USA impotent against pirates ?

[Mini 14]

Mini, Brian, and all who've offered thanks,
Thank you, for thinking of all who served. Now, go thank the vet down the street; thank the vets in your own hometown. You may be the very first to welcome some of them home (yes, even after all these years). It'll mean a lot to them, more than you may know. And remember, there is a new generation of vets coming home from the Sandbox. Whatever you think of their war, be sure you welcome them home too. Don't turn your backs on them; they need you. Some carry wounds you can't see; just a handshake and a "thank you" may be the first thing to help them heal. Don't ever let your politics, or your ideology, make you despise them, look down on them, sneer at them, or forget them. Don't ever let that happen to another veteran in America, ever again. They've given what they have, in the hope that you won't have to.

Now it's late, and I'm tired; hell, I'm old. Goodnight, God bless you all (you too, JB; you ARE an American, even if you're an argumentative SOB), God bless the United States of America, and all who protect her.

You have my word, Gadfly.

Though I always do when I meet one, I will seek one out today.

 

[strollingbones]

Also, I think that's in violation of International Law.

its a violation of international laws to defend your ship?

really?

Once again, ALL the Companies can do is small arms. The pirates have access to HEAVY military arms. The Company ship fires on the speed boat. The Pirates SINK the ship. Ya that solves all kind of problems.

so how many have they sank?

 

[strollingbones]

why are conservatives all about personal responsibility until they are not?

isnt it the job of the private ship making a profit to defend themselves?

 

[Mini 14]

Once again, ALL the Companies can do is small arms. The pirates have access to HEAVY military arms. The Company ship fires on the speed boat. The Pirates SINK the ship. Ya that solves all kind of problems.

so how many have they sank?[/QUOTE]

How many have they stolen?

How many have they killed?

But beyond all that.....

Why are you defending them?

I can't think of any scenario where full force and annihilation aren't called for with regard to the pirates. They've proven, time and again, they aren't interested in negotiating.

They don't sink boats, because they're after booty. Killing the people on board is just part of the job. And when they come across a ship/boat/yacht that is not transporting something of value, then the people become their booty.

 

[Intense]

You want truth? The truth is we went into Viet Nam to suppress the locals' attempts at self-determination when they tried to do as we did and break away from a colonial power. The motive was simple: fear of losing access to cheap resources and labour. It was an attempt to ensure the capitalists could continue to exploit the local population, pure and simple. And it was that very exploitation that made the communist movement attractive to so many in the first place. The entire Red Menace was a propaganda campaign based around the bourgeoisie's fear that they would lose profits as markets were lost and they were less able to exploit the world's poor and weak. You fought the rich man's war against your fellow human beings in order to secure their profit margin.

That's the reality of the situation when you boil it down to its true nature and strip it of the nationalist propaganda. It's a story that's been played out numerous times in history.

Yep, China and the Soviet Union had zero interest in Nam, JB;s sources are complete and unquestionable, .... Mr. Undisputed Truth. Civil War had nothing at all to do with it either, we made that up too. Laos, Cambodia, among the safest places on the planet. .... In your dreams.

 

[strollingbones]

the quote is from sgt...

look at the link that lists the ships that have been taken..their current status etc

perhaps if you would read the links provided there mini 14

 

[strollingbones]

i am not defending the pirates....simply saying the ships need to provide their own defenses....

 

[Mini 14]

the quote is from sgt...

look at the link that lists the ships that have been taken..their current status etc

perhaps if you would read the links provided there mini 14

So you're defending them over semantics?

Ok, then.

I still don't get it.

 

[strollingbones]

what the hell are you going on about mini 14

i am not defending the pirates simply thinking that private ships should provide their own defense....

 

[strollingbones]

and you ask about the ships....i have already provided a link that tells you what you ask

 

[Mini 14]

i am not defending the pirates....simply saying the ships need to provide their own defenses....

Again....

naive.

It just isn't practical, bones. They're already paying duty and taxes, part of which is to provide for their protection and safe passage. Second, the task of arming each ship with the necessary armament isn't practical. You can't just hand them a crate of M-4s and expect that to be enough. The pirates have REAL weapons of war. Third, "defending" a ship in those waters calls for the use of deadly force, in almost every instance. Are you ok with the ships pulling into port and simply saying "yeah, we killed 14 about a day ago, but the seas aren't too rough."

What is wrong with securing the area with an international force, a squadron of fighter jets, and charging taxes/duty to all those who use the waters for commerce to cover the additional, required expense? I guarantee that if an F-16 starts cruising around the area, and blows 3-4 of the pirate ships out of the water, it will have a positive impact.

I'd much rather see that scenario than a Toys R Us cargo ship with 2 50mm cannons on the front, blasting away at anyone that got too close.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

You want truth? The truth is we went into Viet Nam to suppress the locals' attempts at self-determination when they tried to do as we did and break away from a colonial power. The motive was simple: fear of losing access to cheap resources and labour. It was an attempt to ensure the capitalists could continue to exploit the local population, pure and simple. And it was that very exploitation that made the communist movement attractive to so many in the first place. The entire Red Menace was a propaganda campaign based around the bourgeoisie's fear that they would lose profits as markets were lost and they were less able to exploit the world's poor and weak. You fought the rich man's war against your fellow human beings in order to secure their profit margin.

That's the reality of the situation when you boil it down to its true nature and strip it of the nationalist propaganda. It's a story that's been played out numerous times in history.

Out of curiosity what were they making in VeitNam that the cheap labor cons were exploiting?

 

[Mini 14]

Out of curiosity what were they making in VeitNam that the cheap labor cons were exploiting?

Rice.

Its what's for dinner.

 

[strollingbones]

i have nothing against an international force....i have everything against the us becoming an international police man...

This time, the pirates didn’t get that far. According to a statement released by the U.S. 5th Fleet in Manama, Bahrain, when a pirate skiff approached the ship this morning, the security team on board responded with evasive maneuvers, and blasted them with Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) and small-arms fire. The pirates then broke off the attack.

April’s Maersk Alabama incident forced a rethink of counter-piracy measures, including embarking armed security teams. Shipping companies and their insurers had in the past been reluctant to have armed security teams on board, but as recent incidents have shown, sometimes the combination of the LRAD, firehoses and evasive maneuvers is not enough.

Take, for instance, the case of the cruise ship MSC Melody: An Israeli security team used guns and firehoses to repel the attackers.

And while the LRAD was famously used to repel pirates in a 2005 attack on a cruise ship, a team of three security operatives was unable to outgun pirates with a sonic blaster in a separate incident. They were forced to jump ship.

Vice Adm. Bill Gortney, the commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, praised the operators of the Maersk Alabama for their willingness to take on more-robust defenses. “This is a great example of how merchant mariners can take proactive action to prevent being attacked, and why we recommend that ships follow industry best practices if they’re in high-risk areas.”

U.S. Ship Repels Pirates With Sonic Blaster, Bullets (Updated) | Danger Room | Wired.com

 

[Mini 14]

i have nothing against an international force....i have everything against the us becoming an international police man...

This time, the pirates didn’t get that far. According to a statement released by the U.S. 5th Fleet in Manama, Bahrain, when a pirate skiff approached the ship this morning, the security team on board responded with evasive maneuvers, and blasted them with Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) and small-arms fire. The pirates then broke off the attack.

April’s Maersk Alabama incident forced a rethink of counter-piracy measures, including embarking armed security teams. Shipping companies and their insurers had in the past been reluctant to have armed security teams on board, but as recent incidents have shown, sometimes the combination of the LRAD, firehoses and evasive maneuvers is not enough.

Take, for instance, the case of the cruise ship MSC Melody: An Israeli security team used guns and firehoses to repel the attackers.

And while the LRAD was famously used to repel pirates in a 2005 attack on a cruise ship, a team of three security operatives was unable to outgun pirates with a sonic blaster in a separate incident. They were forced to jump ship.

Vice Adm. Bill Gortney, the commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, praised the operators of the Maersk Alabama for their willingness to take on more-robust defenses. “This is a great example of how merchant mariners can take proactive action to prevent being attacked, and why we recommend that ships follow industry best practices if they’re in high-risk areas.”

U.S. Ship Repels Pirates With Sonic Blaster, Bullets (Updated) | Danger Room | Wired.com

The LRAD is useless outside of 300 yards. I honestly would prefer a long range tazer to an LRAD.

So sometimes the LRAD and private defense works, and sometimes it doesn't.

We already knew that.

Killing them works EVERY time.

 

[Claudette]

Yep. If you see a load of pirates headed your way, pull out your .50 Cal and open fire.

Works every time.

I was listeing to the news last night and one ship has payed them over 5 million for the release of their ship and crew. They hold many ships and hostages. Pretty lucrative operation.

If your in a private yacht, well stay the hell away from Somalia or its surrounding waters.

If your a freighter, tanker, whatever you need to have your own security on board that has no problem blowing pirates out of the water.

I have a hard time figuring out why these vessels don't have security and in most cases aren't armed. Is it some law of the high seas??

If so they need to catch a clue and remedy the situation.

BTW I wouldn't be trying to scare em off with noise. The .50 cal works fine for me.

 

[Intense]

i am not defending the pirates....simply saying the ships need to provide their own defenses....

Many Rational Defenses are in violation of Maritime Law.

 

[Sallow]

Thanks to liberals the US is impotent against just about everything.

How many pirates did the Bush's and Reagan kill?

They didn't have to kill any. Somalia didn't mess with the US while they were President. And as far as the 4 US hostages killed recently:

Pirates kill four U.S. hostages near Somalia | Reuters

I place the blame squarely on Obama. His inaction cost them their lives.

What "inaction"?

Obama signed off on taking out pirates
By DAVID S. CLOUD & NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON | 4/12/09 6:07 PM EDT
Updated: 4/13/09 10:39 AM EDTText Size-+reset.
The ship on which Captain Phillips was taken hostage.
AP Photo President Barack Obama issued a standing order to use force against pirates holding an American captain hostage — including giving a Navy commander the authority to act if he believed the captain’s life was in danger, two senior defense officials said Sunday night.
Obama signed off on taking out pirates - David S. Cloud and Nia-Malika Henderson - POLITICO.com

And the four people in that Yacht broke off from a larger group. They were risk takers..and lost the gamble.

 

[Intense]

Yep. If you see a load of pirates headed your way, pull out your .50 Cal and open fire.

Works every time.

I was listeing to the news last night and one ship has payed them over 5 million for the release of their ship and crew. They hold many ships and hostages. Pretty lucrative operation.

If your in a private yacht, well stay the hell away from Somalia or its surrounding waters.

If your a freighter, tanker, whatever you need to have your own security on board that has no problem blowing pirates out of the water.

I have a hard time figuring out why these vessels don't have security and in most cases aren't armed. Is it some law of the high seas??

If so they need to catch a clue and remedy the situation.

BTW I wouldn't be trying to scare em off with noise. The .50 cal works fine for me.

Friday, May 15, 2009

On May 11, the Washington Times reported on congressional testimony in support of arming merchant mariners to allow them to defend their crew and ships from pirate attacks.

In testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Captain Richard Phillips, who was abducted by pirates last month, and who was freed through the heroic action of U.S. Navy snipers, told the committee that armed crews "should be part of the overall debate about how to defend ourselves against criminals on the seas."

With the increase in pirate attacks on the high seas, many are now realizing that firearms and armed citizens can be effective criminal deterrents at sea, as they are on land. Right now, vessels are target-rich environments for piracy due to the high level of probability that seamen are unarmed.

As was the case with arming trained commercial airline pilots in the wake of 9/11, legitimate consideration should be given to extending the right to self-defense to ship crews who are more regularly facing criminal attack.

As the Times article concludes:

"In May 5 Senate testimony, Philip J. Shapiro, chief executive officer of Liberty Maritime Corp., said: 'In light of the recent threats to U.S. merchant mariners, we respectfully request that Congress consider clearing the obstacles that currently block ship owners from arming our vessels.' Most nations do not permit armed vessels to enter their waters. But developments in the air suggest a solution for change on the high seas. In 2007, the Homeland Security Department and the State Department announced they would begin negotiating with other countries to let armed pilots carry their guns with them when they fly into foreign destinations. It is time to initiate an even more serious effort to let ship crews carry guns. Armed seamen would be less expensive than giving each merchant ship its own naval escort."

NRA-ILA :: Amendment II If By Sea

 

[JBeukema]

Oh, and let's not forget that his obligation is to the radical view of his religion where as a United States soldier's obligation is to the nation

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Americanism-Fourth-Great-Western-Religion/dp/0385513127]Amazon.com: Americanism:The Fourth Great Western Religion (9780385513128): David Gelernter: Books[/ame]

Americanism has its saintly god that can do no wrong (the USA) and its devil (everyone else)

Americanists, like all nationalists, will go to extreme mental gymnastics to convince themselves that the nation's actions are always justifiable while condemning the same actions when performed by others- just as many condemn Hitler but seek justification for the fate of the Hittite, Ammonite, and Jesubite babies who were slain by the Israelites, they will defend America's support for Pinochet and our actions in Guatamala while condemning Saddam

Americanism is a a specific breed of nationalism, which is a faith like Catholicism and Communism. Read Arthur Koestler's contribution to [ame="http://www.amazon.com/God-That-Failed-Arthur-Koestler/dp/0231123957"]this book[/ame].

Religion has nothing to do with it.

It is exactly as Koestler described. You all become so angry because you are unable to defend what you believe or explain why you believe it beyond the fact that it is what you've been taught (programmed) to believe

Men in the military are there to protect your right

By occupying France? By suppressing Viet Namese self-determination? Haw were the Korean peasants a threat o my life or rights here in the US?

do you have the balls to not pay your taxes? Because it's funding your "elite."

As I've said before, Mankind dreams of a benevolent dictator and a ruling elite to guide them and ensure they enjoy peace and prosperity. Men have always dreamed up magical men in the sky to control their lives, tell them how to live, and make life easy. Why, therefore, should men be anything but grateful when an elite class rises up to fulfill that very role here on Earth, in reality? Indeed, men have long been content to love under a good king or to trust to corporate elite. I would like to see a number or reforms take place; I pay my taxes and work within the system as I am able to help bring about those reforms. It is a utilitarian decision. I don't believe it is feasible or even desirable to bring about the mass upheaval that would result if we were to upend the system completely. History shows us that it is far safer- both in terms of our own welfare and in terms of securing the progress made against the forces of reaction- to work in stages.

And so I will work to combat the decision of the ruling elite in the most egregious cases while advocating and working to see brought about more modest reforms to make things better. I am fortuitous enough to live a nation where others have won many of the hardest battles for you and me- battles fought not in the army, but in the unions, in the factories and in the streets. Many of the reforms we now seek are not less for ourselves than for our brothers and sisters abroad. In this fight, we are much more effective working within the system than opposing it in total and trying to fight the war from inside a prison system.

How many people do you know what to be labled as felons and have the rest of their lives ruined?

So now you're saying he joined only to avoid going to jail? How do you know this? Why can't he defend his beliefs and actions himself?