• 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!

Somali pirates seize ship; 21 Americans aboard

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Somali pirates seize ship; 21 Americans aboard

My Way News - Somali pirates seize ship; 21 Americans aboard

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) - Somali pirates on Wednesday hijacked a U.S.-flagged cargo ship with 21 crew members aboard, a diplomat and a U.S. Navy spokesman said.

The Kenya-based diplomat identified the vessel as the 17,000-ton Maersk Alabama and said all the crew members are American. The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The U.S. Navy confirmed that a U.S. flagged ship with 21 members of crew was hijacked early Wednesday off the eastern coast of Somalia.




So now, what will the response be. I personally am concerned that Obama will not respond with a firm hand and this will open up more attacks on American ships.


Obama is at a crossroads here with this one. If we pay the ransom, shame on us, shame on him.
 
Drop leaflets stating that they are going to bomb a bunch of there mansions in the next 24 hours, then do it. That will put a stop to it.
 
Another problem handed on from Bush. But, it's the present, and we do indeed need to do a good old fashioned Roman campaign of clearing the seas of pirates. But it's a damn big ocean and it'll require a ton of man power to patrol successfully. I can't imagine we have tons of resources to spare at present though.
 
Drop leaflets stating that they are going to bomb a bunch of there mansions in the next 24 hours, then do it. That will put a stop to it.

The pirates have mansions we know about?
 
Another problem handed on from Bush. But, it's the present, and we do indeed need to do a good old fashioned Roman campaign of clearing the seas of pirates. But it's a damn big ocean and it'll require a ton of man power to patrol successfully. I can't imagine we have tons of resources to spare at present though.


So uhm, how is this "bush's fault"? Please, this ought to be entertaining.



The pirates have mansions we know about?


Newsvine - Somali pirates transform villages into boomtowns


Once you catch up to the rest of us, please rejoin the discussion. :2wave:
 
Another problem handed on from Bush. But, it's the present, and we do indeed need to do a good old fashioned Roman campaign of clearing the seas of pirates. But it's a damn big ocean and it'll require a ton of man power to patrol successfully. I can't imagine we have tons of resources to spare at present though.
Oh I almost forgot, it's Bush's fault. Thanks for opening that for me. Why don't you move on as your side told us. This is Obama's problem, he is President, and it happened now. If he does not take immediate military action, he is lost.
 
So uhm, how is this "bush's fault"? Please, this ought to be entertaining.

Fault? I don't recall implying that Bush invented piracy. It's just one more of many things that were going on during Bush's presidency though that's been handed off to Obama. And now that an American ship has finally been attacked it's on Obama's watch and now he's got to deal with it.

Of course, I forgot all those threads you started last year stating how you were concerned that Bush might not respond with a firm hand and it could lead to attacks on American ships.

I mean, you did start threads like that, right?
 
Last edited:
Fault? I don't recall implying that Bush invented piracy. It's just one more of many things that were going on during Bush's presidency though that's been handed off to Obama. And now that an American ship has finally been attacked it's on Obama's watch and he's got to deal with it.


Ah so you had no point, you just wanted to bloviate and whine about bush. thanks for clarifying.

Of course, I forgot all those threads you started last year stating how you were concerned that Bush might not respond with a firm hand and it could lead to attacks on American ships.

I mean, you did start threads like that, right?


Link me to the last American ship attacked. YOU FAIL


:lol:
 
Ah so you had no point, you just wanted to bloviate and whine about bush. thanks for clarifying.

Whine and bloviate? I agreed with you that it's up to Obama to clean up this mess or we risk losing credibility. You're the one who pissed his pants because I said the word "Bush."


Link me to the last American ship attacked. YOU FAIL

Goddamn, you're so eager to user the word "fail" like a thirteen year old commenting on a youtube video that you can't even read the previous paragraph. Here, I'll recap for you because I know that two posts ago is just so long ago for you.

I said,

"And now that an American ship has finally been attacked it's on Obama's watch and he's got to deal with it."

So, uh, yeah....fail.

And again, since you're so quick to jump down Obama's throat for the piracy, then surely you can show me some threads you started last year when the stories first broke, declaring that if Bush doesn't do something about it then the situation could escalate to where it could affect us directly. Right? I mean, you wouldn't want to look like a partisan hack or anything.
 
Whine and bloviate? I agreed with you that it's up to Obama to clean up this mess or we risk losing credibility. You're the one who pissed his pants because I said the word "Bush."


So what was your point in bringing up bush? Let me know where you decide to plant the goal posts ok?



Goddamn, you're so eager to user the word "fail" like a thirteen year old commenting on a youtube video that you can't even read the previous paragraph. Here, I'll recap for you because I know that two posts ago is just so long ago for you.

I said,

"And now that an American ship has finally been attacked it's on Obama's watch and he's got to deal with it."

So, uh, yeah....fail.

And again, since you're so quick to jump down Obama's throat for the piracy, then surely you can show me some threads you started last year when the stories first broke, declaring that if Bush doesn't do something about it then the situation could escalate to where it could affect us directly. Right? I mean, you wouldn't want to look like a partisan hack or anything.



talk about a "partisan hack"! What does Bush have to do with any of this then? There has never been an american ship hijacked before. If there was, I'd "jump down his throat", just as I did when Bush did the 1st bailouts.
 
So now, what will the response be. I personally am concerned that Obama will not respond with a firm hand and this will open up more attacks on American ships.

.

I think you will see a marked difference between the way George Bush handled pirates and the response of the Obama administration. Bush never had a "firm hand", he was playing at soldiers with real people. I have no doubt Obama will demonstrate the cost of seizing Americans on the high seas. The answer is simple, historic, and can be expressed in one word.

Marines.
 
I think you will see a marked difference between the way George Bush handled pirates and the response of the Obama administration. Bush never had a "firm hand", he was playing at soldiers with real people. I have no doubt Obama will demonstrate the cost of seizing Americans on the high seas. The answer is simple, historic, and can be expressed in one word.

Marines.



Want to take a wager on that?
 
Why is Obama supposed to respond to this? Two things will happen. Maersk will pay the ransom or they'll be released after a few days. 'We' won't pay anything. This is the responsibility of the company who sent them there.
 
Why is Obama supposed to respond to this? Two things will happen. Maersk will pay the ransom or they'll be released after a few days. 'We' won't pay anything. This is the responsibility of the company who sent them there.




there is a reason ships fly a countries flag. You know that right?
 
Obama will do as much for the 21 Americans as hes doing for the captured journalists in Iran and North Korea. Nothing.
 
Obama will do as much for the 21 Americans as hes doing for the captured journalists in Iran and North Korea. Nothing.

I think you're wrong, but we'll know very soon.
 
So what was your point in bringing up bush? Let me know where you decide to plant the goal posts ok?

Oh my god, you're still crapping your pants about this? So Bush was president when the Somali piracy stories started to break and he didn't tackle the problem. Is that actually disputable? If you weren't a partisan hack, you'd just shrug and say, "yeah, that's true, but we've got to deal with this in the here and now." Instead I say "Bush" once and you instantly lose all control of your bodily functions. Get a grip!

talk about a "partisan hack"! What does Bush have to do with any of this then? There has never been an american ship hijacked before. If there was, I'd "jump down his throat", just as I did when Bush did the 1st bailouts.

So you don't see how increasing piracy in one of the world's busiest shipping lanes where our own interests are at stake might have been of some concern?
 
Here's the latest:


Cmdr. Jane Campbell, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet, said that it was the first pirate attack "involving U.S. nationals and a U.S.-flagged vessel in recent memory." She did not give an exact timeframe.
When asked how the U.S. Navy plans to deal with the hijacking, Campbell said: "It's fair to say we are closely monitoring the situation, but we will not discuss nor speculate on current and future military operations."
It was not clear whether the pirates knew they were hijacking a ship with American crew.
"It's a very significant foreign policy challenge for the Obama administration," said Graeme Gibbon Brooks, managing director of the British company Dryad Maritime Intelligence Service Ltd. "Their citizens are in the hands of criminals and people are waiting to see what happens."
Brooks and other analysts interviewed by the AP declined to speculate on whether American military forces might attempt a rescue operation. A senior Navy official in Washington said the Obama administration was talking to the shipping company to learn "the who, what, why, where and when" of the hijacking.
 
Oh my god, you're still crapping your pants about this? So Bush was president when the Somali piracy stories started to break and he didn't tackle the problem.

No American ship, not our problem. American ship. Our problem.

Any questions?

Is that actually disputable? If you weren't a partisan hack, you'd just shrug and say, "yeah, that's true, but we've got to deal with this in the here and now." Instead I say "Bush" once and you instantly lose all control of your bodily functions. Get a grip!

3rd request. What was your point in bringing up Bush.


What did you mean by "Another problem handed on from Bush"


So you don't see how increasing piracy in one of the world's busiest shipping lanes where our own interests are at stake might have been of some concern?



Nope. I see it more as a problem for europe, east aisia, and africa to handle. Until you touch our ships.
 
I think that Q-boats would be the best strategy to stopping the piracy. Simply put a number of soldiers in otherwise normal cargo ships. Sail them in Somali waters, and give the pirates a nice surprise when they show up. It would be much cheaper than deploying the fleet, and probably much
more effective.
 
I think you will see a marked difference between the way George Bush handled pirates and the response of the Obama administration. Bush never had a "firm hand", he was playing at soldiers with real people. I have no doubt Obama will demonstrate the cost of seizing Americans on the high seas. The answer is simple, historic, and can be expressed in one word.

Marines.

As cold as it sounds, RH's idea of hitting the pirate's bases (and by extension, unfortunately, the villagers within them) probably makes the most sense. You simply can't successfully patrol that large an area for pirates unless you plan on committing all your resources to the campaign.
 
I think that Q-boats would be the best strategy to stopping the piracy. Simply put a number of soldiers in otherwise normal cargo ships. Sail them in Somali waters, and give the pirates a nice surprise when they show up. It would be much cheaper than deploying the fleet, and probably much
more effective.



Can't. I believe maritime treaties forbid civillian ships from being armed or something.
 
there is a reason ships fly a countries flag. You know that right?

Irrelevant. The overwhelming majority of those who have paid ransoms are the companies that own the ships. I can't even think of a government paying the ransom.
 
Back
Top Bottom