Didn't the crew of the ship get away safely? Didn't the captain get away safely? Didn't we capture 1 pirate and kill the others?

Considering the outcome that no civilian died, I'd say regardless of the actual intentions of those involved, all the decisions made were the right ones, at the right time.

Would it have been better for Bush to go to war in Iraq instead of desperately trying to gain the approval of the UN over the course of a few months? Would that situation have been different? *note: this is NOT a comparison of Bush v. Obama's ability to lead; I'm just showing a similar situation that occured (albeit on different scales) in both administrations.

I just don't understand the point of this thread. So...Obama didn't immediately call for the use of force...a few days pass...the innocents are saved and the thugs stopped...therefore, Obama can not lead effectively? That is pretty flawed logic.

if this had turned out bad and the captain had died the obama loyalists wouldnt have said squat.

somali 3 pirates were no contest to navy seals tho

to give obama credit for doing his job i wont do it.

i will give credit the the us navy and us navy seals its why we have them.

the somali piracy issue is the clinton legacy and the legacy of obama

obama is weak its that simple

everything obama is doing is making the us weaker.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by neo67]

Originally posted by irishchic

Well...looks like he's going to get another chance to "blither":

Wow, you've got his number, don't you? We need to employ our subs immediately and fire at anyone who refuses to ID themselves as peaceful. Over and done, we get the credit and the practice. We'll need it for the deepwater Chinese Navy coming to a sea near you.

Great link!

I see "pirates" on land starting to organize right here.

And they don't want a "ransom" either, just their own lives and jobs; to be left alone.

jw

Originally posted by Avenginggecko

I just don't understand the point of this thread. So...Obama didn't immediately call for the use of force...a few days pass...the innocents are saved and the thugs stopped...therefore, Obama can not lead effectively? That is pretty flawed logic.

Biden warned Obama "would be tested." He hesitated when he could've acted decisively. He had to be asked TWICE by the Pentagon for permission to "engage." The military will not "engage" an enemy unless attacked, absent permission to do so.

He is flinching with N Korea. He blinked first with Iran. He bows to Saudi royalty. He apologized to Europe. His diplomats blame the U.S. for their problems. He is aimless in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And this is good with you?

He is going to be tested again and again.

How many days must pass before it's okay for him to act? Until Saturday, we didn't know if the Captain was safe or alive.

jw

Originally posted by neo67

obama is weak its that simple

everything obama is doing is making the us weaker.

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I try to keep an eye on my threads but was called away.

They are going to "test" him again and again. He doesn't have the will to push anyone but Americans and their rights.

He waffles in Iraq and Afghanistan. He flinches with NKorea and Iran.

We are in deep trouble.

jw

Originally posted by jdub297
Originally posted by neo67

obama is weak its that simple

everything obama is doing is making the us weaker.

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I try to keep an eye on my threads but was called away.

They are going to "test" him again and again. He doesn't have the will to push anyone but Americans and their rights.

He waffles in Iraq and Afghanistan. He flinches with NKorea and Iran.

We are in deep trouble.


jw

yes indeed we are in deep deep trouble.

Originally posted by amazing
But based on past behavior, president bush or republicans as a whole, haven't shown much of the renowned american cowboy attitude.

But being a "cowboy" is what the dems here and everywhere accused Bush of being during his presidency. So, which is it? You can't have it both ways, even though the dems love to try for that all the time. Of course, the other word for that is hypocrisy.

Just my 2 cents here

Not even worth that ...

Originally posted by grover
Gee he must be far worse then than someone dithering for days while a major American city drowned huh?

This has been debunked many, many times. Only die hard dems are still repeating this fallacy.

Again, the truth is that it takes 3 to 5 days for the federal government to respond to any large disaster. The situation in New Orleans was no different, and made worse by the local dems "playing ostrich" (sticking their heads in the sand and hoping the problem will just go away) instead of preparing for the storm. Remember the two pictures that came out at the time? One showed all the school buses (which could have used to evacuate the people of New Orleans) sitting there under water, while in Republican Galveston and Texas the picture showed a long line of buses being used to transport evacuees.

And again, bottom line, Katrina was not Bush's fault. Other things were, but not Katrina.

[edit on 4/15/2009 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by whatukno

During WWI and WWII we were fighting an organised military. These people aren't a military and they are hardly organised.

Nope, again. Germans used 1 or 2 (u-)boats tasked to certain "lanes." Same tactic as Somalis. The Somalis are well organized and well armed. They are not well trained, but have no fear of death.

These are desperate people. Living in a failed state, watching impotently as the livelihood they knew is taken away from them. They turn to what they can in order to feed their families and try and make a better life for themselves.

Do you really believe the pirates are former fishermen? They "retire" when they're paid?

The pirates' ransoms go to buying more arms or to enrich their sponsoring tribal warlords.

(Say 1 group of pirates received the $5MM ransom, you think they bought food with it? Built houses? Quit being pirates? What, is there a 'pirate factory' that sends out new ones as the old ones take their spoils and retire?)

And you want to attack them with the power of our navy?

YES!

The tax cost alone would be prohibitive not to mention the overkill.

The boats are already in the water. Why not have them do something useful instead of "simulations" while they're out there?

Besides the fact that we are trying to patrol an area roughly the size of Texas.

Germany patrolled the North Sea, English Channel, Mediterranean, and Atlantic. The Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean along the African coastline are nothing. These are defined "shipping lanes" just like the Transcontinental Railway, Chisholm Trail and Western Trek were 150 years ago. We called them "bandits" back then. And it didn't stop us from stopping them

I believe it is up to our merchant sailors to defend themselves.

Thses are working men who undertook to load, drive and unload boats. Now we ask them to conscript themselves to military duty as well? If your boss told you you would now have to fight to the death as another assignment, for the same pay, would you?

I understand ports not wanting armed vessels to dock but perhaps a compromise can be reached.

Changing diplomatic relations and our way of business to accomodate thieves? You are not serious on that one, are you? Would you make them incur additional shipping costs to change routes, too? Are you ready to pay double for imports until the pirates change routes too, then pay more as we change again?

You stand up to a bully. You do not change your life only to allow him to keep bullying.

Do you really think they'd stop if sailors had guns? The pirates would just use bigger guns!

(The French, of all people, used their Navy to track and intercept 11 pirates yesterday. No lives lost. America is now looking to the French as examples of fortitude!)

I really am disgusted by the weakness Americans now display in so many things; banking, loan and insurance underwriting, defense of borders and country, to name a few. Sometimes common sense and sound business means you have to tell a potential customer "No." Sometimes you have to tell a neighbor "Clean up your place or I'll do it for you my way."

I'd hate to see your neighborhood and your business' P&L or Balance Sheet.

Look what you've done to my Country.

jw

Obama dithered because he had to make sure he didn't have any cousins on that pirate crew first.

Originally posted by Bombeni
Obama dithered because he had to make sure he didn't have any cousins on that pirate crew first.

And thats where it always ends up.
Nothing he does will ever be good enough.
For the next 8 years, this is where it's always gonna end up.
The problem is not that hes not good enough, it's that he's not white enough.

[edit on 18-4-2009 by Grimstad]