• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should US Navy do more concerning pirate attacks?

Should US Navy and military do more about pirate attacks off Africa?

  • Yes, the seas must remain safe and open.

    Votes: 18 60.0%

  • Maybe, but only in response to pirate attacks.

    Votes: 3 10.0%

  • No, we should not involve in unless US citizens are captured

    Votes: 8 26.7%

  • IDK/Other

    Votes: 1 3.3%
  • Total voters
    30
Sherman123 said:
Really difficult to enact in practice. Just to copy what I had put earlier: Putting arms on a vessel dramatically raises maritime and employee insurance costs and makes it very difficult to put your ship into harbor as most countries will not allow you to dock with weapons on board and you cant exactly ditch them over the side when you reach your destination. Realistically you would need an international convention to make this workable on a large scale.
Click to expand...
To bypass the last bit - a ship could leave the weapons in international waters on a boat of some sort - perhaps they pay a fee to some enterprising person to hold their gear til they leave port.

Insurance companies should LOWER what they charge if the ships are armed. Depending on how. And what training.
 
Sherman123 said:
Agreed but its very difficult to make happen in practice. Putting arms on a vessel dramatically raises maritime and employee insurance costs and makes it very difficult to put your ship into harbor as most countries will not allow you to dock with weapons on board. Realistically you would need an international convention to make this workable on a large scale. That leaves the Navy as the course of action.
Click to expand...

The company has no liability even if all the crew is murdered. The company has liability if anyone in the crew harmed anyone. That's how liabilities work. On ships. In stores. This needs to change.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I don't support any military action that has our military's hands tied. I am sick of sending our people into situations where politics is more important than winning and staying alive. If the Navy is allowed to stalk and kill the pirates, send SEALs ashore and kill them, etc. Total War. Then yes. Otherwise no.
Click to expand...
You don't need SEALs for this one. If US Navy vessels were given free reign to blow any vessel that looks to be used for piracy out of the water with no questions asked, piracy would cease in a week. No one wants their dingy blown out of the water when they use it not only for piracy, but for fishing as well.
 
Yes. But they also need to reduce wasteful spending - audit the federal reserve. Cut the size of government in half. Gary Johnson vastly reduced the size of government while Governor of New Mexico. He went into office with a huge budget deficit in 1995 and left office in 2003 with a huge budget surplus.

That's called common sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom