Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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

SOMALI pirates have threatened revenge after two separate hostage-rescue raids by foreign forces killed at least five comrades, raising fears of future bloodshed on the high seas. The latest raid by US forces this morning saved American hostage Capt Richard Phillips. Three pirates were killed and one was taken captive, the US Navy said.

That rescue mission and one by France last week have upped the stakes in shipping lanes off the anarchic Horn of Africa nation where pirate gangs have defied foreign naval patrols.

"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.

"We cannot know how or whether our friends on the lifeboat died, but this will not stop us from hijacking," he said.

Sea gangs generally treat their captives well, hoping to fetch top dollar in ransoms. The worst violence has been an occasional beating.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: navy; notbreakingnews; pirates; somalian; somalipirates
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-168 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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

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.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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.

144 posted on 04/13/2009 5:40:04 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
Go Navy!

When you care enough to send the very best!!!

147 posted on 04/13/2009 6:29:40 AM PDT by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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

149 posted on 04/13/2009 7:13:51 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

SWEET!


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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Travis T. OJustice
Correction:


151 posted on 04/13/2009 7:32:54 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

These Islamic “pirates” are not even fit to lick Blackbeard’s boots.


156 posted on 04/13/2009 9:01:35 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Prophet in the wilderness
PI-RAT ism

πRATs

157 posted on 04/13/2009 9:28:44 AM PDT by SteamShovel (Global Warming, the New Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bikerman

Just one? :)


158 posted on 04/13/2009 10:08:48 AM PDT by Does so (One Big Assed Mistake, America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-168 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson