now I know who is the IGNORANT fucking moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLuX
it's not trish....................... :twisted:
Printable View
now I know who is the IGNORANT fucking moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLuX
it's not trish....................... :twisted:
you people are truly sad and i genuinely feel sorry for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by yosi
Wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Apart from the numerous hijackers and Somali security force members killed in shoot-outs related to hijacking, several innocent people have died prior to this week.
The FV Ching Fong Hwa was hijacked in April 2007, and one Chinese crew member was killed by the pirates on May 28 because the ship's owners failed to meet their ransom demands.
As the pirates boarded the MV Bunga Melati Dua in August 2008, one Filipino crew member was killed.
On September 28, 2008, Vladimir Kolobkov, the captain of the MV Faina, died of a stroke while held hostage by pirates.
After the MV Acton was hijacked in October 2008, three crew members died while held hostage.
During the hijacking of the FV Ekawat Nava 5 in November 2008, the pirates fired on an Indian naval vessel, which returned fire, causing injuries to the Thai crew and the death of at least one Thai civilian.
Given that the pirates often fire machine guns and grenades at the vessels during the attack (one rocket propelled grenade landed unexploded in the captains cabin of a Panamanian cargo ship attacked this week), it is amazing there have not been more deaths.There are estimated to be 230 people, from around the world (many poor Filipinos), held right now by Somali pirates, precisely because multi-million dollar ransoms have not been, or cannot be, paid. These hostages are innocent people with worried families at home.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Why do you ignore these people with your fatuous explanation?
Several shipping companies are rerouting around South Africa to avoid the horn of Africa altogether... is all of this because shipping companies "are willing to pay ransoms"?You wrote that there have been no other deaths until this week, and you have not even cared to question the validity of this. You chose to believe there were no other deaths because it fit your bias, and ultimately because those deaths of innocent people were unimportant to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
You're a sheep who takes up for pirates.
Oh really?Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLuX
trish
A Hot HungAngel
Posts: 3982
DeLuX
Rookie Poster
Posts: 5
The ignorant one is the the rookie barging in here and insulting one of the most intelligent and respected posters on this board.
Furthermore, the fact that this is the internet and you apparently have something you think other people might want to hear you say (a moot point if ever there was one) does not excuse you using foul and abusive language to a lady who has, as always, conducted herself impeccably.
You have your point of view, newbie, and you are entitled to it. But your lack of respect marks you out as an ignorant prick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShreach
LOL :roll:
As for the substance, attacking pirates' shore settlements will not succeed and will just turn ordinary, financially-motivated criminals into martyrs. Not a smart move. The very last thing we need is the cause to be taken up by politically-motivated terrorists, who will be much more violent; as someone pointed out, a boatload of explosives controlled by a determined suicide crew would have no difficulty sinking even military vessels, and merchant vessels would be easy meat. That outcome has to be avoided.
Shipping companies have been operating a "gentleman's agreement" for many, many years-- pirates take a ship, look after the crew, ransom is paid, everyone is released.
This cosy arrangement has unfortunately fostered increasing levels of piracy. Furthermore, increased naval activity in the sea areas off Somalia has, according to sources published this week, increased the uptick of piracy in the Indian Ocean--apparently the pirates can survive long offshore voyages in search of ships to attack.
There are specialist marine security firms who hire ex-soldiers and marines and offer their services for shipping protection. If the violence escalates, then it is possible that these crews will travel on ships in this area as armed security.
However, we are talking about a lot of shipping, and not all shipowners will pay for protection-- American and European owners might, but will the convenience-flag carriers? This is a real problem because many British, American and European professional seamen work for lines registered in Panama and elsewhere, which cannot be required by Govts other than their own to comply with possible new rules requiring that ships carry security crews. As the pirates travel further and further out to sea to seek easy targets, the area where ships need protection will expand, and the pirates will soon learn to avoid US, UK and French registered ships, if they know they are carrying armed security or can easily call on naval support-- and the target ships will become those registered in Panama, Honduras and other flag-of-convenience states instead; but these ships may very well be carrying British, American or French crew and officers themselves.
Historically, the Merchant Marine of all nations have been reluctant to carry firearms-- it's not their job and they are not trained for it. Furthermore, seamen working for US, UK and other registered flag ships, know perfectly well that they have colleagues working on flag-of-convenience ships, and have probably worked on those themselves in the past and may do again. The last thing they want is an escalation of violence against any flag registered shipping.
This is not a simple matter of being gung-ho Team America, and in the end the only solution will be the emplacement of strong government in Somalia and the other pirate rats' nests (there are quite a few) as Brenda says.
Bear in mind that there are currently over 20 hostage ships anchored off Somalia right now, and another, Indian registered, was taken this morning. There are over 200 crew currently being held hostage there. Whatever happens now, we have to be very careful not to cause these people to be killed.
No need for the thanks...I didn't call you anything either. Just some pacifists. I don't know you personally...so I can't judge.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
..some of the posts are getting way hot on here though. Maybe this thread should be moved to the political section. Anyway, I'm out.
Peace :wink:
A very good book to read about combat and killing, and how being obliged to kill effects a decent man:
http://www.history-books.us/wp-conte...-old-breed.jpg
It's a book that silences the chatter of those lucky enough to be far removed from violence. Not much there to comfort either the bloodthirsty jingoist or the prissy pacifist.
I think one needs a pretty strong justification to take a criminal's life, but it looks like it was met here. The Navy appeared to use the same standard rules of engagement that police use in hostage standoffs. Try to negotiate and reason with the hostage takers, give them a chance to give up, but when the hostage takers point a gun at the hostage, that's the trigger point. And that's how it went down, according to the news reports. I doubt the Navy was shooting just to make a point.
Besides, in the long run, the shipping industry cannot afford to pay 2 million for each ship that passes by Somalia. Let's get real.
With most of these things there's a tipping point; it remains to be seen if that has been reached. I doubt if it'll be the ransom that does it, it will be the level of violence.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrF
Personally I am in favour of armed security squads on these ships for defence in international waters, but it's a very delicate matter and there are a lot of hostages being held right now.
FWIW I can't imagine what else the US Navy, or any other Navy, could have done in this situation.