Was the Mogadishu incident the most significant moment of the 20th century? Watch

thecrazycanes
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
As this week is Holocaust Memorial Week; I, like everyone else, gets reminded of what a sad event the Holocaust was but it always leads me to think more about the Rwandan Genocide. 800,000 dead in 100 days. 20 years ago. Significant media attention. And yet, the world stood by. For that reason I would consider it to be the largest atrocity of the 20th century. But the main reason there was little involvement was because the year previously a US Peacekeeping mission in Somalia went horribly wrong - see 'Black Hawk Down' to get a rough idea. This incident heavily affected the USA's international policies and meant they ignored the most violent 100 days the world has ever seen and even led them to be less active in monitoring terrorism. They were so afraid of a repeat of Mogadishu that they became very passive. Then the 9/11 attacks took place, despite the monitoring of Bin Laden but without any action. The rest is history. The war in Afghanistan which is still not officially over. Tightened security. Loss of privacy through internet monitoring. It could even be argued that this is why the US still haven't taken any action in Syria even though crimes against humanity have very clearly been committed. I believe this is another reason it was such a significant event because it still has a huge impact on our lives today.

What are your thoughts on this event and its knock-on effects?
Or do you consider there to be a more important event that still has large implications on our lives today?

I personally think this shouldn't be attributed to just the USA's failure and that it should be a lesson to other countries that they should stand up and stop being so reliant on the US.
0
reply
Clip
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
The care bears are not interested in when genocide is "narrowly averted" by military action. Basically, a lot of people would rather see a million people die in a genocidal civil war than have 1000 people killed by "western" intervention. When you intervene, people tend to get killed, and for many this is nothing more than a stick to beat governments with.

Really - you see this all the time. No matter what happened in a country before, or what could have potentially happened - any intervention is automatically murderous western imperialism and the murder of innocent Muslims/Africans (delete as necessary).

As for Mogadishu making the US avoid military action - that's highly debatable. They put a whole light infantry division on the ground in Haiti the year after Somalia. Between the first Gulf War and Somalia, there were arguably fewer US deployments than between Somalia and 9/11
0
reply
Fezzick123
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
I can sort of see your line of argument but I think you're stretching the chain of cause and effect a bit far here.
0
reply
Swanbow
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
Mogadishu was a relatively small blimp in American Foreign Policy. Following 9/11 it's impact has faded away. American decision to not get involved in Syria was due to the fact that Obama would have lost the vote if he took it to Congress, just like Cameron did, more than anything else.

However I agree that the world shouldn't be reliant on the United States and the West to intervene. The United Nations Peacekeeping Force powers should be be vastly increased so they can engage combatants to prevent tragedies like this.
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
28 June 1914 was the most significant, and tragic, moment of the 20th century.
0
reply
Creat0r
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by thecrazycanes)
This incident heavily affected the USA's international policies and meant they ignored the most violent 100 days the world has ever seen and even led them to be less active in monitoring terrorism.
I just did some basic maths which might be wrong but gives you a rough idea. In the Second World War roughly 3.3 million people died every 100 days.

(Original post by thecrazycanes)
It could even be argued that this is why the US still haven't taken any action in Syria even though crimes against humanity have very clearly been committed. I believe this is another reason it was such a significant event because it still has a huge impact on our lives today.
The British public weren't convinced that the Assad regime used the chemical weapons on the civilians, it made no sense for them to do it when he West was ready to come crashing in. British public opinion forced our government to hold back and avoid intervention at a time when US was looking for back up.

Splattered all over the US media was Britain's choice to hold back, this massively influenced Americans public opinion especially as many were unsure. The result was John Kerry warmonger throwing his dummy out of the pram and disliking the Brits, instead turning to France as their new best friend. France, being against the invasion of Iraq a decade ago jumped to the chance to redeem themselves.

What do I think about Mogadishu? Maybe it did have some impact on US foreign policy for a while, but it's not had a lasting impact.
0
reply
thecrazycanes
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by Fezzick123)
I can sort of see your line of argument but I think you're stretching the chain of cause and effect a bit far here.
I guess so, listened to this http://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/strategic-s...-and-march-911 and tried making other possible links.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What's your favourite genre?

Rock (169)
24.56%
Pop (170)
24.71%
Jazz (27)
3.92%
Classical (41)
5.96%
Hip-Hop (125)
18.17%
Electronic (45)
6.54%
Indie (111)
16.13%

Watched Threads

View All