Navy Seals kill Somali pirates, liberate ships.

[deckeda]

karsen wrote:
... When it's underway I can't imagine it's pretty damn hard to get aboard. You'd think a couple crew members with guns, or even a water canon could blow invaders right off the side. Maybe they are taught not to fight back.

NPR interviewed the guy who runs this: http://apmss.co.uk/

With a bit of (money, and) high-tech equipment and smartly-deployed "disincentives", it seems most ships could be safe, without needing weaponry.

[vision63]

How can those degenerate Somalis think they can simply take from the super-wealthy? I say we kidnap Iman and tell them if they don't give the ships back that we'll cut her throat.

[$tevie]

Dakota wrote:
[quote=kj]
Of course it's wrong, and illegal, but I have a hard time getting too outraged. The only article I read seemed to say the pirates weren't hurting anyone, and were actually treating the hostages really well (catered food, etc.).

Almost makes me wanna go on a cruise with them. Got brochures?

[kj]

Racer X wrote:
[quote=kj]
Of course it's wrong, and illegal, but I have a hard time getting too outraged. The only article I read seemed to say the pirates weren't hurting anyone, and were actually treating the hostages really well (catered food, etc.). The pirates evidently pay their bills, so whole cities are thriving because of them. And the pirates/bandits foil every legitimate attempt to bring aid into the country. The only real answer is to restore order in somalia, and that isn't going to happen. So letting the regular folk exist off the crumbs of the pirates might be as good as it gets, without more of a commitment. kj.

sure. And the fact that drug lords pay workers to harvest and process the crops makes it OK as well?
I thought that saying it's wrong and illegal covered that. Otherwise, I was basically saying more needs to be done than just killing the pirates. My mother did medical and relief aid in somalia, which gave me some idea of the suffering there. It's just unfortunate stopping the pirates will cause innocent people to suffer even more than they already have. I guess that makes me an idiot? kj.

[kj]

$tevie wrote:
[quote=Dakota]
[quote=kj]
Of course it's wrong, and illegal, but I have a hard time getting too outraged. The only article I read seemed to say the pirates weren't hurting anyone, and were actually treating the hostages really well (catered food, etc.).

Almost makes me wanna go on a cruise with them. Got brochures?

Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. kj.

[kj]

mikeylikesit wrote:
At first blink kj's posts almost always make me think I'm the one who has lost his tether, he's like a rubber punching bag that takes everything and just bounces back. Detachment is useful but not the end all.

Rog, maybe you should stick to your paranoid "pete alerts". Insanity is more your style. kj.

[Greg the dogsitter]

kj wrote: I thought that saying it's wrong and illegal covered that. Otherwise, I was basically saying more needs to be done than just killing the pirates. My mother did medical and relief aid in somalia, which gave me some idea of the suffering there. It's just unfortunate stopping the pirates will cause innocent people to suffer even more than they already have. I guess that makes me an idiot? kj.

So you're saying that we don't think more needs to be done...

...no, just kidding. Sorry.

I do like what you wrote. :-)

[kj]

Greg the dogsitter wrote:
[quote=kj]I thought that saying it's wrong and illegal covered that. Otherwise, I was basically saying more needs to be done than just killing the pirates. My mother did medical and relief aid in somalia, which gave me some idea of the suffering there. It's just unfortunate stopping the pirates will cause innocent people to suffer even more than they already have. I guess that makes me an idiot? kj.

So you're saying that we don't think more needs to be done...

...no, just kidding. Sorry.

I do like what you wrote. :-)
Thanks, that's very passive-aggressive of you. kj.

[kj]

Actually, it bugs me that you want to continue snarking about something you aren't willing to continue discussing. It's not quite passive-aggressive, but it sure is annoying. kj.

[Greg the dogsitter]

kj wrote:
Actually, it bugs me that you want to continue snarking about something you aren't willing to continue discussing. It's not quite passive-aggressive, but it sure is annoying. kj.

I'm not snarking. It was joke. I didn't think you were implying anything at all.

Edit: Further, I sincerely apologize if my words led you to believe something other than what I meant. That would be my fault, not yours.