On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:17:15 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 23:44:26 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

If Obama wanted to, he could stop this overnight...

The problem predates the current administration, no reason to
politicize the discussion.

Not trying to politicize anything, Obama is the one who can stop it
"now". When Bush was in, I had the same feeling, in fact I am sure I
noted it here.

The loss of 4 lives, fellow boaters, is a tragic event - no question
about it.

If you were president how would you rank it on a scale of national
priorities compared to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, terrorism, Iran,
the economic crisis, the impending food and energy crisis, etc. ??

It is one of the highest priorities of the US Navy.

"The mission of the Navy is to maintain, train and equip combat-ready
Naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression and
maintaining freedom of the seas."

"The mission of the United States Navy is to protect and defend the
right of the United States and our allies to move freely on the oceans
and to protect our country against her enemies."

See what I mean Wayne?

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:07:08 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 23:27:14 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

It doesn't make any sense. We know the DOD monitors every inch of the
gulf, they surely must know which mother ship a skiff came from. As to
the "world courts", if you vaporize the mother ship and skiffs, there
will be nothing left for court

Didn't it happen in the Indian Ocean, thousands of square miles?
That's my understanding. There are hundreds if not thousands of
fishing boats out there, all looking a lot alike.

I think we have theater surveillance capability sufficient to plot and
track a lot of vessels. Once the operators get a feel for watching
them I bet they can profile out the mother ships pretty quick and
spend most of the effort watching them.

It certainly can't be much harder than tracking terrorists in the
wilds of Pakistan. These ships can't really hide in a cave and come
out somewhere else.

I agree, but I think Wayne has a good point.. in the scheme of things,
it seems pretty low priority. Not saying it shouldn't be done, but
these people clearly knew the risks. I believe they were warned more
than once.

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:02:13 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:43:51 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

is that they are possible going to bring children (future buccaneers)
with them as innocent human shields. Shag a couple boats loaded with
the just and the unjust alike and sooner or later the world court[s]
will hear about it and then condemnation will hit like the swarms of
Egypt.


That is why I like Plume's idea of drones. We seem to think it is OK
to kill a terrorist and everyone else in the building.

I don't think that's ok at all. This rarely happens these days.
Mostly, these people are out and about.

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:22:05 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:20:15 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:31:55 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Feb 23, 11:23*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:02:13 -0500, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:43:51 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:


Especially when you do it by remote control and there are no TV crews
around to show it live on the 6 o'clock news. * :-)



It would still get to the media Wayne. Seems like that stuff does
anymore.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnQp6mLUD_M

The best way to do this would be totally black. Never admit we did
anything. Let the pirates think Allah blew up their boat.
There is no reason they ever have to see the drone that tracked them
or the drone that fired the Hellfire missile

There are too many people involved.

The first problem is the "No ****, there I was..."

That is an internal problem in the US that should be addressed. Maybe
when that Manning kid gets 20 years in Leavenworth people will start
respecting the security clearances they have.
The "good democrat" president, FDR, would have had Manning shot by now

Those were different times and the circumstances are totally
different. That said, I do think he should go to prison for a long
time. He broke the law. I don't think he should be isolated and
perhaps psychologically tortured, which is what seems to be happening

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 08:55:11 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:19:05 -0500, BAR wrote:

Exactly where do Americans belong?

If you are in a strange city at night and someone warns you that
certain neighborhoods are unsafe, would you go there anyway?

If you have the opportunity to go through an unsafe area with a larger
group and ignore that opportunity by going off on your own, who's
fault is it when you get in trouble?

Correct. Of course, I think we (as a nation) should try and help
them.. all means at our disposal.

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:25:01 -0500, "MMC" wrote:

I think the real success by the war on terror was going after the terrorists
money. Doesn't seem the same effort is going into shutting down the pirates.

The Somali pirates are an annoying gnat by comparison (unless you are
personally involved of course).

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:25:33 -0800, wrote:

If you were president how would you rank it on a scale of national
priorities compared to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, terrorism, Iran,
the economic crisis, the impending food and energy crisis, etc. ??

For people like this guy, it's one of THE most important things, along
with preventing women from getting proper health care, and fighting
gays over marriage.

That strikes me as another one of your knee jerk irrational posts.
Are there more women not getting proper health care than men? I'd
have guessed that it was probably split about 50/50. And what is the
big issue with gay marriage? For about 5,000 years of recorded
history marriages took place between men and women. Why has that
concept suddenly changed, at least in the minds of some?

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:30:46 -0800, wrote:

I don't think he should be isolated and
perhaps psychologically tortured, which is what seems to be happening

You're right about that. He should be in with a bunch of hardened
criminals like everyone else. There's only one problem: I don't
think he's gone to trial yet, and if he was locked up with hardened
criminals, he'd probably never make it to the court room.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:25:33 -0800, wrote:

If you were president how would you rank it on a scale of national
priorities compared to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, terrorism, Iran,
the economic crisis, the impending food and energy crisis, etc. ??

For people like this guy, it's one of THE most important things, along
with preventing women from getting proper health care, and fighting
gays over marriage.

That strikes me as another one of your knee jerk irrational posts.
Are there more women not getting proper health care than men? I'd
have guessed that it was probably split about 50/50. And what is the
big issue with gay marriage? For about 5,000 years of recorded
history marriages took place between men and women. Why has that
concept suddenly changed, at least in the minds of some?

Because Obama is dithering with the marriage crap again as a deflection
from his organized destruction of our economy.

On Feb 24, 12:22*pm, wrote:


That is an internal problem in the US that should be addressed. Maybe
when that Manning kid gets 20 years in Leavenworth people will start
respecting the security clearances they have.
The "good democrat" president, FDR, would have had Manning shot by now

you know good and well that Hoover would have.