Skip to comments.
Pirates vow revenge after rescue mission
News.Com.Au ^
| April 13, 2009
| Abdiqani Hassan
Posted on 04/12/2009 8:35:13 PM PDT by Melissa 24
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-168 next last
To: Melissa 24
"The French and the Americans will regret starting this killing. We do not kill, but take only ransom. We shall do something to anyone we see as French or American from now," Hussein, a pirate, told Reuters by satellite phone.
141
posted on
04/13/2009 5:30:23 AM PDT
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: Non-Sequitur
I'll confess to some surprise on my part. I thought he'd wait it out till they surrendered. I never thought Obama would give them the OK the shoot them.Obama imposed the civilian average-Joe legal self-defense standard for use of deadly force on the military - deadly force only allowed if someone's life in "imminent" danger. So, of course, the captain's life was eventually in "imminent" danger under the circumstances, and they were ready to act when it was.
142
posted on
04/13/2009 5:33:04 AM PDT
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: ExTexasRedhead
No, I think they’re smarter than that. They know we wouldn’t give them a cent for pair. ;)
143
posted on
04/13/2009 5:37:00 AM PDT
by
SouthTexas
(When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people.....)
To: mvpel
Obama imposed the civilian average-Joe legal self-defense standard for use of deadly force on the military - deadly force only allowed if someone's life in "imminent" danger. So, of course, the captain's life was eventually in "imminent" danger under the circumstances, and they were ready to act when it was. But at least he seems to have given them the authority to act on their discretion in using deadly force. That surprised me a little.
There have been two military crisis since Obama was inaugurated - this one and that thing about the surveillance ship off China. Both times Obama acted more forcefully than I'd expected, and in a manner that I'd expect the Joint Chiefs to recommend. It appears that he is listening to his military advisors and taking their advice. If so, it's one of the few hopeful signs I've seen out of his presidency.
To: ExTexasRedhead
BO can hide behind Hillary’s big butt.
145
posted on
04/13/2009 6:06:17 AM PDT
by
Piquaboy
(22 year military veteran of Navy, Air Force, and Army.)
To: okie01
However, arms of any kind on a merchant ship are against the UN treaty governing "safe passage". This treaty seems to be demonstrating -- on an international scale -- how gun control really works. The criminals do what criminals do, ignore laws and prey on the defenceless law-abiders. We never did sign onto the UN "law of the sea" treaty did we? We probably signed onto some stupid similar law screw it extenuating circumstances and such. Hire private security and issue letters of marquee (if thats what they call blanket immunity for suppressing piracy in hot zones)
146
posted on
04/13/2009 6:17:08 AM PDT
by
Dosa26
To: Texas Eagle
Go Navy! When you care enough to send the very best!!!
To: Melissa 24
Sea gangs generally treat their captives well, hoping to fetch top dollar in ransoms. The worst violence has been an occasional beating.
Classic. What nice, honest boys they are.
148
posted on
04/13/2009 6:37:43 AM PDT
by
dr_who
To: Constitution Day; VanShuyten; Rebelbase; Travis T. OJustice; Tijeras_Slim; raccoonradio; ...
(Tried submitting this to
Howie Carr's Chump Line, but the mailbox was full):
I have a working title for the inevitable screen treatment of the Pirate hostage crisis off the Somalian coast:
BLACKBEARD DOWN
To: martin_fierro
150
posted on
04/13/2009 7:21:51 AM PDT
by
Travis T. OJustice
(I can spell just fine, thanks, it's my typing that sucks.)
To: Travis T. OJustice
Correction:
To: martin_fierro
Arrrr, Tinypic blocked by work filters.
152
posted on
04/13/2009 7:37:55 AM PDT
by
Travis T. OJustice
(I can spell just fine, thanks, it's my typing that sucks.)
To: freema; smoothsailing
One thing I am sure of, Ma, there’s three former pirates that have not lawyered up! ;-)
If they were all dealt with in this manner it seems there would be less need for lawyers.
153
posted on
04/13/2009 8:36:03 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
(But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
To: farlander
Glad you liked it. It = HK G36KE short assault rifle.
More views and info can be found here:
HK G36KE
I wish & dream, but do not own one.
154
posted on
04/13/2009 8:44:44 AM PDT
by
vox_freedom
(If there were no God, there would be no Atheists. - G. K. Chesterton)
To: TenthAmendmentChampion
Khat is nothing at all like methamphetamine, the only thing they share in common are that both are stimulants.
Two big differences, khat is all natural where as methamphetamine is completely chemical. Khat does not throw one into speed psychosis after many days of use, nor does a Khat user continue to chew the leaves for several days in a row without sleeping which on the hand a meth addict will continue his use for days. weeks on end without sleeping.
The Somalia Islamic’s have been trying to outlaw Khat because they consider it un-Islamic ...
155
posted on
04/13/2009 9:00:38 AM PDT
by
08bil98z24
(War on Drug supporters are enemies of the Constitution.)
To: martin_fierro
These Islamic “pirates” are not even fit to lick Blackbeard’s boots.
To: Prophet in the wilderness
157
posted on
04/13/2009 9:28:44 AM PDT
by
SteamShovel
(Global Warming, the New Patriotism)
To: bikerman
158
posted on
04/13/2009 10:08:48 AM PDT
by
Does so
(One Big Assed Mistake, America)
To: okie01
arms of any kind on a merchant ship are against the UN treaty governing "safe passage". Figures the UN would be behind something that stupid. Seems it's time to repudiate that treaty and start protecting our ships.
159
posted on
04/13/2009 10:19:46 AM PDT
by
Fast Moving Angel
(There are no points for second place.)
To: Dosa26
We never did sign onto the UN "law of the sea" treaty did we? No, but that's not the treaty that restricts arms aboard a merchant ship. The treaty in question is 30-40 years old.
160
posted on
04/13/2009 12:09:53 PM PDT
by
okie01
(THE MAItNSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-168 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson