On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:40:25 -0500, Harryk
wrote:
On 2/28/11 1:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Lil Abner" wrote in message ...
On 2/28/2011 11:02 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
And this boat has three children. It's time for this to stop. The Navy
needs to storm this boat. If the innocents are killed they need to
identify the pirates, which town they are from in Somali, and eliminate
it. I guarantee you do this a couple of times, and the Somalis
themselves will put a stop to it...
Somehow it is more civilized to let the drama continue. That there is a
Global government etc that should deal with piracy as a crime with due
process and Pirates rights.
We have the resources to locate these people on the oceans.
Sink them without asking them, about their troubled childhoods, poor
villages back home, and their hopes and aspirations.
Somalia is a trouble region and really is no civilized government in
control of anything their gnp is probably all from piracy.
Let the military deal with them as they deem wise and necessary, on the
spot and no recriminations from Washington etc.
No trials. Once the victims are free, put the pirates back on the mother
or pirate ship and sink it.
Close their ports and destroy them. they might get upset...well the
victims are upset and the rest of the world is tired of it.
Reply:
Solution to the piracy. Limit the fishing to within 100 miles of the
shore. If a Somali boat is outside the 100 miles, they sink and die.
When the Somali's decide that piracy is not worth the problems, then
they can fish further out. If the pirates capture a boat inside the 100
miles, is the boats problem. They kill hostages while in Somalia, then
figure how who had gotten rich in the last 5 years and kill them.
Under International Law, I doubt you can do that. How are you going to
legally restrict access to the high seas?
He's talking about a blockade I would guess. That's pretty difficult
given the length of the coast line... very expensive to maintain.
Of course, everyone seems to be forgetting our little adventure in
1993, wherein Clinton tried to do something and got blasted by the
right-wing.
Here's a bit of history for those too ignorant to look it up.
http://novaonline.nvcc.edu/eli/evans...Somalia93.html
"The U.N. asked its member nations for assistance. In December 1992,
in one of his last acts as President, George Bush proposed to the U.N.
that United States combat troops lead the intervention force. The
U.N. accepted this offer and 25,000 U.S. troops were deployed to
Somalia. President Bush stated that this would not be an “open-ended
commitment.” The objective of Operation Restore Hope was to rapidly
secure the trade routes in Somalia so that food could get to the
people. President Bush stated that U.S. troops would be home in time
for Bill Clinton’s inauguration in January.
Once President Clinton was inaugurated he stated his desire to scale
down the U.S. presence in Somalia, and to let the U.N. forces take
over. In March 1993 the U.N. officially took over the operation,
naming this mission UNOSOM – II. The objective of this mission was to
promote “nation building” within Somalia. One main target was to
disarm the Somali people. UNOSOM – II stressed restoring law and
order, improving the infrastructure, and assisting the people with
setting up a representative government.
President Clinton supported the U.N. mandate and ordered the number of
U.S. troops in Somalia reduced, to be replaced by U.N. troops. By
June 1993, only 1200 U.S. troops remained in Somalia, but on June 5,
1993 24 Pakistani soldiers were ambushed and killed during the
inspection of a Somali arms weapons storage site. The U.N. responded
with an emergency resolution to apprehend those responsible. While it
was not specifically stated, Aidid and his followers were believed to
be responsible. On June 19, 1993 Admiral Howe ordered Aidid’s arrest
and offered a $25,000 reward for information leading to this. He also
requested a counterterrorist rescue force after the massacre of the
Pakistani troops."