Extremists kidnap 40 males in northern Nigeria

[Lite Beer]

Extremists kidnap 40 males in northern Nigeria
HARUNA UMAR, Associated Press

BAUCHI, Nigeria (AP) — Boko Haram extremists have kidnapped about 40 boys and young men and killed scores of soldiers in a bold attack on a multinational military base in northeast Nigeria, according to fleeing residents and an intelligence officer.

The militants came to the remote village of Malari on Friday and urged people to come out and listen to a sermon, farmer Bulama Malam told reporters Saturday.

"After telling us that they wanted to preach to us, they began to select young men aged between 12 and 25," Malam said. "I was lucky to escape because they only selected very young and able-bodied men."

He spoke in Maiduguri, the capital of northeast Borno state, to which he escaped on foot.

On Saturday, hundreds of the insurgents nearly overran the Multinational Joint Task Force base at Baga, on Nigeria's northeast border with Chad, an intelligence officer told The Associated Press. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to reporters.

The multinational force includes soldiers from Nigeria and its neighbors to the north and northeast: Cameroon, Chad and Niger.

Nigeria's homegrown Boko Haram group has begun regionalizing the conflict, launching several attacks across the border in Cameroon in recent weeks.

Boko Haram has increased the scope and number of its attacks since Nigeria's military in October announced that the insurgents had agreed to a cease-fire. Boko Haram's leader, Abubakar Shekau, denied that in a video.

The insurgents drew international condemnation with the April kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls. The U.S., Britain, France and others sent intelligence officers, hostage negotiators and drone flights to help find the girls to no avail. Dozens of the girls escaped on their own, but 219 remain missing.

The failure to rescue the girls has brought international condemnation also for Nigeria's military and President Goodluck Jonathan, who is running for re-election on Feb. 14.

Hundreds of other boys, girls, young men and women have been kidnapped by the insurgents. Some who escaped say the males are forced to fight for Boko Haram, while females are used as sex slaves and suicide bombers.

___

Associated Press writer Michelle Faul contributed to this report from Johannesburg.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-01-04

[neverdie]

These scum need to be eradicated quickly.

[Seastallion]

Yes, ND, they do.

This is the kind of thing that needs UN intervention. If Nigeria can't protect it's own children, then they need to be forcibly made to seriously combat these scum of the earth.

[Seastallion]

I wonder if the sort of (understandable) anti-Muslim sentiment that must be fomenting in Nigeria may have influenced Nigeria's voting (or abstaining) in UN matters.

Or if outside military aid has been promised in return for certain votes/abstentions?

This is definitely a situation where I would support US-allied global police action, but just keep the other politicing out of it.

[JetsetBkk]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

[Steely Dan]

I wonder if the sort of (understandable) anti-Muslim sentiment that must be fomenting in Nigeria may have influenced Nigeria's voting (or abstaining) in UN matters.

Or if outside military aid has been promised in return for certain votes/abstentions?

This is definitely a situation where I would support US-allied global police action, but just keep the other politicing out of it.

Indeed it possibly does, if you are the victim of Islamic terrorism yourself it may be a little easier to identify who else may be in the same boat. Alas the Europeans are slow learners. Any lack of apparent conviction in Nigerian government military action may be partly due to fear of dividing a nation of 150 million in two on basis of religion. IMHO it's almost too late to avoid already and a denouement similar to that of Sudan is the probable final outcome.

[ggt]

OMG...they must have become bored with kidnapping and sexually abusing young girls...this does not bode well for the young boys...

[Morch]

I wonder if the sort of (understandable) anti-Muslim sentiment that must be fomenting in Nigeria may have influenced Nigeria's voting (or abstaining) in UN matters.

Or if outside military aid has been promised in return for certain votes/abstentions?

This is definitely a situation where I would support US-allied global police action, but just keep the other politicing out of it.

I do not think that there were many cases (if any) of international military intervention which did not involve politicking and participating countries interests. Not even sure that such purity of intention is a reasonable demand - considering the "boots on the ground" and the coffins shipped home. Assistance usually comes with a price, one way or another.

[chuckd]

I wonder if the sort of (understandable) anti-Muslim sentiment that must be fomenting in Nigeria may have influenced Nigeria's voting (or abstaining) in UN matters.

Or if outside military aid has been promised in return for certain votes/abstentions?

This is definitely a situation where I would support US-allied global police action, but just keep the other politicing out of it.

Australia and the European nations are all members of the UN.

Go for it.

[arjunadawn]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

[simple1]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

Don't know if the order has been rescinded but on 4 December 2014 it was announced Nigeria had cancelled further US led training. Apparently the reason being

"The fall-out between the two countries follows US accusations that the Nigerian Army continues to commit blatant human rights abuses which include torture, collective punishment and summary executions in its faltering campaign against Boko Haram rebels"

In addition US has refused to supply heavy weapons and so on.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37244:nigeria-terminates-us-led-special-forces-training-programme&catid=56:diplomacy-a-peace&Itemid=111

UK has also been supporting the Nigerian military (French as well?)

[arjunadawn]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

Don't know if the order has been rescinded but on 4 December 2014 it was announced Nigeria had cancelled further US led training. Apparently the reason being

"The fall-out between the two countries follows US accusations that the Nigerian Army continues to commit blatant human rights abuses which include torture, collective punishment and summary executions in its faltering campaign against Boko Haram rebels"

In addition US has refused to supply heavy weapons and so on.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37244:nigeria-terminates-us-led-special-forces-training-programme&catid=56:diplomacy-a-peace&Itemid=111

UK has also been supporting the Nigerian military (French as well?)

I will add when it comes to trainning and arming other countries there is a guiding law regarding the behavior of the country in regard to human rights abuses, etc. It works fairly convienently for the US. If a determination is made tha the country in reference has abused the status then State Depart and Defense Depart programs that train, fund, and leave equip are required to be stopped. This same argument can be seen in practice regarding the overthrow of Morisi and al Sisi taking charge in Egypt. The US had a choice to change their status; it is the perogative of the executive. But when changed to a negative the congressional US law kicks in and advisors come home and money stops.

The US further fineses or manipulates this law as a tool by holding "OGA," Other government Agencies as excempt so some trainning or some actions continue. Conclusion: Something really pissed US off. We got no satisfaction so we quietly labeled them in violation, then informed we had no choice but to stop activities- which is true. However, this is way to important to allow Nigeria to fall without a fight so I am suspect that something doesnt continue under DoD and/or State Depart Anti Terrorism Assistance, branch, where I formally contracted. Africa is a mess of varying us interests and agencies trying despearately to play catch up to a decade of neglect where the chinese made remarkable commerce inroads the US shit the bed in Iraq (and needless to say islamic jihad made exponential progress at same time).

[Steely Dan]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

Don't know if the order has been rescinded but on 4 December 2014 it was announced Nigeria had cancelled further US led training. Apparently the reason being

"The fall-out between the two countries follows US accusations that the Nigerian Army continues to commit blatant human rights abuses which include torture, collective punishment and summary executions in its faltering campaign against Boko Haram rebels"

In addition US has refused to supply heavy weapons and so on.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37244:nigeria-terminates-us-led-special-forces-training-programme&catid=56:diplomacy-a-peace&Itemid=111

UK has also been supporting the Nigerian military (French as well?)

I see the progressives insist on the same restrictive rules of engagement they inflicted on their own forces in Afghanistan. Today an army has not only to defeat the external enemy but do so with an enemy within seemingly batting for the other side.

[Seastallion]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

Don't know if the order has been rescinded but on 4 December 2014 it was announced Nigeria had cancelled further US led training. Apparently the reason being

"The fall-out between the two countries follows US accusations that the Nigerian Army continues to commit blatant human rights abuses which include torture, collective punishment and summary executions in its faltering campaign against Boko Haram rebels"

In addition US has refused to supply heavy weapons and so on.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37244:nigeria-terminates-us-led-special-forces-training-programme&catid=56:diplomacy-a-peace&Itemid=111

UK has also been supporting the Nigerian military (French as well?)

I see the progressives insist on the same restrictive rules of engagement they inflicted on their own forces in Afghanistan. Today an army has not only to defeat the external enemy but do so with an enemy within seemingly batting for the other side.

You should have read Arjunadawn's post prior to posting.

[Steely Dan]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html
http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

Don't know if the order has been rescinded but on 4 December 2014 it was announced Nigeria had cancelled further US led training. Apparently the reason being

"The fall-out between the two countries follows US accusations that the Nigerian Army continues to commit blatant human rights abuses which include torture, collective punishment and summary executions in its faltering campaign against Boko Haram rebels"

In addition US has refused to supply heavy weapons and so on.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37244:nigeria-terminates-us-led-special-forces-training-programme&catid=56:diplomacy-a-peace&Itemid=111

UK has also been supporting the Nigerian military (French as well?)

I see the progressives insist on the same restrictive rules of engagement they inflicted on their own forces in Afghanistan. Today an army has not only to defeat the external enemy but do so with an enemy within seemingly batting for the other side.

You should have read Arjunadawn's post prior to posting.

Posts crossed by two minutes. Whilst on the subject of delays, why wasn't Boko Haram put on the designated terror list two years earlier?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/08/report-hillary-clinton-refused-to-officially-designate-nigerias-islamist-boko-haram-a-terrorist-group-while-she-was-secretary-of-state/

[arjunadawn]

why wasn't Boko Haram put on the designated terror list two years earlier?

It is no longer possible to even declare the enemy or define the enemy, and so our men and women can hardly fight them- this is true whether in justice, state, defense, or other services; in the last 6 years the US lexicon has been scrubed of all intellectual verbage that could articulate the threat- religious warfare. Thus free passes for Boko Harem are in essence no different than the Muslim Brotherhood's open access to the White House, or repeated succour given to US based CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood even when our allies list same groups on their own terror list. I dont want to suggest that the US admin is overlooking radical jihad. I am stating that I believe they are enabling it! All one has to do is skip over any islamic/jihad topic, location, subject, person, etc., and just go to the results section of every islamic issue this administration has been involved with. No need to connect the dots when the results section is one big ass stamp! "Jihad Approved!" Every thing that has been touched by this administration has turned fundementalist.

Take a look at Hillary and Bill's cozy connection with the by then already powerful Muslim Brotherhood and it is easy to see who has been calling the shots in the USA for some years now (According to court documents in the Holy Land Foundation trial, CAIR, a coconspirator, was in possession of Muslim Brotherhood documents that specifically detailed their infiltration and ascent of the US political system; coopt and control it). Wikipedia is incorrect when it rebuts Huma Abedin's Muslim Brotherhood connection; she as well as mom are/were heavily involved with the female portion of the Mulsim Brotherhood (Hillary Clinton's advisor). This is not conspiracy it is fact.

[Steely Dan]

why wasn't Boko Haram put on the designated terror list two years earlier?

It is no longer possible to even declare the enemy or define the enemy, and so our men and women can hardly fight them- this is true whether in justice, state, defense, or other services; in the last 6 years the US lexicon has been scrubed of all intellectual verbage that could articulate the threat- religious warfare. Thus free passes for Boko Harem are in essence no different than the Muslim Brotherhood's open access to the White House, or repeated succour given to US based CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood even when our allies list same groups on their own terror list. I dont want to suggest that the US admin is overlooking radical jihad. I am stating that I believe they are enabling it! All one has to do is skip over any islamic/jihad topic, location, subject, person, etc., and just go to the results section of every islamic issue this administration has been involved with. No need to connect the dots when the results section is one big ass stamp! "Jihad Approved!" Every thing that has been touched by this administration has turned fundementalist.

Take a look at Hillary and Bill's cozy connection with the by then already powerful Muslim Brotherhood and it is easy to see who has been calling the shots in the USA for some years now (According to court documents in the Holy Land Foundation trial, CAIR, a coconspirator, was in possession of Muslim Brotherhood documents that specifically detailed their infiltration and ascent of the US political system; coopt and control it). Wikipedia is incorrect when it rebuts Huma Abedin's Muslim Brotherhood connection; she as well as mom are/were heavily involved with the female portion of the Mulsim Brotherhood (Hillary Clinton's advisor). This is not conspiracy it is fact.

It's insanity is it not? The United Arab Emirates designated CAIR a terrorist organization as well as MAS (Muslim American Society)' yet these are the people who have the ear of the White House and are quoted by the MSM. Meanwhile Al Sisi, who the U.S administration don't approve of asks for a modernization of Islamic jurisprudence. I wish Goodluck Johnathan good luck if he decides to get Algerian on the terrorists and eliminate them by all means at his disposal, without due process if that would hamstring the effort.

[JockPieandBeans]

The militant group Boko Haram has seized a town and key multinational military base in north-eastern Nigeria, officials and eyewitnesses say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30672391

I will refrain from commenting on the effectiveness of this Multinational Military Force.

One thing is guaranteed, these nutjobs are now getting braver, they are now, without a doubt, better armed and things are only going to get worse in Nigeria.

[arjunadawn]

why wasn't Boko Haram put on the designated terror list two years earlier?

It is no longer possible to even declare the enemy or define the enemy, and so our men and women can hardly fight them- this is true whether in justice, state, defense, or other services; in the last 6 years the US lexicon has been scrubed of all intellectual verbage that could articulate the threat- religious warfare. Thus free passes for Boko Harem are in essence no different than the Muslim Brotherhood's open access to the White House, or repeated succour given to US based CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood even when our allies list same groups on their own terror list. I dont want to suggest that the US admin is overlooking radical jihad. I am stating that I believe they are enabling it! All one has to do is skip over any islamic/jihad topic, location, subject, person, etc., and just go to the results section of every islamic issue this administration has been involved with. No need to connect the dots when the results section is one big ass stamp! "Jihad Approved!" Every thing that has been touched by this administration has turned fundementalist.

Take a look at Hillary and Bill's cozy connection with the by then already powerful Muslim Brotherhood and it is easy to see who has been calling the shots in the USA for some years now (According to court documents in the Holy Land Foundation trial, CAIR, a coconspirator, was in possession of Muslim Brotherhood documents that specifically detailed their infiltration and ascent of the US political system; coopt and control it). Wikipedia is incorrect when it rebuts Huma Abedin's Muslim Brotherhood connection; she as well as mom are/were heavily involved with the female portion of the Mulsim Brotherhood (Hillary Clinton's advisor). This is not conspiracy it is fact.

It's insanity is it not? The United Arab Emirates designated CAIR a terrorist organization as well as MAS (Muslim American Society)' yet these are the people who have the ear of the White House and are quoted by the MSM. Meanwhile Al Sisi, who the U.S administration don't approve of asks for a modernization of Islamic jurisprudence. I wish Goodluck Johnathan good luck if he decides to get Algerian on the terrorists and eliminate them by all means at his disposal, without due process if that would hamstring the effort.

Yes, its madness, and this OP gives one of numerous clues exactly how absurd it all is- under the color of fighting terrorism we are enabling jihad--- at every turn. History will not judge the American people kindly with regard to their ignorance as to what was being done in their name. I suspect this may apply equally to any number of other countries that daily sanitize islamic jihad to make it look something its not. Indeed, it seems one of the major job descriptions of leading Western politicians these days is to take the verbatim words of those avowed to destroy us, grind the words through a ridiculous machine, and regurgitate the islamic jihad declarations and koran citations has something other than what our enemies emphatically state; ie., "IS is not islamic."

Many sunni governments throughout the middle east are wholly illegitimate and moreso according to shar'ia. These governments will be the first rolled up in any caliphate either by the muslim brotherhood or someone like al baghdadi. A few years ago our allies started going it on their own. They funded and motivated al sisi to the tune of billions of dollars to offset the US declaring it will withhold funds due to our laws requiring it. So our allies facilitated the Egyptian ouster of Morisi, a MB ally of the Obama white house. This alone speaks volumes. They know the US is now the largest supporter of terrorism in the world. This is why our allies also conducted air raids in Libya without US knowledge. Everywhere, everyone is waking up because regardless of how manipulating jihad sentiment may provoke shia isolation and target Iran, its blowback is going to destroy the sunni leadership locally. So their actions on this issue are very instructive. So, how how a response is fashioned to Nigeria's problem may be deduced by looking at other recent players in US intervention, or awakening. If you want to know what happens next in Nigeria ask yourself, what would be the worst possible thing for Nigeria with regard to islamic jihad, and this is the position you will find the US motivating.

[arjunadawn]

The militant group Boko Haram has seized a town and key multinational military base in north-eastern Nigeria, officials and eyewitnesses say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30672391

I will refrain from commenting on the effectiveness of this Multinational Military Force.

One thing is guaranteed, these nutjobs are now getting braver, they are now, without a doubt, better armed and things are only going to get worse in Nigeria.

Nigeria is a big country to fall; it is also a vital country. Based on the West's support of our allies over the past decade alone I think its fair to predict Nigeria will fall to islamic jihad.

[TSF]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

Don't know if the order has been rescinded but on 4 December 2014 it was announced Nigeria had cancelled further US led training. Apparently the reason being

"The fall-out between the two countries follows US accusations that the Nigerian Army continues to commit blatant human rights abuses which include torture, collective punishment and summary executions in its faltering campaign against Boko Haram rebels"

In addition US has refused to supply heavy weapons and so on.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37244:nigeria-terminates-us-led-special-forces-training-programme&catid=56:diplomacy-a-peace&Itemid=111

UK has also been supporting the Nigerian military (French as well?)

That's like listening to PETA when you're trying to rid your home of rats & cockroaches. You don't consider the rights of vermin. You exterminate vermin.

[JockPieandBeans]

Nigeria is a big country to fall; it is also a vital country. Based on the West's support of our allies over the past decade alone I think its fair to predict Nigeria will fall to islamic jihad.

I fear that you are indeed correct.

When it does, it will only provide the springboard for this Jihad to spread quickly throughout the whole of sub - sahara Africa.

[englishoak]

Nigeria is a big country to fall; it is also a vital country. Based on the West's support of our allies over the past decade alone I think its fair to predict Nigeria will fall to islamic jihad.

I fear that you are indeed correct.

When it does, it will only provide the springboard for this Jihad to spread quickly throughout the whole of sub - sahara Africa.

That I believe is the agenda the west has anyway, it knows its creating its own monsters, gotta keep that boogyman alive to justify the military expense.

Edited January 5, 2015 by englishoak

[TSF]

Nigeria is a big country to fall; it is also a vital country. Based on the West's support of our allies over the past decade alone I think its fair to predict Nigeria will fall to islamic jihad.

I fear that you are indeed correct.

When it does, it will only provide the springboard for this Jihad to spread quickly throughout the whole of sub - sahara Africa.

Same as the "Domino Theory" in Asia back in the 1960s. Instead of communists today we have Jihad spreading like wildfire.

[JockPieandBeans]

Nigeria is a big country to fall; it is also a vital country. Based on the West's support of our allies over the past decade alone I think its fair to predict Nigeria will fall to islamic jihad.

I fear that you are indeed correct.

When it does, it will only provide the springboard for this Jihad to spread quickly throughout the whole of sub - sahara Africa.

That I believe is the agenda the west has anyway, it knows its creating its own monsters, gotta keep that boogyman alive to justify the military expense.

Not sure who exactly you refer to as the " West "

Since 1990 UK Military spending in sub - sahara Africa has been

Sierra Leone 76 Million total.

Democratic Republic of Congo 1.2 Million total.

In 14 years I would guess that the bill for MP's expenses would be larger.

Hardly a need to keep a boogeyman alive to justify anything.

Edited January 5, 2015 by JockPieandBeans

[Morch]

"No boots on the ground" Obama will never agree to go in.

He might lose a few votes for his party.

Obama has quietly increased the "boots on the ground" in Africa a great deal, in many areas we would be surprised to learn. Under AFRICOM and the 5th Special Forces alone there are many "advisors" on the ground developing an opposition to islamic jihad in africa. IMO, its marginal. (If you are going to do something, do it correctly- this is why America is known to give its allies just enough aid to loose a war). There are different training areas but the scope of operations is all Africa.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/05/12/small-special-forces-unit-will-deploy-to-nigeria.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/magazine/can-general-linders-special-operations-forces-stop-the-next-terrorist-threat.html

http://nypost.com/2014/05/27/us-special-forces-fear-bringbackourgirls-will-send-them-into-nigeria/

On the unlikely off-chance this topic will not further deteriorate into the run of the mill "Islam is bad"/"USA is controlled by x" variety...

Could be wrong (not much of a Nigeria expert), but relative to other countries which fell apart or are in the process of being declared total loss, seems like Nigeria is not quite there yet. Things are obviously not well, but as far as I understand, not as bad as in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq.

Assuming that there is an interest, economic or otherwise, in preventing a similar breakdown (let us, for a moment, put aside notions regarding the current situation and worse being a design by foreign powers) - how could Boko Haram be effectively countered?

Guess what I'm really after is more general in nature, but through using the current situation - namely, what viable options exist when considering involvement in such cases. Some options seem to have outlived their usefulness (equipping and training local armed forces, lengthy massive presence of foreign "boots on the ground", leaving sides to sort things out by themselves). At present, the choice made is usually a mixture of minimal troop presence mixed with air strikes - which is yet to prove itself effective strategy.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Morch

[JockPieandBeans]

Could be wrong (not much of a Nigeria expert), but relative to other countries which fell apart or are in the process of being declared total loss, seems like Nigeria is not quite there yet. Things are obviously not well, but as far as I understand, not as bad as in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq.

Assuming that there is an interest, economic or otherwise, in preventing a similar breakdown (let us, for a moment, put aside notions regarding the current situation and worse being a design by foreign powers) - how could Boko Haram be effectively countered?

Guess what I'm really after is more general in nature, but through using the current situation - namely, what viable options exist when considering involvement in such cases. Some options seem to have outlived their usefulness (equipping and training local armed forces, lengthy massive presence of foreign "boots on the ground", leaving sides to sort things out by themselves). At present, the choice made is usually a mixture of minimal troop presence mixed with air strikes - which is yet to prove itself effective strategy.

Morch

For a start, the Countries that you list are predominantly Muslim. The main difference with Nigeria is that it is almost 50 / 50 Christian and Muslim.

How can Boko Haram be effectively countered. there is only one way that they can be effectively countered. However the previous encounters in the Countries that you have mentioned dictates that Western Governments will be loath to get involved again. There are various reasons for that, which is not for this thread.

It has been shown time and time again, that the vast amounts of money that is spent by the West on ( training ) foreign armies is nothing more than a waste of money in most cases. Minimal troops with airstrikes is also another pointless exercise. Nothing more than " Look we are doing something "

That leaves us with " Letting them sort it out themselves " Considering that Boko Harams stated aim is to establish a caliphate in Nigeria, there is only one way that option is going to end.

Where does that leave us ?

I believe that it leaves us with an option that no one ( Governments ) wants to talk about, does not want to consider and does not want to get involved in.

It would not surprise me to find that media reporting in the West, under instruction, gets less and less until it is non existent, just as it did with Iraq and will do with Afghanistan.

[arjunadawn]

On the unlikely off-chance this topic will not further deteriorate into the run of the mill "Islam is bad"/"USA is controlled by x" variety...

Could be wrong (not much of a Nigeria expert), but relative to other countries which fell apart or are in the process of being declared total loss, seems like Nigeria is not quite there yet. Things are obviously not well, but as far as I understand, not as bad as in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq.

Assuming that there is an interest, economic or otherwise, in preventing a similar breakdown (let us, for a moment, put aside notions regarding the current situation and worse being a design by foreign powers) - how could Boko Haram be effectively countered?

Guess what I'm really after is more general in nature, but through using the current situation - namely, what viable options exist when considering involvement in such cases. Some options seem to have outlived their usefulness (equipping and training local armed forces, lengthy massive presence of foreign "boots on the ground", leaving sides to sort things out by themselves). At present, the choice made is usually a mixture of minimal troop presence mixed with air strikes - which is yet to prove itself effective strategy.

When the frequency of related topics tend to digress to same names actors and agents and malfeience this is a vital glue to the widespread perception that the events we wish to disusss narrowly in threads simply cannot have context without the underlying foundation addressed. As this comes up so often, often enough to be called "run of the mill," it should hardly be overlooked; at least noted. BTW, "islam is bad" is an unfair simplification. jihad is bad, Islam, as practiced within the moral constructs agreed by most of the world is fine and well regarded. It is jihad that is repugnant.

Nigeria is, IMO, in an awkward position of near equal christian and muslim segments of society but being closer to the heart beat of regional jihad how they play their counter insurgency card could backfire. Indeed, I am even unsure they treat this as insurgency, but that is what it is, regardless of the religious imperative that binds the insurgents. The glue that is needed for a national resolve is similar as in all places, like the US- the willingness to define and describe the threat free of political correctness. When considering insurgency operations a key component is the undergound. What are the numbers that give shelter and support to the insurgents? When dealing with islamic jihad and shar'ia it can be fairly said that significant numbers exist which are either supportive or at least passive, but would in no way work against the jihadis- IMO. This makes for an enormous threat. As so many insurgencies and coups are actually executed by minorities have such numbers sympathetic IMO makes for an uphill struggle to counter such an insurgency. Therefore nothing less than full scare recognition of an existential threat, the means by which it is bound- religion, the means by which is spread, funded, etc. Also, it would be pretty damn smart to finally address some of the true disparities that exist between those sucking the oil life out of nigeria without giving anything back the starving peoples that enable this oil theft. The exploitation is legendary. A good place to start counter insurgency would be to take back some of the core issues the opposition employs to bend the populace to their will.

I have no current thoughts on actual military engagement right now; i would need more data, But dealing with this from a psyops, public relations, social policy point of view, they need to equalize the distribution of oil wealth instead of topical money spreading to buy votes or local compliance. Really have some reform to change the nature of peoples lives. When peoples lives are improved they rarely seek to upset that status quo for the unknown. IMO

[simple1]

By way of some context of the violence in Nigeria, remember the Nigerian Civil War back in the late 1960s led to approx one million deaths.

I have read that both the Nigerian Christians and Muslims hold a strong distrust of their military that must be quite a negative for the future. Have to agree on the economic disenfranchment of so many in Nigeria. The Muslim North has for years been under invested and ignored by the highly corrupt central government and State politicians. I assume the usual ethnic and tribal divisions contribute to the mess. Some quotes by Nigerians in Wikipedia...

Chris Kwaja, a Nigerian university lecturer and researcher, asserts that "religious dimensions of the conflict have been misconstrued as the primary driver of violence when, in fact, disenfranchisement and inequality are the root causes". Nigeria, he points out, has laws giving regional political leaders the power to qualify people as 'indigenes' (original inhabitants) or not. It determines whether citizens can participate in politics, own land, obtain a job, or attend school. The system is abused widely to ensure political support and to exclude others. Muslims have been denied indigene-ship certificates disproportionately often.^[73] Nigerian opposition leader Buba Galadima says: "What is really a group engaged in class warfare is being portrayed in government propaganda as terrorists in order to win counter-terrorism assistance from the West."^[74]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamist_insurgency_in_Nigeria

It's a bit old but a Pew Research article talks to some aspects of the Christian / Muslim divide at:

http://www.pewforum.org/2007/03/21/nigerias-presidential-election-the-christian-muslim-divide/

[SiSePuede419]

Boko Haram?

Prog Rock is so over, man...