Obama twice approved force to rescue hostage [Archive]

d.mcc

April-12-09, 08:12 PM

So much for BO not having what it takes eh?

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama twice authorized the military to rescue a U.S. captain held by Somali pirates and whose life appeared to be at risk, administration official said hours after today’s rescue.

The Defense Department twice asked Obama for permission to use military force to rescue Capt. Richard Phillips from a lifeboat off the Somali coast, most recently late Friday evening. On Saturday morning, Obama signed off on the Pentagon’s request, as he had a day earlier, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

Somali pirates last week took the Maersk Alabama off the Horn of Africa. The crew fought back the pirates and reclaimed the ship, but Phillips was taken hostage aboard a lifeboat. Navy ships soon were on their way to the area.

full article here: http://freep.com/article/20090412/NEWS07/90412020/Obama+twice+approved+force+to+rescue+hostage

ccbatson

April-12-09, 08:15 PM

For once, I commend him on a job well done. Never negotiate with, or pay ransom unless the objective is to propagate the incidence of this type of crime.

Sstashmoo

April-12-09, 11:00 PM

ccbatson

April-12-09, 11:09 PM

Running away with tail tucked is not a good suggestion Sstashmoo.

firstandten

April-12-09, 11:39 PM

Bravo President Obama.

Quote: “We remain resolved to halt the rise of piracy in this region. "

Well if I may offer a suggestion to him, how about balancing the trade and stop relying in goods shipped from the other side of the world? When we have people right here out of work that are quite capable of producing them.

How about having European counties and companies stop illegally fishing in their waters and dumping toxic waste off their shores because its cheaper to do that than to do it legally.

These Somailies are thugs but there's a reason why they are like this and those reasons will need to be addressed because this has been going on since the nineties.

ccbatson

April-12-09, 11:43 PM

The Somali pirates keep doing this because?? They succeed by virtue of idiots paying them ransom money for committing crimes.

Gistok

April-12-09, 11:56 PM

The Somali pirates keep doing this because?? They succeed by virtue of idiots paying them ransom money for committing crimes.

Gotta agree with you Cc... the more they ransom, the more money they get... the more money they get... the more boats and weapons they buy... the more boats and weapons they buy... the more brazen they become....

Funny how no one (except for us and maybe the French) learned from the 200 year old lesson of Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Coast pirates...

If they continue we should bomb some coastal villages/fleets that house these thugs. Villagers that house these now rich warlords are starting to get worried that we'll do just that. Since our military has become relatively good at surgical strikes, perhaps collateral damage (loss of innocent life) can be kept to a minimum.

Patrolling an area 1/3 the size of the continental US in the Indian Ocean is logistically prohibive...so we need to be proactive, rather than reactive.

d.mcc

April-13-09, 12:04 AM

The Somali pirates keep doing this because?? They succeed by virtue of idiots paying them ransom money for committing crimes.

Sounds kind of free-marketish to me...

Sstashmoo

April-13-09, 12:22 AM

Quote: "Running away with tail tucked is not a good suggestion Sstashmoo."

Batts, Your post makes absolutely no sense. Where did I imply we should run with tail tucked?

firstandten

April-13-09, 12:53 AM

Gotta agree with you Cc... the more they ransom, the more money they get... the more money they get... the more boats and weapons they buy... the more boats and weapons they buy... the more brazen they become....

Funny how no one (except for us and maybe the French) learned from the 200 year old lesson of Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Coast pirates...

If they continue we should bomb some coastal villages/fleets that house these thugs. Villagers that house these now rich warlords are starting to get worried that we'll do just that. Since our military has become relatively good at surgical strikes, perhaps collateral damage (loss of innocent life) can be kept to a minimum.

Patrolling an area 1/3 the size of the continental US in the Indian Ocean is logistically prohibive...so we need to be proactive, rather than reactive.

You start bombing them then you will have the whole world against you. These countries know that they screwed over these people. Problem is the ranson money got good to them and now it would be hard to go back to just being fishermen. The companies look at the ranson as a cost of doing business that's why they keep sailing ships in those waters.

oldredfordette

April-13-09, 06:54 AM

There's no excuse for kidnapping and terrorism. But there's more to the Somalia story than you might know:

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/what-international-media-isnt-telling

rajdet

April-13-09, 07:31 AM

Nice article oldredfordette, thanks for posting it. You are right Firstandten, there is always at least two sides to every story.

How about having European counties and companies stop illegally fishing in their waters and dumping toxic waste off their shores because its cheaper to do that than to do it legally.

These Somailies are thugs but there's a reason why they are like this and those reasons will need to be addressed because this has been going on since the nineties.

4real

April-13-09, 11:42 AM

obama did everything, he is solving all the worlds problems so quickly i can't believe it.

now he can take on the afghan's since we won in iraq.

i just hope the somali terrorists don't get to angry and want to blow us up whenever they can

d.mcc

April-13-09, 12:03 PM

I have to say that after the jump it seems as though the quality of the posters has actually decreased...

Stosh

April-13-09, 12:26 PM

I was just wondering why, in this day and age, that merchant ships aren't allowed some sort of defensive capabilities for these occasions. I'm not sure that just anyone can be allowed to carry the weaponry needed to destroy small ships, but maybe some regulatory body can grant defensive weaponry based on need.

Jimaz

April-13-09, 01:02 PM

I heard one of the techniques used against pirates is to surround the deck with barbed wire. It would be difficult to cut the wire while being blasted with high-pressure fire hoses.

I'm sure they have other tricks up their sleeve that they don't want to reveal.

Johnlodge

April-13-09, 01:09 PM

I thought we were sending Batson over there to toast these pirates?

Stosh

April-13-09, 01:33 PM

These guys are merchant marine, not soldiers. A better idea would be to put soldiers on board a few ships or to have decoy ships that are actually armed to the teeth. An even better idea would be to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with Somalia.

I think that the decoy idea is a great one. Particularily if it is from another nation other than ours or France. Soldiers are also one option. I still think that, merchant marine or not, that they would be able to be taught the use of a machine gun or a RPG.

4real

April-13-09, 01:39 PM

why did they have to ask twice and why did he have to authorize twice?
wasn't once good enough?

So Obama is a hard nosed hawk all of a sudden I guess, good news.

Gistok

April-13-09, 01:56 PM

You start bombing them then you will have the whole world against you. These countries know that they screwed over these people. Problem is the ranson money got good to them and now it would be hard to go back to just being fishermen. The companies look at the ranson as a cost of doing business that's why they keep sailing ships in those waters.

Umm.... we're already doing that in Pakistan.... besides Pakistan, is the whole world against us there? No!!

All the shipping companies are doing is funding more trouble and more sophisticated weaponry. What do you want, another powerful Cartel like the drug cartels in Central and South America?

Bending over and taking it up the ass is not the way to go about this in dealing with these thugs... especially when doing so makes creating a "real" Somali government nearly impossible with well funded warlords. I hardly think that making the situation worse by paying of these thugs will make the world against us...

These thugs still have over 200 foreign captives held hostage... what should we do... wait until they have over 1000??

firstandten

April-13-09, 03:05 PM

Umm.... we're already doing that in Pakistan.... besides Pakistan, is the whole world against us there? No!!

All the shipping companies are doing is funding more trouble and more sophisticated weaponry. What do you want, another powerful Cartel like the drug cartels in Central and South America?

Bending over and taking it up the ass is not the way to go about this in dealing with these thugs... especially when doing so makes creating a "real" Somali government nearly impossible with well funded warlords. I hardly think that making the situation worse by paying of these thugs will make the world against us...

These thugs still have over 200 foreign captives held hostage... what should we do... wait until they have over 1000??

There should be some negotiations with the Somali government on getting there gov't stabilized and getting there economy going again which would include some aid military and financial. You then have quite a different conversation with the warlords and thugs. Something to the effect that if they don't get there act together they will probably be killed or arrested.

In the meantime any company shipping in those waters should have a security force on the ship for protection.

rb336

April-13-09, 03:31 PM

There should be some negotiations with the Somali government on getting there gov't stabilized and getting there economy going again which would include some aid military and financial.

what Somali Government?

Detroitej72

April-13-09, 05:34 PM

Newsflash: the most the Somali Gov. controls is about 1/4 of Mogadishu, hardly worthy of controlling the nation.

Bravo on Pres. Obama for correctly taking prompt action when required.

Redleg81

April-13-09, 05:52 PM

Q-ships are what are needed out there....

ccbatson

April-13-09, 10:57 PM

Stasshmoo 68...your sugestion implies altering US policy in response to the pirates crimes...that is what I meant by tucking tail and running.

firstandten

April-14-09, 12:08 AM

what Somali Government?

Good point ! I think they have some gov't in there that is as weak as water. We've been known to prop up governments, dictators etc. This might be another instance.

ccbatson

April-14-09, 08:01 PM

Now that the pirates have stepped up their crimes, our military, and the administration, will be put to a bigger test. I, for one, hope they slap down the pirates with extreme prejudice.

rb336

April-15-09, 10:33 AM

Now that the pirates have stepped up their crimes, our military, and the administration, will be put to a bigger test. I, for one, hope they slap down the pirates with extreme prejudice.

all we ask is, after all you "obama can't handle this" crap in the "other" piracy thread, that you admit that he handled it well, and without the bluster a righty would have

4real

April-15-09, 11:33 AM

Islandman

April-15-09, 12:14 PM

What a joke.

firstandten

April-15-09, 01:31 PM

What would be shocking is if he didn't allow the military to take action.

At the prompting of two lawyers for him to okay it he said yes, big deal

He takes credit for what the Navy Seals did,.. not a leader at all.

If the plot had failed and the captain was killed you would have blamed Obama for bad decision making. Your trying to have it both ways. He is the commander-in-chief all military decisions good and bad will fall under him. Give him credit for this success because you sure will hammer him if a military operation goes bad.

ccbatson

April-15-09, 04:50 PM

Rb...see my post 307.....Apology accepted.

ccbatson

April-15-09, 04:51 PM

Oops, make that #4 on this thread.

Detroitej72

April-15-09, 06:28 PM

Yeah, that is funny. A few days ago, they were saying that Obama didn't have the balls to go after the pirates. As soon as he does and the mission is a stunning success, then he suddenly had nothing to do with it at all.

Obama made the call. The Navy Seals would have had to sit there and watch had he not.

Maybe the righties here would have liked it better if Obama flew in on an air force jet with a "Mission Acomplished" banner hanging nearby.

rb336

April-16-09, 09:44 AM

Rb...see my post 307.....Apology accepted.

whatever post - yep, sorry, i did not catch it

ccbatson

April-16-09, 10:20 PM

A first for Rb!!!! An open admission of being wrong.

Bobl

April-21-09, 06:44 AM

From AP:

"Ron Kuby, a New York-based civil rights lawyer, said he has been in discussions about forming a legal team to represent the Somali suspect.
"I think in this particular case, there's a grave question as to whether America was in violation of principles of truce in warfare on the high seas," said Kuby. "This man seemed to come onto the Bainbridge under a flag of truce to negotiate. He was then captured. There is a question whether he is lawfully in American custody and serious questions as to whether he can be prosecuted because of his age."

Judging by the "catch and release" policy and the smiling arrival of this "prisoner", we are all in for a long period of silliness.

ccbatson

April-21-09, 10:25 PM

Do US civilian courts have jurisdiction over Somali pirates now?

d.mcc

April-22-09, 12:08 AM

Do US civilian courts have jurisdiction over Somali pirates now?

No, but apparently our law enforcement does...

rb336

April-22-09, 07:42 AM

Do US civilian courts have jurisdiction over Somali pirates now?

It is part of the international maritime law. Attacks on ships at sea can be posecuted under the juristiction of the country under whose flag the ship is sailing.