Read again.
I clarified that I was talking about warlord actions in the recent past in Kenya, and that also they are not as big a problem as in other African nations, but they do continue to be a problem today:
And still being a threat from neighboring countries:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/10/16/africa/AF-Somalia-Kenya.php
Yep.
And it has to be clear that I do see them becoming more of a treat now, as a result of the leadership problems that are happening in Kenya.
Yes, but I see no evidence of Kenya losing control of it’s strong and ethnically integrated military. Do you even think that would happen?
[/QUOTE]
The strong central government can come back, but right now saying that it is strong is an exaggeration.
[/QUOTE]
It is strong in the sense that it has a strong and effective military force (unlike most failed states cursed with warlords).
Politically, Kenya is weak with a credible but split parliament. However there is no chance of it being carved up into militarized factions. Tthere is still an effective chain of command, from the president on down.
I can’t say there is leadership amongst the clans that fits the definition of a warlord that I looked up. The word is commonly used for tribal leaders in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I did cite “and violent tribal and clan disputes”. I would assome the clans and tribes had leadership. In any case, what’s the big deal ?
Oh I don’t know. Centalized maybe but I wouldn’t say strong.
Oh, on preview, I see GIGObuster has settled the issue of Kenyan warlords.
An op/ed from the Daily Nation referring to nameless village chiefs as “warlords”? Come on. That is as good as a quote from yourself.
The big deal is that I yelled shenanigans on the word warlord but I still left you guys with enough wiggle room to back down and stick with generalized Kenyan crime. However, you guys won’t back down with the Warlord crap. It won’t fly. Not in Kenya.
That is a matter of opinion, but I hold to my word of “strong” but with the addition of “…enough to not be a failed African state with warlords”
If the leadership problems are not solved soon, I do think is possible.
Corruption is still IMO present, I was following the case of the Somali pirates that captured a ship with russian tanks, there is evidence some higher up in the in Kenyan army was not going to keep the tanks in Kenya.
How is not being carved a reason to assume that warlords or other criminals could not corrupt or avoid the armed forces when the government is paralyzed?
Incidentally the US and 3 other nations are still surrounding the ship with the “Kenyan” tanks so it will be an item that Obama will also have to deal with.
:rolleyes:
Well, just complain to the Kenyans for defining them thus.
And the other quote was form the New York Times, via the International Herald.
And I have to agree with The Flying Dutchman, you are too much stuck in the definition of what a Warlord is, I’m not complaining if people in Kenya see them or the Herald call them so, the fact is that many are not worried on agreeing with you on what a warlord is.
You didn’t quote the other link which talks about… Somalia. Ironically doesn’t this prove my original point that you might have mistaken Kenya for Somalia? However, now I just believe you are just being stubborn.
Not me but that is a matter of opinion.
I agree that corruption is heavy in Kenya but corruption doesn’t equal a loss of control of areas of the state.
Please just show me a warlord. I will concede if you just do it. I am not going to play games of what criminals “could” do for corrupt government officials. I only had a problem with the use of the word “warlord” for Kenya. Just show me one. Then I will concede.
Kenyans or some guy writing an op/ed? You have no proof that the majority of Kenyans think that there are warlords in Kenya.
and it says just what to prove your point?
Many? You cited one op/ed guy who might even be using hyperbole or dramatic license. Just show me a warlord. Please. I will shut up.
I define warlord like how anyone else define them with a damn dictionary.
Oh… and there is a reason why tribal leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan are referred to as Warlords but not in Kenya. It’s the same reason that tribal leaders in Somalia are referred to as Warlords.
That report points to the Kenyan army training warlords to fight with others in neighboring countries.
But I was also referring to the warlords roaming in Kenya coming from neighboring countries with little trouble.
Or perhaps the Independent also has faulty dictionaries.
:shrug:
Not really important to be hung up in a definition. But it is clear that when you said that I was “clearly wrong” regarding warlords in Kenya, you are only partially correct. Very little activity with local warlords (but they are some), but plenty coming in from their neighbors. And going back to the subject, I do think that they, and other criminals would be a concern for any Obama relative in Kenya.
I would have given you this point if you just first said this.
However, in my posts and your replies we were both clearly talking about Kenyan warlords not Somali warlords who are in Kenya.
Their dictionaries are working just fine as they were not talking about Kenyan warlords but Somali warlords (who retain the name no matter where they go) who happen to be committing crime in Kenya. Here is a quote from your cite
There is no ambiguity to who they are calling warlords. Somalis not Kenyans.
I see the handshake you are giving me and I am willing to give one back but I won’t concede my original point about the warlords. All of your other points in this quote I can easily agree with.
:shug:
I already posted awhile back that:
“the unrest happening in neighboring nations and the recent Kenya violence means that the warlords are not too far away as The Flying Dutchman reported.”
You clearly are missing that I was concentrating on warlords coming into Kenya from neighboring nations, feh, whatever.
As mentioned it is not me who you have to complain if reporters in Kenya call some over there warlords, however those local warlords, if they are there, are not my main concern here, so drop it.
I have a hard time believing that this whole debate was just an example of the both of us talking past one another. We were both clearly talking about Kenyan warlords how could post #22 make sense any other way? BTW I’ve seen no evidence that reporters in Kenya call anyone a warlord but those who are Somali warlords. Also I think you are using words like “local” to obscure whether you’re talking about Kenyans or Somalis. so… you drop it. (jk :))
Oh I don’t know, words like “neighboring nations” and “warlords are not too far away” should have been enough of a clue, I thought. 
Ref the O.P. the best solution all round would be for Obamas aunt to claim political asylum in another country,maybe Europe.
That way he isn’t seen to be corruptly using his office for family members while at the same time not putting up a relative as a hostage for terrorists.
With the situation left him by Bush he has enough on his plate without a problem like this.
You can choose your friends but you can’t choose your family…
Ask the Carters,ask Dubbyas father.
As I understand it, the aunt has overstayed her visa and is now in the U.S. illegally. Much as I admire and respect our new President-elect, his duty will soon be to see that the law is faithfully executed. The aunt should have no favors done for her. Her request for asylum (if she makes one, which I tend to expect, even though it seems groundless to me) should be evaluated fairly and impartially by an immigration judge, just as anyone else’s should be. But I presume she will be deported, as she should be.
Whether or not there are warlords in Kenya there certainly are pirates off the coast of Somalia and Kenya who make a living out of kidnapping, it’s a real possibility they might try their hand at the big leagues. If anyone can make a case for political asylum Obama’s relatives can.