Althouse: Pirates defeated.

April 12, 2009

Pirates defeated.

Captain freed.

317 comments:

1 – 200 of 317 Newer› Newest»

john said...: What a story, if true. Did the Navy get a secret message to the captain that he was to jump overboard right before they opened fire? Cool.

As Reynolds said: "Hat tip to Obama". You the man today, Pres.; 4/12/09, 2:22 PM
Anonymous said...: What do you think the movie about this dramatic standoff will be rated?

There's a good deal of violence, so probably ARRGGGGGHHHH!; 4/12/09, 2:25 PM
The Dude said...: Good for the navy. Apparently President Pussy grew a pair.

The pirate trial will be great - parrots, eyepatches, hooks - this has the makings of great theater.; 4/12/09, 2:31 PM
Beth said...: Go, Navy!

What wonderful news.

We were being generous in our negotiations, but the other side wouldn't accept any conseqences for the pirates. Now three are dead and the other's in custody.; 4/12/09, 2:31 PM
save_the_rustbelt said...: Seals 1, Pirates 0

I'm guessing thermal imaging with matched with .50 sniper rifles to penetrate the shell of the lifeboat.; 4/12/09, 2:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Beth -- It doesn't sound to me like we were being generous, according to the cited article.

It sounds like the negotiations were very unilateral. The "elders" had dropped any ransom demand and we wanted them to agree to arrest. They wouldn't, so we broke off negotiations and did our thing.

By the way, the very fact that there are "elders" involved suggests that these aren't rogue operations, does it not?; 4/12/09, 2:38 PM
Beth said...: I guess my definition of generous is that we offered them a way out without a gunfight, which we'd surely win, even if the captain would be sacrificed. You're surrounded by Navy gunships: give up and we won't kill you right here. That's generous in my view.

No, of course this piracy wave isn't a rogue operation.; 4/12/09, 2:44 PM
Anonymous said...: I forgot to add that the movie version will have four blond pirates, the leader being a man named Hans who is motivated by money and his anger at left-liberal causes.

Yippie-ki-yay motherfucker.; 4/12/09, 2:51 PM
dick said...: Sure didn't take long for the left to get into this:

Who Are the “Barbarians”?

From my understanding, the Somali pirates don’t usually kill people. And they’re known for treating hostages well. They have no respect for property rights, obviously, but they seem to have more respect for human life than all of you people who prefer to blow up boats with innocent hostages in them and blow up entire towns with civilians, women and children in them just to make a point. Who are the “barbarians” again?

There’s got to be a better solution, but I’m sure it would involve helping Somalia get its act together and at the very least stopping the incursions of foreign fishing ships and vessels from dumping toxic waste into Somali waters.

That’s not nearly as exciting as a battle on the high seas, is it?

— Ali; 4/12/09, 3:04 PM
Unknown said...: Yahoo! Great news.; 4/12/09, 3:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Dick -- I don't see a link, so it's hard to know what that it. But I find this sentence telling:

There’s got to be a better solution

Isn't this the leftist-socialist-Marxist philosophy in a nutshell. It's all lazy critique. There's not one empirical thing about it.; 4/12/09, 3:06 PM
Unknown said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/12/09, 3:08 PM
Unknown said...: Of course there's a better solution. They don't engage in piracy, and we don't kill them. Much better solution.; 4/12/09, 3:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Who are the barbarians here?

...asks the person behind a computer, possibly sipping a latte, about a navy with a nuclear-powered submarine who killed three people they tried to negotiate with who came from a lawless non-state and were drifting in a small, wooden boat and holding a stolen human being for ransom.; 4/12/09, 3:11 PM
Beth said...: If there are ships dumping toxic wastes on the coast of Somalia, I don't see how taking hostages and ransoming cargo ships has anything to do with trying to stop that from happening. There are reporters covering the Somali pirates - why haven't their sources brought them the toxic waste stories long before now?; 4/12/09, 3:20 PM
Frodo Potter said...: Great news. Congratulations, Captain Phillips! You sir, are one formidable man. Are you sure you weren’t at Thermopylae?

save_the_rustbelt, good call. If Phillips had the presence of mind to keep himself low—and the anecdotal evidence is that he did indeed have great presence of mind—then snipers using thermal imaging, silencers, and muzzle flash suppressors could have done this very effectively.

I also am of the opinion that neither this nor the other pirate operations are rogue. These pirate operations are planned well ahead of time and very generously financed. In fact, geee. . . could it be? I just looked at a map and Saudi Arabia and Yemen are just across the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. Hmmmm.; 4/12/09, 3:23 PM
LouisAntoine said...: In general though, does anyone argue that the penalty for theft should be death? How about for kidnapping? Kidnapping children?

Personally I believe the death penalty should be reserved for murder, child rape...

Beyond that, the pirates did not deserve to die, and in general I think America is over reliant on lethal force (by police, by the military) to resolve standoffs.

That said, I'm sure the situation was extremely difficult and they did what they had to do, so to speak. It doesn't mean I have to cheer for the deaths of the pirates though, does it?; 4/12/09, 3:23 PM
Anonymous said...: I cheer for the death of pirates.

Look, dude, they miscalculated and made errors in this act of piracy. Their plan failed. They had an American citizen held hostage. They were facing the United States Navy, whose very job it is to kill people. That's what they do.

They did not take the offer of surrender, though it would have been the prudent course.

And now they are dead. If it happens again, we'll kill some more. Don't give me this Thou shall not kill malarkey. The very day Moses brought that rule down from Mount Sinai he put some 3000 Jews to death.; 4/12/09, 3:31 PM
Revenant said...: You're surrounded by Navy gunships: give up and we won't kill you right here. That's generous in my view

Yeah, I'm with Beth on that one. When you've got every cause and right to kill someone and can easily do it with minimal risk to yourself, letting him live counts as a generous concession on your part.

I'm surprised that the pirates tried capturing an American ship in the first place. You'd think they would have better sense than that. There are so many ships sailing under flags of convenience -- why pick a fight with a superpower?; 4/12/09, 3:33 PM
Revenant said...: In general though, does anyone argue that the penalty for theft should be death?

Let me put it to you this way: if I'm home when it happens, there's definitely a death penalty for robbing MY house.; 4/12/09, 3:35 PM
Jeremy said...: As to these horrible "pirates and why they do the things they do:

Johann Hari from The Independent:

In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken.

At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died.

Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it."

Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Mr Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."

At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia's seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish stocks by overexploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs.

More than $300m-worth of tuna, shrimp, and lobster are being stolen every year by illegal trawlers. The local fishermen are now starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: "If nothing is done, there soon won't be much fish left in our coastal waters."

This is the context in which the "pirates" have emerged. Somalian fishermen took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least levy a "tax" on them.

They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia – and ordinary Somalis agree. The independent Somalian news site WardheerNews found 70 per cent "strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence".

No, this doesn't make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters – especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies.

But in a telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali: "We don't consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas." William Scott would understand.

Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our toxic waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome?

We won't act on those crimes – the only sane solution to this problem – but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 per cent of the world's oil supply, we swiftly send in the gunboats.; 4/12/09, 3:44 PM
Jeremy said...: Seven Machos said..."I cheer for the death of pirates."

Of course you do.

Probably because of your vast experience in such matters.

Duh.; 4/12/09, 3:47 PM
LouisAntoine said...: The american conservative attitude towards dealing death in foreign lands disgusts me.

"You're damn right we killed the somebitches"

Look, any adult knows that bad things happen and sometimes the forces of order must kill.

But why are some people always so excited about it? It's a terrible thing, to kill. Seems rather childlike to be so cavalier about it. It's the destruction of a person.; 4/12/09, 3:49 PM
Palladian said...: Haha, Gene! Where's your patriotism now? President Obama finally does something unquestionably right and all you can do is shit on America. Don't you support our President? How unAmerican you are.

Of course you would have sympathy for pirates. You're basically the equivalent of a pirate. You sail in here again and again under false flags and hijack and destroy an otherwise prosperous and interesting comment stream. Maybe Althouse will take a lesson from the President and finally blow you the fuck out of the water, once and for all.; 4/12/09, 3:51 PM
somefeller said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/12/09, 3:52 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: I sure wish it was our normal policy to kill pirates at sea. Then all we'd have to worry about is the complaints of Europeans.; 4/12/09, 3:52 PM
somefeller said...: Apparently, the Navy SEALs popped three out of the four pirates, while saving the captain of the ship. That's some good shooting.

As far as the hand-wringing about the killing of the pirates goes, they weren't just stealing, they were holding people at gunpoint while taking their property and kidnapping them. Sorry, but if you don't want deadly force used against you, don't start out with threats or actual acts of deadly force against others.

Oh, and one more thing, anyone who bitches about this and who claims to do so as a liberal/progressive gets their Democratic Party membership revoked, if they had one to begin with. President Obama gave me that concession. One of the benefits of donating generously to the DNC, plus we figured out early that having guys who complain about this sort of thing around aren't useful to the team. If you want to complain, go hang out in the parking lot with the loser Nader kids.; 4/12/09, 3:52 PM
Palladian said...: "But why are some people always so excited about it? It's a terrible thing, to kill. Seems rather childlike to be so cavalier about it. It's the destruction of a person."

Uh oh! Another un-American hater of the President.

I think it's rather childlike to think that defense of our interests abroad is a bad thing. I think it's rather childlike to be empathic towards enemies. Goo goo ga ga.; 4/12/09, 3:55 PM
LouisAntoine said...: Ya don't hear me, knee-jerk.

Killing may be necessary sometimes, but it's not cool. Ask someone who actually has done it.

I think you're an immature and angry person, Palladian, who has seen too many movies.; 4/12/09, 4:01 PM
Skyler said...: MM wrote: In general though, does anyone argue that the penalty for theft should be death? How about for kidnapping? Kidnapping children?

Yeah. Steal something on the high seas, threaten to kill the crew if not ransomed? Yeah, hang them from the yardarms. Kidnapping. Yeah, death.

I don't hijack ships. Do you? Why would you have any pity for these animals?

Dick commented that the pirates generally don't hurt anyone. Well duh. When it's so easy to get a payoff, why would they escalate to actually using violence? All they want is other people's money, they'll do as little work as possible to get it.

The only way to end piracy is to kill pirates.; 4/12/09, 4:10 PM
Jeremy said...: Saving the Captain, personally, approved via the President most here hate, was an absolute necessity

Any form of abduction is unacceptable, but to dismiss the reasons behind such behavior is less than honest.

I understand the wild cheering among some here for the killing of these people, I wouldn't expect anything less, but I wonder what YOU would do under the circumstance confronting the Somalians. (And by the way, right now there are actually 13 other ships being held by these "pirates," some for over a year, all in the hopes of trading hostages for food and support.)

Right now here in America we have people throwing "teabag" parties (which in itself is rather bizarre, considering what the term refers to), over what many conservatives consider the socialist/communists taking over America...so try to imagine what we would be seeing if we experienced any of this:

-dumped nuclear waste washing onto our shores

- citizens suffering strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies

- citizens suffering from radiation sickness

- the dumping of lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury into our fishing areas of the ocean

- the looting of our fishing areas, destroying our greatest resource for survival

Think we might be little bit pissed about things like that?; 4/12/09, 4:12 PM
Skyler said...: MM also wrote: Killing may be necessary sometimes, but it's not cool. Ask someone who actually has done it.

I don't know. Different people react different ways. It's popular in our modern culture to portray anyone who kills someone as being traumatized. I think when you really know that the person you're killing needs to be killed, most people don't really have a problem doing it. Some get great satisfaction from it. And they're perfectly rational, well adjusted people. It's called justice. Defending freedom. And it's the right thing to do sometimes, and our minds are clever enough to know that difference despite the nonstop barrage of mamby pamby modern portrayals on TV and the movies.; 4/12/09, 4:14 PM
Jeremy said...: Skyler - "
I don't hijack ships. Do you? Why would you have any pity for these animals?"

So with these vessels representing various countries doing they are doing to the Somalians...and considering they have literally no real military or financial recourse...what would YOU suggest they do to counter these actions?

I'm not suggesting we ourselves do so, but there is firm evidence this is what happens on a continuous basis.; 4/12/09, 4:24 PM
jayne_cobb said...: Yes Jeremy,

These pirates were just misguided patriots seeking an outlet for their anger over environmental wrongs.

After all, piracy didn't start in this region of the world until just recently.; 4/12/09, 4:26 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: Jeremy - you have cites for all of that?; 4/12/09, 4:26 PM
traditionalguy said...: Montagne Mointaign... The object of American use of force is not killing people. They can surrender anytime and be benevolently treated. That was why German Wermacht units looked for ways to surrender to American Army units before the Russian Army got to them in April 1945. The recent victory celebration, that annoys you, comes from the refusal of Americans to surrender to people trying to kill them. Get used to it.; 4/12/09, 4:30 PM
Clyde said...: Scratch three skinnies.

Don't tread on us!; 4/12/09, 4:32 PM
Palladian said...: Gene, why do you hate America and our President? Are you ever happy about anything? What a hemorrhoid of a person you are.; 4/12/09, 4:32 PM
Jeremy said...: jayne_cobb said..."Yes Jeremy, These pirates were just misguided patriots seeking an outlet for their anger over environmental wrongs. After all, piracy didn't start in this region of the world until just recently.

First of all they're called "pirates" because the actions take part on the high seas. If they were farmers for instance, defending their homeland from an oppressive King...you know, like America...they would be considered "patriots."

*And could you tell me what YOU would do if YOU were having your food source and health obliterated by major corporate shipping concerns? Do YOU live near a beach? Are you dependent upon fishing to survive?

We both know the answer to those questions.

These people are desperately poor really have little if any recourse to protect or sustain themselves. I suggest your read something about their situation before making such snarky and uneducated comments.

Laura = "you have cites for all of that?"

I posted this before, but here it is again: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-you-are-being-lied-to-about-pirates-1225817.html; 4/12/09, 4:37 PM
Cedarford said...: Beth - There are reporters covering the Somali pirates - why haven't their sources brought them the toxic waste stories long before now?

They have. For years. AS well as fishing rights violations. You were just ignorant that this has been a long controversy.
_____________________________
Frodo - then snipers using thermal imaging, silencers, and muzzle flash suppressors could have done this very effectively.

WTF do silencers and flash suppressors have to do with anything in a firefight? It's just so much gun porn detail, irrelevant to the action..

The captain jumped, the Navy people had a clear field of fire. They wasted the 3 pirates with machine gun fire from spec ops hand helds or the far more devestating deck-mounted ones until they were sure nothing was even twitching. Since the captain was in the water, close to the boat with 3 AK-47s that could take him out in a second - his safety depended on making the 3 in the boat quite dead. The one aboard the Bainbridge got to don some nice handcuffs and maybe start making calls to Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch or Nadine Strossen of the ACLU for his future legal team.
___________________
Montagne - Beyond that, the pirates did not deserve to die, and in general I think America is over reliant on lethal force (by police, by the military) to resolve standoffs.

This wasn't criminal justice situation, idiot. It was a hostage situation.
_______________
Montagne - But why are some people always so excited about it? It's a terrible thing, to kill. Seems rather childlike to be so cavalier about it. It's the destruction of a person.

Hardly. For many, killing people in battle, bravely, will result in medals, congratulations, and be considered one of the apogee feats of that persons life.

Montagne Mointaigne said...
Ya don't hear me, knee-jerk.

Killing may be necessary sometimes, but it's not cool. Ask someone who actually has done it.

Sure its cool. I helped kill people in the Gulf War by finding a group of about 40 hiding out. I wasn't the actual trigger-puller. That was the F-16 pilot dropping the cluster bomb. We think we got 'em all. Congrats and "well dones" were passed around, and the only regret was we had to destroy some perfectly good Kuwaiti highway equipment in order to put the 40 or so, (who had no idea it was coming), into a shrapnel-storm.

--------------
somefeller said...
Apparently, the Navy SEALs popped three out of the four pirates, while saving the captain of the ship. That's some good shooting.

Not really. Ship was close, the lifeboat was a sitting duck waiting to be hosed down with 100s of rounds once the captain jumped in the water and was out of the line of fire.
______________
What is interesting is this was a rare case where the pirates didn't get control of the ship and a large crew - which would have made friendly casualties inevitable on any rescue mission.
So this incident does not translate out into an effective military or legal action plan for the other 99.5% of instances of piracy.
However, now you have dead enemy, whose comrades may retaliate on the other 200 hostages now being held...And the failure of the world to have sensible laws on pirates or agree on sensible military action continues.; 4/12/09, 4:42 PM
Paco Wové said...: "...what would YOU suggest they do to counter these actions?"

I would suggest they not be pirates.; 4/12/09, 4:44 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Now if they could just shell the town and harbor giving the pirates safe haven, a real message would be sent. Piracy is hazardous to your health.; 4/12/09, 4:46 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: Jeremy, thanks. This jibes with what I've seen elsewhere: it's European countries, possibly Asian countries, that have been dumping crap at Somalia. Not us.

And you could say, but they have to do what they can to survive even if it means attacking Americans who never were their problem - except that that tactic isn't doing anything for them and isn't going to do anything for them, it's only making us mad.

Here:

"First of all they're called 'pirates' because the actions take part on the high seas. If they were farmers for instance, defending their homeland from an oppressive King...you know, like America...they would be considered 'patriots.'"

We weren't attacking countries other than England when we were trying to free ourselves from England.; 4/12/09, 4:48 PM
Revenant said...: It's a terrible thing, to kill. Seems rather childlike to be so cavalier about it. It's the destruction of a person.

The problem with your reasoning -- well, one of the problems, at least -- is that you assume "the destruction of a person" automatically implies "a terrible thing".

But there are, of course, cases where the destruction of a person is a wonderful thing. This is such a case. We aren't being cavalier about it; we're celebrating a serious but joyful occasion.; 4/12/09, 4:48 PM
Jeremy said...: Paco Wové said..."I would suggest they not be pirates."

People do all kinds of things when their lives are threatened.

What would YOU do if the same circumstances existed here?

Call 911?; 4/12/09, 4:49 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Score! Ninjas.; 4/12/09, 4:51 PM
Jeremy said...: Laura(southernxyl) said..."Jeremy, thanks. This jibes with what I've seen elsewhere: it's European countries, possibly Asian countries, that have been dumping crap at Somalia. Not us."

I never said it was US.

In fact I specifically said it was not US.

That's not the point.

The point is WHY these people feel they have to resort to such measures in the first place.

How did we handle the British?; 4/12/09, 4:51 PM
Paco Wové said...: "...now you have dead enemy, whose comrades may retaliate on the other 200 hostages now being held..."

but the French beat us to the killing-pirates game already. Or are you suggesting that the French killing pirates is cool, but us Americans killing pirates is bad, bad, bad? Mon Dieu! <slaps forehead> Of course! It's always our fault! Silly me.; 4/12/09, 4:54 PM
Jeremy said...: Peter V. Bella said..."Now if they could just shell the town and harbor giving the pirates safe haven, a real message would be sent. Piracy is hazardous to your health."

Ahhh, the standard chickenshit response.

Shell them from a distance, kill as many of them as your can, good or bad, teach them a lesson they'll never forget.

And this from a former police officer.; 4/12/09, 4:54 PM
Jeremy said...: I notice no one has come up with an alternative example of what WE would do under the same circumstances as the Somalians.

That's because WE know exactly what WE would do: WHATEVER WE HAD TO DO TO PROTECT AND SUSTAIN OURSELVES.

Just like them.; 4/12/09, 4:57 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Oh Christ, the excuse mongers have shown up. There is a political excuse for every crime. The only reason the poor pirates are attacking, taking over ships, and kidnapping crews is political; they are trying to expose bah, blah, blah. They are trying to earn money for blah, blah, blah. If yo uwere poor, you would commit crimes to survive.

This is all unmitaged bullshit. They are asking for multi-million dollar ransoms. They are not demanding that dumping be stopped or fishing cease. They are demanding ransom for one reason and one reason only; the root cause of crime. Greed. It is all about greed. Nothing more. Nothing less.

As some Admiral stated last week- the pirates have a good business model. The figured out a way to make big money for little risk.; 4/12/09, 4:58 PM
Beth said...: I haven't been aware of the fishing rights and waste dumping stories, true. If that's all true, then those stories should come out along with this one; perhaps this will be the tipping point all around.; 4/12/09, 4:58 PM
Michael Haz said...: When I read the headline of this thread, I knew it wouldn't be long before the "Blame American For Everything" commenters would trot out their reasons why piracy is okay, the rescue was bad, and the problems in Somaila are all of western origin.

I wasn't disappointed.

Of course, the reasoning behind the anti-west sentiment is an uncorraborated newspaper article published in a left-leaning British newspaper. It was in a newspaper, so it must be true!!!

If you believe the Somalis are lovely peace-loving peoples who are simply getting a raw deal from evil westerners, I suggest you take personal steps to help them.

Sell everything you own and donate 100% of the proceeds to a charitable organization that helps Somalis. Then join the Peace Corps and insist on being sent to Somalia.

No? Can't do it? Right. The l;efty position is always Someone should do something! But not me......; 4/12/09, 4:59 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Jeremy - your wailing about alleged nuclear waste dumping is completely irrelevant because the Maersk Alabama was not dumping nuclear waste. It was carrying relief supplies for starving African children, for God's sake.

And by the way, the motivations here were monetary not environmental.; 4/12/09, 5:00 PM
Beth said...: If they start retaliating against other hostages, then expect attacks on land. And the people on land surely know that. There has to be a lot of pressure on the hostage-takes not to retaliate, but there's no telling if they have the sense to make the right call.; 4/12/09, 5:00 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: Jeremy, we didn't fight the British by attacking the Chinese.

I can see a person doing outrageous things to try to survive. IF the outrageous things reasonably would help the person's survival. What earthly good will it do the Somalians to attack us? We are not their problem.

And haven't I seen a whole lot of griping from various entities both at home and abroad about us thinking we're supposed to be the world's policeman? What exactly is it that the Somalis would like us to do, (that they're asking for so politely,) and is it anything we should do? Maybe it is, I'm asking.; 4/12/09, 5:02 PM
LouisAntoine said...: For like the fourth time, I'll say that though the killings may be entirely justified, getting a hard-on about them strikes me as tacky, at the very least.

I don't think I can win this argument... I guess I'm a bit of a bleeding heart but I get really pissed off when intentional killing is talked about lightly, such as the "Good! Scratch three skinnies!" comment. I don't think committing a crime automatically makes a person forfeit their right to be alive. Consequences for bad acts, sure, but short of death. I guess that's why I'm American and not, say, a Nazi or a Wahabi cleric.

I think people who are have gung ho, "waste 'em!" attitudes are morally deficient.; 4/12/09, 5:04 PM
Anonymous said...: This is easy. Don't do your pirating against American-flagged vessels or ships with American crew members and the odds approach one that you won't be dealing with death at the hands of the American military.

Is this concept really so hard to grasp?; 4/12/09, 5:10 PM
Cedarford said...: traditionalguy said...
Montagne Mointaign... The object of American use of force is not killing people. They can surrender anytime and be benevolently treated.

That's not how war is fought.

Most times when we are using lethal force in battle, the object is indeed to kill. Kill enemy on foot or sleeping the ground, in planes, aboard ships, in tanks. Or in the past, American practices to bomb cities and kill millions of civilians to terrorize the enemy. Napalm the enemy village...

Nor can people "surrender at anytime". In many phases of battle, no quarter can be given because it will slow the mission down. No time or sometimes people available to take prisoners - and you can't leave unsecured enemy to your rear.
Certain combatants, when finally cornered, like snipers and gunners in a machine gun nest, are far less likely to survive to be taken as prisoners than other regular combatants.
Geneva experts recognize these realities of warfare influence prisoner-taking and surrender acceptance.; 4/12/09, 5:12 PM
Michael Haz said...: Monty said: I think people who are have gung ho, "waste 'em!" attitudes are morally deficient.

I presume that you are referring to the Somalis who dragged the bodies of American soldiers through the streets of Mogadishu in 1993.

You were referring to the Somalis, right? Because I didn't see that mentioned in your comments.; 4/12/09, 5:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Montagne -- They could have surrendered. They didn't. Now they are dead.

Just as it's easy for the hoi polloi to cheer death, it's easy for someone like you to sit behind your computer and criticize action in the real world.

The real world does suck, doesn't it? Why is it so messy? So unfair? How come your theories of justice won't work? So sad. So tragic.; 4/12/09, 5:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Cedarford -- You are missing a golden opportunity to blame Jews here.

I know you can do it.; 4/12/09, 5:15 PM
Beth said...: Montagne, as Seven points out, the US offered them opportunities to surrender their hostage and be taken into custody alive. When that failed, and the captain jumped ship, there was no recourse but to shoot, to save him. The Somalis wrote the rulebook on this one; they outsmarted themselves. There's no shame in celebrating the outcome - the innocent man lived. The ones who had no concern for his life died. Frankly, I haven't seen much belicose bloodthirstiness in these responses; you seem to be looking for and finding what you expect.; 4/12/09, 5:20 PM
Anonymous said...: I guess that's why I'm American and not, say, a Nazi or a Wahabi cleric.

What an asshole.; 4/12/09, 5:22 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Cedarford -- You are missing a golden opportunity to blame Jews here.

I know you can do it.

He does not have to. Other apologists have shown up. We all "know" that international terrorism started in the Sixties because those Israelis were so mean to the poor, voluntary refugees of Palstinian descent. The poor Pals were justly murdering people all over the world to expose the mean Jews, blah, blah, blah. When it was all about the money.

Next they will be telling us that crime is the result of poverty and people fighting injsutice in order to survive; instead of greed and immorality.

That's the new American way.; 4/12/09, 5:26 PM
Cedarford said...: Montagne - I don't think I can win this argument... I guess I'm a bit of a bleeding heart but I get really pissed off when intentional killing is talked about lightly, such as the "Good! Scratch three skinnies!" comment. I don't think committing a crime automatically makes a person forfeit their right to be alive. Consequences for bad acts, sure, but short of death. I guess that's why I'm American and not, say, a Nazi or a Wahabi cleric.

The crux of your problem is you see terrorists and pirates as "criminal" - but when you bring the military to bear on bad guys - they are no longer regarded as "suspects" awaiting capture and their lawyers, but instead as "targets". The military lawfully takes life, maims, destroys property - without trial.

And don't presume you are "more American" less Nazi or Wahabbi with your aversion to killing dangerous people.

LtCol Brian Chonish jumped into a trench full of Iraqis. He killed until his M-16 and 9mm Beretta were out of ammo. Then he picked up an AK-47 and RPG out of dead enemy hands and went further, killing more. Alone, he killed 22 and crippled 4.

He was awarded the Navy Cross. Many said he was cheated out of a MOH.
I venture to say that most Americans are far prouder of Chonish and his actions than you, with your prissy attitude about "precious pirate rights".; 4/12/09, 5:32 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Right. You've said it four times. You say everything four times. We get it. We got it the first time. The following three times and beyond are entirely superfluous. Redundant. Repetitive. Repeated. Said again uselessly. Echoed. Iterated. Reiterated. It's argumentum ad nauseum , a fallacy in which you, Jeremy and others here excel, whereby the statement is repeated with the expectation it gains strength through repetition. It doesn't. The argument is just as lame as when it was first stated.

I'm glad these people are dead. Your pissing on my satisfaction with our shiny new president finally growing a pair will not affect my temporary Easter-present glee. However, I will not listen to any victory statement issued by the White House because, frankly, I don't think they had much of anything to do with this beyond signaling the OK. Nor will I read any more of your predictable rehashed navel-gazing agonizing. ))Poof!(( You're vanished.

* chomps on chocolate bunny ear *; 4/12/09, 5:34 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: What is with all the hand wringing here? The pirates were ARMED, you know, like with guns? You kill people who are armed with guns. you do not sing Kumbayah with them, you do not make nice nice with them. When the opportunity strikes, you fucking kill them. End of story.

And yes, you celebrate; you congratulate and you recognize the heroism of those who did it.

You do not glorify the criminal, terrorist, or pirate. You do not excuse their actions over some trumped up politicized bullshit. You do not romaticize them. You do not give them a platform for their imagined or made up grievances. That is Un-American and un-patriotic.; 4/12/09, 5:41 PM
Jeremy said...: Geee. looks like the Chipper has his thong in a bunch.

I realize you're glad these people are dead, but I never said anything about them not being killed for what they were doing.

Maybe if you were to actually read and understand what I said you could calm your little self down.

The Captain was being threatened with death, we took out the three who were doing the threatening.

That's good.

The reasons behind the situation in the first place...bad and not getting any better.

Right now there are 13 other ships being held captive, some for over a year.

Not good.; 4/12/09, 5:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- No one is talking to you.; 4/12/09, 5:51 PM
LouisAntoine said...: Cedarford-- I don't doubt that most americans are prouder of a war hero than of me, a guy with a computer job. I never claimed otherwise!

But I bet that Chonish doesn't revel in the fact that he killed people. He was brave. He did what was necessary-- more than what was necessary. But I bet he doesn't wish he'd killed 23 rather than 22. I bet he hopes he never has to do something like it again-- even though he may have to again if he is still active duty.

It's instructive that seven machos implies I'm trying to justify piracy and kidnapping. I took pains to try to communicate that even though I think killing was necessary in this case (the reports indicate that there was good reason to believe the hostage was in mortal danger) I never think it's something worthy of celebrating. Celebrate the fact that the hostage survived, not the fact that three others died.

It's friggin' easter sunday. I'm talking about basic notions of christian decency. Not that they are exclusively christian by any means. Happy Easter there Chip. I speak to you from the infinite nothingness of nonexistence.; 4/12/09, 5:52 PM
Kerr Consulting said...: Hmm. Let me see if I can get this straight.

The Europeans are, and have been for years, dumping toxic waste of all sorts - including heavy metals - in Somali waters.

The Europeans are, and have been for years - to the point of starving the locals fishermen - overfishing the Somali waters, to include lobster and other shellfish, that are well-known to concentrate heavy metals in their flesh.

So - if both these statements are true, where are the outbreaks of mercury, cadmium, and lead poisoning in Europe? Did I just miss the suspicious rise in brain damage and birth defects in France?; 4/12/09, 5:53 PM
Anonymous said...: I celebrate the death of these pirates.

Nowhere can it be construed that I have charged anyone here with support of piracy. Your wishy-washy failure to understand the real world is more than enough of a subject for criticism.; 4/12/09, 5:54 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Hey, for all you bleeding hearts and New True Americans. Maybe the US can send some community organizers to the coastal areas of Somalia. The can organize them into sports teams; you know, midnight basketball and all that. Hey, they can even come up with cool names; the Somali Pirates, the Skinny Skivvies, the Mogadishu Mariners…

The organizers can build basketball courts and teach the pirates the art of the game. They could even see to it that some pro stars show up once in a while to pump up the pirates. They could have a weapon trade in program. Give up your gun and get a basketball and a pair of cool Nikes.

The pirates would have something constructive to do and it would take their minds off of committing crimes. They would learn sportsmanship and how sports is a good model for living one’s life.

Once they were converted to sports, they would stop committing their crimes and start leading productive lives. Maybe they would even go to religious services on Sundays or Saturdays.

It worked in our inner cities here. Gangs disappeared and dope dealers stopped selling and got menial jobs. Kids stopped joining gangs and doing dope. Everyone lived happily ever after. Never, ever underestimate the raw power of community organizers.; 4/12/09, 6:03 PM
traditionalguy said...: Cedarford... Don't tell the bad guys that we kill surrendered prisioners. What's a matta you? They just have to surrender in time.; 4/12/09, 6:05 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: So - if both these statements are true, where are the outbreaks of mercury, cadmium, and lead poisoning in Europe? Did I just miss the suspicious rise in brain damage and birth defects in France?

The hand wringers and bleeding hearts here have not finished writing phony news stories to post here yet. Give them time.; 4/12/09, 6:06 PM
jeff said...: Phil, you got to stop bringing logic to a Michael rant. The UN would like to investigate this issue (as the UN loves to do) but has been unable do to the lawlessness of the Somalians. So who knows what has happened.
The idea that the poor Somalians have no choice but to become pirates, is refuted by their actions. A few pirates become rich and finance more tribal warfare among themselves. I do not remember the revolutionary farmers from Delaware fighting the British by stealing from Italians and using the money to fight the Virginians. luckyoldson's mileage may vary.; 4/12/09, 6:09 PM
LouisAntoine said...: Ok machos, I give up. Killing pirates is awesome. I celebrate with you strong men in dark places doing terrible things to protect us all. In fact I'm getting such a boner thinking about it I am going to excuse myself now. Thank you. How could I have denied myself this pleasure for so long. Certainly my daily frustrations are relieved by the thought that out there on the high seas, nautical gangbangers are getting their brains hollowed out by righteous american heroes. Why if I saw a pirate myself, I might pump a few bullets into him. Maybe I would kill him with my bare hands if the whim possessed me. Awesome.; 4/12/09, 6:11 PM
KCFleming said...: "Pirates defeated."

Damn Yankees.; 4/12/09, 6:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Good, Monty. The sooner we arm our merchant sailors and encourage them to defend themselves, the better. And since a vast majority of Americans seem to have finally realized that the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the highest law in the land, that day will come soon.; 4/12/09, 6:16 PM
Deana said...: I'm just so happy and proud of the captain, the Navy Seals and the Navy in general.

It is always astonishing what hard work, practice, and commitment to principle can accomplish.

I'm so proud and thrilled for everyone.; 4/12/09, 6:32 PM
rhhardin said...: As far as I can tell, the Captain's life was in immediate danger exactly when three SEALS saw a clear shot at the pirates.

A happy coincidence that it met the conditions on the orders, if so. The dice fell our way.; 4/12/09, 6:36 PM
Anonymous said...: It is always astonishing what hard work, practice, and commitment to principle can accomplish.

What's ironic is that the pirates probably had the first two qualities.; 4/12/09, 6:37 PM
Lyle said...: Who knew Barack Obama would turn out to be a Buffalo Soldier. 3 black pirates down. Man shoots as good as G.W. Bush did.

... not to mention all the kills he's made in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Hussah President Obama!; 4/12/09, 6:38 PM
rhhardin said...: The guy who comes at you with a gun is saying, at the minimum, if you don't do what I say, I'll kill you.

He doesn't get much consideration after declaring that.

If he comes at you with a truce flag, or otherwise follows the rules of battle under the circumstances, then he gets other considerations.

Guys, at least, understand rules.; 4/12/09, 6:39 PM
Revenant said...: For like the fourth time, I'll say that though the killings may be entirely justified, getting a hard-on about them strikes me as tacky, at the very least.

Yes, we understood your position the first time you said it. You think our response is in poor taste. We get it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a busy evening schedule of not caring that I need to get back to.; 4/12/09, 6:40 PM
Big Mike said...: Had work to do today, so am late to this thread.

@Beth, I find myself agreeing with you. It's a strange feeling. :-)

I followed Jeremy's link and it came across to me like the 9/11 "trufers" or the people who keep trying to "prove" that Barack Obama was not really born in the United States or the people who insist that Sarah Palin got pregnant with Bristol's baby while she was 8 months preggers with her own. And maybe what the writer alleges is actually true, all I'm saying is that it doesn't persuade me at all.

The preamble to the Constitution says that the document is ordained and established to, among other things, provide for the common defense. I'm not happy that the pirates were killed, but I'm very happy that the captain was freed. Be nice if the pirates had surrendered instead, but that's not how they wanted to play it. Maybe the pirates will retaliate and murder other hostages they hold, but that's not the way to bet -- dead hostages tend to lead to dead hostage takers.

A good day for the US of A and, like many others, a tip of my hat to the President. I still think his economic policies will be disastrous for the United States in both the near and long term, but for today I'm proud of him.; 4/12/09, 6:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Lyle -- Is it really necessary to inject race into everything?; 4/12/09, 6:51 PM
Beth said...: @Beth, I find myself agreeing with you. It's a strange feeling. :-)

Just go with it, Mike. It will be easier next time. And the time after that...; 4/12/09, 6:54 PM
Joan said...: ITA with Beth, in all her replies -- thanks for doing all the lifting today, Beth!

In summary: Yay!; 4/12/09, 7:05 PM
Lyle said...: Seven Machos,

Race matters. Race has symbolism. Barack Obama is special, in part, because of his race.

If the world wants to look at us Americans as warmongering cowboys, they should at least Barack Obama s no different... and America has history of black cowboys and black soldiers (Buffalo Soldiers).

It's important to emphasize this, because a lot of people are taught America kills people in the developing world in part because we are racists. President Barack Obama is black, however, he's killing our enemies with the best of all our pasts Presidents.

So three cheers to him!!! Buffalo Soldier!!!; 4/12/09, 7:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Race is a foolish social construct that is not real, does not matter, and leads only to malignity, even when used for benign purposes.

Our president is our president. People are people. The pigmentation of anyone's skin doesn't matter a whit. Please get the memo.; 4/12/09, 7:10 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Well done, President Obama and the Navy Seals!

Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin said Obama would fuck this all up. Instead, he saved the day.; 4/12/09, 7:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Micheal -- Pirates do what they do to us. We do what we do to pirates.

What's the issue?; 4/12/09, 7:23 PM
Lyle said...: Seven Machos,

You may be completely right, but President Obama is special because he's something other than white.

The world must also now see America as something other than a bunch of old white dudes oppressing "the other", cause one of "the other" is now and charge and killing them left and right.

Hussah Obama! Hussah!; 4/12/09, 7:25 PM
Anonymous said...: There is no other.; 4/12/09, 7:27 PM
Jeremy said...: LoafingOaf said..."Well done, President Obama and the Navy Seals! Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin said Obama would fuck this all up. Instead, he saved the day."

And you can bet your ass most here just don't know how to handle such news.

It's hard to bitch and whine when things go well...and that's what most here live for.

Read through the comments and find all that offer congratulations to President Obama for dealing with the situation in the right manner.

Good luck.; 4/12/09, 7:29 PM
Swifty Quick said...: Whatever happened to the meme about how gunslinging cowboy diplomacy is why the world hates us, and about how this kind of action will only create more pirates?; 4/12/09, 7:31 PM
Jeremy said...: I know it's off topic, but how many of the local wingnuts are attending "teabag" parties to celebrate losing your minds? Burning the books. Routing the communists.

And do you know what teabag generally refers to?; 4/12/09, 7:33 PM
Meade said...: from the NYT article: "President Obama had previously authorized the use of force..."

Deserves an "Obama is like Bush" label.; 4/12/09, 7:36 PM
Jeremy said...: Zeb Quinn said..."Whatever happened to the meme about how gunslinging cowboy diplomacy is why the world hates us, and about how this kind of action will only create more pirates?"

Well, first of all, from what I read, the perpetrators were about to kill the Captain and the order was given to take them out. This is exactly what any reasonable country would do to protect their citizens.

Second, this isn't quite the same as invading a sovereign nation under false pretenses.

But of course, you already know that.; 4/12/09, 7:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael = loon.; 4/12/09, 7:36 PM
Jeremy said...: Zeb: ***UPDATE 6:36PM*** CNN is reporting that Navy sharpshooters were secretly parachuted onto the fantail of the USS Bainbridge and hid there, out of view of the pirates. When their commanders determined that Captain Phillips was "in imminent danger," the snipers went into action. At the moment that two of the pirates came into view with one aiming an AK-47 at Phillips, the sharpshooters shot each of them in the head.; 4/12/09, 7:41 PM
Jeremy said...: Rush Limbaugh claims the Somali pirate saga shows how both Obama and Clinton are "inept" in handling "3 a.m. phone call."; 4/12/09, 7:45 PM
Lyle said...: Meade and others,

Yep, Barack Obama is as much a cowboy as G.W. Bush ever was. Not only did he kill 3 African pirates today, but he's killing the Taliban left and right in Pakistan.

He's a Buffalo Soldier after all, thank god.; 4/12/09, 7:51 PM
Skyler said...: Obama didn't screw up, but he's got a lot further to go before my expectation that he'll be like Jimmy Carter is changed.

After all, even Jimmy Carter did an attempt to rescue the hostages.; 4/12/09, 8:14 PM
rhhardin said...: It seemed to me from this linked video that the military was still getting its story straight, apparently to get it to fit under the condition that the captain's life be in immediate danger, which is what permitted them to act.

In which case Obama didn't exactly solve the problem; the military did.

The trick now it to avoid charges of coverup and worse.; 4/12/09, 8:16 PM
Unknown said...: Agreed. I give due credit to Obama for pulling this one off. I mean, the real heroes were the SEALs, but Obama made the right choice letting them do their job.

Jeremy's daddy didn't give affection, no,
And the boy was something that mommy wouldn't wear.; 4/12/09, 8:18 PM
Unknown said...: The "Agreed" was meant for Skyler's comment, BTW; 4/12/09, 8:21 PM
Jeremy said...: mcg said..."Agreed. I give due credit to Obama for pulling this one off. I mean, the real heroes were the SEALs, but Obama made the right choice letting them do their job."

Geeee, that was really nice of you.

And what in the fuck do I have to do with you giving the President some credit?

Are you really that small?; 4/12/09, 8:21 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: Jeremy said
"Right now here in America we have people throwing "teabag" parties (which in itself is rather bizarre, considering what the term refers to)"

and then

"I know it's off topic, but how many of the local wingnuts are attending "teabag" parties...?

And do you know what teabag generally refers to?"

I suppose you are trying in this arch way to tell us that "teabag" has been given a vulgar meaning by people who can't let a word have its original innocent meaning. I'd rather remain in blissful ignorance. I suspect others here would as well. We're going to end up resorting to point-and-grunt if we can't leave the English language alone.

Jeremy, there are tea parties being held in reference to the Boston Tea Party, which was a protest against taxation. I have seen tea parties being referred to, not teabag parties. Seems like you are really stretching there. Might think of getting your mind out of the gutter.; 4/12/09, 8:23 PM
Jeremy said...: Hard On - "In which case Obama didn't exactly solve the problem; the military did."

Nos shit, Sherlock?

And if Obama is standing next to the sniper, he has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

Do YOU idiots EVER give up and admit you're losing your minds over Obama winning??; 4/12/09, 8:23 PM
DaLawGiver said...: What would YOU do if the same circumstances existed here?

I would take the million I made last year from ransoming some punk Europeans, buy a fake Canadian passport and live me the good life in Montreal strip clubs.; 4/12/09, 8:25 PM
Jeremy said...: Laura - The Boston Tea Party was related to taxation WITHOUT representation, not the middle-class getting tax breaks.
Our taxes are not being levied without representation.

I would bet 95% of the idiots taking part in these "parties" will get a tax break and have the fucking brains of a titmouse.

They're not just bitching about taxes, they're bitching about burning books, evolution, Communism and Obama not really being an American citizen.

Are YOU in this fold?

I bet you are.

And, as for teabags...ask a friend or look it up. Be sure to concentrate on those who like to suck on men's balls.; 4/12/09, 8:28 PM
DaLawGiver said...: What would YOU do if the same circumstances existed here?

I would take the million I made last year from ransoming some punk Europeans, find out where Micheal lives, kidnap him, and make him give free blow jobs in my gay strip club in Montreal.; 4/12/09, 8:28 PM
Bob Ellison said...: Yesterday, NPR reported the pirates saying they aren't afraid of the US military...and today they're right!; 4/12/09, 8:29 PM
rhhardin said...: @Jeremy: the point is, if the military is figuring out its story to put the action under what Obama permitted them to do, then probably the conditions were not met in fact.

In which case they were acting outside Obama's orders, which is

1. a no-no

2. no credit to Obama.; 4/12/09, 8:29 PM
Jeremy said...: Lawgiver - You've never made more than $30,000 a year in your life...and if you ever did, your employer got screwed.

And you didn't answer the question did you?

You'd probably just whither and die before doing anything to protect your family and community.; 4/12/09, 8:30 PM
Jeremy said...: Hard On - DO you think they did it without an order from Obama?; 4/12/09, 8:30 PM
rhhardin said...: con't

Orders like shoot the pirates if you can without damaging the captain would have been creditworthy.

Orders like shoot the pirates only if the captain's life is in immediate danger would not have been.

The latter seems to have been the case.; 4/12/09, 8:31 PM
Jeremy said...: Politico: By NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON | 4/12/09 6:07 PM EDT Updated: 4/12/09 8:02 PM EDT

"President Barack Obama twice issued a standing order that authorized U.S. Navy Seals to kill the pirates who held an American captain in a standoff on the high seas, according to White House aides and Pentagon officials.

Obama’s orders – given Friday night and again Saturday morning — authorized the Seals to fire on pirates holding Capt. Richard Phillips if Phillips' life was in danger, officials said."; 4/12/09, 8:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Isn't it odd that Michael has decided to come in and decimate threads today?; 4/12/09, 8:34 PM
Michael Haz said...: @Beth: +1 on your 5:20 PM comment. Very well said.; 4/12/09, 8:34 PM
rhhardin said...: As I said elsewhere, Obama should take credit for it; and maybe it will change him for the better.; 4/12/09, 8:35 PM
Jeremy said...: Hard On - Semantics aside...you know it authorized by President Obama.

Short of him standing next to the snipers, tapping them on the shoulder or sighting the target...what more could any President do?

I know you hate Obama and you want your friends here to love you, but give it up.; 4/12/09, 8:35 PM
Anonymous said...: So if I read the comments right, President Obama has made it safe for people to dump tea in our waterways. Is that correct?

Seems to me that Obama handled this pirate mess by sending the military in to execute a plan. This is much different than claiming a couple guys in boats reporting to people living in a failed state constituted an existential threat to our nation.

The surprise is that a lot people have talked themselves into believing things of left-wing foreign policy that just aren't true.; 4/12/09, 8:35 PM
rhhardin said...: @Jeremy, it seems to be as I said.; 4/12/09, 8:36 PM
Jeremy said...: I hate to ask such a silly question, but does this Seven character, the one who evidently fancies himself as some kind of really cool terrorist, wearing the really neat ski mask...ever provide a comment that makes sense?; 4/12/09, 8:38 PM
rhhardin said...: The military has to spin now to put the captain's life in immediate danger.

What Obama wanted was don't shoot the pirates unless you have to, the Jimmy Carter approach.

I just hope Obama takes credit for it anyway, and finds he likes the feeling of something working out.; 4/12/09, 8:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael = loon = thread decimater.; 4/12/09, 8:38 PM
DaLawGiver said...: Lawgiver - You've never made more than $30,000 a year in your life...and if you ever did, your employer got screwed.

My Montreal strip clubs are more like a hobby, I don't think of them as businesses. I inherited all my wealth I don't need to work. But I will reserve a spot for you in my Butt Pirates Follies 2009, in fact I'll even give you top billing!; 4/12/09, 8:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael is under the impression that no one makes any more money than he does. The idea of a six-figure salary is so outlandish as to be unreal.; 4/12/09, 8:43 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: "And, as for teabags...ask a friend or look it up."

You have a problem with reading comprehension, don't you? That's what happens when people let their language get sloppy. I SAID I didn't want to know whatever vulgar meaning you and people like you have attached to teabags. I have Earl Grey and English Breakfast Tea teabags on my counter right now. The word is a useful word in its current meaning.

"Are YOU in this fold?

I bet you are."

Why do you bet that? Is there a choice between being in "this fold" or being a pervert?; 4/12/09, 8:47 PM
DaLawGiver said...: I am so glad the Navy capped those idiots. I just wish they had shot the 4th one so we wouldn't have to waste any more taxpayer money on him.

Regardless of Michael's ravings ANY asshole who tries to hijack an American flagged ship 450 klicks from land deserves to be shot.; 4/12/09, 8:50 PM
Jeremy said...: Hard On -"What Obama wanted was don't shoot the pirates unless you have to, the Jimmy Carter approach."

Opposed to just shoot everybody because we can. And if we can avoid doing so, just don't.

The intellectual, human approach to intelligent negotiation.

Can I assume you're in favor of police officers shooting first and worrying about other matters later?; 4/12/09, 8:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy, you seem to have gone from deploring the killing to insisting on giving Obama credit for it within the space of a few hours.

I read Johann Hari's piece, and I don't buy it. If a single ship had been held for ransom with the demand that Country X stop poaching fish, or dumping nuclear/chemical waste, sure. But, whaddaya know, the pirates/Somali Patriots/whatever seem to prefer cash. No doubt they devote all but a tithe of it to fostering birth-defected Somali newborns and compensating destitute fishermen.

Now, if the dumping and overfishing stories are true (Hari's update notwithstanding, I think it's implausible that Europe would poison all the fish with uranium and other heavy metals, then steal all the seafood to eat), the Somalis might have some reason to applaud the pirates; but there's no evidence at all that the pirates are operating from any motive but greed.; 4/12/09, 8:51 PM
Jeremy said...: To anybody who can actually read: I have never, not once, said they shouldn't have been shot and killed.

Maybe if you read my comments instead of launching the standard "I'm just doing my best to suck up to my fellow wingnuts" attack you would know that.

The 4th one was not in the boat, he was already negotiating elsewhere.; 4/12/09, 8:52 PM
Jeremy said...: mdulakthomson said..."Jeremy, you seem to have gone from deploring the killing to insisting on giving Obama credit for it within the space of a few hours."

ONCE AGAIN...if you can read:

I have never, not once, said they shouldn't have been shot and killed.

Maybe if you read my comments instead of launching the standard "I'm just doing my best to suck up to my fellow wingnuts" attack you would know that.; 4/12/09, 8:53 PM
DaLawGiver said...: Obama gets the cred for allowing the Navy to run this operation the way it wanted to. Thank God he didn't listen to bleeding hearts like Micheal who would rather pay a ransom to a gang of criminals instead of kill them.; 4/12/09, 8:58 PM
Jeremy said...: I'm sorry, but I can't respond to people who haven't even read my comments yet want to debate what wasn't even said.

You're making things up out of whole cloth so your friends will know you're really tight with the locals.

Obama did the right thing, we did the right thing, I could care less about the dead "pirates," but I do understand some there are always reasons associated with people doing things like this.

This is why the Republicans are dead meat. YOU decide what you think it should be...and that's it.

No negotiation, no debate, no acknowledgment that there are many factors in play.

You just can't get over Obama winning the election and you sound like children.; 4/12/09, 8:59 PM
Jeremy said...: Lawgiver said..."Obama gets the cred for allowing the Navy to run this operation the way it wanted to."

You don't have the guts to give your own President any credit.

You're so intent upon sucking up to your friends here you can't break away for one minute to give the man his do.

Like I said; little children.; 4/12/09, 9:02 PM
Jeremy said...: If George W. Bush gave the order/approval for this operation 99% of the people here would be so fucking happy you'd be cleaning a load out of your little plaid pants or skirts.

And you know it.

Obama won...America won.

You lost.; 4/12/09, 9:04 PM
DaLawGiver said...: Michael thinks the pirates are loving intellectuals who are only trying to survive. They were forced to be pirates by the evil corporations who polluted their pristine coastline.

This is the best thing Obama has allowed to happen since he came into office.; 4/12/09, 9:05 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: Jeremy - you think people here are unhappy that Obama gave the order/approval for this operation? Can you point out a single comment where a person wishes that he had not?; 4/12/09, 9:07 PM
Jeremy said...: For those few with a brain: 60 Minutes has a terrific report on tonight relating to robotics and the relationship to our soldiers.

I realize it's part of the MSM but give it a shot.; 4/12/09, 9:10 PM
The Dude said...: Michael loves him some 60 minutes. Isn't that special.; 4/12/09, 9:13 PM
Frodo Potter said...: Jeremy and Montagne, especially Jeremy, I don’t think anyone would confuse Beth with a redneck Republican and even she is taking you to school.

Aside from the point that Phil Smith and some others have made, even if the Somalis’ backyard was being polluted with toxins, plenty of other indigenous cultures have suffered with toxins being dumped on them and have not resorted to piracy. As several people pointed out, there was no demand for environmental concessions, no demand for cleaning up the ocean, no demand for stopping dumping. There was only a demand for money, hence piracy.

Jeremy, I don’t know what else to say except that you actually performed the difficult task of making Cedarford look good.; 4/12/09, 9:13 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: If George W. Bush gave the order/approval for this operation 99% of the people here would be so fucking happy you'd be cleaning a load out of your little plaid pants or skirts.

And you would have been accusing him of atrocities, war crimes, hate crimes, crimes against humanity, torture, and taking us to war under false pretenses, and attacking the " legitimate Coast Guard" of a sovereign nation. You are a hypocrite.

BTW, it is Un-American and not patriotic to bash those who criticize the government or our elected officials. It goes against everything we true Americans believe in.; 4/12/09, 9:13 PM
JSF said...: Congrats on President Obama for allowing the navy to do it's job.

Now Herr Michael/Lucky/Jeremy wants us all to walk in Lockstep behind Obama.

The Thousand Year reich by the Democrats are back!

Seig Jeremy!; 4/12/09, 9:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy,

Maybe if you read my comments instead of launching the standard "I'm just doing my best to suck up to my fellow wingnuts" attack you would know that.

Look, Jeremy, I did read the comments, from alpha to tedious omega, and among them was this of yours:

First of all they're called "pirates" because the actions take part on the high seas. If they were farmers for instance, defending their homeland from an oppressive King...you know, like America...they would be considered "patriots."

*And could you tell me what YOU would do if YOU were having your food source and health obliterated by major corporate shipping concerns? Do YOU live near a beach? Are you dependent upon fishing to survive?

We both know the answer to those questions.

These people are desperately poor[, and] really have little if any recourse to protect or sustain themselves. I suggest you read something about their situation before making such snarky and uneducated comments.

To which you didn't add, "But obviously they should all be shot dead anyway." If your intention was to say that, of course, these patriots acting in defense of their maritime farms all deserved summary execution, I can only apologize for misreading you so egregiously. All the same, I fear your meaning was a little unclear, and not only to me.; 4/12/09, 9:16 PM
The Dude said...: Michael is not well. I think he has been consuming too many toxins. But he thinks he is fine, and he can call people names, so he is a mighty warrior, like his hero Barry.

He makes Cedarford look balanced.; 4/12/09, 9:17 PM
Jeremy said...: Frodo Potter - You're another on who evidently can't read.

Again - for the chimps - My one point is this: People do all kinds of things under duress, just as you and I would...but that certainly doesn't mean they should be capturing or terrorizing people.

They were killed for doing so and deserved it...and I NEVER otherwise. I personally would have shot any of them.

I don't even know what you're trying to imply.; 4/12/09, 9:18 PM
Jeremy said...: I think I've reached the bottom of the intellectual barrel so I'll leave you all to a mutual suck-off.

And be sure not to watch 60 Minutes.

You wouldn't understand.; 4/12/09, 9:21 PM
Skyler said...: Jeremy,

I don't really think this is a political issue so much. Let's be happy the man was saved, the crew is safe, and the ship is secure.

We don't know Obama's participation in this. Maybe he was on the video conference helping the snipers spot targets. For all we know he didn't want to be awoken. But to his credit whatever he did or didn't do, it worked. Yay.; 4/12/09, 9:22 PM
DaLawGiver said...: Have a nice night Michael.; 4/12/09, 9:24 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: People, please. You just do not get it. Now remember, today is Easter Sunday. The day that the Messiah arose. Jeremy is celebrating in the only way he knows how; by basking in the glow of the new messiah, savior, and chosen one. He is blinded by the light of the messiah and is a true believer. He is just praising the savior. He as been converted to the true and only religion allowed, Obamism. He is a disciple. We cannot fault him for being an Obamist. It would be Un-American and not patriotic. As good and true Americans, we believe in the freedom of religion, even idol worship.

Jeremy is just evangelizing and witnessing. It is part of the Obamist sect. We are all sinners and must be saved, just like Jeremy. He is sharing his salvation and happiness with the rest of us.

Soon he will be seen on street corners with the Audacity of Hope, the new bible, in one raised hand, while preaching the glories of Obama and how he has come to save the world from eternal damnation, perdition, and sin. He will preach how we are being lead to a new beginning. A new life. A life of servitude for the common good.

Can we get a Hallelujah brothers and sisters?; 4/12/09, 9:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy,

My one point is this: People do all kinds of things under duress, just as you and I would...but that certainly doesn't mean they should be capturing or terrorizing people.

They were killed for doing so and deserved it...and I NEVER [said] otherwise. I personally would have shot any of them.

I see. People do all sorts of things "under duress." All the same, if you capture or terrorize people "under duress," you deserve to die.

But, see, your version of "under duress" is rather expansive, isn't it? I'd say, to go all Hollywood about it, that a man who robbed a bank because his daughter was being held hostage and would be killed if he didn't do what he was told was in fact acting "under duress," and though I imagine police would be justified in killing him, he would not "deserve" to die.

Now, your people "under duress" seem to have, by comparison, rather a lot of freedom of action. From what you say, every coast-dwelling Somali is under exactly the same "duress," and yet for some reason most of them aren't out taking hostages. Why ever not? It's a poor sort of "duress" that you can just ignore, as millions of less vicious and venal Somalis apparently do.; 4/12/09, 9:31 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: I personally would have shot any of them.

With what? A rubber band? I would bet you do not even own a gun, let alone know how to use one. I would bet you do not believe in the rights of gun ownership. I would bet that if confronted with evil, you would either run and hide or beg, whine, moan, and cry while pissing and beshatting your pants.

No, Jeremy, your kind would never kill anyone. You do not have the mindset or even the mind.; 4/12/09, 9:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael is crazy, people, and not very bright or good at conversation. He ruins a good salon.; 4/12/09, 9:35 PM
Unknown said...: And what in the fuck do I have to do with you giving the President some credit?

Absolutely nothing. I was giving him credit before I saw this thread, in another forum.

I just take a little delight in proving you're an ignorant twit when you say stupid shit like this: "Read through the comments and find all that offer congratulations to President Obama for dealing with the situation in the right manner."; 4/12/09, 9:38 PM
Unknown said...: I think I've reached the bottom of the intellectual barrel

Dude, you were scraping that all by your lonesome before you changed your name the first time.; 4/12/09, 9:39 PM
Love said...: I hear most of the pirates were from Pittsburgh.

Ain't that weird?; 4/12/09, 9:42 PM
Jeremy said...: Skyler said...We don't know Obama's participation in this. Maybe he was on the video conference helping the snipers spot targets. For all we know he didn't want to be awoken. But to his credit whatever he did or didn't do, it worked. Yay."

Unless we can make a call to Obama, I'm just relying on reports I've read:

Politico: By NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON | 4/12/09 6:07 PM EDT Updated: 4/12/09 8:02 PM EDT

"President Barack Obama twice issued a standing order that authorized U.S. Navy Seals to kill the pirates who held an American captain in a standoff on the high seas, according to White House aides and Pentagon officials.

Obama’s orders – given Friday night and again Saturday morning — authorized the Seals to fire on pirates holding Capt. Richard Phillips if Phillips' life was in danger, officials said."; 4/12/09, 9:47 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: "I just take a little delight in proving you're an ignorant twit when you say stupid shit like this: 'Read through the comments and find all that offer congratulations to President Obama for dealing with the situation in the right manner.'"

Yes, that is funny, considering that the very first comment says this:

"As Reynolds said: 'Hat tip to Obama'. You the man today, Pres."; 4/12/09, 9:48 PM
Jeremy said...: Laura - There are over 150 comments...and you found ONE from John?

Well, damn, I guess that shows me.

Duh.; 4/12/09, 9:54 PM
Jeremy said...: Laura - Do you not understand that when someone says there is a dearth of kudos to Obama it doesn't mean there are none?

Good lord...; 4/12/09, 9:56 PM
Unknown said...: Look, turdbag, we conservatives don't have to explicitly give Obama credit when the Navy carries out an operation: it is assumed---because the Navy takes its orders from the Commander-In-Chief. When we praise the Navy we praise its Commander by proxy.

I know that's a bit difficult for lowlifes like yourself to understand, when you have to to bend over backwards to claim you "support the troops" in one breath because in the other breath you're painting their Commander as a chimp.; 4/12/09, 9:57 PM
Laura(southernxyl) said...: It was the first comment, buddy. Couldn't miss it.

Now please point to all the comments you've made where you've approved of anything Pres. Bush did ... whoops, I think you've already been challenged to do that.; 4/12/09, 9:58 PM
JSF said...: The Thousand Year rule by Democrats has begun!

If you do not support President Obama, you vill be shot!

Herr Michael/Lucky/Jeremy vill enforce the Lockstep behind President Obama and the Democrats!

Her Michael/Lucky/Jeremy wants no opposition!

Seig Jeremy!; 4/12/09, 9:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why did you feel the need to change your name?; 4/12/09, 9:59 PM
Unknown said...: Oh by the way I also praised his visit to Iraq. I don't even care if he was politically motivated it was a class move. Not to mention he seemed to suggest that we were going to finish the job, which I fully support no matter who is in office.; 4/12/09, 10:02 PM
Unknown said...: Now please point to all the comments you've made where you've approved of anything Pres. Bush did ... whoops, I think you've already been challenged to do that.

What a great point, Laura. By all means, Jeremy, put up or shut up. Well, edit that: put up, and then shut up anyway.; 4/12/09, 10:02 PM
David said...: It looks to me like it Obama got pushed by the military. From the NYT article: The Defense Department twice asked Mr. Obama for permission to use military force to rescue Captain Phillips, most recently late on Friday night, senior defense officials said. On Saturday morning, the president agreed to permit action, they said, but only if it appeared that the captain’s life was in imminent danger.

It took three requests for Obama to give the go ahead? The captain has been held at gunpoint for two days. This was not imminent enough danger for the President?

There will be further hijackings, and further hostages will be taken. Each time, must there be three requests to the President to try to save them?

If Michelle Obama were held hostage by three terrorists with guns, would that not be imminent enough danger for President Obama?

This is a very fine result for the brave captain and his family. It is not, however, a good process for future victims. The inevitable future victims.; 4/12/09, 10:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy [9:21],

I think I've reached the bottom of the intellectual barrel so I'll leave you all to a mutual suck-off.

You know, it's actually much more effective if, after stomping angrily offstage, you stay off. Coming back for the odd bit of sniper fire makes you look ... how do you say? ... irresolute. That's it.; 4/12/09, 10:13 PM
Anonymous said...: David -- Ask yourself: had Bush handled it the same way, how would you feel?

Don't be like this cretin Michael, who for whatever demented reasons puts party before country, and syntax.; 4/12/09, 10:14 PM
Jeremy said...: mcg said..."Look, turdbag, we conservatives don't have to explicitly give Obama credit when the Navy carries out an operation..."

I never said you had to do anything.

I merely pointed out the fact that those who don't give credit where credit is due are gutless.

Politico: By NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON | 4/12/09 6:07 PM EDT Updated: 4/12/09 8:02 PM EDT

"President Barack Obama twice issued a standing order that authorized U.S. Navy Seals to kill the pirates who held an American captain in a standoff on the high seas, according to White House aides and Pentagon officials.

Obama’s orders – given Friday night and again Saturday morning — authorized the Seals to fire on pirates holding Capt. Richard Phillips if Phillips' life was in danger, officials said."; 4/12/09, 10:20 PM
Skyler said...: I wonder why someone's life would have to be in danger before being allowed to kill pirates.

Just because there is no explicit international law treaty that describes the proper response to piracy doesn't mean that the settled law prior to these treaties isn't in force.

The UN and other international bodies have decided to stay silent about the treatment of pirates, therefore we default to prior established customary international law. And that means we dangle pirates off the side of the piers and the fish eat them.; 4/12/09, 10:20 PM
Anonymous said...: The UN and other international bodies have decided to stay silent about the treatment of pirates, therefore we default to prior established customary international law.

This is not how it works. The UN and other international bodies only have law because the countries involved make it and agree to it. Said countries can also disagree to it later, if they so choose.; 4/12/09, 10:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:23 PM
Jeremy said...: mdulakthomson - I didn't stomp.

I went to have a bite of dinner and was bored with the local cretins.

As to being "irresolute" I've heard worse and from a better bunch than this.; 4/12/09, 10:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:25 PM
Jeremy said...: David - We've already see what a President who doesn't think before acting gets us. (hint: G.W.)

Obama apparently adheres to the "think before acting" theory of engagement.

There's plenty of history illustrating the same behavior in our very best military and political leaders.

You're just sucking up to your friends.; 4/12/09, 10:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:29 PM
Peter Hoh said...: It takes 182 comments to say "good job" to the Navy and a word of thanks that the captain is safe?

What the hell is wrong with some people?; 4/12/09, 10:30 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: As to being "irresolute" I've heard worse and from a better bunch than this.

If we are sooooo below your standards, why do you keep coming back? Why would a true AMerican like you want to associate yourself with the great unwashed masses? I mean there are other places where people will agree with your every utterance and you can bask in your glory.

You only come here to insure that the Party talking points of the day are well presented and argued. Unfortunately, you lie a bit too much and then never rememeber what you say. Then, like a good Democrat hack you still deny.

You are nothing but a troll. I may not know what a teabag is, but I do know what a scum bag is; a guy named Jeremy.; 4/12/09, 10:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael showed up and went ballistic.; 4/12/09, 10:31 PM
Jeremy said...: David - "There will be further hijackings, and further hostages will be taken."

No shit?

There are many others being held right now, some for over a year now.

The shipping companies either will not pay are still negotiating of don't have the dough.; 4/12/09, 10:34 PM
Jeremy said...: Peter - Some are okay.

And it's fun.

Other than sucking up to your fellow wingnuts, why do you come here?; 4/12/09, 10:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:36 PM
Jeremy said...: Seven - Why do you use the picture of a terrorist?

Does it make you feel...cool?

I find it kind of creepy.; 4/12/09, 10:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy,

mdulakthomson - I didn't stomp.

I went to have a bite of dinner and was bored with the local cretins.

And you had your "bite" among the "local cretins" and were back posting in, let me see, 26 minutes. Expeditious! I wish I had a public eating-place as close as that. If I want to do dinner in that time-frame, I have to prepare it myself. Of course, that means that I don't have to suffer the "local cretins," but still ...

As to being "irresolute" I've heard worse and from a better bunch than this.

No doubt. But, tell me: Do you really want me to think that your earliest posts on this thread were consistent with your wanting the pirates shot? Because, you know, they really don't read that way. Just sayin'.; 4/12/09, 10:38 PM
Love said...: A lot of us have wondered about the Seven The Terrorist thing.

What's up with that?; 4/12/09, 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- The fact that you don't get my picture is only proof of your lack of knowledge about the world.

But why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm sure you have been wondering, Locals. I see you here so often.

If you don't get it, consider it a basic lack of knowledge.; 4/12/09, 10:41 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Can we trade Jeremy for al the hostages held in Somalia? It would be a fair trade. He would fit right in with those people. They would love him. He would make those nice hostage videos for them extolling the greatness of the peace loving Somali people and how the whole world is fouling their waters and stealing their fish.

He could claim his new found solidarity with the Somali Pirates. He could teach them how to play basketball too.; 4/12/09, 10:41 PM
Jeremy said...: mdulakthomson said..."And you had your "bite" among the "local cretins" and were back posting in, let me see, 26 minutes."

It wasn't a six course meal, dipstick.

And I find the fact that you're timing my departures and arrivals rather complimentary.

Are you falling for me?

I'm straight and married so maybe you better move on.

If you don't mind dating a terrorist, Seven hasn't had a date in years.; 4/12/09, 10:43 PM
Jason said...: Take THAT, Bill Mazeroski!

--The Yanks; 4/12/09, 10:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:44 PM
Jeremy said...: For those of you who don't get Seven's picture, maybe this will ring a bell:

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_munich.php

Duh.; 4/12/09, 10:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael -- Why the name change?; 4/12/09, 10:46 PM