Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by jamzmom, Apr 8, 2009.
Pretty horrifying news this morning.
KP just announced that no KP Mids are aboard this ship.
You are right - this is scary. Wonder what happens next?
Not too many details out yet but I sure hope the pirates are pretty much peeing their pants when they got their hands on the crew manifest & saw they were all Americans.
Fire hoses against AK-47's and RPG's. Brilliant tactic.
310 miles offshore. That is significant in itself because that is WAY out at sea. These bad guys are getting good.
Looks like a job for the Navy SEALs.............. or Jimmy Carter.
I was thinking the exact same thing Zaph. I keep think Biden saying Obama would be tested in his 1st 6 months, and this looks like the test.
Will Obama talk with them or just send in the Seals, afterall he believes you can talk to the terrorists.
If I recall correctly didn't France use their equivalent to Seals to rescue one of their ships?
My prayers go out to the family members of this crew.
Seems like either a CG MSRT or an FBI team would be well suited for this.
I don't so much blame the POTUS (President of the United States) or the VP for this. I blame the shipping companies that, for either internal cowardice reasons, financial reasons, or a refusal to engage applicable government bureacrats, refuse to properly arm or otherwise defend their crews.
"But Zaphod! Are you actually suggesting that...... horror of horrors......these crews be ARMED? Isn't that DANGEROUS?"
Well, DUH! That crew sure is SAFE right now, aren't they?
And if the usual linguini-spined peaceniks can't stomach the idea of individuals defending themselves, then how about hiring a professional security detachment to sail with the ship?
Nah. I suppose it's better to save the money and pay it out as ransom. Never mind.
Unfortunately, this was only a matter of time.
As long as Maersk complies and parachutes a couple of million bucks the crew will be well kept, hopefully.
I am not sure what the solution is - do we provide a Navy escort for every American shipping vessel? Or do we go into Somalia and smack the crap out of them?
Oh, come on! What are the chances of THAT happening?
As you said, get another helo, a few million bucks, and a parachute, and hope that nature takes out the garbage for us the way it did last time.
Okay Zaph...I have to ask abou your tag line, where did Obama say that...I am not saying he didn't, but WOW oh WOW and now I just want to know why he would!
To continue Off Topic:
Of course Obama didn't say those words - it is just Zaphods way to continue to disrespect the Office of the President, as usual.
As this is a forum mostly visited by Young Adults who are willing to serve their country, perhaps with their lives, who are or will be in an environment where they are being taught to respect their Commander in Chief and the office - it's inappropriate - especially by a supermoderator, regardless of your political views. IMHO.
The quote was originally by Churchill and distorted by Zaphod.
You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. It is victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory, however long and hard the road may be. For without victory, there is no survival.” In a speech in the House of Commons, May 13, 1940.
back to our continuing program......
No. It's called satire. It is a direct flip of my old signature line (the incredible and historic quote delivered by the great Winston Churchill) applied to Obama. The fact that he's doing such a bang-up job of making the satirical into fact without any help from me is just gravy.
Besides, I didn't hear any whining when the shoe was on the other foot for eight years, so you'll have to forgive me if I ignore it now. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism, remember? So deal with it.
No, Pima, Obama didn't say that. He's just LIVING that. If he DID say it, would anyone really be surprised?
I thought he said it over on his meet the world tour and I just missed it. Afterall didn't we just hear that he knew AMericans were thought of as crass people?
I just hope that he responds correctly for the sake of these hostages. It's bad enough they were forced to sail defenseless into hostile waters. I hope they won't be left out to dry in the aftermath.
I think that is where the quandry the administration is facing. I would think the shipping company would need to request assistance from the govt. If they do than Obama will need to address why he used military force. Currently he is facing the issue that Geithner wants to take over companies that are failing, so where and when will the govt get involved. 5 Americans or 20 Americans? What if there is another ship that flies under a different country's flag, but the entire crew is American do we use force there, or only if it is an American flag ship, and what about an American flag ship that might have foreign crew do we allow them to decide if they want to bring their elite forces in to rescue their citizens?
Another option, the shipping companies invest in security teams to secure their vessels. There is little hope in escorting merchant vessels through the many dangerous check points around the world.
Unlike the other nations who have had flagged vessels hijacked, the U.S. does not negotiate with terrorists.
True, the problem of dealing with failed states.
Well, in all fairness to the guy, I don't think he'd have a very hard time doing that. For crying out loud, even Carter tried to rescue the hostages in Iran back in 1980.
That IS a quandry, but only because of the politics involved, and I'm not talking domestic politics. America has been the policeman of the world for years simply because most of the rest of the civilized world has decided to outsource their defense to us. We are more than able to send our forces to rescue anyone anywhere, but where do we stop?
The other problem is that the terrorists have been paid off in the past, so now they are encouraged, so much so that they are striking hundreds of miles out to sea (one has to wonder how good their intel is to hit a ship that far out and nail one with a valuable cargo or owned by a big-wig company with deep pockets).
Going into Somalia is a non-starter. I for one would have resolved this issue years ago by levelling Mogadishu and a few other places after the Blackhawk Down incident, but we didn't, so there they are. And now we can't go into another nation and simply smac them around. After all, isn't that part of the "change" we voted for?
So we can't go into SOmalia and strike them where they live, we shouldn't pay them off, and we really can't task all of our SEALs to maritime defense duties because the companies or the other countries won't take care of security themselves.
Great situation. I hope the pay those sailors get is worth it all....
It's also important to remember SEALS aren't our only teams, nor are they always the best pick for this kind of operation. I like SEALs but there are teams better suited for this kind of stuff.
The U.S. has an obligation to any American in trouble overseas in some way. It changes sometimes based on the situation, but that still remains.
Separate names with a comma.