- #36
Skyhunter
Wasn't it George H. Bush who sent our troops to Somalia without APCs?russ_watters said:This is not the same as Clinton's failure to provide APCs to our troops in Somalia.
Wasn't it George H. Bush who sent our troops to Somalia without APCs?russ_watters said:This is not the same as Clinton's failure to provide APCs to our troops in Somalia.
Seeing as how the marines who were killed were conducting operations in towns along the euphrates river it seems likely that the amphibious capabilities were a necessity.solutions in a box said:I was implying that the Marine reserves are forced to use slow lightly armored tracked amphibious vehicles that were definitey not designed for highly mobile desert patrols.
Getting back to the topic of conspiracy theories, I think the point being made by SIAB is that this can sound implausible, yet it was true. We don't know half the things that have happened IMO.solutions in a box said:The Bush administartion has sent marine reserves to fight in the Iraqi desert in "amphibious" vehicles, hmm that sounds implausible too. It even sounds like it could be a weak conspriracy theory proprosed by some whacko liberal antiwar blogger.
nothing is as it seems
I got the impression that that's what was being implied. Sometimes I jump ahead in a conversation because I can predict where it's going to go.Smurf said:You just couldn't resist could you.
Yes, it was - when Bush sent the troops to Somalia, the mission was purely humanitarian. They supervised the handing out of food and protected the UN aid workers. It was Clinton who changed the mission to be one of botched pseudo-nation-building and therefore he is responsible for the mess that ensued.Skyhunter said:Wasn't it George H. Bush who sent our troops to Somalia without APCs?
russ_watters said:It was Clinton who changed the mission to be one of botched pseudo-nation-building and therefore he is responsible for the mess that ensued.
russ_watters said:Yes, it was - when Bush sent the troops to Somalia, the mission was purely humanitarian. They supervised the handing out of food and protected the UN aid workers. It was Clinton who changed the mission to be one of botched pseudo-nation-building and therefore he is responsible for the mess that ensued.
It seems to me that Clinton wanted to get out of Somalia from the very beginning.US President George Bush launches Somalia intervention
Deteriorating security prevents the UN mission from delivering food and supplies to the starving Somalis. Relief flights are looted upon landing, food convoys are hijacked and aid workers assaulted. The UN appeals to its members to provide military forces to assist the humanitarian operation.
With only weeks left in his term as president, George Bush responds to the UN request, proposing that US combat troops lead an international UN force to secure the environment for relief operations. On December 5, the UN accepts his offer, and Bush orders 25,000 US troops into Somalia. On December 9th, the first US Marines land on the beach.
Bush assures the American people and troops involved that this is not an open ended commitment; the objective is to quickly provide a secure environment so that food can get through to the starving Somalis, and then the operation will be turned over to the UN peacekeeping forces. He assures the public that he plans for the troops to be home by Clinton's inauguration in January.
This US-led United Task Force (UNITAF) is dubbed "Operation Restore Hope."
Clinton takes over
Clinton, like Bush, is anxious to scale down the American military presence in Somalia and let the United Nations take charge.
UN takeover; "nation building" (UNOSOM II)
In March, the UN authorizes UNOSOM II, a UN operation with expanded enforcement power, whose mandate stressed "the crucial importance of disarmament" of the Somali people. This UN-led mission was to take over from the US-led UNITAF. The expanded operation's new mission goes beyond simply providing humanitarian relief, calling for the UN to facilitate "nation building," to get Somalia back on its feet by restoring law and order, shoring up the infrastructure, and helping to set up processes for establishing a representative government. By the end of March, 28 different nations send contingents to Somalia in support of the new militarized operation. The US officially hands over the command to the UN on May 4.
While Clinton supported this expansion of the UN's mandate, he simultaneously ordered the number of US troops in Somalia to be reduced and replaced by UN troops. By June, only 1,200 US combat soldiers remained in Somalia, with 3,000 support troops.
Oh, I'm sure he did. And the fact that some of the things that happened happened early in his term didn't help much, I know.Skyhunter said:It seems to me that Clinton wanted to get out of Somalia from the very beginning.
What do you mean? You just agreed with me above and provided a good quote that supports it. The last sentence, in particular, says that Clinton supported the expansion of the effort into nation-building while simultaneously reducing our presence. You cannot expand the mission while reducing the forces available to do it. The fact that the UN was supposed to take over (which, I can only guess, is your point) is irrelevant because they didn't really take over. The raid on Oct 3, 1993 was an all-US raid and it was not adequately equipped by its leaders in Washington.Could you provide some evidence to support your assertion?
He supported the United Nations efforts at nation building, not a US effort at nation building.russ_watters said:Oh, I'm sure he did. And the fact that some of the things that happened happened early in his term didn't help much, I know. What do you mean? You just agreed with me above and provided a good quote that supports it. The last sentence, in particular, says that Clinton supported the expansion of the effort into nation-building while simultaneously reducing our presence. You cannot expand the mission while reducing the forces available to do it. The fact that the UN was supposed to take over (which, I can only guess, is your point) is irrelevant because they didn't really take over. The raid on Oct 3, 1993 was an all-US raid and it was not adequately equipped by its leaders in Washington.