Terror Watch

Blood in the Water

Will deadly force deter Somali pirates—or just make them more violent?

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 05/06/2009 3:55:29 PM

    izageek, I hope you are feeeling better today. Regarding what I needed, I appreciate your help but please, don't do anything. I just saw a message for me from that poster on that article. Thank you for wanting to help.

  • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 05/05/2009 12:03:13 PM

    Iza, I left you a post regarding your appt. today on the other artcle but will leave the same here. Good luck, hang in there, it will be allright!

    Hugs,

    Pia

  • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 05/05/2009 11:31:14 AM

    izageek, I'm looking for a friend...how to find that friend through the internet with limited info. My friend told me which college they graduated from but there are too many alumnis listed to go through. I'm not sure about the year either. Thank you.

    • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 05/05/2009 11:38:57 AM

      PS Iza, I need to find Charlie Brown to set things right. He is avoiding me here.

  • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/21/2009 1:55:59 PM

    I find it funny that Obama has to order death to get repgis to side with him...LMAO! thank you for proving my point about the teabagging repig party.

  • Posted By: tdragon @ 04/19/2009 4:19:11 PM

    My husband is in the maritime industry and could have very easily been on board either one of those ships delivering food and aid to Africa. I certainly hope the US does something NOW about the piracy off the coast of Somalia, before any innocent US Citizen gets killed. The US needs to take immediate action!!! They have already said they plan to ???seek out and slaughter??? American sailors if they are captured, they will not care about a ransom, it will be for retaliation only! The US can not take the chance??? ???.either put trained armed military national guard, or reserves on our ships in those waters and shoot on sight any boat approaching without question or???.. STOP shipping food to those countries at once???. Then, I bet the larger areas would start to do something on the ground if they could not get food and medical supplies. You have to clean up before you can start to build something, and sending them money to start a military may be the answer in the long run but the answer RIGHT now is to eliminate as many of the pirates on the water as possible.

  • Posted By: wstephenjackson @ 04/19/2009 1:43:41 PM

    Regrettably, the pirates themselves have placed us in such a position. Shall we accept that we are responsible for these acts, because we have 'ignored' these people? I think not. They have suddenly found easy money, and like anyone of a criminal ind, they are determined to take and steal and do not mind killing to do it. These are not 'patriots', for heaven's sake, these are armed goons ... gangsters, no different than an armed drug gang. The best way to handle them would be to somehow make shipping simply immune to them .... not harming any of them, just making their objective impossible. This would eventually have them walking away to try something else. I am not sure this is feasible, however. Shipping companies, like all modern business, literally turn on pennies. The next best way to handle the problem is to kill every single one who tries it. It may sound politically incorrect, but once their odds of success turn to zero, they will get the message. As long as their odds are anything at all, it will not only continue, it will increase. The violence will escalate regardless; there is money in it. I suspect that already blood is being shed amongst themselves for the choicest attack positions.

  • Posted By: Numbersdontlie @ 04/16/2009 10:39:54 PM

    Aren't you aware that the USS BAinbridge is one of many military ships PATROLLING that area due to piracy. Several countries have military patrolling there! France not only made the first rescue of a french family's private yaght, but they killed 2 pirates in doing so. They raided a pirate ship yesterday and took 11 pirates.

    This is a joint effort and it has to stop. Today. Now. Paying then doesn't work, killing them is a start. I would rather our young military kill pirates than be killed by suicide bombers in Iraq.

    • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 2:14:22 AM

      Maybe you have heard of the USS Cole?
      Do you know where it was attacked?
      So you see. You could call it evening old scores, or you could call it going back to square one.
      Take your pick. No matter how you slice it, it is another part of the world where Americans are killing or being killed, which, to my mind, is unnecessary, and not a good thing.

      • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 12:50:55 PM

        So your answer is to simply let the piracy continue?

        • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 1:49:45 PM

          Spot on OBL... again. My most hazy notion of the history of piracy like this (e.g. Barbary Coast) is that the merchants didn't have the resources to stop it and governments hadn't gotten to that point, so the costs of ransom were just factored in as costs of doing business. That led to it's logical extension, and governments finally exerted the resources to snuff it. Don't like the idea of the escalation that will be the pirate reflex, but where the past would lead ultimately would cost more in every way, with the worst ramifications, including being the cash cow for terrorist groups.

          • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 4:14:51 PM

            I am sure if you went back to caveman days, you could find many other examples to support your recommendation.

            But really now, that was two centuries ago? Can't we do a little better? Communications, coordination, code, detection... if those could thward Nazi U boats set up for coordinated attacks throughout the Atlantic, and if it could prevent attacks in the Pacific by Japanese submarines, why is it not being done now?
            Putting aside for a moment all of the saber rattling and flag waving and body bags, it is obvious that there are less expensive and more effective things that could be done to manage this problem. I am surprised that so many people believe that killing is success these days, not failure. Too much DOOM maybe?

            • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:48:21 PM

              We're talking about pirates, not unruly children. Just saying.

              • Posted By: KMS7783 @ 04/19/2009 9:44:49 AM

                Not too much Doom, too much trying to appease everyone else. Can it be that we have so often been told that force is not the answer to everything...that we have come to believe that it is the solution to nothing?

                Bravo SEALs and all the other military personnel it took to do this.

                Also, do you remember 444 days?

                I applaud this action, and understand that the pirates might try something again, And I hope we have th egust to dthis again, if they do try it. Oh, but what if they start shooting sailors? Then the next time a US Navy ship sees those little boats, turn the phalanx on them. I am tired of seeing the US pushed around. Oh, theres that saber rattling. My response, Let me pull this put so it doesn't rattle anymore.

              • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 5:43:35 PM

                Why not unruly children?
                Seriously, imagining them as high school vandals is probably not too far off. Certainly their level of sophistication in terms of doctrine is nowhere near that of the Germans or Japanese.
                If you kill them, more will come eventually, and then vengeance yadayadayada.
                If you deter them in other ways you solve the problem cheaply and effectively.

                If you have teenage kids, you lock the liquor cabinet before you leave the house. You don't wait for them to get drunk and then shoot them. Teenage kids with guns? Same thing. Teenage kids with rocket launchers? Same thing. Certainly there is a limit to what you can do with truly desperate people, but it is not as if the pirates were killing people left and right to begin with. The pirates are not wild dogs or supermen.

                Months ago on this site, people were advocating food aid to Somalia and such measures. That would probably not be so effective and seems to me to be way too indirect. Killing everyone in the area has also been suggested ad nauseum. I see a huge middle ground of options that are too quickly ignored.

                On the "supporting terrorists" thing. I am not sure if this is still true, but a few months ago, you had an Islamic government in Mogadishu and more secular groups controlling the northern coast. My impression was that they did not get along well. If anything, this killing of three pirates will move pirate groups closer to alliance with the Islamic government. So here again. Killing people just makes diplomacy less effective. If the goal is reducing Islamic militancy and reducing the resources of pirate groups, then killing these three Somalis was very counterproductive. Saving an American's life is certainly a worthy goal... but effective countermeasures would have prevented all of this.

                • Posted By: star3 @ 04/18/2009 8:23:14 PM

                  Unruly children!?! McLB, even for you that is a dumb statement. Unruly children do not carry guns, attack people or kiddnap them, threaten to kill, or demand ransom $$. What is wrong with you?! An unruly child, you discipline with a scolding or a spanking; so, do you think that action might work on the "unruly" pirates? If you do, then we'll watch while you administer that. I suppose you consider terrorist to be just tenny boppers out for a day of fun in the sun games. Your type amazes me, how you managed to maintain this long.

        • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 3:27:18 PM

          Pretty bound up in your logic, aren't you?
          Already you can see no options other than killing or piracy?
          Gee. Could there be ANY OTHER WAY to solve this piracy problem? The answer is yes, and other countries are using different measures, with limited success.
          My point is that killng, and especially indiscriminate killing of civilians as advocated by PAULEBJ and ASBESTOS, is a stupid, immoral response that is bound to have very bad consequences.

          So if your choice is DO NOTHING or KILL EVERYBODY, then I think we need to look for more choices, don't you?

          • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:13:58 PM

            No, I've been advocating a measured response from the start: Conceal Marines on random ships, as many as possible.

            1. You don't waste fuel or ordnance

            2. There is zero chance of killing any innocent sailors.

            3. The pirates have no idea which ships are guarded, and which aren't.

            4. The Marines are already on the payroll.

            • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 4:21:34 PM

              Not bad. The more concealed they are, the less effective they are, but I get the idea.
              I think someone said months ago that if you did something like this, that the pirates would find out about it in advance and avoid those ships, but I disagree with that criticism.

              Good points: it punishes the bad guys and protects the good guys.
              Bad points: Marines will hate the monotony, get bored. Combat pay? Insufficient quarters? Ships might object to having them aboard? What if they get killed or captured? They would have to be far from help or reinforcement for the plan to work.

              • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:47:29 PM

                "Not bad. The more concealed they are, the less effective they are, but I get the idea."

                Not really. The idea would be to sucker the pirates in.

                Also, Marines are also used to cramped quarters. The sleeping arrangements on a cargo ship would be heaven compared to a troop transport or warship. Combat pay is a fairly insignificant expense, and I seriously doubt that the Marines are going to come up second in a fight with pirates...though having a Navy surgeon accompany them isn't a bad idea...and they would only be a half hour from helicopter medivac if needed (which is not much different than conditions in normal operating theaters).

                • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 6:08:13 PM

                  One of the problems from medevac is FROM WHERE TO WHERE? There is just nothing out there.
                  But I get your idea. I agree that Marines are cheaper than SEALs, but they will not be too happy to hear that.

        • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 1:43:19 PM

  • Posted By: mainermike @ 04/19/2009 8:29:13 AM

    AS I SEE IT -------- Mike "Mainer Mike" Brown.

    As you can see after reading this article, there is no simple answer to this problem. Not fighting back won't help, fighting back with force could make it worse, companies paying money to the pirates to save the captured crew members adds fuel to the fire, and not paying the ransom can result in the crew getting killed.

    So what should be done to overcome this enourmous problem?

    The countries affected will have to step up and do something.

    Like France. Or some other nation besides the U.S.

    Why is it always us that has to do the dirty work?

    But you wait, America will be forced to lead the way, because the rest of the world knows we'll do it if they just wait.

    The joys of being a superpower.

    That's AS I SEE IT. I'm Mike "Mainer Mike" Brown.

  • Posted By: NeoPoliticus @ 04/19/2009 3:50:27 AM

    If that's what Hosenball and Isikoff believe, then I'd say they are the perfect targets to have someone in their family kidnapped for ransom. And after they pay, we'll kidnap them again. (They'll probably still have a few fingers left.)

  • Posted By: 1RobSoCal @ 04/16/2009 3:37:31 PM

    I'm sick and tired of these pirates and other outlaws going to take revenge on the US because we protect ourselves in whatever way is appropriate for the circumstances. A 25 year old pirate say "we'll seek out Americans, and if caught we???ll slaughter them". Hmmm and we are the bad guys. I say blow them all out of the water. This is really war on the high seas and all bets should be off.

    • Posted By: rpearlston @ 04/18/2009 9:57:08 PM

      So you can't recognize bravado when you see it.

      Bravado is what you say, to yourself and out loud, to try to convince yourself that you're not scared out of you mind when you really are scared out of you mind.

      That quote wasn't about plans. It was about fear. To be specific, it was about fear of the way that the US presents itself to the world, as the ultimate enemy.

      And you wonder why so many people hate the US. You are a prime example of the answer to that question.

  • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 1:09:06 AM

    The Navy seals made exactly the right choice, and we are proud of them. Maybe this will cause other idiots who want to play Captain Hook to think before going in search of another ship to hijack. There are still some people in the world who have not yet learned from observing, that Americans don't mess around; we love peace, but if you disturb our peace, you will find a pit bull at your throut. We love freedom, and will do what is neccessary to protect it. We won't start a fight, but we will end one if its directed at us. Peace.

    • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 2:05:57 AM

      Pretty big maybe you got there STAR3.
      The cycle of war that America uses reads a lot like your post. LIke a broken record, Americans choose war in cases where peace has worked well in the past. Has all this killing made America more secure? The torture, the prisons, the killing, the illegal wiretaps, the neglected vets, the war debt, the profiteering. Roll all of that up into a ball and tell me that kililng is the answer.

      People like you put your chin up and assert that kililng is necessary in this rough world we live in, but other countries are showing every day that it is not necessary. America is on the wrong track. It has gone from Blackwater to backwater.

      Here is one example: other posters talk about genocide.

      What do you say to them? Will you state categorically that civilians in Somalia should not be harmed? You end your post with the word PEACE. You imply in your post that any means can be used if an American is threatened. Does that sound right to you? Can you write that genocide is never justified? I defy you to do that. Show everyone what America is all about. Be specific.

      • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 04/17/2009 1:19:24 PM

        More importantly, genicide has never been done in the written history of the planet. There have been attempts at genicide, but none was a completed effort, however, there are droves of hyperbole weilders like yourself who use the term as both a sheild and a sword!

        • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 3:31:03 PM

          Never any genicide, yous???? Which planet did you just arrive from?! What do you call what Hitler did to the Jews----playing footsie?!? Give some people a book, teach them to read, and this is what you get....

          • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 04/17/2009 10:51:20 PM

            There seems to be alot of living Jews, genocide means to completely irradicate the entire gene pool! Nice try, not!

            • Posted By: star3 @ 04/18/2009 7:55:55 PM

              No it doesn't, it means TRYING to eliminate them. Read, Yous. Read. If you can. And, learn to spell genOcide.
              Genocide: Any deliberate attempt to kill, or program planned, to destroy all the people of a certain nation, race, ethnic group, ect. (Per webster's Dictionary). ATTEMPT, Yous---not succeeding. You must be thinking of ANNIHILATE, yOUS.

        • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 2:11:02 PM

          YOUSOCRAZY-

          Maybe a complete genocide has never been completed as you say (I bet there have been), but I gotta say that this is close to the worst arguement for anything I've ever seen.

          • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 04/17/2009 10:54:04 PM

            Your are correct, everyone should use inaccurate words to draw an emotional effect to the arguement that they can not construct without that exageration! Grow up, adults speak in truth and reality not "you upturned my sand box"! Waaaaaaaaaa, waaaaaaaaaa!

        • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:50:18 PM

          "More importantly, genicide has never been done in the written history of the planet. "

          Incorrect. The Beothuks of Newfoundland were wiped out entirely.

          • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 4:57:13 PM

            No surprise who came up with the specific.

      • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 3:23:37 PM

        I'm a realist, McLB, we have tried to negoiate with peace talks, and if you're familiar with history, you'll notice how well those worked. The enemy we face today is very different from the ones priviously, and everyone would do well to recognize that, past enemies had the same goal we did----to stay alive, but the ones today will kill themselves if they can take out several others at the same time. Yes, before you say it, I know all about the Japanese suicide bombers during WW2, but there was never as many of them doing that as there are today of idiots strapping bombs to themselves, and do these jackasses have any pride or decency at all !?! They recruit children to use as suicide victims---yes! Victims, because thats what a child is when used by an adult feeble minded whimp, too cowardly to do it themself! So, don't talk to me about coming on too strong, when the U.S.A. has done everything in it's power to keep peace with others and to lend them $$$, to send food and help when they have a disaster, and you notice just how much all that was appreciated when WE needed help, so, yeah, I'll talk peace when people like the pirates beat their weapons into plow shears, and learn a legal trade. As for the torture you spoke of, I suppose you don't consider the beheading of the journalist by the terrorist to be torture, do you? No, of course you don't, that was "justified" right? That mean old journalist torturing those poor terroist with those nasty news articles. How sad, shall we have a party for those poor pathetic little terrorist souls who were soooo mistreated, that we forced them to chop off a journalist head, maybe we should throw in a medal for bravery, and toss in a couple of your cookies. Gheesh, LB, where is your brain located? Maybe if you'd stop sitting on it, it wouldn't be so squashed. I completely understand that you liberals don't want war, and neither do conservatives, but the difference is, conservatives are realistic enough to know that while war and killing is not desireable, it is sometimes neccessary. Its part of the human condition for some people to try to control the other people, and it's, also, part of the human condition for the other people to resist. I suppose your solution to the pirate problem would have been to say to them, "Well, golly gee whiz, folks, if you wanted some of our money, why didn't you just ask? All this while you kept a big friendly smile in place. Why don't YOU just change YOUR name to "LITTLE MISS POLLY POLITE"? Gheesh!!! Some people's kids....

        • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 4:02:36 PM

          sorry about your hysterical ranting problem STAR3.
          Sounds like you are ready to take all of your frustrations built up over the last 60 years or so and go lynch some Somali villagers with PAULEBJ and ASBESTOS. Is that what it amounts to?

          Hey, too bad about kamikaze pilots, children with bombs, lending, food aid, disaster aid, journalist beheadings, .... but what does that have to do with solving this problem?

          You go for your gun, right STAR3? After all of your frustration, your FIRST response is to go to the gun, not the last, am I right? Tell me that this is not what is destroying America. From West Virginia to New York to a hospital in California, people in the US decide every day that killing is the only solution left. Do you?
          Negotiation solves a lot of problems. Engagement and dialogue, thank God, solve most problems of the world today, even in law enforcement. Technology, barriers, caution, observation, precautions, knowledge... you probably own a gun, but you still lock your doors and lock your car, right? I think what you are trying to do is call everyone else in the world stupid because they do not advocate violence as a FIRST, or second or third resort.

          Killing the pirates is not the answer. Killing their families and destroying any other means of livelihood for them is not the answer. There are less expensive, moral, more effective means of solving the problem. I am certain that other countries have found them. I hope America does too.

          • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 8:46:27 PM

            Well, hell, LB, If I'm ever in a situation where some snot for brains is pointing a gun at me, I'll just tell them "Oh my! I don't believe in violence, so can't we just discuss this?" If it works, I'll come back and let you know, hey, man, you were right! But if it doesn't, I'll try to find a way to communicate that to you from the spirit world. All you can say is "Too bad" about the children used as suicide bombers?! Real compassionate, there, LB, hope you never have any kids. To answer your ridiculeous question, no I don't go for the gun first, but I sure as hell won't wait around to find out what the attacker is going to do. You see, LB, what you don't seem to get, is that the criminal already knows what his/her plans are, but you don't, so you're willing to wait to find out what their plans are, and by the time you find out, it may be too late for you to react. No, I am not willing to just start shooting right away without provacation, but when I KNOW I am in the company of criminals who don't have scruples about behavior, then, yes, I would tend to be a bit suspicious of their intent, and would be prepared to shoot at the first sign of aggression on their part, and I'd say the pirates showed agression when they attacked our ship, kiddnapped the captain, tied him up and demanded money. Crap, LB, what more do you want to wait for before becoming aggressive yourself if theres a chance you could save the innocent person's life? All I can say is I'm dam glad my life doesn't depend on you for my safety. By the way, as far as I know the pirates families are still breathing, don't think we killed them, as you want to insinuate we would. Guess when the Almighty was passing out brains, you thought He said beans, and asked for only a small portian. Its called common sense, BL, see if you can find some laying around somewhere. And, just so you won't concern yourself about me, let it be known I am not frustrated at all about anything, but I do get a bit testy when I see people speaking, writing, posting, when they can't even THINK!

            • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 9:18:24 PM

              P.S. If you call what I am saying "ranting", then you don't want to be anywhere near when I have one of my Hissy Fits, not to be confused with a conniption, neither one is pretty, but its kind of difficult to tell the difference, especially when its directed at you, while you're just trying to negotinate, and eat your cookies. Have another one, LB, maybe you'll even manage to convience yourself those pirates were actually sweet little darlings, out for a day in the soft ocean breeze, when this big old American ship had the odasity to invade their space, so they had no alternative but to recipicate. They really wanted to talk it over nicely, but we insisted they take our captain and threaten the rest of us before we'd let them go. Tsk, tsk, tsk, how mean!

  • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/16/2009 10:08:24 PM

    squini and people saying similar things are right.
    Many months ago, I presented a plan on this forum, THE MCLOVIN PLAN, which would have worked had it been followed.
    There are so many options available that do not require deadly force and do not require the spending of a billion dollars to fight a problem that costs shippers a few million per year. Convoys could be organized and protected. Non lethal combat devices, fences and nets, early warning systems, etc.

    What it will come down to now, thanks to a SEAL Commander, is all out war with yet another country whose people are browner than he is, paid for by the US taxpayer. Oh yeah, sure, everyone is a hero, everyone has a medal, but haven't we all had enough of this already? The SEAL operation probably cost three or four times the ransom paid to pirates over the last two years. That is not smart money. That is opera.

    Piracy has continued in that area since the time of Alexander. Rather than saying that everything has to change and everything has to stop, how about producing vessels and simple systems for coordinated action? Forces of many nations could actually be led to do something constructive there rather than just having the cowboys dance in and dance out.

    Please note that the previous two posters suggest killing babies. No really. Killing babies.
    America's foreign policy is seriously coming down to this? Is this even reasonable? How many innocent people's lives are worth a few million dollars to insurers? The AIG bonuses would have paid ransoms for the next 200 years, but apparently genocide is the preferred solution that immediately springs to the mind of ASBESTOS and PAULEJB. The old adage rings true, for someone with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. For Americans and their guns, every problem looks like a Sam Peckinpah western.

    • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 12:42:01 AM

      Oh Bull, McLovinB! Go bake some Alice B. Tolklin cookies, and strum your guitar for the pirates, and invite them aboard for tea! Get a grip on reality, Flower Child!

      • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 2:07:08 AM

        STAR3, just change your handle to JINGO101.

        • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 2:37:17 PM

          I'll take that under advisement, McLovin, in the mean time, how are those cookies coming along?

          • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 2:54:07 PM

            Apparently, you're the expert. Get back into the kitchen and have a look. And take your Country Joe McDonald album with you.

            • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:49:17 PM

              What? Country Joe and the Fish were anti-war.

              • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 5:05:24 PM

                You know the song, right? Star3 needs to listen to that while he checks the cookies and adjusts his apron.

                • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 9:51:21 PM

                  McLB, Hi, sweetie, guess what, surprise, surprise, me is not a He, me is a She. :)

    • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:16:47 PM

      What possible reasoning are you employing to state that the seal operation cost 3-4 times the ransom paid over two years? Are you suggesting that it cost $300,000,000-$450,000,000 to fly those seals from the African mainland to the ship? What?

      • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 4:51:21 PM

        It's worthwhile to consider also what the proceeds of piracy fuel and where that leads, and what 'costs' are ultimately avoided by denying success to them.

        • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 5:38:35 PM

          This is a fact. A few years back, the pirates were restricted to coastal waters. Thanks to ransom money, they are now capable of operating hundreds of miles out from the coast.

          • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 5:43:38 PM

            Yup. And we're no where near the end of the natural progression if the funds aren't denied to them.

            • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 6:28:03 PM

              I agree. I even agree that spending twice as much on prevention as on ransom would be the RIGHT thing to do, even if some accountant would disagree.
              I acknowledge sadly also that killing all of the pirates and all of their families would be cheap cheap cheap, but who wants to live in a world like that?
              So how to get the funds? From insurance companies, shippers and governments. Have everyone pony up.
              Get armed vessels from all countries together. I am almost certain that France, the US, Norway, Japan, India, and Iran have vessels there already... oh and kinda Kenya.
              How to use the funds? First pay me a royalty because it is my plan. I will take 10% off the top. Then set up convoys and shipping lanes and do not let ships through unless they are escorted. At one end, the escorts get a bunch of ships. They go through and turn around to go back. Run the convoys at high speeds and leave big wakes. Approaching craft get warnings and then get destroyed. Use decoy craft and hidden Marines and other measures to confuse and harry the pirates.
              Lather, rinse, repeat.
              Even if you need to use military force, all of the craft and countermeasures are nearby and mutually reinforcing. If some shipper or captain will not participate, then yank their insurance. If it gets too boring for the US Navy, then let the Norwegians, Japanese and Iranians do the boring stuff. Everybody shares the credit. Costs and duplicated efforts are minimal, I get my 10%, insurance rates fall, ransoms disappear, and even if the SEALs have to kill someone, everyone in the whole world, even radical Islam, knows that they tried their best to avoid killing.

              I would even eat my 10% to live in a world like that.

          • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 6:01:50 PM

            And that is good and bad.
            It means that the most capable pirates are the ones that, well, might just have to be killed. The truly nasty characters will select themselves, if you get my drift.
            The amateurs who stay close to shore? They have fewer resources and can be more easily deterred by other means.

      • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 5:58:10 PM

        Where are you getting 100 million ransom?
        I think the Saudis paid a million for their tanker? 10 million? I do not think it was that high.
        SEALs are extremely expensive. They have a lot of specialized training, nice salaries. I am sure it is higher than yours. Great benefits. Then you have the Bainbridge and all of their salaries operations, maintenance, and depreciation. Combat pay. Overtime. There is recon. Intelligence. Specialized communications. All that has to be ready BEFORE the SEALs are even inserted. I am thinking millions here. If one had been injured, just the paperwork would have doubled the cost. The cost of trying the one live pirate in New York will double that.
        Now how much bang for those bucks? Three dead teenagers.

        Tell me there is not a better way. Of course nuclear weapons are a cheap alternative, but my name is not Paul, so I will not consider that.

  • Posted By: ezekiel2517 @ 04/17/2009 2:30:12 PM

    Instead of having military ships try to watch over 1 million square miles of ocean, why don't they form up convoys (like in WW II) so one or to armed ships could protect the whole convoy.

    • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 4:14:54 PM

      Because the ships aren't all heading for the same destination, as they were in WWII.

      • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 4:33:17 PM

        It's not the entire answer, but widely divided lanes within a corridor might be useful in and overall approach.

        • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 5:13:51 PM

          Have to add that the traffic is more concentrated into lanes than you might think. Most of the ships are taken in or near the Gulf of Aden, but are then moved out to the eastern coast of Somalia or other locations. The MSNBC site has an interactive map of some attacks of 2008.
          If you remember that the attacks are mostly near the coast, you can probably figure the lanes and vulnerabilities pretty easily just by looking at a big map.
          I am baffled as to why 30 or so armed vessels from different nations would not be able to form a picket or convoy system to work craft through these areas. There are already about that number of military vessels there, I think. India, Japan, Iran... Saudi Arabia could afford to send five with no sweat.

          • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 04/17/2009 5:39:04 PM

            "If you remember that the attacks are mostly near the coast"

            They used to be.

            • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 5:48:14 PM

              Most still are.
              The further the pirates get out to sea, the larger their craft must be. They are also more vulnerable. If they use a mothership/raiding craft kind of attack, then they have to approach, launch craft and negotiate high seas before the target craft can evade. That is difficult to do.
              Larger craft are more detectable. Countermeasures could be more effective against them than in coastal areas anyway.

    • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 3:18:13 PM

      I think you have the right idea.

  • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 10:50:37 AM

    And republicans would like you to believe that you can not have dipolmatic ties with them, JUST BLOW ME UP. Republicans believe that on Iran and N. Korea come on republicans wake up. Just like last nights TEABAG party. It showed nothing, only bashes of the democrats. Secondly, I do not know why you REPUBLICANS are pissed at Obama for the taxes, your tax rates are still from BUSHS' dumb azzes. Anyways Im a Liberal and I think when we seen a little skipper boat coming towards a massive carriers blow to the moon. The pirates are just going to kill anyone they capture.

    • Posted By: falcon642 @ 04/16/2009 2:59:26 PM

      Republicans are made because Obama's budget just made the budget FOUR TIMES LARGER than it was at any time during Bush's Presidency. According to the CBO, in less than two years the Obama administrations policies will add more to the national debt that was added during 8 years of the Bush administration.

      Republicans are mad because the Democrats call a plan with $1.9 trillion in red ink a "budget". Republicans are made because the spending spree the Democrats have gone requires such excessive borrowing that soon the American Dollar will have "Made in China" printed on it.

      • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 3:33:39 PM

        Very true but if Bush did not get us into this mess to begin with, the Democrats would not have to spend. Iraq war at 12 billion a month, the degragulations of the bank system thanks to Bush. I can keep going if you want. Then again, you started to talk about China, what about the business that the CEO are Republican that ship American jobs overseas becasue they do not want to pay a worker 15 bucks an hour with benefits but they want to line their pockets with MILLIONS and MILLIONs in bonuses. Wake up falcon642. Look Obama is already turning the economy back around. Numerous economist are saying we are coming close or are at the bottom. The democrats always have to come to the rescue after a Republican has been in office.

        • Posted By: falcon642 @ 04/16/2009 4:13:59 PM

          The question is not what might have been, the question is what do we do now. Yes the Republicans created several problems, however the Democrats are making those issues worse by saddling our country with a level of debt that has not been seen since WW2. The Democrats really need a better justification for their polices than "the Republicans did this." Character assassination is the first sign of an uneducated argument and the Democrats are engaged is blatant character assassination to cover up the horrible fiscal decisions they are making.

          Furthermore, by your math the war in Iraq costs $120 billion a year. Get rid of the war in Iraq and Obama's budget still produces a $1.7 trillion dollar deficit, over 3 times larger than the largest deficit in history.

          Next, anyone who blames this entire economic mess on one party is a polarized partisan zombie. There is plenty of blame that belongs to the Democrats. Over borrowing is at the root of this economic meltdown. The average American household first started exhibiting a negative savings rate under the Clinton administration. Aggressive lending to low credit home buyers began under Clinton and you can see that in that it was in the late 90s that home value was first detached from inflation rate. Anytime any commodity increases at value at a rate significantly higher than inflation rate that commodity is headed for a bubble.

          Next, the Bush administration tried several times before the meltdown to place extra regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those efforts were blocked by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. A good deal of the deregulation you talk of happened under the watch of Democrats. The Democrats are every bit as at fault for this current mess as the Republicans. If you can't see that, stop watching Keith Olbermann and try reading some intelligent conservative writers such as George Will.

          • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 2:22:39 PM

            falcon642-

            "however the Democrats are making those issues worse by saddling our country with a level of debt that has not been seen since WW2."

            It is actually incredible to me that you insist that we should not look back, and we should only focus on declarations like these of yours.

            The reasons for how we are in this mess and the reasons why what must be done are direct consequences of what was done and not done by the prior administration.

            Blaming the fireman for putting out the house fire is just a will to both deny recognizing the reality of the immediate past, and a will to misdirect blame.

          • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 7:52:14 PM

            Believe it or not I am a moderate but i lean towards the democrats. Im a 21 year old History major in college. I agree with you on some of your ideas. Yes, I dont like my tax dollars going to companys when their CEO's are taking home Million dollar bonus. Granted my tax probably are not has high as yours, since I have a part time job while going to college. And the debt is going to be huge and I think I heard like 8 trillion dollars, or something huge like that. However what would happen if some of these companys that recieved the bailout go under? What will the unemployment be? That is what worries me, and would the crime rate would jump to, stuff like that. Republcians nor Democrats have seen the economy like this since the Great Depressoin and FDR. I have always told my friends and family one thing. Checks and Balances. If a democrat is in the office president the republicans or other politcal parties should be in control of the house or senate, or vise versa. That way there is a little more checks and balances. Right now the democrats can pretty much pass whatever bills they want. I do not like that idea. Moreover, we all need "republican, democrats, green, independent, or whatever, to fix the problem, and yes we do need to stop pointing fingers.

          • Posted By: BG.Bryan @ 04/16/2009 5:46:47 PM

            I like your style. As I posted elsewhere, there is plenty of budgetary guilt on both sides of the aisle. While I don't agree competely with your character assignation claims (again, that's epidemic on both sides) I agree with your balanced and considered approach. So many of these posts are filled with hatred and venom--neither of which will advance the debate. The world is not black and white, the problems are complex, and the solutions unclear. I am ok with the current budget--I think it is expensive because it is ambitious--if it pays off, the deficits will disappear (it has happened before) The current problems are the result of many deep-rooted factors: one is the endemic lack of savings and the culture of borrowing that permeates American society. I have been living in Bulgaria for a couple of years, and here most people continue to use "Magyar Credit Terms" 100% cash down, no payments. As a result, most people are somewhat baffled by the credit crunch everyone is talking about. The greed and lack of oversight and regulation across the business spectrum can be laid at the feet of both parties--both are largely owned by spec. interests, just different ones. Get the flood of money out of the system, reform the electoral system that now practically demands officeholders to put themselves in the pockets of lobbyists in order to finance their elections, begin addressing these gordian knots, and things can get better.

      • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/17/2009 12:18:31 PM

        WOW see what happens when a president doesn't try to "cook the books" on a war being fought....bush NEVER included the WAR in any of his budgets....whoops...so yeah Obama's is bigger...HA! no pun intended ;)

        • Posted By: 40YearR @ 04/17/2009 1:54:50 PM

          Hey Harley! Good to see you back, Bud!

          And I have the same 'irony' over the fact that the ideologues want to trumpet unsubstantiated 'private' statements that Sarkozy supposedly said about Obama, and want to chant all their other delusions, old and newly invented, but they give Obama no credit for ending the war cost hiding, and actually doing an honest budget.

          They shouldn't be allowed to 'forget' or 'distract' themselves with their drivel.

      • Posted By: BG.Bryan @ 04/16/2009 5:32:47 PM

        I get the anger, but let's face it--there is nothing new about massive defict spending, and neither party is innocent. Reagan charted then-new territory in deficit spending in order to stimulate economic activity, that's pretty much what's going on now. It is also true that one factor in the comparative size in the Obama budget and the Bush budgets is that the costs associated with the ongoing wars were kept off the books under Bush. I know that doesn't account for everything, but it has to be considered. Also, as was demonstrated under the Clinton budgets, with some moderation of spending practices and reasoned budgetary decisions, deficits can be reduced and/or eliminated once economic growth recovers. Remember how bloody murder was screamed with Clinton's first budget, and not 1 Republic voted for it....

        • Posted By: falcon642 @ 04/16/2009 9:14:07 PM

          It is a bad comparison to compare Reagan's budget deficits to Obama's. Reagan was trying to stimulate the economy and destroy the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union went under because it could not afford to continue the arms race that Reagan started, Reagan spent the Soviets into history. The deficits accrued by Reagan are the price of riding the world of the Soviets without a major war, a price that is very much worth it.

          Now compare the goals of Reagan's budget to Obama's. What great adversary is Obama trying to spend into oblivion? Furthermore, Reagan's deficits were a record for the time but they also represented a much smaller percentage of national GDP. The $1.9 trillion deficit accrued by Obama's budget represents nearly 30% of our national GDP. That is the equivalent of someone who earns $30,000 taking on $10,000 extra debt every year. Does that sound sustainable to you?

          Finally the idea that the government can spend its way out of a recession/depression is highly overrated. By all economic measures, the low point of the Great Depression was 1938, after SIX years of "New Deal" policies. The effectiveness of the New Deal is greatly overrated and as such we should be extremely careful basing any future economic recovery plans too closely on the New Deal.

        • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/16/2009 7:45:40 PM

          hey proud mom, if you had the choice of being a true patriot, a real citizen of the wonderful country, or just hating and fearing everything and going back to the school of FOX LIMPBAAAAH...what would you do?

          a. Be a true Patriot
          b. Go back to school (of fear and hate.)

    • Posted By: BG.Bryan @ 04/16/2009 6:00:26 PM

      Hey History, I am a fellow Dem. and mostly sympathetic to your views, but it is neither necessary or helpful to engage in the hate-speech against the Republicans/conservatives. There is way too much of that these days--why add to it. Elevate your arguments, use reason not insult. We are "liberals" and many of these guys you're arguing with are conservatives--many of them hate us, and express it pretty crudely, but remember: if you lay in the mud with one, you are no cleaner than a pig. You can't control what others say, but you control your words. Just friendly advice.

      • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 7:38:50 PM

        BG.Bryan I try not to us hate but sometimes thats the way it is. I am really a moderate just like many others, yet it just seems that republicans are the first to throw shots at liberals. Anything and everything republicans will say. I' tired of conseratives always talking "stuff" about liberals so im going to fight for them. You are right thou BG. Bryan. Have a good one.

        • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/16/2009 7:44:41 PM

          if you have repressed homosexual tendencies and would do ANYTHING to get with a liberal democrat, just ask ONE to bend over.

          • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 10:05:06 PM

            Yupers, im ok with gay people. And with that comment you must be republican.

    • Posted By: paproudmom @ 04/16/2009 12:54:59 PM

      Go back to school!

      • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 1:52:07 PM

        I am in school, thank you and a History Major at that. Do some research on how Pompey the Great solved the pirate problem in the Mediterrean Sea. Just an example. As long as ships are sailing the ocean and businesses are going to pay the money the pirates want, theres going to be pirates seizing the ships. We need to have our military, Russian, Chinas, Britians, anyone how has ships that sail that area to protect them. If they see small ships sailing towards a shipping ships give a warning shot, then blow them up if they do not turn around.

        • Posted By: dAtcrAzybOk @ 04/16/2009 3:48:41 PM

          No need to go all the way back to Pompey and the Mediterranean Sea. (A history major... mediterrean? seriously?) Go back to see what Thomas Jefferson did to the pirates.

          • Posted By: History 101 @ 04/16/2009 7:57:05 PM

            Your a funny man or women, I did say History major, NOT English or a Spelling major if there is one. So you think I do not know my history because I missed the "an" in Mediterranean.

        • Posted By: dAtcrAzybOk @ 04/16/2009 3:50:46 PM

          hey, you... History Major. It's the Mediterranean Sea. Not the Mediterrean Sea.

          And you can just go back to Thomas Jefferson. See how he dealt with pirates and do the same.

        • Posted By: dAtcrAzybOk @ 04/16/2009 3:49:21 PM

          No need to go all the way back to Pompey and the Mediterranean Sea. (A history major... mediterrean? seriously?) Go back to see what Thomas Jefferson did to the pirates.

    • Posted By: dor-republican @ 04/16/2009 6:29:10 PM

      and all democrats bend over

      • Posted By: pnoty96 @ 04/16/2009 7:06:20 PM

        You Republicans should try that. Maybe you wont be such uptight jerks.

        • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/16/2009 7:49:31 PM

          hey proud mom, if you had the choice of being a true patriot, a real citizen of the wonderful country, or just hating and fearing everything and going back to the school of FOX LIMPBAAAAH...what would you do?

          a. Be a true Patriot
          b. Go back to school (of fear and hate.)

    • Posted By: bighead1191 @ 04/16/2009 5:24:01 PM

      Why don't you stop bringing up old wounds? Why don't you stop harping the one sided message?

      Get rid of political parties and the country would be so much better. Stop following like sheep those whom you blindly elect time and time again. Start to use your own mind for one...

      Yes, Bush made a mess. Yes, the republicans made a mess. So did the democrats. Everyone is to blame here. Everyone is guilty. Everyone needs to put the past in the past and learn to move on.

      Should some of Bush and friends dealings be looked into? Yes. However, there are more pressing matters at hand. You say you are a student? Yet you speak with pure ignorance. Why? Stop driving this liberal/conservative wedge.

      Parties serve no benefit to this country. One can only hope that one day at the sheep will stop following the wolves in sheepskins. That people will learn to actually think for themselves.

      • Posted By: bighead1191 @ 04/16/2009 5:29:04 PM

        Meh. Lack of an editing button does bother me when I re-read it and notice my mistakes...

        • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/16/2009 7:43:00 PM

          hey proud mom, if you had the choice of being a true patriot, a real citizen of the wonderful country, or just hating and fearing everything and going back to the school of FOX LIMPBAAAAH...what would you do?

          a. Be a true Patriot
          b. Go back to school (of fear and hate.)

    • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/16/2009 7:40:24 PM

      if you have repressed homosexual tendencies and would do ANYTHING to get with a liberal democrat, just ask ONE to bend over.

  • Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 04/17/2009 12:16:54 PM

    Democrats really need a better justification for their polices than "the Republicans did this."...
    NO! actually they don't, the TRUTH (repigs look up that word) is always the best justification for anything.
    "A good deal of the deregulation you talk of happened under the watch of Democrats."...
    That's the first thing you've said that is remotely true. Under Bill Clinton, REPUBLICAN Phil Gramm wrtoe and passed the legislation lift regualtion and over sight on banks and speculators, Clinton singed it into law after the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS passed it...(continued bellow)
    "Next, the Bush administration tried several times before the meltdown to place extra regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those efforts were blocked by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd."....
    (continued from above) and BUSH stood by for eight years, six of which he had a REPUBLICAN CONGRESS to correct it with, they are the ones who kept giving him blank checks for Iraq and yet leaving our troops underfunded (weird huh).
    So you got anymore parroting points you'd like to mention...LMAO!

    As for the "pirates", just because some repig didn't think it up and in fact Bush ignored it for eight years also, now the repigs are scared and whiney about Obama standing up to them, pathetic, the only thing that made this world more violent has been the actions of GW BUSH and his Klan.

  • Posted By: ross1972 @ 04/17/2009 10:26:29 AM

    Will deadly force deter Somali pirates???or just make them more violent?

    Are you kidding me?is this what the United States has become?Your people are being attacked,imprisoned,humiliated and ransomed.Soon al Qaeda will begin paying them for american and british hostages in order to extract their own political concessions or to execute.
    Your country learned this lesson once from pirates ot the north african coast and it seems you must learn it again: STAND UP OR BE STOOD ON.

  • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 04/17/2009 9:50:19 AM

    Will deadly force deter Somali pirates???or just make them more violent?

    Of course, all corpses get real violent having been annialated!
    Maybe the 15 mins. between when we start the offensive and finish, they will be world class violent, after that they will become grade A fertilizer!

  • Posted By: mhull1 @ 04/17/2009 9:42:07 AM

    The escalation of violence is only to go so far before the US military comes in a wipes them off the planet.

  • Posted By: asbestos @ 04/16/2009 9:42:10 PM

    Appeasment - it didn't work with Hitler, it won't work with the Somali pirates.
    To borrow from the Iranian leader, Somolia needs wiped off the map. There is no Somali military, only civilians. The civilians are the problem. If they don't surrender unconditionally, kill them. It will be ugly. All the world will scream bloody murder. It is necessary.

    • Posted By: McLovinB @ 04/17/2009 3:31:18 AM

      I guess that is all well and good until somebody someday decides to wipe your barcalounger off the map along with a couple of civilians who happen to live near it.

      Do you ever wonder why countries all over the globe are scrambling for better weapons technology? Could it be that having a nuclear device is the best way to protect innocent civilians from some US nutbag shouting for genocide from a barcalounger?
      Asbestos, one need look no further for a good reason that disarmament is doomed to fail. There will always be some neanderthal like you who is willing to see a village full of people in someone else's country and want to turn it into a parking lot. I might be mistaken, but I think every major world religion, well except one, sees turnabout as fair play. So every time you open your mouth, you lose a little more of your security and freedom. How does it feel?

  • Posted By: Interested Surfer @ 04/16/2009 10:29:44 PM

    The comments here are on the basis of increased insurance premiums. If no pirates take ships, insurers can't charge more for insurance premiums. While the failed state of Somalia obviously needs to be addressed, the world should not aid further procurement of advanced pirate technology by paying ransoms as easily as a wimp who forks over his lunch money to the school bully. No wonder piracy is a profitable business! IPerhaps fighter aircraft could patrol the region, as they could respond more quickly than ships, and sink the pirates' crafts. Pirates would be the ones who fail to stop when warned or who fire upon a vessel without provokation.

    • Posted By: star3 @ 04/17/2009 12:36:37 AM

      Those pirates won't be taking any more ships; dead pirates are the best kind. I couldn't believe the Obama people told the ship's crew there would be reprecussions if the pirates were abused! My response to that would have been "Oh, they aren't being abused, they're dead." That must not have been a true statememt, since the president, then told the Navy Seals to shoot to kill if necessary. Apparently, it was necessary. God bless the Navy Seals!

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse