintains its autonomy.
• Receiving Support:One party may receive financial, military, or diplomatic support from another, but this support is generally in response to specific needs or goals. The receiving party is still in control of its actions and decisions.
  • Example: During the Cold War, the U.S. provided military and economic aid to countries like South Korea or Israel, but these countries made their own strategic decisions.

In these cases, while the parties may cooperate closely, they typically act as independent entities that share goals or interests.

What a Proxy is :

• Proxy: A proxy relationship is different in that one party (the patron) typically uses another party (the proxy) to achieve its objectives, often with the understanding that the proxy is acting on behalf of the patron. The proxy may have some degree of independence, but it often relies on the patron for resources, direction, or support.
  • Proxies are often used in conflicts where the patron state or actor doesn't want to directly engage or risk its own resources or reputation.
• Indirect Engagement:The patron may give the proxy arms, training, funding, or even direct support in a conflict, but the proxy is the one doing the fighting or carrying out actions on the ground.
  • Example: During the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union used proxy wars in places like Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Latin America. In these conflicts, one side (e.g., the U.S.) supported local forces (like the Mujahideen in Afghanistan) to fight against Soviet influence, while avoiding direct confrontation.
  • Example: Iran's support of militias in Iraq, Syria, or Lebanon can be seen as proxy relationships, where Iran backs groups like Hezbollah or Shiite militias to exert influence in those regions, without directly engaging in conflict itself.

The Key differences between the two:

Key Differences:​

• Autonomy vs. Dependence: An ally is typically a more equal partner with shared interests, while a proxy is more dependent on the patron for resources, guidance, and direction, often with less autonomy.
• Direct vs. Indirect Influence: In an alliance, both parties have direct influence over decision-making, whereas in a proxy relationship, the patron often has significant influence over the proxy’s actions or objectives.
• Nature of Action: Allied support can be mutual and collaborative, whereas a proxy relationship often involves one party directing or heavily influencing the actions of the other party, with the proxy serving as a means to achieve the patron’s goals.

In essence, being an ally or receiving support suggests a more mutual and independent relationship, while being a proxy involves a more asymmetrical relationship with one party relying on the other for support or direction.

 

[Itsnotthateasy]

The government was losely allied with the US, because the Soviet picked side with Ethiopia. So it was mutually strategic for both.

Being allied and forging an alliance is not the same as a proxy. Learn what an actual proxy is

What Are Proxy Militias?

Proxy militias, often understood as going extinct after the Cold War, are alive and well, getting their funding from government sponsors.

spheresofinfluence.ca

The government it didn't act in behalf of the US, it acted to defend itself and the country from foreign backed proxy militias.

What an Alliance is:




What a Proxy is :


The Key differences between the two:

Somalia was most accurately termed a client state of the US. Hence their deep involvement with Somalia's security till the end of their puppet regime. I used the word proxy to draw a parallel with what you claim the SNM was but the dynamic is pretty much the same.

Anyway this all pretty much accepted fact? I don't know what the interest is in trying to present Kacaan as a popular government without significant foreign interest and backing. Doesn't really make sense. Twitter is more of a place for this kind of alternate history/reality.

 

[Idilinaa]

Somalia was most accurately termed a client state of the US. Hence their deep involvement with Somalia's security till the end of their puppet regime. I used the word proxy to draw a parallel with what you claim the SNM was but the dynamic is pretty much the same.

View attachment 348016

This is like saying every NATO member state is a client state of the US , including Korea, Japan etc because they are for security and strategic reasons allied to the US

Much like Somalia they are all sovereign independent countries , they bore no allegiance to the US and neither to do they obey US foreign policy direction. They pursue an independent domestic and foreign policy.

It's like i showed , Somalia often broke off from the United States and disagreed with many times throughout and saw it as a threat at times even and openly pushed anti-american sentiments and views.

 

[Itsnotthateasy]

This is like saying every NATO member state of the US is client state of it, including Korea, Japan etc because they are for security and strategic reasons allied to the US

Much like Somalia they are all sovereign independent countries , they bore no allegiance to the US and neither to do they obey US foreign policy direction , either. They pursue an independent foreign policy

It's like i showed , Somalia often broke off from the United States and disagreed with many times throughout and saw it as a threat at times even and openly pushed anti-american sentiments and views.

Somalia recieves direct military and economic aid from US.

NATO is a joint defence pact, there's no economic component or even direct military aid.

Somalia is unambiguously a US client.

You keep going back to 1975.

 

[Idilinaa]

View attachment 348019
Somalia recieves direct military and economic aid from US.

NATO is a joint defence pact, there's no economic component or even direct military aid.

Somalia is unambiguously a US client.

You keep going back to 1975.

Receiving military and economic support does not make it a client state. Even in your own source before the cut off it says the government was receiving support from Italy, Western European countries, Saudi, Egypt etc.

It was not a client state for multitude of reasons:

Summary:

 

[Idilinaa]

You can't even begin to compare a strategic partnership to proxy groups who literally took orders and was organized by a foreign enemy power and was backed entirely by them.

14 leading SNM were invited by Mengistu's Colonel Moges and housed by Ethiopia funded and armed to kick start their insurgencies, and carry out the plan of secession coined by the Ethiopian general.

Col. Moges was pretty much organizing everything, replacing certain SSDF and SNM leaders replacing them with someone else, putting them together etc.

SNM leaders shamelessly brag about it on television as well

''Then i ensured Mengistu i will obey his commands''


During this time might i add, the Ethiopian government was issuing genocidal decree's on destroying Muslims and collectively punishing them.

Same even during the Derg, a column from 1987 documenting interviews by Ethiopian Muslim refugees in Somalia : Their Christian Church Patriarchs would issue decrees to destroy the Muslims. ''Korans destroyed, koranic schools closed, prayers forbidden, and mosqes destroyed. Their materials were desecrated by the army who used them to construct state buildings

Ethiopia: 'Destroy the Muslims'​

and was hatching out plans on how to implement Isreal style ethnic cleansing on Ogadenians

Ethiopia also borrowed schemes from Isreal to replicate Gaza situation on Ogaden: And make Ogaden into the new Palestine


A qoute from Ethiopian officials and military personels:

And these traitors went and locked arms and took on orders from them to bring chaos and destruction to their country. And are actively trying to politically leverage the destruction they created

There is nothing they can say that will justify this betrayal, you can point at the Somali government all you want but nothing will justify going to a foreign historical enemy to fight your own people.

Our ancestors never sought support from Ethiopia, no matter what dispute we had internally amongst eachother.