Eshmun, you insist on banging the drum over two points; that...

Eshmun, you insist on banging the drum over two points; that management has caused this under-valued share price, but also that the terrorist violence is serious and caused this weak share price?

 

You say that the government cabinet was re-shuffled to align it more with peoples of the northern border regions not as a signal that a new, harder line would taken by the military against the jihadists. Then keep pushing that line on a thread discussing a new counter-terrorism military campaign that killed 149 terrorists?

 

In an effort to refute my opinion that the terrorist raids on villages recently might be as much about opportunistic crime as simply political violence you post a news link that states Burkina Faso is part of the G5 group “set up to fight terrorism and organised crime in the Sahel region.”?

 

You find that the Sahel jihadists have given themselves a name and met in numbers as “worrying. Escallation might lead to more recruits” like it new information to light should be suddenly worrying to WAF holders. The JNIN group of which you googled is spread across the entire Sahel region, 9 countries, but only a small portion of BF nowhere near WAF? Everyone knows that for years there are multiple jihadist groups in this region all aligned with similar goals. Similar violence by the same groups has been going on for over 3 years, this is old news.

 

Your selective research shoots down any credibility built up in happier days before you went under water and over the edge. The same article you linked goes on to say things like:

 

“ blending tactics forces JNIM to limit its actions to the Sahel only, where it can benefit from this contribution. JNIM has never attacked targets outside the Sahel. It leads a conflict of attrition whose outcomes would be on the long run.”

 

“JNIM is a regional organisation and makes of the Sahel and part of West Africa its favourite terrain. Even the idea of fighting against the distant enemy (the powers that help current regimes), is applied by JNIM in the Sahel and not elsewhere.”

 

What I have been saying is that the terrorists are a regional based group in the Sahel and that they will only continue to cause trouble in the Sahel through trying to galvanise an ethnic/religious group into a social and political force in the lands the inhabit.

 

Nothing you posted refutes this claim, the troubles are very largely confined to the border regions well away from WAF. Your own links support that these jihadists are not interested in a Daesh style expansion of their area of influence beyond tribal lands. The fact of 149 dead terrorists support that the new government was brought in to show a stiffer resistance and more support to the villagers being terrorised. Your own links state that the terrorism is associated with organised crime, which is usually more opportunistic than organised.

 

Yes the situation is not ideal, risks real and perceived have risen, but why foment fear with such wonky posts when most WAF watchers are interested on finding out what the situation means for an investment in WAF? The situation is not a lot different to what it was the last 3 years with ongoing terrorist attacks in the Sahel border regions, yet you happily bought in the 30’s then but now it’s all too much? Get a grip please.

 

More time spent in rationale debate and less time searching scapegoats to your own flawed investment decisions would be more helpful and what HC is for. Just accept that management could have done nothing about the selling that this recent wave of terrorist violence has brought, nothing will undo your buying too early, not everyone has an agenda, HC readers want to see learned an honest debate not scare mongering. There is an opportunity here for old holders to average down or new ones to get on board imo, so just because you are full doesn't justify poisoning the well. Get that foil hat tuned in properly and back to posting good, sensible opinions that many here apparently respect you for.

Good luck