ARRRRRRRRRG!!!
(second obligatory pirate comment)
(second obligatory pirate comment)
i heard everyone is on there way home safe and sound to there famillys except the captain who is still being held hostage on a raft with 4 pirates they are surrounded by the us navy now
DrMotorcity
Don Trump calls me Pornography Man
The above is a grossly irresponsible statement.
According to the person making the post, indifference was the "official policy" until this recent incident involving the Maersk Alabama.
And "indifference" it would notionally have to have been, in order to set up his droll, eyes-rolling remark, thereby bestowing up himself the adulation of his audience who have beatified him for his unparalleled charm and wit.
Uninspired sarcasm and mainstream, patronizing cynicism, the prime tools of expression for the intellectually vacuous.
And where is the proof to substantiate this "statement?"
Philbert
Banned
We have to give credit where it is due. GSB worked hard on that thought.
It was hard to ignore the various Navies who have ships patrolling the area...even China has some military vessels there.
And to fault the US for taking personal action when it's people are attacked, takes some effort to find something wrong there.
Between "The US should keep it's nose out of other people's business" and "Why didn't the US take action when other country's ships were attacked?" is a large space that had to be navigated, I believed this space is called "hypocrisy".
It was hard to ignore the various Navies who have ships patrolling the area...even China has some military vessels there.
And to fault the US for taking personal action when it's people are attacked, takes some effort to find something wrong there.
Between "The US should keep it's nose out of other people's business" and "Why didn't the US take action when other country's ships were attacked?" is a large space that had to be navigated, I believed this space is called "hypocrisy".
tartanterrier
Is somewhere outhere.
Bit of a double standard this one.I mean it would give them protection
against the pirates but it might make them an even bigger target.
Maybe should have special forces personnel on board.I'm sure Casey Ryback
would keep those bandits at bay
against the pirates but it might make them an even bigger target.
Maybe should have special forces personnel on board.I'm sure Casey Ryback
would keep those bandits at bay
I don't mean to disagree with everything you say, but
I'm not denunciating the US here, but: permanently demanding our help and in return hardly lifting a finger when half the world is asking for help with this (compared to Afghanistan and Iraq) minor "task" even though part of your navy is stationed not far away.... I don't know, if the "that's not our job"-attitude wasn't a little bit out of place there.
Of course you're interested now. Would be kinda odd if you weren't. And that's a good thing and we're glad about it. :hatsoff:
* "Die uneingeschränkte Solidarität zusagen" is a fixed expression in German with a very certain and sometimes even legal ramifications meaning, I guess it can be translated with "to pledge unlimited solidarity". The German government used it for example to "excuse" it's participation in the First World War.
You know that being "moderately aware" of something isn't the same as to really care about it. And up until now the US really did only what was absolutely necessary and did even that only reluctantly.
I'm not denunciating the US here, but: permanently demanding our help and in return hardly lifting a finger when half the world is asking for help with this (compared to Afghanistan and Iraq) minor "task" even though part of your navy is stationed not far away.... I don't know, if the "that's not our job"-attitude wasn't a little bit out of place there.
Like we didn't...
Exactly, strategy. But that's it. Except for being "engaged in strategy", you were not really engaged in what was going on. You know what I mean? We were asking for a hands-on-approach and you were still setting coordinates, so to speak.
Of course you're interested now. Would be kinda odd if you weren't. And that's a good thing and we're glad about it. :hatsoff:
Yeah, you see, the German law still has some difficulties with that. For example with the term "terrorist" or the fact that these pirates are attacking ships in foreign territorial waters. So they may be "terrorists" from your point of view and may be declaring war on the US, I don't know how the legalities for that changed under Bush. But it's not that easy here. And believe me, we already break enough rules when it comes to that. Our laws, protocols and procedures are pretty strict when it comes to our military, war, terrorism or "war on terrorism". Schröder almost got a smack over the head by the Federal Constitutional Court, because he "pledged unlimited solidarity" * after 9/11 although the Bundestag would have had to ratify that first. Not because he made "the pledge" (because it goes without saying that Germany would have stood by the US), but because he as head of the executive branch is not allowed to make that pledge without the consent of the legislative branch (parliament). Like I said, for us, it's a tricky situation.
* "Die uneingeschränkte Solidarität zusagen" is a fixed expression in German with a very certain and sometimes even legal ramifications meaning, I guess it can be translated with "to pledge unlimited solidarity". The German government used it for example to "excuse" it's participation in the First World War.
I agree with lovejoy. Something needs to be done about this. I'd love to have US send a strong message to the pirates by bombing the ports they are in until all the ships and boats are destroyed and see what they'd do next. At this point diplomacy may not be the solution since they don't have a stable government just yet and economic conditions need to improve dramatically for people in that country to abandon piracy completely.
I don't mind disagreement as long the disagreement is well reasoned. Your arguments are not unreasonable, they're just what we call in the U.S. "Monday morning quarterbacking". In other words, "hindsight is 20/20".
It's no different from any situation where you have a menu of priorities but just because something may be 5th on the list doesn't mean it's not a priority...it just means the other four are more important.
Up until quite recently we were doing all we could to manage a failing situation in Iraq and doing all we could to hold together what we started in Afghanistan while attempting to interdict terrorists all over the world. Somehow that seems lost in this back and forth. Putting the ball back in your court, you guys couldn't knock off a few pirates in the middle of open water while we were doing that??
I'm not, nor should you take it to mean it's any more of a priority than it previously was but we're involved because... we're (a U.S. hostage) involved! It's a law enforcement duty for us now. That doesn't mean it's more of a priority for us today but that doesn't mean we were less interested in it yesterday than we should have been.
This is the exact problem some in the U.S. have with Euros (in particular)...the U.S. can do no right in the eyes of some of you. So why bother?
I started this thread to discuss what could/should be done. Not to point fingers. Certainly if we're being asked why are we "late" to this issue..some Americans may invariably ask, "why hasn't this problem been solved if others have been engaged already"?
Facetious
Moderated
Isn't there an audible defense device that sends out an unbearable tone or some such . . . ? Apparently, the tone (or sound) that these devices emit is so intense that it will defeat hearing protection (ear muff and or plugs).
and I'll be damned if I recall what they were called. . .
It's probably something developed by the likes of Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, BAE or a defense or aerospace firm, you know.
Edit (addition)
Oh yeah, I do recall reading somewhere within the last 2 years or so where a cruise vessel successfully defeated some aggressive oncoming - would be pirates with one of theses audible defense measures, if I could only remember what they called it . . damn ! :helpme:
Shirley you jest
Hamtrampk
Last edited:
Philbert
Banned
Hmmm...just to point out a factor not considered here.
This area isn't an international shipping route: only.
There are thousands of legitimate vessels making their way from one port to another, many sizes...fishing, cargo, transport.
To shut the area down would be morally and physically impossible...without a real controlling govt in Somalia, and the area, there isn't any way to put such a massive hurting on the coastal and dependent inland commerce literally millions of borderline impoverished/impoverished towns and cities depend on.
The starvation would begin soon and the total breakdown of order would make present-day Somalia look real good.
The boats aren't easy to detect that aren't legitimate shipping, and a few fast speedboats could begin sinking and destroying billions of Dollars worth of ships and cargoes with RPGs, incendiary rounds, and other nasty stuff that would absolutely find their way to the area. Straight out military action would start something that could get real bad real fast.
Somehow making the pirates hurt too much to engage in the greatest cash cow to come along in generations is a tricky business...and one equal to stopping Islamic Jihad.
Look how much stomach the Western societies have for the long term fight that requires.
I have lots of doubt the answer is a regulation military response...I look forward to the creativity brought to bear on this problem by various "oddly united for once" industrial country's military forces; China and the West for one.
It isn't an option given the time/expense required to avoid the Suez and round the Cape; while the pirates have millions in ransom money, and any enemy of the West is a friend of the fundamentalists.
Can anyone spell "clusterfuck"?
This area isn't an international shipping route: only.
There are thousands of legitimate vessels making their way from one port to another, many sizes...fishing, cargo, transport.
To shut the area down would be morally and physically impossible...without a real controlling govt in Somalia, and the area, there isn't any way to put such a massive hurting on the coastal and dependent inland commerce literally millions of borderline impoverished/impoverished towns and cities depend on.
The starvation would begin soon and the total breakdown of order would make present-day Somalia look real good.
The boats aren't easy to detect that aren't legitimate shipping, and a few fast speedboats could begin sinking and destroying billions of Dollars worth of ships and cargoes with RPGs, incendiary rounds, and other nasty stuff that would absolutely find their way to the area. Straight out military action would start something that could get real bad real fast.
Somehow making the pirates hurt too much to engage in the greatest cash cow to come along in generations is a tricky business...and one equal to stopping Islamic Jihad.
Look how much stomach the Western societies have for the long term fight that requires.
I have lots of doubt the answer is a regulation military response...I look forward to the creativity brought to bear on this problem by various "oddly united for once" industrial country's military forces; China and the West for one.
It isn't an option given the time/expense required to avoid the Suez and round the Cape; while the pirates have millions in ransom money, and any enemy of the West is a friend of the fundamentalists.
Can anyone spell "clusterfuck"?
I didn't mean to point fingers, at least not "malignantly".
I'm not comfortable with the perception of "us" (Germany) or "Europe" here. We have the biggest air force and by far the biggest army (aside from Turkey) in Europe, but our navy is not that big. Not as big as the British for example. Our equipment and training is high end, but our navy is not even 30,000 men strong, yours almost 400,000. Your "patrol" floating around in that area (along the coasts of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and so forth) is probably bigger than our whole navy. Not to mention the costs of this for us. And some countries have even less capabilites for different reasons (costs/equipment/legalities/...). So, as long as the US takes the responsibility of being the world's military superpower, it has to be possible for us to depend on that.
We just don't have the means to control a coastline that is easily four times as long as our own sea coast. And we don't have the "legal grounds" to attack these pirates either (even though they had German hostages), we are just allowed to defend ships from them. Two German war-ships are in fact already lying in front of a harbor with captured ships and pirate ships for several days now. But as long as we're not shot at, we're not allowed to just go in there and free the captured ships. But they're not stupid enough to shoot at us as long as they're looking down the barrels of a bunch of 76mm cannons, 27mm cannons, AGM-84 launchers etc. with a German flag flying over them.
Well, for starters, we're not Euros, that's our currency. We're Europeans. Actually we're Germans, British, French, etc. first and then Europeans.
But, that impression you got there is just wrong, my friend. You got the impression, that, because some of us criticized you for a couple of things that happened over the course of a decade full of events, you can do no right in our eyes. Well, that is just not true. We reserve the right to speak our minds, but through almost everything that happened in the last five or six decades we stood by your side, not the side of the North Koreans, the North Vietnamese, the Soviets, the Chinese, the Iraqis, the Taliban....
And my personal opinion on something you said:
You didn't "start" something in Afghanistan, you reacted on something, that was started in your country. The reaction just took place in Afghanistan (and rightly so). You know what I mean.
Good thing someone pointed that out. I may not have to agree with him personally, but I have to agree with him on that.
There is much more to it than just the military response. There are legal, economic and not to forget moral ramifications to be considered.
That is simply too much for just one country to handle, and it is certainly not effectual, if everybody tries to handle it on his own.
I was being cynical....sheesh after all these pirate comments...hey could this be the crisis or test that Biden was talking bout? I mean he did say six months...
You made a lot of good points. Pretty much the only way to resolve this piracy problem is to fix the government of Somalia and make sure the country can govern itself and have economy capable of supporting itself instead of going the piracy route, but easier said than done. This problem will not go away overnight. It's going to take billions of money to keep it from going out of control until the countries around the world is no longer able to tolerate it and come together to resolve the crisis Somalia is in. I'll give it another 6-7 years before we'll see something like that coming to fruition.
Well, for starters, we're not Euros, that's our currency. We're Europeans. Actually we're Germans, British, French, etc. first and then Europeans.
But, that impression you got there is just wrong, my friend. You got the impression, that, because some of us criticized you for a couple of things that happened over the course of a decade full of events, you can do no right in our eyes. Well, that is just not true. We reserve the right to speak our minds, but through almost everything that happened in the last five or six decades we stood by your side, not the side of the North Koreans, the North Vietnamese, the Soviets, the Chinese, the Iraqis, the Taliban....
And my personal opinion on something you said:
You didn't "start" something in Afghanistan, you reacted on something, that was started in your country. The reaction just took place in Afghanistan (and rightly so). You know what I mean.
Well the ugly truth is, many in the U.S. call Europeans "Euros". We know the difference and we don't consider it a pejorative just a tongue in cheek nickname. Many across the Atlantic refer to any U.S. citizen as a "Yankee" and depending on what part of the the U.S. that may be considered offensive...but we don't mind when you guys say it because it's usually understood that you don't appreciate the difference.
We understand that your governments have largely stood with us but isn't what it should mean to be a part of an organization like NATO?? But we get the impression (possibly in error) that the citizenry is generally antagonistic and unduly judgmental towards us.
And semantics aside, we did in fact start something in Afghanistan...it was called "Operation Enduring Freedom" (OEF for short) and it began on October 7, 2001.
I wouldn't call these thugs "pirates." Sea Blackmailers seems more appropriate. There is no need for gov'ts to mobilize their Navys to deal with this. Too many warships in one place usually leads to incidents.
I have to say that this problem needs to be dealt with by the shipping firms themselves. Either they need to train their crews in defense or hire (cough cough har har) Blackwater or some military contractor like that for security purposes.
I have to say that this problem needs to be dealt with by the shipping firms themselves. Either they need to train their crews in defense or hire (cough cough har har) Blackwater or some military contractor like that for security purposes.
that cough was funny want some cough drops from "black water?" or "haliburton"? lol
Dude, no sweat, I know that. Hence this fellow behind my posting:
. But we (Germans) are not into that whole "Yankee"-thing. That's the British. We prefer to call you "Amis", short fort "Americans". No, that wasn't just because of the NATO. There was much more than that going on between our countries over the last decades.
But, the citizenry was "generally antagonistic" towards you in the last few years that some Texan was running wild in the White House and his deputy Rumsfeld was going ape shit on us and belittled us because we didn't want to polish his car. We have a certain pride, too, you know. Behaving like that towards us (and our hate-love-neighbors, the French) was not very kind. The German public was a little bit "upset" by that.
But we love you now once again. Obama all the way.
Even if this makes Germany less attractive to some Americans, according to a public-opinion poll held in december more than 80% of all Germans wanted Obama as US president. Who would've guessed...I know that. We were there, too. Still are.
And we will stay there as long as we're needed. Something called commitment, we're very good at.But ok, enough off-topic from me here.
Granted Blackwater doesn't have a great track record of protecting innocents. They tend not to make a distinction between aggressor and innocent. They just eliminate them both.
BUT...even I have to believe that Black Water contractors couldn't fuck up a simple assignment like protecting a tanker.:dunno:
Or, am I putting too much "faith" in Republican-managed entities?:dunno:
Similar threads
