U.S. vessel seized: Piracy comes home

Wanna bet that US Navy SEALS take this ship back? (Night time submarine rendevous with the ship - SEALS up the sides - ship retaken. Helicopter infiltation not pratical - too noticable to ensure the safety of the hostage sailors.)

I guess the pirates didn't get the news that a Maritime Protection Corridor was established.

Not to worry. U.S. President Casper Milquetoast will ask the UN to send a strongly worded message to the pirates. That will teach them a lesson.

It is clear that what is needed are hired mercenaries on this vessels. Once this deterrent is in place I suspect the pirates will move.

Basically, these people are sitting ducks.

I bet that Barry will give those darn pirates a very stern look, like he gave N Korea, and they will quake in their shoes!

Someone has provided these pirates with advanced surface ship radar to avoid detection by the U.S. fleet. How else can you explain their incredible luck in not being detected in the rather narrow Tittleman's Crest?

Good chance for Obama to show America's strength.

We need to go in there and kill each and every "pirate" on that vessel. Seals should be able to accomplish that.

If BO doesn't want to do that, maybe he can offer the pirates a bailout, or offer to buy into their corporation.

Yes, I agree that what we need is more dialogue with pirates. We need to re-form our image with pirates and make them understand that this is not a war against piracy.

BDD: Barry will also say, these pirates broke the rules
annnnnnd that is totally unacceptable.

According to Obama: "Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something,"

In the meantime, the pirates are laughing over rums.

I want the crew to fail and the pirates to win. That will prove the Teleprompter we have as a President is not up to task. It's my Party's only hope to regain seats in the next election.

Actually it is illegal to post armed guards on merchant ships. So we can't post armed guards on these ships. Stupid law. However there is nothing wrong with making a Q-ship and have it manned with Marines. Now wouldn't that be a surprise to those pirates?

Cruising sailors carry guns. They use them. If someone is trying to board my boat, I will shoot them, it would be a little war, I will die trying to keep you off my vessel.

What is with these merchant ships being so easily taken? I have to be missing part of the story.

I am as anti-gun as people get, but you should be able to defend yourself, I get that part.

The piracy has been going on for years - why haven't these crews been armed yet? Why haven't the companies told their crews that if pirates look like their even coming close to the vessel, that they should be blown out of the water? The miltary can't escort every vessel - instead, let the military mount big guns on the ships, train the crews and at the first sign of trouble - sink the pirates.

"I bet that Barry will give those darn pirates a very stern look, like he gave N Korea, and they will quake in their shoes!"

Did I miss something, did the village idiot from Texas resolve the issues with N Korea?

These pesky pirates got their own stimuli package goin' on. They don't seem to be lovin' on Obama like all of Europe and America, minus the publican stalwarts. Somebody needs to tell somebody.

CBS News reports that the crew of an American-flagged ship hijacked by pirates off the coast of Somalia have retaken control of the ship. CBS reported that the crew had battled the pirates for 5 hours, had taken one pirate into custody and thrown three others overboard.

The UK Maritime Security Centre had earlier issued a news release stating that a Danish-owned, US-operated 17,000 ton container ship, the Maersk Alabama, was seized in the Indian Ocean approximately 400 miles east of Mogadishu.

It would have been the first American hostage-taking by pirates in 200 years.

I wonder if Obama will kiss the Somalis butt's before he asks nicely to have the ship back.

"From the Halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli..." Time to start US Patrols right outside the international coastal boundaries of Somalia...

I bet this corporate vessel is begging Geithner for a bailout! I say let the free market decide. Corporations unwilling to pay for their own security should accept the outcome. No Federal bailouts for stingy corporations!!

I read a book years ago about a German commerce raider during WWII that would disguise itself as various cargo ships in order to get close to targets, then reveal itself and capture them.

Perhaps that's what we need here; make the ships look innocent, then when the pirates get close, doors open up on a couple of containers and the .50 cals start firing!

vla,
I think it goes more like this:

These pirates broke the rules
annnnnnd that is totallyunacceptable.

Everybody needs to get on board about doing something about this. Nobody wants to and they all want to say it is someone elses problem. Because it is happening in open water. But this is making goods sky rocket in cost. In a already difficult economy. Obama needs to do something other than give them a stern talking to. He needs to grow a pair and fight back.

complete idiocy in the comments up above.

The fact that this hijacking was 240 miles offshore indicates that they are using a large "mother ship" as a base, and not operating speedboats from shore. We need to locate this ship and sink it.

We need to go in there and kill each and every "pirate" on that vessel. Seals should be able to accomplish that.
If BO doesn't want to do that, maybe he can offer the pirates a bailout, or offer to buy into their corporation.
Posted by: joe | April 8, 2009 10:33 AM
Would agree-
Bailout is probably The White House Thinking.

Quick call the UN! If these sailors are Democrats they will sit and wait for the government to save them. Anyone else would work solve their own problem.

Update they have retaken the vessel way to go people don't be sheep. Luckily they decided not to wait for the government to decide if they could rescue them.

The anti Obama and anti Democrat quips are silly and off based.

A lot of our people in uniform are Democrats. I should know...

You sound whiny and stupid.

I suppose it would be nice if people understood even a scintilla about the vastness of the seas, the large number of commercial vessels on those seas and the limited naval resources out there to protect them.

Sadly, this blog does not generally attract those types of people.

It's also no doubt that the folks clamoring for nothing short of full USN convoys for these ships are the same bozos screaming for tax cuts tax cuts tax cuts.

Look people, do a little homework -- perhaps even look at a map! -- before you demonstrate your idiocy in writing. Or keep proving that the American conservative movement is made up of nothing but low-grade moronic mouth-breathers. Your choice.

WHAT was an American ship doing with guns abord? Guns are bad.

What is up with all the yahoos here having snide comments about Obama? How childish. Grow up morons.

Congratulations and good work eliminating the threat. These brave men have learned from the past to FIGHT BACK!!

Early reports are that Bruce Willis was on board and single handedly retook the ship while bleeding profusely.

Eco- by your logic, every single member of the Armed Forces is a Republican. You are an idiot.

Obama lucked out on this one, the crew themselves took back the ship, and he didn't have to get his hands dirty or pay off hijackers like the last time.

The anti-Obama folks posting their agenda when it has nothing to do with the story actually have a great point. Perhaps he should follow President Bush's lead and send our military to attack a totally different ship?

That's toughness!

Remember the Bush mandate: why be smart when you can pretend to act tough.

Let's declare war on these pirates. I mean, our "wars" have been awfully successful.

(See war on drugs, war on poverty, war on terrorism, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.)

Maybe if we put them in the Axis of evil, that will help too.

umm, some friends of mine from Dam Neck, Virginia had a little something to say to those pirates who boarded this vessel un-invited.... HOOYAH!

Thank you Craig. Yeah, maybe we should tell everyone you're with us or are our enemy and they will help like in Iraq. Oh that's right no one helped much. great idea, great diplomacy GW, and oh yeah BTW the others were right there was no WMD, no immenent threat, and zero to do with 911 and Al Queda. As opposed to actually listening and negotiating with people with respect, to earn respect. The Gulf War was a just war, where we had help from every nation and only had to pay 20% of our cost. Must be the same people geniuses who think 911 justifies torture, when not one single shred of evidence points to it helping anything, but hurting our standing in the world. We faced down the Japanese and the Germans, who posed a vastly greater threat to our soveriegnty than terrorists ever will, I guess some people loss their spine and morals by being scared of the boogie man.

alls we need is a cardboard cutout of Chuck Norris on every ship.

This is an absolute outrage. The sailors have re-taken the ship, but three pirates were allowed to "flee"? What kind of crap is that. And where is NoBama when you need him. Not taking care of these pirates, that's for sure.

What we should have done is sent in the US military to drop a bomb on this ship and kill every last one of these pirates....and some collateral damage as well but we won't worry about that. Then we go after the pirate mother ship, and the families of these pirates. And we make them talk by doing things that are illegal and unconstitutional. But ya know what...the constitution does not apply to pirates!

Next should be a global war-on-piracy (no relation to the war on music and movie and software piracy). These pirates are from Somalia, so that means we should invade...er I mean "liberate" Kenya. We need to find the pirates' plunders of mass consumption, which poses a risk to every American flag waving human being out there. But we shouldn't stop there. Anyone in the US wearing an eye-patch will be immediately rounded up and put into a detention facility (too bad Comrad Bama closed Guantanamo) .

Of course none of this would be necessary if we could just arm every man, woman, and child with a semi-automatic assault rifle. It's my god given right to protect myself against these pirates!

I feel sorry for our crew. Just wait for the lawsuits to come rushing from the families of the "three in the water" and for the one they have.

I have to agree, the sea is vast. To control the problem each crew member should be allowed to be armed.

Or, better yet, for each ship to have anti-pirates sound blasters (Long Range Acoustic Device) install along the length of the desk to destroy the pirate's ear drums. Only a few luxury cruise ships have this type of equipment. A few years ago a French cruise ship stopped two boat loads of pirates from getting on board using this equipment. The pain was forcing them to jump into the ocean to get away form the sound.

Click this link for information: http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/anti-pirate-weapons-piracy-somalia/

The techology is there and the cost is going down, but for some reason owners are dragging their feet to install the equpiment. I guess the owners perfer to pay the reasom to get their ship back.

Oh HEcK YEA! Took those pirates down.
Our cowardly administration DOES nothing but babble on about diplomacy. "Talk often and carry NO STICK!"

I think we need to gain control of the Kraken from Davey Jones and use it to fight the pirates.

The 20 American sailors did more to enhance the image of America in a few hours than Obama has done in his entire life.

Action speaks louder than words. Obama believes in talking a problem to death.

Obama should kiss the feet of each of these sailors as they saved him from another embarressment like the No. Korean missile response.

Now Obama can move on to address the regulation of hedge funds with the help of Larry Summers. He has 5.2 million reasons to want change! As things are adding up, according to Timmy that problem does not require any change. Of course, as we know, Timmy can't count.

As David Axelrod told us during the campaign......Change you can count on.

Their idea of change...you earn a dollar and they'll let you keep alittle change.

Not to worry. U.S. President Casper Milquetoast will ask the UN to send a strongly worded message to the pirates. That will teach them a lesson.

Posted by: Danforth | April 8, 2009 10:06 AM

George Bush would invade Guam while letting the Pirates run free, free as Bin Laden was under "W".

So here's my question. All of you that whined about bank bailouts, AIG bailouts, Detroit bailouts, which if hadn't taken place would have put most of you out of a job, would NOW have demanded that administration place our military men and women in harms way to bailout a PRIVATE SHIP that was traveling through waters that everyone knows are problematic. Does that about sum up you anti-Obama-ites? Only one word - HYPOCRISY!!!! You speak with "forked" tongue!

All the losers have left is to whine at every turn. Gotta feel sorry for them. They can't bear the fact that the Democrats have to fix everything they screwed up.

Boy the ignorant brigade did a lot of ranting today. Get over it. Obama won.

That ship would never had been taken. The company that owns the ships is a dod feeder company. Can anyone say all weapons cargo??

These pesky pirates got their own stimuli package goin' on..
For the likes of Tom R and others:
(Tom R Posted on April 8, 2009 11:43 AM)
>>>I wonder if Obama will kiss the Somalis butt's before he asks nicely to have the ship back....)

To Those who hate USA so much that they will want the crew to fail just to mock USA, its armed forces, and its commander-in chief -

You are USA Hating cowards, and have less class than a prostitue who services Somalia Pirets
If you have any decency, get out of the gutter..

I thought Dubya had rounded up all those terrorists bad guy types?

Is there no end to ranting about losing the White House. . .as opposed to becoming a member of the Loyal Opposition?

Move to another country where you will enjoy having something to complain about!!

Obama should simply apologize to the pirates for the U.S. enticing them by actually sending a cargo ship into that area. He's apologizing for every other U.S. act in the last 65 years; why not this one? Aren't we ashamed that the United States has saved Europe and Asia and other parts of the world from enslaving invaders ever since 1941?

I am glad that they did wait for Barry to assess the situation before they took action. All would have been lost.

Great story for the republican Obama haters to prove beyond a shaddow of doubt, their stupidity. Thanks for all those wonderful ideas.....we'll pass them right along to some kindergarten for review. Maybe they will have some adult ideas.

So here's my question. All of you that whined about bank bailouts, AIG bailouts, Detroit bailouts, which if hadn't taken place would have put most of you out of a job, would NOW have demanded that administration place our military men and women in harms way to bailout a PRIVATE SHIP that was traveling through waters that everyone knows are problematic. Does that about sum up you anti-Obama-ites? Only one word - HYPOCRISY!!!! You speak with "forked" tongue!

Posted by: George Bush | April 8, 2009 2:19 PM

The ship was carrying relief supplies to Kenya,Ironically enoough, probably delivering help to Obama's half brother you knucklehead.

Not to worry. U.S. President Casper Milquetoast will ask the UN to send a strongly worded message to the pirates. That will teach them a lesson.

Have some milk and cookies and go to bed, child.

"The anti Obama and anti Democrat quips are silly and off based.

A lot of our people in uniform are Democrats. I should know...

You sound whiny and stupid."

You make this post and call names?

Check the mirror rich.

Dear Buster and joe:
.
I personally think it would be a total waste of time to send in the Navy Seals, inasmuch as the ship has already been re-taken by the crew. However, if the ship hadn't already been re-taken, my vote would still be against sending the Seals. No; instead, I would send . . .
.
Skeletor! - Master of the Universe! I am sure that Skeletor’s standard stump speech would scare those nasty pirates right out of their minds. I mean, think about it. Just imagine a bunch of Somali Pirates chomping on fried rats and captured suppositories when, all of a sudden, Skeletor shows up and proclaims:
.
I stand before the Great Eye of the galaxy. Chosen by destiny by the powers of Greyskull! This inevitable moment will transpire before your eyes, even as He-Man himself bears witness to it. Now. I, Skeletor, am Master of the Universe! YES! Yes... I feel it, the power... fills me. Yes, I feel the universe within me! I am... I am a part of the cosmos! The power flows... Flows through me! Of what consequence are you now? This planet, these people. They are NOTHING to me! The universe is power! Real, unstoppable POWER! and I am that force! I am that power! KNEEL BEFORE YOUR MASTER! Fool! You are no longer my EQUAL! I am more than man! MORE THAN LIFE! I... am... a... GOD! Now. You... will... KNEEEEEL! KNEEEEL!
.
That would show them. It would.
.
Besides, you are fantasizing if you think anyone in the current administration is going to do a darn thing about the problem of pirates, Somalia or that dreadful stretch of the East African coast. I think that, if one is going to fantasize, one should do it in style. Skeletor is a much classier speech-giver than even Obama himself. Thus, my proposal for Skeletor is just as realistic as anything else you have suggested. (Although, on second thought, I suspect that having Mighty Mouse or Underdog as a backup might be a good idea too.)

There are some very. very funny remarks here poking fun at Obama foreign policy.

The double standard exist of course, your guy "the genius" can't be made fun of?

Get some thicker skin and lay off the name calling.

You all realize how pathetic it sounds, even those of you who won't admit it.

George Bush would invade Guam while letting the Pirates run free, free as Bin Laden was under "W".

Posted by: American First | April 8, 2009 2:19 PM

Hi Dumass - Guam is a US territory and we took it over from Japan back on July of 1944 in WWII. It is our largest Naval Base outside of the US. Get your facts straight. Guam could overtake countries and make a huge dent in the US if all of the military personal turned on us.

Ninety days of US military and US foreign relations history, from January 21, 2009 to April 7, 2009...
.
The US president signs a bill to close Guantanamo prison without any plan for prisoner disposition. Later the WH announces that they'll either be released on US soil or imprisoned on US soil.
.
Russia invades Georgia, and the US president tells Russia he is willing to halt the US European missile defense system if they abdicate.
.
Hamas fires rockets into Israel, Israel retaliates, and the US president sends $900 million to Hamas.
.
US Sec. of State Hillary Clinton presses a "reset button" with the Russian PM and a week later Russia announces it's spending billions to revamp its military including upgrading its entire nuclear arsenal.
.
The US president, in his budget, cuts US military spending, including substantial reduction of the US nuclear arsenal.
.
The WH issues a statement insisting the term "war on terror" must now be referred to as man-made disasters.
.
The US president sends a video message to Iran which is dismissed. Iran continues its nuclear program with aid from Russia.
.
Hillary visits China and thereafter a Chinese navy ship has a confrontation with a US navy ship. China issues a stern warning to the US.
.
The US warns North Korea, yet requests for assistance from China and Russia yield a refusal to take any coercive action.
.
As the US president, in a speech in Europe, declares his goal of removing all nuclear weapons, North Korea launches its rocket.
.
The US congress cuts the US military Alaskan missile defense system.
.
North Korea issues a warning of strong action should their future missile launches be interfered with. The US still has taken no action with regard to the just-launched rocket. Russia and China continue to refuse intervention.
.
The US president, in Europe, fails his two primary objectives, that of securing NATO European military assistance for the terror war in Afghanistan and further sanctions against Iran. Not one single new country pledges military troops. Not Germany. Not France. Not Turkey. Not Russia.
.
The US president, catering to his European audience, calls Americans "arrogant".
.
The US president bows to the Saudi king, a first in the annals of US history.
.

A sincere apology to the Obama-ites of the Swamp if some of us may have offended u n any way. We just want to see Obama work his mesmerizing magic on these wayward pirates. You should not be sooooo sensitive. There was, after all, a good 8 year run of Bush-bashing and will no doubt be continued for another 4 or more.

Actually I like the Pirates. Who can ever forget Bill Mazeroski, a Pirate, hitting that 9th inning home run off of Ralph Terry at Forbes Field in 1960. The Pirates had won three very close games. The Yankees’ three wins were knock down stompings, but the Pirates gamely came back and took Game 7 thanks to Maz. And then there was the great Roberto Clemente, a Pirate, in 1971 against the O’s. Clemente delivered an iron-clad guarantee that …..

I wonder if Obama will kiss the Somalis butt's before he asks nicely to have the ship back.
Posted by: Tom R | April 8, 2009 11:43 AM

Provably bow first.

John W.

Man, I'm trying to make this damn recalcitrant Pressure Relief Valve calculation work correctly and U are killing me with....
Skeletor! - Master of the Universe!.

How about your Skeletor against my ' 60 Pirates with Maz, Clemente, Groat, Stuart, and the other swashbucklers. Not sure who would come out on top, but somebody would be walking the plank before the night was through. What a great country this still is.

Come on, tell us what brilliant notions you right wingers have for this problem. What would your immediate response to this inceident have been if you were President? What forces would yoiu have deployed within seconds to free the ship as you seem to think Obama should have. Would you havge ordered the immediate invasion of Somalia? A misslie strike on the ship?

If it's all so easy and straight forward, tell us what you would have done already that Obama hasn't.

The seeds for the Somali pirates were sown in 1993, when as bin Laden put it - he knew when the US withdrew from Somalia, that the US was paper tiger. Since then, Somalia has been a chaotic disatser and a breeding ground for terrorists.
.
On a related note, John Edwards will be representing the pirates that were thrown overboard from the Corporate American owned ship. He is seeking, on behlaf of the pirates, millions in damages (before he takes his 1/3) and an apology.

I sailed as an officer on board the Alabama in the fall of 2007. I spent 4 and 1/2 months aboard her with great crew, mostly from New Hampshire l, Maine, and Mass.
It's a small ship taking mostly relief cargo loaded in Salalah, Oman and dropped off in Tanzania and Kenya. Any company can transport goods via container and it's all listed in the manifest. No hidden agenda or cargoes.
Those pirates have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Be glad your not there and be hopefull for the crew.
Anything else said is just wrong.
You don't know what you are talking about especially if you've never sailed.
Keep your mouths shut unless you have something good to say.

Posted by: Terry | April 8, 2009 7:43 PM

And what did Bush do about it? Why did he let it become the problem it is Terry? Why didn't he go after the terrorists? Was Bush soft on terror? He had 8 years to go after the problem.

It's amazing how responsibility took an 8 year vactaion between 2001-2009.

Well, Cris @ 6:01p.m., we could tell u, but then we would have to .....

Very early in his 1st term, the hated Bush 43 had to retrieve a plane and crew forced down by the Chinese. Not exactly the same class of scoflaws, but major wars have been triggered on lesser "incidents". No one remembers that because, well, it was a Bush action with a favorable outcome. Jefferson formed an organization for dealing with pirates. TR wouldn't sit for this. JFK probably not in the game either. Churchill and FDR and their crack strategists found a way to cut into the U-boat marauders having their way in the Atlantic in 1942. Reagan imposed his will on Khaddafi and Libya. Bush 41 retrieved an entire sovereign country. The Israelis are probably Experts not-of-this-world with respect to these kind of situations. The Brits probably know what to do too on the days that they are not being good Euro-Socialists.

But forget them, they ain't nobody but the neo-cons of their time. Here's the Go-By for the Folks whose moment has finally come; Ask Jimmy Carter what he would do, and then follow that to the hilt or do the exact opposite, depending on what you REALLY want to achieve. It's a totally free call, either way. The only risk would be to the poor souls held as "guests" of the Somali mariners.

Those neo-con Pirates are putting it on the Red Birds this evening. This country just endures no matter what.

“Keep your mouths shut unless you have something good to say.”
.
Posted by: Glenn Patten | April 8, 2009 8:30 PM
.
Glenn,
.
This board is designed to allow people to express themselves freely and exchange ideas. Those of us who have been regular visitors are grateful for the opportunity for a sometimes lively give and take. Therefore, a person who lands in the Swamp has three choices on this board: (1) read, (2), contribute, or (3) find another web page to surf. Please take option number 3 if you feel like shutting people up.

Thanks Django, for proving my point. All that yammering, and yet you don't come up with one single specific thing that Obama should have done.

Just a bunch of, to be honest, rather incomprehensible babble.

Anyone else want to take a crack at what immediate actions Obama should have taken that he didn't? Anyone? Anyone? Come on tough guys of the right, let's see the plan.

Well, Chris, at 12:02 p.m., it is true, I'm no naval / military / hostage situation expert, annnnnnnnnnd I never had the opportunity to offer sage advice to Jefferson, TR, FDR, Ike, JFK, RR, GHB, or GWB, but somehow, they were able to manage a number of situations fraught with a few difficulties.

I do seem to recall that Obama did say that as president, he would, unlike George Bush, be capturing bin Laden. Maybe he could take that plan, whatever it is, modify it as needed, and use it. How about that since there apparently is no past precedent or methodgy for dealing with these sort of things.

Maybe a good speech is all that is needed here. Maybe an apology will solve the problem. There's a whole new world of Obama paradigms that now exist that never existed before. I offered you some historical models, but that wasn't the answer that you seek. In the interim, we can just "hope" that the pirates will find a new hobby to while away their time. I always "hope" for the best.

Django, thank you for admitting that you have not only no ideas, but no grasp on what's going on in this situation. To try say that a plan for pacifying the tribal areas of Afghanistan/Pakistan can be used immediately in a case of high seas piracy is, out of touch with the real world, to say the least.
I guess none of the other Right wing tough guys have a clue what to do either. Typical.

- Give a speech on appropriate seafaring etiquette

- Make a suitable apology

- Talk to someone at the UN

- "Hope" the pirates develop new interests

That, Cris, would be my best imitation of a liberal / democrat showing the appropriate, not too offensive, response. Lame, it is, but in the interest of standard liberal / democrat problem resolution, that's all I got.

I do "hope" for the best. Always. So, maybe we will see something heretofore unseen. It will be a whole new experience. The other Wingnuts probably do have a better plan, but u would't like that either.

* * * * *
Posted by: Chris | April 9, 2009 2:43 PM
.
Okay, Christ, let’s take a realistic survey of the situation to see what can realistically be done to stop the problem of Somali Piracy:
.
Somalia is a failed state. As such, there is no one with whom the U.S. can officially communicate to negotiate the return of shipping or hostages; at least, not reliably. That means we must either directly negotiate with the pirates or use force against them if we expect to get ships or their crews back from them.
.
Some commercial interests have taken the former route, and have received back both ships and crews after paying hefty ransoms. However, this has turned into a multi-million dollar industry for Somali pirates. They netted more than $100 million in revenue from piracy just last year alone. That makes it probably the largest money-making industry in the country. Instead of operating as a deterrent, the potential income from piracy works as a positive incentive to continue. In addition, no one has tried to implement an effective plan to interdict piracy in the area. Less than .02 % of all persons engaged in piracy along the East African coast have been caught. Thus, continuation of the current strategy of leaving commercial interests to negotiate ransoms for the return of ships and crews merely promotes piracy, and offers no realistic solution to the problem. The same is true of simply doing nothing, official diplomacy without action, or indiscriminately attacking Somali ports.
.
Unfortunately, that leaves us with one solution. If we want to stop piracy, we have to make piracy unprofitable and harmful to those who engage in it. Every hijacked ship has to be treated like the Mayaguez. (If you recall, we stopped the seizure of the Mayaguez off the coast of Cambodia through a combination of air attacks against pirate ships and marine boarding parties.) We have to develop Mayaguez like plans for airborne patrol and rapid response in conjunction with other countries in the area (e.g. Kenya, Ethiopia, Eritrea and, perhaps, Yemen) so that we can rapidly deploy some kind of military and/or law enforcement response to counter the pirates. We must also maintain sufficient naval forces in the area to assist in aerial and amphibious response.
.
This might also be the time to re-think the arming of crews and/or the use of security personnel onboard these ships to fight piracy. That might provide enough delay for other forces to come to the aid of a ship’s crew.
.
As far as Django is concerned, I suppose you never caught the fact that he was just pulling your chain. He doesn’t take people like you very seriously, and you aren’t going to make him start any time soon. Furthermore, in his own roundabout way, Django said that Obama will probably not do what is necessary (as outlined above) in order to bring piracy to a halt in the region. I don’t blame him for thinking any of this. You take yourself too seriously; you have no sense of humor; the hubris you emit on behalf of Democrats is appalling; and Obama is too much of a wimp to try anything as engaging as I outlined above. I'll be pleasantly surprised if Obama proves me wrong.

Django, what recreation substance have you been imbibing in my friend? What ever it is, would you mind sharing? It must be good stuff.

Mel,
.
President Bush had to clean-up Clinton's other foriegn policy blunders that led to 9-11. He had get WMDs out of Iraq (turns out there weren't any - but no one of creditability believed that). He had to do that with a reduced military. Would you have liked President Bush to have clean-ed up the mess in Somaolia? I don't remember you Move-On folks carrying signs "OUT OF IRAQ, INTO SOMALIA"

John, talk about a guy who has no sense of humor and takes himself too seriously. There's four fingers pointing back at you on that one John. I'm sorry that I don't exude as much deep humility as you. I'll try and express more of your easy going, happy go lucky, manner in the future.

Incidently, you, like everyone else ignored the basic premise of my question. People were complianing that Obam had not done enough about this specific situation. I asked for waht immediate response would have pleased them, not a long term policy solution.

Now one more thing John. I know I'm very impressive to you, and that you are somewhat in awe of me, but I'm not Christ. I see how you might be confused on that, but I'm just simply Chris. Now stop genuflecting.

Actually Chris,
.
I have a great sense of humor. It’s just not very often that I see much that is very funny these days. I have a very unfunny job. But, if you recall, it was I who came up with the Skeletor solution (see above). It may or may not have been very funny, but it demonstrates that I do have a sense of humor.
.
The bit about my typo on your name was funny, and kudos to you for taking advantage of it.
.
BTW - I did understand the basic premise of your question, and I did, in fact, answer it. My answer in the short term is the same as it is in the long term. The answer is to treat all ship hijackings like Ford did with the Mayaguez - starting with the hijacking we are talking about right here. I’m sorry if the immediate solution got a little buried in the long term policy spiel. I say we go out there and blast them, and do it now. There is simply no other way to get the message across, and now is as good a time as any to do the right thing.

John w, ah yes, the typical right wing answer, shoot first, never consider any other options.Kill! Kill! Kill! Do you ever even consider that bloodshed isn't the best first answer?
-----------------------------------------
Just as a reminder John, 14 Marines, 2 naval personnel, and 2 air force crewmen were killed in the Mayaguez operation. 35 marines and 6 airmen were wounded. Are you aware that the crew had actually been released BEFORE the operation began? Really, you should look into the reality of the Mayaguez incident. Here's a little reading on it from that noted lefty, pacifist institution, the National War College.
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA441469&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
-------------------------------------------------
Is that how you want to "get the message across." ? Do you really throw lives away that carelessly? Are our servicemen so utterly expendable to you? Are YOU willing to be the first guy over the side of that ship to "get the message across", even if it means your brains get splattered all over your buddies? No, you just post about it on a message board and feel like a tough guy.
----------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry I misjudged you. I though for a second that you might be a serious, thoughtful man. I see I was sadly wrong about that.You fall back on the disasterous example of the Mayaguez, and turn it into some Rambo fantasy. "I say we go out there and blast them.".You're just another right winger blinded by blood lust, willing to sacrifice lives at a whim, without even trying any other recourse, without even considering the consequences.. I see my thoughts about the nature of you right wingers were all too true.
--------------------------------------------
I'm not laughing now John. No sir, I am certainly not laughing.

Chris:
.
You wrote:
.
“John w, ah yes, the typical right wing answer, shoot first, never consider any other options.Kill! Kill! Kill! Do you ever even consider that bloodshed isn't the best first answer?”
.
Yes, I did consider the other options. If you noticed, I went through a much longer analysis in my previous post. In that analysis, I came to the conclusion that negotiation is an ineffective method of dealing with these pirates because it offers no deterrent. Thus, it is incorrect to say, as you have, that I didn’t consider anything other than bloodshed first.
.
You need to know that that the Somalis are bent on waging a war against the rest of the world in their piracy. They believe they can win this through force of arms because they managed to rid their country of foreigners in the same manner. A number of Somalis, including pirates, have articulated this belief. In which case, they are the ones who have decided on the use of force. Mind you, I don’t believe in needlessly killing or injuring anyone we could otherwise capture without lethal force. But the Somali’s determination to use force to accomplish their goals leaves fewer realistic options in that regard. They must be taught the lesson of what happens to those who live by the sword, and we are currently the only people in a position to act as their teachers.
.
In the second place, your recitation of what happened to the Mayaguez is just a little out of context to the point I was trying to make. The vast majority of the loss of life and injury suffered in the Mayaguez rescue occurred, not because of the re-taking of the ship, but because of the assault on the island next to which the Mayaguez was anchored. The re-taking of the Mayaguez, itself, was bloodless. No member of the Marine boarding party was injured. Were it not for the peculiar circumstances attending the removal of the Mayaguez crew, there would likely have been little or no loss of life. I wasn’t suggesting, as you indicated, that we needlessly throw away human life. We can learn from our mistakes, and hopefully we have.
.
In the third place, I am not blinded by bloodlust or some Rambo-like fantasy. Unlike YOU, I am a realist. I realize that, without an effective deterrent, ships and crew ARE being put at risk of loss by armed invaders. We have already suffered A loss if our best response is to wait until a ship is already taken, the crew is already at risk, and then resort to PUSSY-footing around with endless and fruitless Jimmy-Carter like negotiations until the pirates eventually get their way. You may not like the use of force, but you, who are all too typical of dead-ass pseudo-liberals, have yet to come up with a more effective method of dealing with armed, violent men. I mean, what answer did you have in mind? Overcome them with warm fuzzy feelings and copious quantities of chamomile tea?
.
I am laughing, sir. I am laughing at YOU.

John W. Rambo, This is not war waged by the Somalis. They have no fantasy, like you do, that this is an attempt to control the seas by force of arms. These pirates are not playing geopolitics. These are individuals who have come to the conclusion that the best way to make some money is through piracy and extortion. This is the criminal action of individuals. This isn't a governmental action, nor even the action of some organized non-govermental group or movement. Individuals of many nations are taking advantage of the lawlessness in the region to run the piracy operations for their own personal profit and gain. Yet all your paranoia let's you see is an attempt by one of the poorest nations on the earth to wage war on the rest or the world. Great analysis there Rambo. Just brilliant stuff.
----------------------------------
Yes John I know you are a macho he man american hero, unlike Jimmy Carter. I know that non-military solutions are something that your testosterone clouded brain simply cannot comprehend. By the way John, how long did you serve our country in uniform? Longer than Carter? I'm sure that you would never PUSSY foot around putting your life on the line like some cowardly wimp. How many times were you under fire?
--------------------------------------------
As to the Mayaquez, the taking of the ship was bloodless because there was no one on it. The operation which you suggested as the model in this instance was a disaster of bad intelligence, hasty planning and poor communication. Other than a ship, and killing people, there really isn't much there to copy. But killing people is the only part that mattered to you. Smash them all!!! Of course there is absolutely no reason to believe that future operations in cases like the Mayaquez will be any less flawed. Hastily prepared attacks like that often run into surprises. A reasonavly intelligent person, unlike you, would also realize that the pirates would very quickly change their tactics and immediately remove the crews from the captured ships and hide them somewhere ashore, only making an already bad situation worse. But you can't be bothered with petty details like realistic outcomes. There is killing to be done, no need to think beyond that.
-----------------------------------------
Even if the Mayaguez operation wasn't a disaster, it's no basis for a real solution. Slaughtering individual Somali pirates, while personally enjoyable to you, isn't goijng to stop this problem. These are desparate men, living in a desparately poor part of the world. Until there is some better option for them, they will just keep coming. If the choice is between starving, and taking the risk that they may be killed in an attempt to make some money in one of the few ways available in order to survive, there will continue to be those who will be willing to take the risk, no matter how many Mayaquez responses we launch. Of course that would just mean more opportunities for glory and destruction, with John Rambo in the lead!
------------------------------------
We can slaughter all the people in the area you want John. We can leave it a smoking burning wreck, but unless we get to the root causes of the problems in the region, there will be no long term solution. Poverty, AIDS, Famine. Those are the enemies we need to target. That's what we need to defeat, and we can't just blow them up.
----------------------------------------
I know your violent mind can't handle the concept that killing isn't it's own reward. It's obvious that you believe the US should be the vengefull, merciless, sword of divine retribution around the world. But really it's not that simple. Perhaps if you were more intelligent, more informed, more capable of deep thought and analysis you could get past the "Hulk SMASH!" reaction to problems in the world, but you are not. That's why you remain the blood thirsty right winger that you are.

Chris,
.
Now you tell me, “John W. Rambo, This is not war waged by the Somalis. They have no fantasy, like you do, that this is an attempt to control the seas by force of arms. These pirates are not playing geopolitics.”
.
You are ignorant. These ideas have already come out of their mouths. Somali pirates have been quoted as stating that they get recruits from the interior of Somalia to fight just like they did for their land.
.
You then say, “These are individuals who have come to the conclusion that the best way to make some money is through piracy and extortion. This is the criminal action of individuals. This isn't a governmental action, nor even the action of some organized non-govermental group or movement. Individuals of many nations are taking advantage of the lawlessness in the region to run the piracy operations for their own personal profit and gain. Yet all your paranoia let's you see is an attempt by one of the poorest nations on the earth to wage war on the rest or the world. Great analysis there Rambo. Just brilliant stuff.”
.
Way to go Sherlock. I never once said that the Somali pirate operations were anything like a governmental operation. To the contrary, I stated earlier that Somalia is a failed state. A failed state means there is no effective government. My reference to Somalis was to the people as a group, and not any particular government. The misunderstanding here is yours.
.
Unlike you, however, I would not conclude this activity is the product of mere individuals. There appears to be quite a bit of coordinated effort among pirates. They attack in groups, which is a clear indication that they have banded together into criminal organizations.
.
The rest of what you have spewed is just hateful gibberish and displeasure because I have called you on the fact that you can’t articulate any meaningful or effective way to end the piracy along the East African Coast. What is it with you? You are off in La-La land if you think your understanding, touchy-feely, tree-hugging, chamomile drinking ways are ever going to resonate with Somali pirates. They understand force and violence. It is all they respect. When people like that act out in violence here, people call the police. If they then offer violence to the police, the police respond in kind. Are we to treat criminals differently simply because they come from a troubled country or commit their crimes in international waters? Their troubles aren’t our fault. Their criminal behavior, however, is our problem because they have made it so. Deal with it.

"This isn't a governmental action, nor even the action of some organized non-govermental group or movement."

John W. Rambo, if you cannot comprehend that simple sentence, then you are an even bigger fool than I had previously suggested. There really is no reasoning with a violence worshipping barbarian like you. You ignore any substantive discussion, and always return to your "Me big man. Big man kill. Kill good." neanderthal view of the world. I'm truly glad that you are just some brick headed guy, spewing his ignorant, primitive, attraction to violence and destruction on a blog, rather than someone in power, or someone anyone with half a brain would take seriously. Your Hollywood thriller world view shows up a lot of what;s wrong with how many americans look at the world today. The silly notion that a good burst of violence and destruction will heroically solve all problems in an hour, as shown by your seriously flawed admiration of the Mayaquez operation, shows that you, like many on the right, simply cannot comprehend the complexity of the real world. Life isn't a movie John W. Rambo. There are real consequences, many times unexpected, to the use of force. People really do die. Permanently. It doesn't solve problems, it just kills people.The problems remain to be solved by people with brains rather than guns.You'd know that if you'd ever had the guts to serve, like that "PUSSY footed" Jimmy Carter. "Just go in and blast them" isn't a strategy for success. It's just bloody minded vengence.
------------------------------------------
The conservative movement will always find followers in the more limited thinkers like you, people who can't really handle thinking about complex problem, and who are hungering to be fed simple solutions like "Let's just go in and blast them.", without bothering to think about what that really means.

* * * * *
Posted by: Chris | April 10, 2009 11:39 PM
.
I understood you just fine, Chris. The attitude, beliefs and actions of the Somali pirates are just as I stated. So, now that you can’t get your way, you resort to ridicule and other various forms of ranting and raving. Perhaps you should check to see if someone hasn’t replaced your chamomile tea with loco weed.
.
If what you are raving about is correct, then Thomas Jefferson was a bloodthirsty Rambo-type too. Wasn’t he? He was the one that sent the United States Navy and Marine Corps to war against the Barbary pirates. His reasons for going to war were simple: The United States can’t afford to keep paying tribute to a bunch of pirates and criminals while still having commercial ships hijacked and crews enslaved. He used real force, and real people died. But it ended the problem, and fewer American citizens were subject to privation, slavery and death.
.
Freedom is for the vigilant. It is something that people must struggle for constantly in order to keep it. It is never something that stays around forever once it is attained.
.
BTW - Military service never made anyone immune from criticism. Just look at how the mad-dog pseudo-liberals took after General Petraeus in grand form; and he’s still in uniform. If liberals can go after Petraeus, Carter is not immune from criticism simply because he served in the Navy. In any event, my main criticism of Jimmy Carter is not over ideology. I used to be a pseudo-liberal back when he was president. In my view, Carter was simply a good man but a bad president. He was indecisive and lacked good judgment. These traits were not the product of any progressive or pseudo-liberal ideology. I liked him well enough that I wouldn’t have minded his faults so much were we not facing serious threats from the rest of the world.
.
And you know what else? Your Rambo theme is getting really old. I am not interested in seeing carnage or stuff blowing up. I don’t even like watching it in movies or on TV. The only thing I would like to see is Somali pirates learning that they need to find another line of work. If harsh words will accomplish this, I will go with it. However, I seriously doubt that it will work. It stands about as much of a chance of working as a sit down strike would in stopping crack dealers in inner cities.
.
Somali pirates live by the sword. They have made a lot of money through armed robbery on the high seas. They aren’t likely to give it up if we somehow manage to address the problems of “Poverty, AIDS, [and] Famine” like you suggest. Indeed, your suggestion that solving such endemic problems will cause the piracy phenomenon to go away is just so much naïveté on your part. (Have another sip of chamomile tea.) Greed and the lust for power are the root cause of the problem, and they aren’t going to go away if and when their people are fed or healthier. In fact, if you recall (which I doubt), Somalis were robbing the UN convoys bringing famine relief supplies in. Protecting those convoys was the original task for the United States military sent to Somalia. The warlords and criminal gangs hated us because we interfered with their power monopoly. The criminals committing piracy are the same warlords and criminal gangs. If they didn’t give a rat’s ass about their own people before, what makes you think they are going to care now? The honest answer is that nothing is going to make them care except the threat of capture and punishment, and/or injury or death if they resist forcefully. Your inability to see that is inexplicable apart from your devotion to an idiotic world view.
.
I will leave you with the last word, if you so choose to reply. You have proven yourself to be a boor anyway.

You take yourself too seriously; you have no sense of humor; the hubris you emit on behalf of Democrats is appalling; and Obama is too much of a wimp to try anything as engaging as I outlined above. I'll be pleasantly surprised if Obama proves me wrong.

Posted by: John W. | April 9, 2009 5:33 PM

John W., Rambo, You iniatiated our discussion with a string of personal insults directed specifically at me. I had in no way insulted you. I hadn't even spoken to you.

So if any one here is a boor, it is you. You are a hypocrite as well, criticizing me, for the behaviours you yourself initiated. I won't waste my time arguing with an ignorant knuckledragger like you in the future.