Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 10, 8:13�pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. �A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". �When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.

You dumb a**, obviously we could to anything from a helicopter mission
to a nucular attack. In all cases the Captain we are trying to save
would die. Period. Yeah, we can kill the bad guys...you got any
ideas how to keep the Captain alive while we do that? You want to
trade places with the Captain?
Ain't always easy
Mike
\

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 10, 11:13*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. *A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". *When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.

Why dont they just install midi-Guns on them...unlimited ammo. End of
problem.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:51:52 -0700 (PDT), Mike wrote:

On Apr 10, 8:13?pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. ?A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". ?When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.
You dumb a**, obviously we could to anything from a helicopter mission
to a nucular attack. In all cases the Captain we are trying to save
would die. Period. Yeah, we can kill the bad guys...you got any
ideas how to keep the Captain alive while we do that? You want to
trade places with the Captain?
Ain't always easy
Mike
\

Maybe the Israelis are right. Don't negotiate with terrorists. If
these pirates even get out of this alive, what is the lesson we have
given the rest of the pirates?

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.



Including the captain of the freighter?




--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Eisboch wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

-------------------------

Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?

Eisboch



It's easy for someone like Bertie to think that is the solution. He's an
ex-marine, after all.


--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 6:31*am, Jim22208 wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 10, 11:13 pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. *A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". *When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.

Why dont they just install midi-Guns on them...unlimited ammo. End of
problem.

For the crisis at hand, we don't need more firepower. We need the
captain to escape again so that we can have a proper Viking funeral for
the Somalians and their rescuers.

LOL!

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Tim wrote:
On Apr 11, 6:31 am, Jim22208 wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 10, 11:13 pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.
Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.
Why dont they just install midi-Guns on them...unlimited ammo. End of
problem.
For the crisis at hand, we don't need more firepower. We need the
captain to escape again so that we can have a proper Viking funeral for
the Somalians and their rescuers.

LOL!



Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of
pirates, and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military
force than invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying
politicians that they are building weapons of mass destruction.


--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"HK" wrote in message
m...


Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of pirates,
and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military force than
invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying politicians that they
are building weapons of mass destruction.




I agree. This situation is far more complex than some of the Clint Eastwood
types calling out, "Make my day" think it is.

The commanding officer of the Bainbridge is under rules of engagement that
precludes him from taking any action that would put the hostage's life in
jeopardy. Some people are critical that the lifeboat wasn't "blown out of
the water" when the hostage briefly jumped overboard.
The reality is that in the middle of the night and from over 200 yards away,
any firepower brought to bear on the lifeboat would also have a significant
risk to the hostage.

The rules of engagement change if the destroyer itself is in danger due to
attack. Under those circumstances the captain is authorized to take any
action necessary to save his ship. Four guys in a powerless lifeboat
armed with small arms and maybe AK-47's isn't exactly a serious threat to a
destroyer.

This is a tough situation. Apparently there are about 200 other hostages
that are being held as ransom bait by these pirates and some of them are on
the boats that the pirates have called upon for reinforcement. "Blowing
them out of the water" brings the same risk of killing hostages.

Right now, nobody is going anywhere and time is on the side of the hostage
and of the Navy.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 9:35*am, HK wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Apr 11, 6:31 am, Jim22208 wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 10, 11:13 pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. *A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.
Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". *When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.
Why dont they just install midi-Guns on them...unlimited ammo. End of
problem.
For the crisis at hand, we don't need more firepower. We need the
captain to escape again so that we can have a proper Viking funeral for
the Somalians and their rescuers.

LOL!

Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of
pirates, and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military
force than invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying
politicians that they are building weapons of mass destruction.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Blah, blah, blah... more illiterate bull**** from our resident dropout.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
m...


Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of
pirates, and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military
force than invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying
politicians that they are building weapons of mass destruction.




I agree. This situation is far more complex than some of the Clint
Eastwood types calling out, "Make my day" think it is.

The commanding officer of the Bainbridge is under rules of engagement that
precludes him from taking any action that would put the hostage's life in
jeopardy. Some people are critical that the lifeboat wasn't "blown out
of the water" when the hostage briefly jumped overboard.
The reality is that in the middle of the night and from over 200 yards
away, any firepower brought to bear on the lifeboat would also have a
significant risk to the hostage.

The rules of engagement change if the destroyer itself is in danger due to
attack. Under those circumstances the captain is authorized to take any
action necessary to save his ship. Four guys in a powerless lifeboat
armed with small arms and maybe AK-47's isn't exactly a serious threat to
a destroyer.

This is a tough situation. Apparently there are about 200 other hostages
that are being held as ransom bait by these pirates and some of them are
on the boats that the pirates have called upon for reinforcement.
"Blowing them out of the water" brings the same risk of killing hostages.

Right now, nobody is going anywhere and time is on the side of the hostage
and of the Navy.

Eisboch

And BTW, this may surprise some, but IMO Obama is doing exactly the right
thing. He's not commenting, he's not showing his hand. The best thing he
can do is to keep the pirates guessing while professional negotiators do
their job.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 9:53*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...







"HK" wrote in message
om...

Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of
pirates, and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military
force than invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying
politicians that they are building weapons of mass destruction.

I agree. *This situation is far more complex than some of the Clint
Eastwood types calling out, "Make my day" think it is.

The commanding officer of the Bainbridge is under rules of engagement that
precludes him from taking any action that would put the hostage's life in
jeopardy. * Some people are critical that the lifeboat wasn't "blown out
of the water" *when the hostage briefly jumped overboard.
The reality is that in the middle of the night and from over 200 yards
away, any firepower brought to bear on the lifeboat would also have a
significant risk to the hostage.

The rules of engagement change if the destroyer itself is in danger due to
attack. *Under those circumstances the captain is authorized to take any
action necessary to save his ship. * *Four guys in a powerless lifeboat
armed with small arms and maybe AK-47's *isn't exactly a serious threat to
a destroyer.

This is a tough situation. * Apparently there are about 200 other hostages
that are being held as ransom bait by these pirates and some of them are
on the boats that the pirates have called upon for reinforcement.
"Blowing them out of the water" *brings the same risk of killing hostages.

Right now, nobody is going anywhere and time is on the side of the hostage
and of the Navy.

Eisboch

And BTW, *this may surprise some, but IMO *Obama is doing exactly the right
thing. *He's not commenting, he's not showing his hand. * The best thing he
can do is to keep the pirates guessing while professional negotiators do
their job.

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not to mention the POTUS shouldn't let 4 guys with AK47's draw his
attention. There are American citizens held hostage every day right
here at home... He can't and shouldn't address every one of them.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 9:53 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...







"HK" wrote in message
om...

Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very
valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of
pirates, and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military
force than invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying
politicians that they are building weapons of mass destruction.

I agree. This situation is far more complex than some of the Clint
Eastwood types calling out, "Make my day" think it is.

The commanding officer of the Bainbridge is under rules of engagement
that
precludes him from taking any action that would put the hostage's life
in
jeopardy. Some people are critical that the lifeboat wasn't "blown out
of the water" when the hostage briefly jumped overboard.
The reality is that in the middle of the night and from over 200 yards
away, any firepower brought to bear on the lifeboat would also have a
significant risk to the hostage.

The rules of engagement change if the destroyer itself is in danger due
to
attack. Under those circumstances the captain is authorized to take any
action necessary to save his ship. Four guys in a powerless lifeboat
armed with small arms and maybe AK-47's isn't exactly a serious threat
to
a destroyer.

This is a tough situation. Apparently there are about 200 other hostages
that are being held as ransom bait by these pirates and some of them are
on the boats that the pirates have called upon for reinforcement.
"Blowing them out of the water" brings the same risk of killing
hostages.

Right now, nobody is going anywhere and time is on the side of the
hostage
and of the Navy.

Eisboch

And BTW, this may surprise some, but IMO Obama is doing exactly the right
thing. He's not commenting, he's not showing his hand. The best thing he
can do is to keep the pirates guessing while professional negotiators do
their job.

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not to mention the POTUS shouldn't let 4 guys with AK47's draw his
attention. There are American citizens held hostage every day right
here at home... He can't and shouldn't address every one of them.

--------------------------------

I am sure these a-holes have his riveted attention. Like many, I've been
following
this situation play out and I am so far impressed with how it's being
handled.

Some people have seen too many movies. Real life desperate people with guns
who
get the impression that it's "them or us" are truly dangerous. Having
someone firing
a weapon at you in earnest is a experience you don't quickly forget.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 10:20*am, BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:51:52 -0700 (PDT), Mike wrote:

On Apr 10, 8:13?pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. ?A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". ?When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.
You dumb a**, obviously we could to anything from a helicopter mission
to a nucular attack. *In all cases the Captain we are trying to save
would die. *Period. *Yeah, we can kill the bad guys...you got any
ideas how to keep the Captain alive while we do that? *You want to
trade places with the Captain?
Ain't always easy
Mike
\

Maybe the Israelis are right. Don't negotiate with terrorists. If
these pirates even get out of this alive, what is the lesson we have
given the rest of the pirates?

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 9:53*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...







"HK" wrote in message
om...

Let's keep in mind the fact that the pirates are holding a very valuable
hostage who has proved how worthy he is. So long as he is alive and
unharmed, it is important for cool heads to prevail. Also keep in mind
other pirates in that area are holding other crews as hostages. What is
needed is a plan that can be implemented to sweep these waters of
pirates, and keep them them clean, far worthier tasks for a military
force than invading a country on trumped-up charges from lying
politicians that they are building weapons of mass destruction.

I agree. *This situation is far more complex than some of the Clint
Eastwood types calling out, "Make my day" think it is.

The commanding officer of the Bainbridge is under rules of engagement that
precludes him from taking any action that would put the hostage's life in
jeopardy. * Some people are critical that the lifeboat wasn't "blown out
of the water" *when the hostage briefly jumped overboard.
The reality is that in the middle of the night and from over 200 yards
away, any firepower brought to bear on the lifeboat would also have a
significant risk to the hostage.

The rules of engagement change if the destroyer itself is in danger due to
attack. *Under those circumstances the captain is authorized to take any
action necessary to save his ship. * *Four guys in a powerless lifeboat
armed with small arms and maybe AK-47's *isn't exactly a serious threat to
a destroyer.

This is a tough situation. * Apparently there are about 200 other hostages
that are being held as ransom bait by these pirates and some of them are
on the boats that the pirates have called upon for reinforcement.
"Blowing them out of the water" *brings the same risk of killing hostages.

Right now, nobody is going anywhere and time is on the side of the hostage
and of the Navy.

Eisboch

And BTW, *this may surprise some, but IMO *Obama is doing exactly the right
thing. *He's not commenting, he's not showing his hand. * The best thing he
can do is to keep the pirates guessing while professional negotiators do
their job.

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And "expert" on TV this morning was saying the same thing. And he was
talking about how time is on our side. Play the waiting game, and they
will have to fold.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

wrote in message
...

On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

-------------------------

Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release the
captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

-------------------------

Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?

Eisboch



Put the additional item in there that we will go into your home towns and
kill your families also. Not legal, but they understand that part about
killing the relatives as it is done by themselves.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 1:36*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...





wrote in message
....

On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

-------------------------

Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?

Eisboch

Put the additional item in there that we will go into your home towns and
kill your families also. *Not legal, but they understand that part about
killing the relatives as it is done by themselves.
t
You've all missed the point. Bush exuded the impression that if you
mess with the USA, that he was crazy enough to stomp you regardless of
consequences.
Obama gives the impression of "Please dont hit me, I'll give you my
lunch money". His bow to the Saudi King was a clear indication of no
action toward pirates.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 1:36 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...





wrote in message
...

On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US
ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

-------------------------

Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?

Eisboch

Put the additional item in there that we will go into your home towns and
kill your families also. Not legal, but they understand that part about
killing the relatives as it is done by themselves.
t
You've all missed the point. Bush exuded the impression that if you
mess with the USA, that he was crazy enough to stomp you regardless of
consequences.
Obama gives the impression of "Please dont hit me, I'll give you my
lunch money". His bow to the Saudi King was a clear indication of no
action toward pirates.

--------------------------

The jury is still out in my mind. I'll wait to see what the final outcome
of this mess is.
Right now I think he is doing the right thing by not delivering threats,
etc.
If the hostage is finally released and no further action is taken against
the pirates or where they came from, my opinion will probably change.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 11, 1:36 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...





wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:
The negotiations should go like this.
USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US ship
or you will all die.
I agree with this post....
-------------------------
Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?
Eisboch
Put the additional item in there that we will go into your home towns and
kill your families also. Not legal, but they understand that part about
killing the relatives as it is done by themselves.
t
You've all missed the point. Bush exuded the impression that if you
mess with the USA, that he was crazy enough to stomp you regardless of
consequences.


What Bush exuded was stupidity...that if you were terrorists and
attacked the United States, Bush would make war against the wrong
country, sacrifice thousands more American lives and ga-zillions of
dollars and in the process allow the economy to be destroyed.

The terrorists continue to laugh at us.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
For GOD's sake, send reinforcements quick. A billion dollar destroyer
that could single handedly defeat Japan in WW2 is stymied by three
thugs in a lifeboat and Obama panics and sends reinforcements when he
hears they may be joined by another unarmed merchant vessel with a
dozen or so pirates.
Obama sends a stern warning, "I'm not kidding, unless they reduce
their demands to $1 million, this time I'll not only bow, I'll pucker
up too" sure put the fear of something into those pirates.

Meanwhile, those awful brits at the UK Telegraph are calling Obama a
"Pantywaist surrender monkey". When a euro type calls you that, its
gotta hurt.

It should. And it is true. Maybe Obama has to learn being president isn't
all about pork-corruption-debt spend.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 1:36 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...





wrote in message
...

On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:

The negotiations should go like this.

USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US
ship
or you will all die.

I agree with this post....

-------------------------

Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?

Eisboch

Put the additional item in there that we will go into your home towns and
kill your families also. Not legal, but they understand that part about
killing the relatives as it is done by themselves.
t
You've all missed the point. Bush exuded the impression that if you
mess with the USA, that he was crazy enough to stomp you regardless of
consequences.
Obama gives the impression of "Please dont hit me, I'll give you my
lunch money". His bow to the Saudi King was a clear indication of no
action toward pirates.
----
Well the Saudi, Osama Bin Ladden's brother has signifigant investment in
Carlyle and that means GM and GMAC.... with Quayle and Bush too.... brothers
of Harvard on the bailout bonanza. What a web of relationships. I am only
surprised the media does not flaunt these relationships.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 11, 1:36 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...





wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 10:20 am, BAR wrote:
The negotiations should go like this.
USA: Our terms are you have 2 hours to return the Captain of the US
ship
or you will all die.
I agree with this post....
-------------------------
Are you both willing to honor the implied contract that if they release
the captain, they won't die?
Are you willing to knowingly and willingly sacrifice the hostage?
Eisboch
Put the additional item in there that we will go into your home towns
and
kill your families also. Not legal, but they understand that part about
killing the relatives as it is done by themselves.
t
You've all missed the point. Bush exuded the impression that if you
mess with the USA, that he was crazy enough to stomp you regardless of
consequences.


What Bush exuded was stupidity...that if you were terrorists and attacked
the United States, Bush would make war against the wrong country,
sacrifice thousands more American lives and ga-zillions of dollars and in
the process allow the economy to be destroyed.

The terrorists continue to laugh at us.

We need to get tougher to deal with this. Should have just been a nuke, one
each for Iraq and Afganistan. Over in 30 minutes.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...



We need to get tougher to deal with this. Should have just been a nuke,
one each for Iraq and Afganistan. Over in 30 minutes.


Does Canada have nukes?

Serious question. I don't know the answer.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...



We need to get tougher to deal with this. Should have just been a nuke,
one each for Iraq and Afganistan. Over in 30 minutes.


Does Canada have nukes?

Serious question. I don't know the answer.

Not officially. But officially we have uranium, mines and partial
refinement capabilities to make them ;)

If we have them, they would be US made and supplied. Some rumours fly
around here and there. My guess is they could be moved from the Dakota's to
Cold Lake in no time.... if they already are not there.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 5:41*pm, "Canuck57" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...



"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

We need to get tougher to deal with this. *Should have just been a nuke,
one each for Iraq and Afganistan. *Over in 30 minutes.

Does Canada have nukes?

Serious question. * I don't know the answer.

Not officially. *But officially we have uranium, mines and partial
refinement capabilities to make them ;)

If we have them, they would be US made and supplied. *Some rumours fly
around here and there. *My guess is they could be moved from the Dakota's to
Cold Lake in no time.... if they already are not there.

The question is what is a desireable outcome here.

If you say freeing the hostages.......WRONG. A desireable outcome is
to minimize future occurences. This may be entirely different from
saving the hostages and not recognizing this fact will result in many
more deaths. Obama is not capable of understanding this. Paying
ransom is morally wrong because it results in more hostages being
taken. Thus, the actiuons of the rest of the world to this point have
been both morally and logically wrong and have brought us to this
point.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...



We need to get tougher to deal with this. Should have just been a nuke,
one each for Iraq and Afganistan. Over in 30 minutes.


Does Canada have nukes?

Serious question. I don't know the answer.

Eisboch

We could have been an early member of the nuclear club...in the 1950s... but
official policy is against them now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_...ss_destruction

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...

The question is what is a desireable outcome here.

If you say freeing the hostages.......WRONG. A desireable outcome is
to minimize future occurences. This may be entirely different from
saving the hostages and not recognizing this fact will result in many
more deaths. Obama is not capable of understanding this. Paying
ransom is morally wrong because it results in more hostages being
taken. Thus, the actiuons of the rest of the world to this point have
been both morally and logically wrong and have brought us to this
point.

--------------------------

I would say that certainly a desirable outcome is to minimize future
occurrences, however......

Our culture values life. The purpose of law enforcement and the military is
to protect and secure civilian life. There have been many examples of
police, firefighters and military sacrificing more than one casualty or
fatality in the effort to save one civilian life.

The primary objective right now is to save the civilian hostage if at all
possible.
Once accomplished, it will be time to minimize future occurrences.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...



We need to get tougher to deal with this. Should have just been a nuke,
one each for Iraq and Afganistan. Over in 30 minutes.


Does Canada have nukes?

Serious question. I don't know the answer.

Eisboch

We could have been an early member of the nuclear club...in the 1950s...
but official policy is against them now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_...ss_destruction


I did some reading on the subject. Canada isn't an "official" nuke member,
but played a significant role in the development of the first bomb. The
Canadian prime minister knew about the existence of the first bomb before
Truman did when he took office after FDR's death.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Eisboch wrote:

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...

The question is what is a desireable outcome here.

If you say freeing the hostages.......WRONG. A desireable outcome is
to minimize future occurences. This may be entirely different from
saving the hostages and not recognizing this fact will result in many
more deaths. Obama is not capable of understanding this. Paying
ransom is morally wrong because it results in more hostages being
taken. Thus, the actiuons of the rest of the world to this point have
been both morally and logically wrong and have brought us to this
point.

--------------------------

I would say that certainly a desirable outcome is to minimize future
occurrences, however......

Our culture values life. The purpose of law enforcement and the
military is to protect and secure civilian life. There have been many
examples of police, firefighters and military sacrificing more than one
casualty or fatality in the effort to save one civilian life.

The primary objective right now is to save the civilian hostage if at
all possible.
Once accomplished, it will be time to minimize future occurrences.

Eisboch


Only a complete asshole would think it ok to sacrifice the ship's
captain, especially after he exchanged himself to further the safety of
this crew.



--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Apr 11, 9:08*pm, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
....

The question is what is a desireable outcome here.

If you say freeing the hostages.......WRONG. *A desireable outcome is
to minimize future occurences. *This may be entirely different from
saving the hostages and not recognizing this fact will result in many
more deaths. *Obama is not capable of understanding this. *Paying
ransom is morally wrong because it results in more hostages being
taken. *Thus, the actiuons of the rest of the world to this point have
been both morally and logically wrong and have brought us to this
point.

--------------------------

I would say that certainly a desirable outcome is to minimize future
occurrences, however......

Our culture values life. *The purpose of law enforcement and the
military is to protect and secure civilian life. *There have been many
examples of police, firefighters and military sacrificing more than one
casualty or fatality in the effort to save one civilian life.

The primary objective right now is to save the civilian hostage if at
all possible.
Once accomplished, it will be time to minimize future occurrences.

Eisboch

Only a complete asshole would think it ok to sacrifice the ship's
captain, especially after he exchanged himself to further the safety of
this crew.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

ANY attempt at negotiation will CAUSE future incidents so logically
should not be considered. It is all well and good to feel for the
family of the hostage but we also have to feel for the hundrerds of
potential future hostages. This logically means no negotiations. You
may call being logical asshole behavior but it works better than
emotionalism.
Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future
incidents. I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can
either.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Somali pirates might be considering capturing Obama's family in
neighboring Kenya. What kind of ransom would they demand? Remember
his brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents are all there
living
in a shanty.....

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:55:28 -0400, Eisboch wrote:



The primary objective right now is to save the civilian hostage if at
all possible.
Once accomplished, it will be time to minimize future occurrences.

Something that seems to be overlooked here, historically, the Somali
pirates have taken great pains to avoid killing their hostages. They
seem to take a "businesslike" approach to piracy. It's about the
ransom. On the other hand, in the Straits of Malacca, piracy is about
the cargo or ship. Crews regularly go "missing" overboard.

Before we go hastily slaughtering people, we may want to consider the
unintended consequences of our actions. Remember the Islamic Courts
Union? Well, they had ended piracy in the waters under their control.
Perhaps, we should have considered that before we aided Ethiopia's
invasion of Somalia. I've said it before, if you want to play
geopolitical chess, you had better be able to see more than two moves
ahead.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:29:14 -0700, Frogwatch wrote:


Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future incidents.
I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can either.

In another forum, I just read *the* solution. Instead of tracking down
and killing these pirates, we should track down and kill anyone who has
paid ransom to these pirates. Case closed, no profit, no piracy.

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:29:14 -0700, Frogwatch wrote:


Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future incidents.
I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can either.

In another forum, I just read *the* solution. Instead of tracking down
and killing these pirates, we should track down and kill anyone who has
paid ransom to these pirates. Case closed, no profit, no piracy.



What? Kill corporate execs? That would be so...unAmerican. :)
--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:21:11 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:29:14 -0700, Frogwatch wrote:


Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future incidents.
I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can either.

In another forum, I just read *the* solution. Instead of tracking down
and killing these pirates, we should track down and kill anyone who has
paid ransom to these pirates. Case closed, no profit, no piracy.

Sure, kill the stockholders too.
Blow the lifeboat out of the water.
Nuke Somalia.
Send Seals to swim under and sink the lifeboat.
Snipe them - though you can't see them.
Blast them with heavy rock music.
With "solutions" like these, who needs pirates?
Thank God the inmates ain't running the asylum.

--Vic

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:21:11 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:29:14 -0700, Frogwatch wrote:


Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future incidents.
I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can either.
In another forum, I just read *the* solution. Instead of tracking down
and killing these pirates, we should track down and kill anyone who has
paid ransom to these pirates. Case closed, no profit, no piracy.

Sure, kill the stockholders too.
Blow the lifeboat out of the water.
Nuke Somalia.
Send Seals to swim under and sink the lifeboat.
Snipe them - though you can't see them.
Blast them with heavy rock music.
With "solutions" like these, who needs pirates?
Thank God the inmates ain't running the asylum.

--Vic

Cheney thinks he is... :)




--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...

ANY attempt at negotiation will CAUSE future incidents so logically
should not be considered. It is all well and good to feel for the
family of the hostage but we also have to feel for the hundrerds of
potential future hostages. This logically means no negotiations. You
may call being logical asshole behavior but it works better than
emotionalism.
Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future
incidents. I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can
either.
----------------------------------------------------------

Negotiation does not necessarily mean paying ransom or allowing them to go
free.
If that was going on, this incident would be over by now.
Negotiation can also be wearing down the pirate's resolve and making them
realize that they have no other option but to surrender. I am not there or
privy to what the negotiations are, but I suspect the latter is what is
going on.

Eisboch

Obama hostage crisis, day 2
 

"HK" wrote in message
m...
thunder wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:29:14 -0700, Frogwatch wrote:


Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future incidents. I
do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can either.

In another forum, I just read *the* solution. Instead of tracking down
and killing these pirates, we should track down and kill anyone who has
paid ransom to these pirates. Case closed, no profit, no piracy.



What? Kill corporate execs? That would be so...unAmerican. :)


I saw an interview with an American CEO of a shipping company. Their ships
are not US flagged, but the company is US owned.
He agreed to pay a million dollar ransom in a previous incident. His given
reason was to ensure the safe release of the crew.
Now, all the skeptics will claim it was also to gain release of the ship,
but he said not so. The ship was insured.

Eisboch