Whether Islamic or not, the problem you have is you are dealing with more variable psychologies than a common criminal will likely present.
I read one account where the pirates were all hopped up on the local drug of choice, Khat. After they secured the hostages, the pirates began arguing, broke into two groups, and had a gunfight right in front of the hostages, with one pirate group killing the other pirate group. I’m guessing the environment they grew up in had a lot of desperation, and cheap life. I’m not sure how much use negotiating with guys like that will be, especially while they are high, or going through withdrawal.
Not that you can’t get that with an American bank robber, or a Cartel chief, but it would seem less likely.
If the FBI had full control of the situation this time around, and the military was just there for support, then this was Obama’s screwup. At this point the whole federal government - even the FBI’s negotiation team, is far more suspect IMHO than the military.
There is no doubt who I’d want in control, if it were me, and I would extend that courtesy to my fellow Americans.
The whole problem we have is that we all know, deep down, Liberals are traitors, who value our enemies’ lives more than those of Americans. Any time Obama deals with a case like this, we know he will be catering the response to value the lives of our enemies, even at the expense of Americans on the ground. Thus, this is a matter for “Law Enforcement”, not the military, and these guys need to be arrested, not killed. It really produces an untenable state of affairs domestically.
I suspect that if you were to examine the records of domestic hostage situations, MANY would involve drugs and/or alcohol. That is one reason they tend to be so problematic for domestic law enforcement agencies - the cops frequently don't know how medicated the perps are - tweakers, junkies and other drug addled miscreants are frequently just looking to get enough cash for their next score and that innate drug-induced instability is what oftentimes causes a robbery to go bad.
"of our enemies, even at the expense of Americans on the ground. Thus, this is a matter for “Law Enforcement”, not the military, and these guys need to be arrested, not killed. "
Then, you need to change the law. But, the law as it exists today, is quite clear. The US Navy is not in the execution business. It's in the war business. To the extent that pirates can be engaged in non-territorial waters is pretty clear, legally - they can only be engaged legally when they are either firing upon US (or non-combatant) vessels, or have boarded a ship under hostile conditions.
Lastly, I wonder how many of the people commenting have spent even a few days on the open seas. There seems to be a prevailing opinion that the US Navy could have diffused this situation with a couple super-double-top-secret SEAL insertions that surely would have happened absent the intervention of the FBI and Obama himself. It's patently absurd.
We're talking about boarding a stand-off vessel in open waters while at the same time, four hostages literally have automatic weapons trained on their heads. The FBI played the only card they had - negotiation. And, it was right to pick the FBI to play that card, because ship captains aren't trained to negotiate with hostage takers. Now, whether that card was played appropriately or not, is for others to decide. I'm not a hostage negotiator, nor was I there. But given the tactical situation, talking was the only realistic option at that time.